The NEXT coming Oz election thread!

Well, at least Crikey agrees with me! :wink: :

Dear Squatters,

The front page of today's (yesterday's) Australian newspaper and its reporting of the latest Newspoll has prompted a range of reactions, from shock at the sheer mendacity of its main headline ''Howard checks Rudd's march'' to muffled awe at the paper's continuing ability to pluck some shred of glass-half-full optimism from the ongoing cataclysm of the Liberal Party's federal polling. All of which is no more or less than one might expect from the country's unofficial conservative organ.

The surprising thing about the page is really in the photograph, an image of John Howard taken yesterday during a visit to a NSW aged-care facility. What, you have to ask, are his minders thinking? Is the juxtaposition of our aging and politically infirm PM with the apparatus of geriatric care likely to be a political plus? Especially when, as is the case in The Australian's photograph, he seems to be the oldest person in the room?

Time for a spry early morning powerwalk, PM -- though probably not in the new Wallabies man-boob jersey -- and some fresh advice. .....

I don't suppose he'd have us staying on even after the Americans have left? :wink: :

It just seems we keep banging our head against a brick wall msolga. I just wish kevin would get some fire in his belly and make some mileage in the right direction and stop being sidetracked by unimportant issues concocted by bonzai and co. Wouldn't it be great to see a Labor leader breathing a bit of fire like Hawkie used to do in the early days. Tens of thousands attended meetings around the country and the Labor politicians vowed to TEAR UP the IR laws. If kevin stuck to that promise, he would have untold support. I fear he has gone SOFT on it.
Workers must be able to collectively bargain. With AWAs, it's the bosses' way or the highway.

Another ALP member resigns. I wonder if kevin knew about this beforehand ?

Rudd's brother forced to quit the ALP

July 14, 2007 - 11:19PM

The high-profile brother of Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has quit the ALP after leaked documents revealed he was giving rival parties thousands of dollars.

The Sunday Telegraph reported the damaging documents came from an ALP source as retribution for Mr Rudd's expulsion of non-compliant union figures Joe McDonald and Dean Mighell.

Greg Rudd, a former Keating government staffer, is the principal and founder of the Brisbane-based firm Open Door Consulting.

Documents obtained by the paper showed that since 2001 the lobbyist has donated more than $10,000 to the Queensland Liberal and National parties.

Under Labor rules, funding another party results in automatic expulsion.

The paper reported that Mr Rudd (Greg) expected "someone to come after him" after reading that Perth-based lobbyist Julian Grill, an associate of disgraced former WA premier Brian Burke, had recently been expelled from the Labor Party under similar circumstances.

"I am formally resigning from the ALP from today. The rules are the rules," Mr Rudd told the paper.

Mr Rudd resigned his ALP membership on Friday the 13th of July.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Rudds-brother-forced-to-quit-the-ALP/2007/07/14/1183833850404.html

Probably. I can't see any issue with it. My guess is that it only makes the paper because he's Kevins brother, and still most people won't care less about it.

Well, I reckon that Rudd lot is one, crazy dysfunctional "Labor" family! I would say much more if I wasn't flat out & on the run! But if I start, I may not be able to stop! :wink:
(... & I've gotta go. Busy, busy, busy! You wouldn't believe how busy!)

A photograph of another of those unfortunate Guantanamo inmates? (That's what I thought when I first looked at the front page of my morning newspaper today.)
But wrong.
It's a photograph of a prisoner of our own Australian "war on terror" .... Indian doctor, Mohamed Haneef, who is guilty of the crime of passing on his SIM card to the wrong person when he left Britain some time ago.

But read the article (below) about the "justice" metred out to Haneef at the hands of Australian authorities. Very disturbing.

I don't think anyone has a problem about legitimate efforts to foil real possible threats to our community. But this?
Not in my name, Mr Howard, Me Rudoock & Mr Andrews!:


Long journey through the justice system … a prisoner, believed to be Mohamed Haneef, is driven from the Brisbane watchhouse in a police vehicle yesterday.
Photo: Eddie Safarik


A case of justice denied
July 18, 2007/the AGE


Illustration: Dyson

The treatment of Mohamed Haneef compromises Australia's legal system and puts at risk the way of life the Government says it is fighting to protect, writes Julian Burnside.

THE treatment of Mohamed Haneef is very disturbing. He spent 12 days in custody waiting to be questioned by police and he was held under provisions that do not appear to contemplate such lengthy detention without charge.

