Atomic tests at Maralinga in S.A. 10 August 1977 — A judicial inquiry should be held  into grave discrepancies in statements by G overnÂ­ ment M in iste rs a b o u t a to m ic  b o m b  te sts a t

Maralinga, the Acting L eader o f the Opposition, the  Hon. Tom Uren, said today. M r Uren said he was  concerned that the A ustralian people had been given  false inform ation by the Governm ent about the  Maralinga test program . M r Uren said:

The Minister for Environment. Housing and Community  Development, Mr Newman, has announced a study by the  Australian Ionising Radiation Advisory Council of the  possible dispersal of radioactive material in me Maralinga  area. Mr Newman admits that low yield atomic testing  continued at Maralinga until 1963. This flagrantly contraÂ­

dicts the Defence Minister, Mr Killen, who told ParliaÂ­ ment on 9 December 1976, that testing ended in 1955-56.  If we are to believe Mr Newman, atomic testing at  Maralinga continued for six years beyond the date conÂ­ ceded by the Defence Minister. If this is true, then Mr

Idlcn has mislead the Parliament and the people. It is inconceivable that Mr Newman could make a gross  mor about the dates o f such a vital matter as nuclear tests  Â°e Australian soil. There is another very serious discrep-  *Â»cy between information provided by Mr Killen and

Ã¢ÂÂ formation from the British Ministry of Defence. In April  '-Ã¢ÂÂ¢us year, Mr Killen issued a list of Australian nuclear tests  lowing that seven tests had been held at Maralinga be-  ^een 4 October 1956 and 9 October 1957. 1 have in my  S e ssio n  a letter written by the United Kingdom De-  lfnct Minister, Mr F. Mulley, to a British Member o f Par-  un'ent. In this letter Mr Mulley makes the following  tatement about Maralinga, and 1 quote:

The 1967 clean-up operation was extensive. The site of  rich nuclear explosion, o f which there were

*"’* Â· Â· . (myemphasis) ' 1)0 is right? Mr Killen who says there were seven tests or  'Mulley who says there were nine? Were two tests con-  ^*ted surreptitiously in violation of the 1958-61 mora-

and was the holding of these tests deliberately  ^*M>eld from the Australian people? On the face of it

; there has been a gigantic cover up by the Government of  the nature and dimensions of the Maralinga test program.

This accentuates the fears which have been aroused  over the past year about the hazards arising from the  storage of nuclear wastes created by Britain at Maralinga.  It is imperative for a proper understanding by the AusÂ­ tralian people o f the hazards associated with storage of  nuclear waste that all of the circumstances o f the  Maralinga test program be fully investigated. The  Government should appoint a judicial inquiry, preferably  a full-scale Royal Commission, to sift the evidence and  find out exactly what happened at Maralinga. It should  also investigate the irresponsible and ad hoc approach the  Fraser Government had adopted to informing the AusÂ­ tralian people about a crucial issue.

