"There were a lot of reasons that I left the SDP back in the day, but if there was a main thing that triggered it, it was their support for nuclear energy. I strongly believed then, and still do now, that nuclear energy is a dangerous folly that we shouldn't pursue, and I am proud of my campaign to stop it.

But there are some people who disagree. From what I gather, they seem to think that if the snowflakes just stopped being so sensitive about nuclear energy, we could ditch this nation's dependence on fossil fuels. This nation could be powered by clean, green nuclear energy! Granted, the green here glows a bit more than you might expect, but what's the problem with that?

In case you can't tell, I don't buy it. Some of you might have also heard the buzz around "thorium reactors", which really is no different to the coal lobby's push for "clean coal". It's a marketing term. Thorium might be more efficient than uranium, but it's still a nuclear reactor. And as "better" as thorium might be, it is still commercially unproven. It has not been tried and tested. Ditching the push for renewables to focus on thorium would be a bit like investing millions on potato power. Sure, can potatoes generate power? Yes. Would powering this nation on potatoes alone ever be viable, let alone affordable or feasible? Hell no!

And in some ways, it's worse. I think I'd sooner support a plan to power Australia off potatoes than I would off thorium or uranium, because at least potatoes aren't radioactive! A lot of people like to act like nuclear is perfectly safe so long as it's managed correctly. Chernobyl? Clearly the result of communist mismanagement. Fukushima? Well, you can't trust those Japanese. Three Mile Island? Well, it was only operated by an American Fortune 100 company - clearly, they were scraping the bottom of the barrel.

The problem is, failures are human nature. Even the most altruistic and perfectly-run companies will get something wrong. When renewables go wrong, you might be without power for a bit. When nuclear goes wrong, people die. And will these nuclear plants be run by people who have the public interest in mind and who are operating purely to do no harm? Of course not! They'll be operated by multinational companies who care about nothing but profit. Companies like Engie.

And I'm sure you now know where this is going. If there is any homegrown example of why nuclear energy won't work, it's right here in the Valley. I don't need to explain this too much, as I'm sure everyone knows this tragedy all too well, but the Hazelwood mine fire blanketed Morwell and the Valley with toxic smoke and ash. At least 11 people died as a result of the fire. It was found by a court that the Hazelwood Power Corporation put workers and public at risk with their reckless disregard for health and safety.

Even though the damage of the fire was estimated to be over $100 million, they got away with a slap on the wrist - just under $2 million. This is a company that made over $95 billion in profits in 2019. They wipe their bums with million dollar bills. They essentially got away with inflicting massive damage on the Valley through their gross negligence.

If there is to be a nuclear power accident in Australia - and I pray to God we never come close to a situation like this - then the results could not only potentially be much worse due to the fact that uranium is just a little bit more toxic than coal, but the companies running it will get away with it.

With all that considered, do you really think it is worth investing in nuclear? Is it worth subsiding a giant pipe dream that will only end up lining the pockets of some French bastard? Is it worth the risk of mismanagement that could kill people? Is it worth the risk of nuclear waste? It is not feasible, it is not affordable, it is not practical, and I promise that, as a Senator, any nuclear power bill that comes in front of me will be dead on the spot!"