When, eventually, the police started questioning Haneef, they apparently found out no more than they already knew: he had given his cousin a pre-paid SIM card that still had some credit. Haneef could no longer use it because he was leaving England. A year later the SIM card was found in a car used by a terrorist.

It is a thin-looking case that will depend on showing that Haneef had reason to think one year ago that the SIM card would be used by a terrorist organisation.

Australia Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty described the case as being "at the margin". Presumably the same thinking persuaded the magistrate that Haneef should be bailed pending trial.

Prolonged detention for questioning is troubling: it is difficult to square with our assumptions about liberty. But things soon got much worse: as soon as Haneef was granted bail, Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews cancelled his visa.

A visa permits a non-citizen to be in Australia. The power to cancel a visa is a necessary one, but its purpose is to terminate a person's right to be in Australia. When a person's visa is cancelled, they must be deported as soon as reasonably practicable. Pending deportation, they must be held in detention. The power to cancel a visa and place the person in detention is in aid of the power to deport the person.

If the minister had cancelled the visa with a view to deporting Haneef, no one could complain too much, putting to one side that it is done on secret evidence, which Haneef is not allowed to see. But Kevin Andrews has cancelled Haneef's visa and does not intend to deport him in the foreseeable future. On the contrary, he has cancelled the visa to help Attorney-General Philip Ruddock and the Federal Police: they want to prosecute Haneef, but they want him locked up in the meantime. Getting the case to trial is likely to take several years. By cancelling Haneef's visa, the minister has ensured that Haneef will remain in custody pending trial, despite the granting of bail. On the face of it, this is a serious misuse of power for an ulterior purpose and an illegitimate interference with the process of criminal justice.

The misuse of power is a dangerous thing in any event, but in the case of Haneef it gets worse. The minister has publicly branded Haneef as a person of bad character. That will make a fair trial more difficult to achieve, especially in the prevailing climate. In addition, Haneef will spend the next couple of years in a detention centre. There is no detention centre in Brisbane, so he is to be sent to Villawood in suburban Sydney. Perhaps he will later be sent to Christmas Island. At least they cannot send him to Nauru, unless they amend the Migration Act.

The first and most obvious result of all this is that Haneef will be held in conditions that are much more uncomfortable than in a modern prison. The second is that Haneef will be a very long way away from his Brisbane-based lawyers. As a former barrister, Andrews must know how hard it is to prepare a case if a defendant is held hundreds or thousands of kilometres away from his defence team.

Legal aid is so poorly funded by this Government that it is unlikely to pay air fares for his lawyers to travel between Brisbane and Sydney as they go through the thousands of documents said to have been collected in the course of the investigation. The inevitable and foreseeable result is that Haneef's defence has been greatly prejudiced. In such a doubtful case, the Government no doubt wants to stack the deck. It is the way they work.

The grim paradox is that Haneef would have been much better off if he had been refused bail. Not many people can say that.

To add to this sorry saga of calculated injustice, Haneef will be liable for the daily cost of his incarceration in Villawood, in circumstances much less congenial than he would have faced, at no cost, in a Brisbane jail if bail had been refused. If it takes two years for the case to come to trial, Haneef will be liable to the Government for about $88,000 for his "accommodation" even if he is acquitted.

Where does the presumption of innocence get a look in?

Nowhere apparently. The minister has hinted strongly that if Haneef is acquitted he will be removed from Australia anyway. He will not say why, apart from references to bad character. It seems that although a charge is enough to show bad character, an acquittal will not establish good character.

The implications of the Haneef case are very alarming. It is another indication of what the Howard Government is prepared to do, especially in an election year. The Immigration Minister is willing to lend himself to the police. The Attorney-General is willing to take advantage of the minister's impropriety. Haneef's ability to defend himself has been wilfully compromised.

The character of any government can be measured by the way it treats those who are powerless.

This Government will use every dirty trick to crush Haneef, regardless of his guilt or innocence.

In the war to save democracy we are at risk of throwing away its most important features.

Julian Burnside, QC, is president of Liberty Victoria

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/a-case-of-justice-denied/2007/07/17/1184559785999.html?page=fullpage

Some background information on the circumstances Haneef finds himself in at the moment:

Haneef charged with terrorism offence
Posted Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:49am AEST
Updated Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:12pm AEST

Gold Coast-based doctor Mohammed Haneef has been charged with recklessly providing resources to a terrorist organisation.

