South Australia's history affords residents greater familiarity than most with the pros and cons of radioactive material. They have the Honeymoon, Roxby Downs and Beverley uranium mines and older generations lived through British nuclear testing out in the desert at Maralinga in 1956-57.

Many, led by the Federal Government, would argue such experiences make South Australia the perfect place for the dump site for waste from Sydney's Lucas Heights reactor.

Just as many, including the South Australian Government and 76 per cent of the population last time anyone checked, say the Maralinga experience in particular has taught them that this time they should just say no.

The federal and state governments are staring each other down as Canberra eyes three sites near Woomera for a repository for low-level nuclear waste. Meanwhile, the South Australian Government is pushing through legislation that would make such a construction illegal.

The state's Environment Minister, John Hill, has been campaigning against the waste dump for years and cannot think of another issue that would merit the recent headline in the local paper: "Opposition to nuclear dump eases - 76 per cent still against". He is overseeing the passage through the South Australian Parliament of the Nuclear Waste Storage Facility Prohibition Amendment Bill. Progress is slow because just about every member of the Parliament wants to say something about it.

The bill sets out to do three things: ban the building of a low-level waste repository; outlaw the transportation of radioactive waste from interstate or overseas in South Australia with the purpose of sending it to a waste dump in South Australia; and make any Federal Government move to establish a dump the trigger for a referendum on the issue.

South Australia is confident all its bases are covered, particularly since it already has laws banning the construction of a medium- to high-level waste storage facility. (The Federal Government is also casting around for a site for one of them.)

While South Australians have taken an active role in the anti-nuclear fight, their counterparts in NSW are noticeably quieter. Apart from environmental and local groups around Lucas Heights, there is not much interest.

Even last week's discovery of a fault line underneath the site for the replacement reactor was not enough to draw the Premier, Bob Carr, out. His Environment Minister, Bob Debus, will write to the federal Science Minister, Peter McGauran, seeking a full explanation.

Perhaps South Australia's new parcel of laws will spark some interest since the waste from Lucas Heights has to go somewhere and if it does not end up in South Australia then a site in the spinifex called Olary, near Broken Hill, is high on the list of suitable locations.

While Debus was concerned about last week's fault line discovery, his spokeswoman was pragmatic: "We don't want to raise people's expectations that we can do something about it because it is a Commonwealth project and there's not much we can do to stop them."

Most people seem to take the same attitude - they are concerned about a nuclear facility in their backyard but, since construction on the replacement HIFAR reactor has already begun, they feel there is little they can do.

Although this is true of the construction of the reactor, the choice of the site for the dumping of waste from Lucas Heights is far from settled. The Carr Government frequently points out it has already legislated against a dump and adds that the Federal Government has promised the people of NSW they will not have to suffer the twin penalties of a reactor and a dump.

But the NSW Greens claim there is a loophole in the law. One of the Greens' two upper house MPs, Lee Rhiannon, says the NSW Uranium Mining and Nuclear Facilities (Prohibitions) Act 1986 prohibits building or operating a nuclear waste facility and associated storage facilities unless they are operated by the Commonwealth, which is what the Lucas Heights dump site would be.

Rhiannon has a private member's bill waiting for a hearing which would remove this exemption as well as stop the transportation of nuclear waste for dumping purposes. "Even if the second reactor is abandoned, Lucas Heights will remain a key nuclear hot spot for hundreds of years because of its radioactive waste, the unused uranium fuel rods and the irradiated building itself," she says. "NSW Labor is under increased pressure to formulate an ecologically aware position since the election of Labor Premier Mike Rann in South Australia. Bob Carr's spin policy of avoiding the Lucas Heights issue makes insiders in the movement question his green credentials."

For their part, South Australian anti-nuclear campaigners are puzzled why their cousins in NSW are not fighting harder. The Australian Conservation Foundation's anti-nuclear campaigner in Adelaide, David Noonan, thinks NSW has its head in the sand when it comes to the question of where the dump will be.

"South Australia has the full support of the community and their government to fight the Federal Government and what does NSW have? People in NSW have to expect the transport corridors will never get out of the state. They won't go past Broken Hill but will stop west of the Darling."

Hill says his constituents are all too familiar with the reality of allowing anything nuclear into the state.

