Skip to navigationSkip to contentSkip to footerHelp using this website - Accessibility statement
Advertisement

Opinion

Are small modular reactors really a solution?

Nuclear option’s pros and cons; skills shortage and foreign students; Voice campaign and identity issues; motherhood and sexism; the new, improved Collingwood.

Yet another treatise on the fanciful notion that small modular reactors will be the solution to our energy challenges (“If Bowen is so sure nuclear doesn’t stack up, repeal the ban”, October 4), this time from a former chairman of the Uranium Institute. Let us suppose for a moment that this solution suddenly materialised, with a factory somewhere geared up to produce these amazing perpetual motion machines. The ludicrous numbers being thrown around, which suppose that countries will simply place an order for 50 or 100, do not simply beggar belief – it makes one wonder what these people are smoking.

Patrick Hockey, Clunes, Vic

It has been suggested to Chris Bowen that the ban on nuclear energy should be lifted. David Rowe

Bowen should note the growth in reactors

Further to Tony Grey’s article about the viability of nuclear power, I note that Silex Systems’ 2023 annual report records on page 14 that in the world today there are 436 operable reactors, 59 reactors under construction, 111 planned reactors and 321 proposed reactors. Food for thought, Mr Bowen?

John Cahill, Mosman, NSW

Advertisement

Nuclear distraction could slow transition

Tony Grey (October 4) extols the virtues of nuclear for Australia and is critical of Chris Bowen’s calculations. He accuses the CSIRO (and AEMO) of “creative accounting”. In fact, storage costs were included in their GenCost report.

As for public opinion, the July AFR poll showed 58 per cent of 421 readers thought Australia “should consider” SMRs – hardly a nationwide endorsement. And where do readers find a balanced argument? For so long the mainstream media has reflected the views of a Coalition that remains divided over whether we need to decarbonise. Will they now join the push for nuclear technology and risk slowing down the transition to renewables?

Fiona Colin, Malvern East, Vic

Reset visa rules to attract more skills

The Grattan Institute’s report on international graduates (“Too many foreign graduates in low-pay, low-skill jobs: Grattan”, October 3) is a timely reminder that Australia’s visa system needs urgent repair.

Advertisement

Our universities educate tens of thousands of international students each year, yet we largely fail to capitalise on their skills and knowledge beyond the lecture theatre. Only 28 per cent of these students use their post-study work rights in Australia, and just 16 per cent become permanent residents.

As we grapple with major skills shortages across most sectors of the economy, Australia is worse off for this self-inflicted brain drain. Our current visa system is to blame. It deters rather than encourages these talented people to remain in Australia and use their Australian education in the area they have studied.

By the time international students graduate, they are well-adjusted to our country and have already made a considerable economic and social contribution. If there is a clear need for their skills and knowledge, why shouldn’t our system encourage them to stay.

Britain, Canada and the United States have all cottoned on to the contribution international students make and are all moving to increase the number of international graduates in their migration mix by upping permanent residency targets.

A small increase in permanent skilled visas going to international students would give our regional towns and capital cities the engineers, nurses, doctors and teachers they are crying out for. The government’s new migration strategy must deal Australia into the global race for the talent and skills we need. We already have ground to make up.

Catriona Jackson, chief executive, Universities Australia

Advertisement

Campaign funding shouldn’t affect outcome

Yes, a sustained campaign of misinformation can cause a slide in the goodwill which early polls recorded, reflecting strong support for an advisory Voice. Yes, some schemes to help First Nations communities have failed because of little consultation with those actually involved. Yes, lots of repetitious, ill-informed comment in social media can besmirch the positive suggestion that a bit of advice from those who may need support would help. Yes, baseless fear-mongering can destabilise a concept that would help to solve issues related to health, education and housing.

But on the other hand, it should not be money for campaigning that influences a decision on whether the few left of the 250 nations that once were here get to give an opinion on any scheme affecting them.

Sally Spain, Oxenford, Qld

‘Identity politics’ can operate both ways

Louise Clegg’s article (October 2) bemoans identity politics and extensively discusses our Constitution but fails to acknowledge that it is written in English and based on English law. This is a prime example of the identity politics which she derides – in this case English identity politics.

Advertisement

I grew up in a small country town where respect for your elders, nation and tradition was inculcated into me. However, my parents and grandparents had little recognition of the laws and tradition of the people who had lived in my country for over 60,000 years. I don’t blame them – they were a product of their time.

We now know much more about that 60,000 years of law and tradition and much more about what has been lost, but Ms Clegg still clings to England. I am grateful for the rights and responsibilities that English law confers upon me, but this country is my flesh and bones, I am not a misplaced Englishman. It is only right to acknowledge its proper history.

The Voice, as merely an advisory body, will be much less powerful than what happens in many of the other countries that make provisions for their Indigenous people. If it gives poor advice and/or goes against the wishes of most Australians, any politician who wants to get re-elected will ignore it. I can’t see what the problem is.

Philip Stevens, Weetangera, ACT

Scarborough isn’t just an Indigenous issue

Amanda Stoker is worried about consulting traditional owners because it could affect energy investments (“Voice will worsen energy logjam”, October 4). She cites the Scarborough ruling against gas exploration as an example.

Advertisement

But looking at the big picture, gas exploration is not in the national interest. This affects everyone. Gas is a heat-trapping pollutant and its production is helping to fuel all manner of disasters. The Scarborough project is expected to produce millions of tonnes of gas annually. Not a wise investment in Australia’s future.

Anne O’Hara, Waniassa, ACT

It’s sexist to suggest mother knows best

I’ve been following your generally outstanding coverage of the PwC scandal since the outset. This week in the Professional Life newsletter, however, Edmund Tadros referred to the Chanticleer podcast by James Thomson where he advocated for a “mum” test.

This implies that all mothers are the font of all knowledge about right and wrong, and more so than fathers or childless people. And that everyone looks up to their mother for advice. That somehow being a mother makes them more virtuous than everyone else. And that’s just not the case. It’s a highly skewed and very sexist view of the world. It’s a silly concept.

Robyn Neasmith, Merimbula, NSW

Advertisement

The Pies are indeed a classier bunch now

While I am no Collingwood tragic and admit to not supporting them on grand final day, I have to agree with Geoff Culbert (October 3) that the team rival supporters love to hate is becoming harder to dislike.

The turning point for me was watching Darcy Moore’s speech at the healing ceremony last April that reflected on the treatment Nicky Winmar and Gilbert McAdam received from Pies supporters in a 1993 match that precipitated Winmar’s subsequent (and historic) lifting-the-jumper gesture. Moore is all class.

Charlie Fearon, Belair, SA

Letters to the Editor

  • We are always interested to hear your views on current topics. Guidelines here and please send your letter to edletters@afr.com.au

Read More

Latest In Federal

Fetching latest articles

Most Viewed In Politics