The 27-year-old has been in Australian Federal Police (AFP) custody since his arrest almost a fortnight ago over alleged links to the recent UK terrorism plots.

He has been charged with recklessly supplying a mobile phone sim card to a terrorist organisation.

The offence carries a maximum penalty of 25 years in prison.

Haneef's bail application is continuing in Brisbane.

Yesterday afternoon AFP officers dropped a court application for more time to investigate whether Haneef is linked to the failed terrorism plots in the UK, and a 12-hour questioning period began.

Haneef's lawyer, Peter Russo, has spent all night at federal police headquarters where his client has been interviewed.

This morning he said Haneef would be charged today with a terrorism offence and has been transferred to the Brisbane watch-house.

He said his client is very upset by the news and will apply for bail.


AFP response

Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty has defended the length of time it took investigators to charge Haneef.

He says it was a question of balancing human rights and the needs of the AFP to establish the facts.

"The detention of Dr Haneef, whilst attracting considerable media attention, is something that the organisation and certainly myself believed was necessary in order to afford everybody the best opportunity to understand what has occurred," he said.

Commissioner Keelty says the AFP has had more than 300 lawyers and police working on the investigation, who had to examine a considerable amount of material.

"The inquiry's involved, and will continue to involve something in the order of the equivalent of 36,000 four draw filing cabinets, that is the quantity of material that's been seized in electronic form from various locations," he said.

He says Haneef has had the charge explained to him.

"The allegation is that Dr Haneef provided support to a terrorist group, the specific allegation involves recklessness rather than intention, the allegation being that he was reckless about some of the support he provided to that group in particular the provision of his sim card for the use of the group," he said.

Federal Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd says he pleased with the the way Australian Federal Police have handled the case.

"My message to the Australian people is this: that when it comes to terrorism, terrorists and those who support terrorist organisations, this country must continue to adopt a hardline uncompromising stance - there are no alternatives," Mr Rudd said.

http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/14/1978526.htm

Another bad poll result for JH the other day, which led to him asking his backbenchers if it was something he'd done, perhaps? (How could he have become so unpopular?) .... & telling them to feel free to be frank about any criticisms they might have about his leadership. Must have been an interesting meeting, hey? :wink:

Leunig (though not a backbencher) obliged by telling him exactly what he thinks!:

Years of 'baggage' hitting PM: pollsters
Patricia Karvelas |
July 18, 20/the AUSTRALIAN

POLLSTERS believe 11 years of "baggage" on a range of issues from Iraq to the children overboard scandal are taking a toll on John Howard and have led to his battering in the polls.

As the Government continues to ponder why it has failed to make inroads in the lead established by Kevin Rudd - and a day after the Prime Minister asked cabinet colleagues if he was the problem - the nation's leading pollsters argue that Mr Howard is failing to cut through with crucial groups.

Newspoll chief executive Martin O'Shannessy said while he had always considered Mr Howard's leadership style and campaigning ability as his "big plus", his reputation had been eroded.

"There's not a lot of love out there," Mr O'Shannessy said yesterday.

"There seems to be some baggage ... that he may not have got over.

"People keep talking about children overboard, people keep talking about the downside of Tampa, there's clearly twice as many people unhappy with Work Choices than are happy with it."

Mr O'Shannessy said a growing number of groups were dissatisfied with Mr Howard.

"In each group in the population there's the mortgage belt who may have issues, there's the people who aren't happy with Work Choices," he said.

"We've certainly found in our polling that young people, 18-34s, who were previously trending towards the Coalition in voting preference are now trending away."

The head of Galaxy Research, David Briggs, wagreed that Mr Howard faced an image problem.

"It's true that in 11 years he has collected a fair amount of baggage," he said. "He is not someone who is particularly liked or trusted but I believe that most voters still respect him and that's the tricky thing."

Mr Briggs said the Government had time to make up ground. "Here we have an election between a Government that is not completely on the nose and an Opposition which is a very attractive proposition," he said. ... <cont>

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22093486-11949,00.html

... & now this: Not exactly a great show of unity in the Liberal leadership at this wobbly time for Howard. (And can you believe that Costello & his wife have never dined with John & Janette at home? Gosh. They really don't seem to like each other!):

Costello's Howard comments a 'damning indictment'
Posted 3 hours 10 minutes ago
Updated 2 hours 32 minutes ago


Labor says if Peter Costello (R) does not trust John Howard (L) neither should Australians. (File photo) (AAP: Alan Porritt)

The Federal Opposition has seized on revelations from a new biography on Prime Minister John Howard, saying they show that he is a threat to the economy.

