Nuclear Tests (Hansard, 20 February 1986)

§ Mr. Norman Lamont

The first round of my discussions with Senator Evans was held in an amicable and constructive atmosphere. I am pleased to announce that, as a result of these discussions, the United Kingdom Government have agreed to provide United Kingdom experts to participate in the technical assessment group which the Australian Government have decided to form. I have also agreed that there should be a United Kingdom representative on the consultative group which the Australian Government plan to establish. The letter of invitation from Senator Evans and my reply, together with the group's terms of reference, follow. I understand that Senator Evans made a similar announcement in the Australian Senate on Wednesday 19 February.

Text of letter to Mr. Lamont from Senator Evans Dear Mr. Lamont As we agreed at our meeting in London on 22 January, the Australian Government is establishing a technical assessment 328W group to advise on clean-up options for the former atomic test sites, particularly Maralinga. I invite representatives of the United Kingdom Government to participate in the group. Participation would be on a "without prejudice" basis to the question of ultimate liability for clean-up costs. We agree that the technical assessment group would undertake field studies and laboratory research and report in detail on options and costs for the radioactive and toxic decontamination of the sites. As a result of these scientific evaluations, "practicable" solutions—in cost/benefit terms—can be established in order to achieve varying possible degrees of access to and habitation of the contaminated sites. Regarding the final terms of reference for the group we agreed that suggestions from the United Kingdom would be communicated to Australia for consideration through your high commission in Canberra. I am anxious to settle the terms of reference as soon as possible so that the group can produce its interim report in May. The composition of the group will be Mr. D. R. Davy, Chief of the Environmental Science Division of the Australian Atomic Energy Commission (Convenor) and Dr. K. H. Lokan, Director of the Australian Radiation Laboratory, a United States plutonium decontamination expert, Mr. B. W. Church. Director of the Health Physics Division, Nevada Operations Office, Department of Energy and two United Kingdom representatives. As discussed, while continuity is desirable it is not essential, and ad hoc co-option of United Kingdom representatives is a possibility. I envisage the first meeting being held in February-March. I propose also to establish the consultative group we agreed on, as soon as possible and am pleased that the United Kingdom Government has agreed to be represented on this body. The other representatives will be from the Australian, South Australian and Western Australian Governments and Aboriginal interests. It will discuss and monitor progress on the rehabilitation of the test sites and maintain communication on all the various matters raised in the royal commission report. I thank you for your co-operation in this sensitive and important matter and look forward to receiving the names of your representatives on the technical assessment group and the consultative group in the near future.

Text of letter from Mr. Norman Lamont MP to Senator Evans Dear Senator Evans, I am pleased that we were able to reach agreement at our meeting in London on 22nd January and that your arrangements for establishing the Technical Assessment Group are moving ahead swiftly. Thank you for your letter and the formal invitation. I am pleased to accept the invitation to send representatives, on the understanding that it is in accordance with the assurance which the United Kingdom reiterated in 1978 to provide technical advice if requested on any further on-site operations to reduce surface contamination. I also acknowledge your agreement that the United Kingdom's representation on the Technical Assessment Group will be on a "without prejudice" basis to the question of ultimate liability for clean-up costs. I am content with the Terms of Reference of the Technical Assessment Group which were handed to the British High Commission on 4th February 1986. However, I would wish to emphasise, as we agreed in London, that the function of the Group is to identify and assess the costs of a range of options, not to recommend which should be selected. Also, I am advised that the range of options relating to the burial pits at Maralinga shall not exclude improving their present condition and the possibility of local disposal of radioactive or toxic debris. The names of the two experts for the Technical Assessment Group are:

Dr. Hylton Smith,
Head of Biology Department,
National Radiological Protection Board;
Mr. David Deverell (Rtd),
Formerly Head of Chemical Technology Division,
Atomic Weapons Research Establishment,
Aldermaston.

We will do our best to provide continuity of representation, but I am grateful for your recognition that other United Kingdom experts may be co-opted on an ad hoc basis. 329W As regards the Consultative Group, I confirm acceptance in principle of the invitation to be represented. The United Kingdom representative will be a member of the British High Commission in Canberra. With your agreement, I would intend to publish this exchange of letters in Hansard; you may well wish to do likewise.

TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT GROUP

Terms of Reference

1. Advise the Minister for Resources and Energy on options for the rehabilitation of the sites used for the British nuclear testing programmes in Australia. In particular the Group shall:

(a) Advise the Minister on requirements, including resources, timescales and costs, for field studies, laboratory research and pilot operations to be undertaken to enable options for radioactive and toxic decontamination of former British atomic test sites in Australia to be developed.
(b) Evaluate, on the basis of a pilot study to be conducted by April 1986, the methodology, cost, scope, timescale and efficacy of scavenging of areas containing plutonium contaminated fragments (an emu parade) and to consider at the same time whether other debris at any of the test sites might be the subject of similar action.
(c) The Group to report to the Minister for Resources and Energy on (a) and (b) above by the end of May 1986.
(d) On the basis of the above field studies, laboratory research and pilot operations, and an assessment of hazards to operators, develop criteria, strategies and costs of options for decontamination of the test sites.

2. In considering options for the clean-up of the sites, possible access should cover the range from:

(a) fully unrestricted habitation by Aboriginals including the case of high dependence on local plants and animals for food: to
(b) casual access by Aboriginals assuming retained or, if necessary, extended fence.

3. The Technical Assessment Group will reconvene as necessary to assess progress of the field studies and research programme and report to the Minister as soon as possible on criteria, timescales and costs of decontamination options. The Group may report progressively once it has reached a final assessment of particular sites and in any case not later than six months after the completion of relevant field studies and research.