342 8 THE COMMISSION IS DEAD, LONG LIVE ANSTO 8.1 Introduction Bob Hawke was elected Prime Minister of Australia in 1983. The ALP remained the governing party until the general election in 1996. Hawke, however, would lose a leadership ballot to Paul Keating (b 1944) on 19th December 1991. The Hawke-Keating years left an indelible mark on Australian society and initiated changes in the nature of government funding of research that affected academic establishments, the CSIRO and the AAEC|XXXV". This period saw the dismantling of the AAEC and the establishment of a new organisation, the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation. Paul Keating was defeated in the 1996 election which was won by the Liberal Party under the leadership of John Howard (b-1939). This chapter will focus on the period from 1983 to 1994. The Commission, during this period, would undergo a massive restructuring which included both name change, a new direction of research and naturally a new Act to govern this body. The chapter will not conclude when the Commission ceased to exist but will explore some of the early years of the new organisation, ANSTO, and the constant Government interference that continued to dog the organisation despite the changes. 8.2 The Commission in Limbo Hawke won the 1983 election, engineered a double dissolution to win in 1984 and then repeated his victory in 1987. Each time Hawke won he did so with a lxxxv" Changes in Australian economic policy during the 1980s are described in G.Maddox The Hawke Government and Labor Tradition' Penguin, Ringwood 1989 and P.Kelly 'End of Certainty' Allen and Unwin, St Leonards 1992 FROM ATOMIC ENERGY TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE 343 respectable majority, with the Australian Democrats or the Independents holding the balance of power in the Senate1. The change in government naturally led to a change to the minister responsible for the Commission; this new minister was The Right Honourable Peter Walsh who came into office on 11th March 1983. Labor Party policy concerning uranium and the nuclear fuel cycle, had changed dramatically during the years in opposition. In fact it was a complete reversal of its previous policy. Peter Walsh has suggested that this reversal had its roots as far back as 1974 for it was at this time that a small group of individuals, led by Tom Uren, had proposed an anti-uranium policy and a reversal of the previous Labor pro-uranium mining and pro-enrichment policies2. The issue of uranium mining came to a head during the 1977 ALP Conference when a motion was moved and passed that the Labor Party would repudiate all uranium export contracts signed during the term of the coalition government. These contracts were signed and mines were being developed by 1980. The next ALP Conference was held in July 1982, but by this time two mines were already in operation and fulfilling export contracts. At this conference the ALP policy concerning uranium mining changed again, this time allowing for the continued operation of the two existing mines (Nabarlek and Ranger) and allowing for the new mine at Roxby Downs to be developed. This became known as the three-mine policy3. The Commission continued to have changes in its make up. Professor Don George retired on 26th May 1983 and was replaced as Chairman of the Commission by Professor Max Brennan. Sir Bernard Callinan also retired and resulting vacancies were filled by Dr D.G. (Terry) Walker from 26th May and Dr J.G.Morris, Director, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital on 31st May4. Terry Walker had been a long time officer of the FROM ATOMIC ENERGY TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE Commission and had been a member of the team which received the Syme Prize in 1964. Terry Walker, the new Commissioner, was appointed the Executive Officer of the Commission at this time. He reflected on this period: 'it was very difficult to know what the government wanted you to do. I mean, I know what they wanted me to do- not cause any trouble. But we had no direction on programs at all. I mean, we were slightly embarrassed ...we did survive; I'm surprised sometimes that we actually did. Because if you read the Hawke government- the Labor party platform at the election of the Hawke Government- you'll realise that they were going to close it down6. Walker continues 'but we were a bit fortunate that our first Minister,...decided that wasn't going to happen6. Peter Walsh was perhaps the only individual in the new cabinet who supported the Commission. The new government, as had been the practice in the past, again wanted to revise the structure and research activities of the Commission and perhaps close the organisation down. Atomic energy was no longer seen as part of the Labor Party agenda and an organisation bearing that name was now an embarrassment to the new government. However, 'new Legislation governing the activities of the Australian Atomic Energy Commission is being developed ...the planned