The extracts from the biography quote Treasurer Peter Costello appearing to suggest that Mr Howard leaked a memo critical of him six years ago.

Opposition treasury spokesman Wayne Swan says if Mr Costello does not trust Mr Howard, neither should Australians.

"This is a damning indictment of the Prime Minister's record," he said.

But Mr Howard denies he or his office leaked the memo.

"To this day it remains a complete mystery to me how it got into the public domain," he said.

Mr Costello is also quoted as saying he worries about the sustainability of some Government spending, and Mr Swan has tried to use that against the Government too.

"The Prime Minister has been spending irresponsibly, according to the Treasurer," he said.

While the new book has made leadership an issue again, Mr Howard says it was resolved last year.

Mr Costello's supporters are making it clear they believe it is too close to an election to change leaders. .. <cont>

http://www.abc.com.au/news/stories/2007/07/19/1983135.htm?section=justin

But hang on! Check this out!:

Terrorism gives Howard poll boost
By Sid Marris of The Australian
July 20, 2007

THE poll with the strongest voter support for Labor all year has recorded a sudden move towards the Coalition.

But the Roy Morgan Research poll reveals that more electors think the Labor party will win the next federal election, due about November or December, and Kevin Rudd's team still contain a commanding lead, 55 per cent to 45 per cent after distributing preferences.

The poll is the first mainstream opinion poll published since the appearance of Dr Mohamed Haneef in jail and his subsequent placing in immigration detention after a Brisbane Court awarded bail, pollster Gary Morgan noted.

He said the swing back was not surprising as historically the Morgan Poll has shown a swing to the Coalition when security related events get big coverage.

It was conducted before publication of damaging remarks by Treasurer Peter Costello about Prime Minister John Howard in an interviews for a book conducted last year.

Support for the Coalition jumped by over 4 percentage points to 40.5 per cent after languishing with in the low to high thirties since December last year.

Labor's primary vote dropped by 3 points but remains a healthy 47.5 per cent.... <cont>

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22104675-601,00.html

... but (hang on again!) the government's case against Haneef was not looking quite so convincing this morning as this news came through, via our media.:

Doubt cast on case against Haneef
Posted 6 hours 44 minutes ago
Updated 5 hours 39 minutes ago


Mohamed Haneef is facing charges of recklessly supporting a terrorist organisation. (ABC TV)

New information has emerged in the case that was made against Gold Coast doctor Mohamed Haneef, who was arrested in Brisbane in connection with the attempted bombings in Britain last month.

In Brisbane last Saturday, the court was told that Haneef's SIM card was found in the car that was smashed into Glasgow airport.

But the ABC has been told by sources in the UK and Australia that the SIM card was first seized by police eight hours later, when his cousin Sabeel Ahmed was arrested in Liverpool.

The ABC understands the Sabeel Ahmed was arrested with two phones, one of which contained Haneef's SIM card.

Evidence was presented in court suggesting that Haneef's SIM card being at the scene of the foiled attack was one of the reasons behind charging him with recklessly supporting a terrorist organisation.


Inconsistencies

Haneef's lawyer Peter Russo says inconsistencies in evidence are a problem in the bail process in Queensland courts.

"These differences are common problems in relation to how prosecutors run matters in Queensland, especially at bail hearings," he said.

"It's quite usual for us to find out that the facts that have been put before the magistrate are different to what actually comes out in the proceedings."

He says the inconsistencies will be raised in court.

"The only way that we're ever going to be able to prove whether that's true or not will be in an open hearing," he said.

"The first opportunity we may get to do that will be on the 8th of August.

"All I can do is just keep working hard and the truth will be found somewhere in the unfolding of the different court hearings that we have."

Police in Britain and Australia would not comment.

http://www.abc.com.au/news/stories/2007/07/20/1983448.htm

Andrews urged to review Haneef decision
Posted 4 hours 13 minutes ago
Updated 3 hours 58 minutes ago

The ABC has been told by sources in Australia and the UK Haneef's mobile phone SIM card was not found in a burning jeep at Glasgow airport, contrary to evidence that may have been cited by the Australian Federal Police in a Brisbane court last saturday.

