It is a shame that these two obviously dedicated authors do not have a better issue on which to campaign. No one is going to build nuclear reactors in the foreseeable future in Aus, no matter what the government policy may be. The authors need to ask themselves why. Abbott's responses, which the authors represent some sort of contradiction, should also be seen in that light.
There is a lot else I could say about this article but I will only mention the national radiation dose register for uranium mine workers, or some such. The reason no-one has really bothered with such a thing is that the amount of radiation mine workers are exposed to has little to do with the minerals they are working, but a lot to do with mine shaft ventilation. The authors have fallen into the trap of thinking that uranium ore must mean heaps more radiation. Nope. Try again.
If there is such a register we should immediately start campaigning for it to be used by all miners.

Curmudgeon,
do you have a site where i can read more on mine shaft radiation levels.( This is a genuine request as i know little of the issue, i am not being difficult).
Beside this, my concern is not really about reactors but is about waste. Storage is problematic due to half life of this horrid waste product. To even consider with the limited and inpart assumed knowledge we have about geological history and the realistic possibilities of seismic disturbance in the medium term we really are playing russian roulett. It's a bit like the stupidity of geosequestration.

Curmudgeon, "No one is going to build nuclear reactors in the foreseeable future in Aus, no matter what the government policy may be."

You underestimate the persuasiveness of the US State Department. After being feted by the State Department, John Howard underwent a miraculous conversion to become George Dubya's Number One nukes salesman. JWH even rushed off to proselytise the nuke religion to the shocked Canadians, before coming back to Oz to put spots on the map to take the problem of nuclear waste of the shoulders of his greatest mate and ally, George Bush. There were special dumping rights for the UK too if Blair wanted to send ships of hot stuff southwards. After all, Oz did have holes where those tons of gold used to be and then there was all of that 'useless' land where bombs had been exploded before. The mining tycoons could create the big holes and then get paid to fill the holes with hot waste, bargain!

In a trice, The Hon. Alexander Downer, MP and Foreign Minister under Howard was able to announce that simply everywhere in his home State of South Australia was perfect as a nuclear dump. Friends of the Liberal party were quick to show support by forming companies to (ahem) exploit the opportunity.

Howard's conversion was so rapid and total that his own ministers were left speechless and scrambling.

The good doctors are right to be concerned that both of the major parties are so pragmatic that any policy reversal is possible and they have given numerous examples of political pragmatism by both sides of politics.

It should also be remembered that a Liberal PM approved nuclear testing in this country in the hope of getting the recipe from the Brits to make an Oz nuclear bomb. Although frustrated by the tricky Poms, there remains a fondness on the right of politics for an Oz bomb and they ae silly enough to believe that Uncle Sam might just allow that if Australia volunteered to be the nuclear dump for the world and especially the USofA.

Cornflower...that was a good summary of events.

Bill and Jim seem unhappy that nuclear energy is a non issue.

Their strategy to raise awareness of their issue is to debate the marginal difference between the non interest of the two parties.

Yawn!