"What Maralinga taught us was that you can't trust the people who say [a dump site] is foolproof," he says. "We have our own examples where so-called best technology has left behind problems and that was only 50 years ago. What the Federal Government wants to dump in South Australia will be around for 250 million years."

Hill and his Premier campaigned hard on the issue in last year's state election. They also extracted a promise from federal Labor that it would back South Australia's opposition to the project.

Federal Labor's new environment spokesman, Kelvin Thomson, says the party remains committed to that promise.
While South Australia is agitating against the waste dump, the Federal Government is taking its time issuing an environmental impact statement for the eight sites it has identified as suitable.

With the EIS also will come the release of the transport corridors that would carry the waste from Lucas Heights to the dump site. The EIS has been imminent for some time, with reports suggesting it was due out in May, then by the end of June, and now there are whispers it might not be until after July. By then South Australia is betting that its laws will be in place and it is at this point that the conspiracy theory kicks in.

If South Australia has outlawed the dumping of nuclear waste within its borders, this leaves the Federal Government with two options: put the waste somewhere else or override the state's laws.

John Hill is talking tough but knows all the state laws in the world would come to nothing if the Federal Government set its heart on locating the waste dump somewhere near Woomera.

The three sites - one called Evatts Field West to the north-west of Woomera and two others in the north-east - are all on land which could be acquired under the Land Acquisition Act.

"There is nothing we can do legally if they do want to put it in South Australia," Hill says. "But we will pursue them politically."

What Hill hopes will be the more persuasive part of the new law is the provision that any move the Federal Government makes a move to establish a waste site in South Australia would act as a trigger for a referendum.

"The [South Australian] Government, the media, the traditional owners and the community would all be familiar with the 'no' case and the Prime Minister and his ministers would be forced to come here to argue the 'yes' case. We are prepared to hold that referendum one week before the next federal election and fight it in that context," Hill says.

The ACF is readying for a fight over states' rights. As Noonan says, what does a community have to do to convince the Federal Government that it does not want the dump?

"States' rights is a huge issue as is environmental democracy. Do a community and a state have the right to say 'no' to a nuclear industry?"

Whatever the answer to that question, South Australia has decided it might as well make some noise.

STATE premiers yesterday began lining up to block the establishment of a medium-level waste dump within their borders, effectively sabotaging a federal government national site search before it has begun.

The six states and two territories yesterday declared they would oppose being host to the dump, making the selection of a site an almost impossible task.

The federal Government is on the verge of awarding a contract for a private consultant to identify up to 20 possible sites for the dump.

It would take waste from Sydney's Lucas Heights nuclear reactor, and be in operation for up to 50 years.

Western Australia and South Australia, the two states most likely to be targeted for a dump site, are the most vocal in their refusal to accept the repository.

West Australian Premier Geoff Gallop said yesterday his state had a clean and green reputation and he wanted to keep it that way.

"Our message to John Howard is quite simple. The nuclear waste that is created in other states and at Lucas Heights is not welcome in Western Australia," Dr Gallop said.

The South Australian Government has already established what it calls its "ultimate nuclear deterrent". It has committed to a state referendum on the issue if federal authorities choose a location in South Australia, and says it will conduct the vote one week ahead of the next federal election.

At least three states - Western Australia, South Australia and NSW - have legislated against hosting the dump, although the federal Government may have the power to override those laws.

Federal Science Minister Peter McGauran yesterday warned the states not to create a political issue. "The fact is we have to locate it somewhere, it has to be a national facility and we are doing it on the basis of scientific advice."

Mr McGauran said he would prefer to negotiate with the states over an appropriate site, despite the federal Government having the constitutional power to choose where it is built.

"Surely it is obvious we have to find a place for this waste."

Mr McGauran accused Dr Gallop of putting at risk life-saving nuclear medical research by refusing to accept that its waste had to be stored somewhere.

Shadow Environment Minister Kelvin Thompson says the Federal Government must reconsider plans for a national radioactive waste dump in South Australia as it moves to strengthen counter-terrorism measures.

Yesterday's Council of Australian Governments' meeting in Canberra agreed there needs to be tougher controls on hazardous materials that could be used in terrorist attacks.

Mr Thompson says the Government must take into account safety issues surrounding the proposed dump.

"If the Federal Government is at all serious about wanting to deal with the threat from hazardous wastes as a security or anti-terrorist measure, it will go back to the drawing board concerning its plans to impose a national waste dump in northern South australia," he said.