Lex Lasry QC says revelations today indicate there were inconsistencies in what appeared in the police record of interview and what was relied upon by the Immigration Minister to cancel Haneef's visa.

Mr Lasry says it appears the evidence against Haneef is thin.

"It's most unfortunate if a decision has been made which has taken away someone's liberty which is taken on the basis of a wrong interpretation of the actual evidence that there is against Dr Haneef," he said.

Mr Lasry says Mr Andrews should consider reversing his decision to revoke Haneef's visa.

"One obvious step is for the Immigration Minister to consider reviewing his decision, assuming that's possible under the Migration Act," he said.

The Indian-born doctor has spent almost three weeks in custody, with the matter of his visa now before the Federal Court.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/20/1983727.htm

So what is the reaction from the Liberals to these rather damning "inconsistencies" in the Haneef case? To pass the buck to the Australian Federal Police. (This "terrorism'-related issue has given the Libs the only boost in the polls they've had for ages. I guess they're not going to do anything that might undo that.)
And what is the response to the allegations of inconsistencies in the evidence against Haneef in court from the Australian Federal police commissioner? To pass the back to the courts.
But what about the court being supplied with inaccurate information in the first place? ... which has led to Haneef's current predicament.

Democracy & justice, JH style. This is absolutely outrageous.


Haneef case not damaged: police
Mark Dodd and Sid Marris
July 20, 2007/the AUSTRALIAN

THE Australian Federal Police commissioner Mick Keelty has declared revelations about inconsistencies in the police statements about the Mohamed Haneef have not damaged the prosecution case.

And the Australian Government is digging in with Immigration minister Kevin Andrews refusing to review his decision to withdraw Dr Haneef's visa after he was granted bail by the court on Monday.

The Prime Minister John Howard was today also avoiding questions, saying it is a matter for the AFP and the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions Office.

Mr Keelty said this afternoon it was up to the courts and not the media to judge the evidence and he did not wish to comment on the matter.

But asked if the revelations about inconsistencies - over material in the interview compared with what was led in court and the location of a crucial telephone SIM card - had weakened the police case he said no.

"Not at all and theses are matter as I say for the court to adduce to the value of the the evidence, not others,'' he said.

"Submissions are made to courts, submissions for bail, submissions on behalf of defendants, are just that they are not evidence they are submissions and we need to let the court determine the value of what has been put before it.''

Mr Andrews today announced he would be allowing a relative of Dr Haneef Imran Siddiqui into Australia to support the Indian-born Gold Coast doctor and consult with his lawyer.

But there would be no review of the decision to cancel his visa and place him into detention awaiting trial.

''The minister is not reviewing his decision to cancel the visa of Dr Haneef,'' a spokeswoman for Mr Andrews said.

''Nothing that has been reported in the media alters his decision that was made based on information provided to him by the Australian Federal Police and is a broader range of information than was provided to the magistrate.''

Any speculation about the prosecution case was a matter for the AFP, she said.

Analysis by The Australian's Hedley Thomas of the police affidavit, which is before the courts, and the 142-page record of Dr Haneef's first police interview, show there are major discrepancies on two significant issues.

This includes the timing of when Dr Haneef lived in a house which was occupied by two relatives involved UK bombings, and whether he had given an explanation to police about why he was leaving the country on a one way ticket.

The ABC has also reported that the SIM card which Dr Haneef is accused of recklessly supply to a terrorist group was found in Liverpool and not in Glasgow as suggested in the court by the DPP's Clive Porritt on Saturday.

Attorney-General Philip Ruddock's office also said he did not want to discuss problems with the case, particularly revelations about the SIM card.

Asked whether Mr Ruddock had been misled by the AFP, a spokeswoman for the minister replied: ``We (Attorney-Generals Department) are not conducting trial by media.''

Pressed again by The Australian newspaper whether she thought the SIM card allegations were an ``important issue'' requiring clarification, the spokeswoman replied, ``No.''

This afternoon Melbourne QC Peter Faris said the Haneef case as ''a shocking mess-up'' and said he had ''trouble seeing a jury convict him (Haneef) on this sort of evidence.''

Mr Faris said the case showed the Australian Federal Police (AFP) were ''way out of their depth'' when it came to handling terrorism cases.

''If I were the attorney-general, I would have the Director of Public Prosecutions and (AFP commissioner) Mick Keelty on the mat this morning demanding that they get this sorted out,'' he said.