introduction of this legislation was deferred pending the outcome of the Australian Science and Technology Council Inquiry into Australia's Role in the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, which is under consideration by the Government'7. The report from the Australian Science and Technology Council (ASTEC) Inquiry into Australia's Role in the Nuclear Fuel Cycle was presented to the Government in May 1984. The report stated that the function of ASTEC was FROM ATOMIC ENERGY TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE 345 'to examine Australia's role in the nuclear fuel cycle and in particular, to consider issues which arise directly from that involvement. The nuclear fuel cycle involves a certain series of steps from the mining and milling of uranium ores, through the conversion of those ores into nuclear fuel and the use of that fuel in power reactors for electricity generation to reprocessing of spent fuel and disposal of waste6. The ASTEC report made a number of recommendations some of which echoed the first Ranger Report and included the following:- ' That exports of Australian uranium should not be limited as a matter of principle but should be permitted subject to stringent conditions of supply designed to strengthen the non-proliferation regime0, 'That Australian participation in stages of the nuclear fuel cycle in addition to uranium mining and milling should be permitted, where such participation promotes and strengthens the non-proliferation regime'10 That Australia take steps to ensure that nuclear material extracted for nuclear purposes from Australian ores after export would become subject to a safeguards agreement to which Australia is a party'11. The recommendations of the ASTEC review did not reflect the views of the Labor Party or the wider community. The AAEC was at this time still involved with research on the nuclear fuel cycle. The Government was now faced with the problem that the ASTEC recommendations were contrary to the will of some of the more vocal members of the Australian community and its own party policy. The Commission was aware that it had to suggest useful and acceptable goals for its research. The Annual report of 1984 demonstrated this new approach by the Commission when it stated FROM ATOMIC ENERGY TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE 346 'in the national interest the AAEC Research Establishment: • Pursues research objectives in areas of national priority • Provides expert technical advice on key nuclear issues... • Provides specialised facilities and services to the community... for research, medicine and the development of Australian industry • Contributes to the maintenance of Australia's position as a country advanced in nuclear science and technology...,12. The report continued with: 'applied research and development emphasises five priority areas: environmental science, waste management, medical applications of radioisotopes and radiation and nuclear technology. Increased effort in these areas has been at the expense of some previous activities, particularly uranium centrifuge enrichment research and development which is being phased out'13. The Commission, by this stage knew that its very existence was now in question and that it needed to establish its new direction in a framework which would be acceptable to or at least tolerated by the vociferous environmental lobby. Work on the nuclear fuel cycle was coming to an end despite the recommendations of the ASTEC report. The development of the use of radioisotopes in diagnostic medicine had profound elfects on the Australian population. A patient could now undergo relatively non-invasive tests (ie if one considers an injection as non-invasive) which could accurately determine the presence of a malignancy or an abnormal function of an organ or gland rather than undergo exploratory surgery which may result in weeks or months of convalescence. The radioisotopes produced in HIFAR all required relatively long half-lives from a medical perspective, but new diagnostic techniques were being developed overseas which used radioisotopes with half-lives of a few minutes or even a FROM ATOMIC ENERGY TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE few seconds. One of these new techniques was the PE"rxxxv"1 scan which allowed a physician to view and record a functioning organ. Consequently, in 1984 the Commission has proposed the acquisition of a cyclotron facility to enable a much wider range of radioisotopes to be available in Australia'14. The Commission was now under the protection of the ambitious Gareth Evans who became the new minister responsible for the Commission, following the 1984 elections. Perhaps it was Walsh's unwillingness to close down the AAEC that led to his transfer to another ministry. The issues of uranium mining and the export of Australia's uranium ores came into the public arena. The Labor Party had its three-mine policy for uranium mining but at the 1984 ALP Conference this issue would again be debated.