''I think it's an absolute disgrace. ''

Prime Minister John Howard meanwhile has distanced himself from the SIM card issue, saying any criticism of the handling of the case should be directed to the Department of Public Prosecutions, not to the government.

''I have no comment to make about the handling of the prosecution because it is not being handled by me,'' Mr Howard told reporters in Evanston, north of Adelaide today.

''I think it would be a good idea if ... everybody let the prosecution be conducted and let the matter be properly ventilated.

''If anybody has questions about the conduct of the prosecution than those questions should be directed to the DPP and the police - not to me.

''Because under our system of justice the executive has no role in the prosecution of people nor it should.''

Dr Haneef's lawyer Peter Russo told ABC radio the only way to determine the extent of Haneef's involvement was in an open court.

''The only way that we're ever going to prove whether that's true or not, will be in an open hearing and the first opportunity we may get to do that will be on the eighth of August,'' Mr Russo said today.

''All I can do is just keep working hard and hopefully the process will unfold and the truth will be found somewhere in the unfolding of the different court hearings that we have.''

Mr Russo said he had been unable to confirm the report that the SIM card was not in the jeep, and was unsure whether the report was an ''ace in the pack''.

''It is one piece in a fairly complex matter so whether or not it is the ace in the pack, we don't know at this stage,'' Mr Russo said.

''It is one of the many things that I was trying to piece together.''

Mr Russo said it was common for facts put before the court at bail hearings to change, and hesitated to call the Australian Federal Police (AFP) investigation sloppy.

''It is very difficult, to point the finger at anyone and say they have been sloppy,'' he said.

''I'm not trying to make excuses for them (AFP) and I know any information that is put before the court has to be accurate.''

Mr Faris said he beleived a jury would now have trouble convicting Haneef.

''You can't get something that's so central so wrong,'' he told ABC radio.

''I think this is fast approaching the situation where there is not a reasonable prospect of a conviction, unless there's some other evidence that we don't know about.

''I just have trouble seeing a jury convict him on this sort of evidence.''

Mr Faris said the case showed the Australian Federal Police (AFP) were ''way out of their depth'' when it came to handling terrorism cases.

''If I were the attorney-general, I would have the Director of Public Prosecutions and (AFP commissioner) Mick Keelty on the mat this morning demanding that they get this sorted out,'' he said.

''This is a fairly minor case. This fellow obviously wasn't going to set off bombs in Australia, but it would be a shocking thing if a series of dangerous terrorists were caught here and their case fell over because the prosecuting authorities were incompetent.''

Mr Russo said he would visit Haneef again at Wolston Correctional Centre in Brisbane's south-west this afternoon.

With AAP



http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22105014-601,00.html

<sigh>

Something else to worry about.:

PM denies Australia will take nuclear waste
By political correspondent Louise Yaxley

Posted 6 hours 31 minutes ago
Updated 5 hours 41 minutes ago

The Government has revealed it is in negotiations with the United States about a nuclear cooperation agreement, but says it is too early to say what that will mean.

Mr Howard has again argued that nuclear power is a good option for Australia and says it could be economically viable within 10 years.

But despite the Liberal Party's Federal Council recently voting for Australia to store the waste of other countries, Mr Howard says that will not happen.

"We've made that clear, we're not taking other people's waste," he said.

The Federal Government says it was the United States which initiated moves towards heightened nuclear cooperation between the two countries.

Foreign Minister Alexander Downer says the US Department of Energy approached Australia to suggest updating a 1982 nuclear cooperation agreement between the two countries.

Mr Downer says the negotiations are not about joining the Bush administration's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, but he is open to the idea

"Certainly not for a moment would I rule that out. It's a real possibility," he said.


Nuclear waste 'trap'

Environment groups say the fact that Australia is in talks with the US opens the way for Australia to host a nuclear waste dump.

Democrats Senator Lynne Allison has warned of serious consequences if Australia signs up to the partnership

"It seems to me that Australia is being trapped into becoming the world's nuclear dump," she said.

Greens leader Bob Brown says Mr Howard will face stiff opposition if he tries to repeal Australia's laws preventing nuclear power stations.

"He's now going to have to move those laws if he wants to go the George Bush path," he said.

"And he'll get a hot debate, particularly from the Greens in the Australian Parliament if he goes in that direction."

Senator Brown says regional neighbours like Indonesia and Malaysia will be aggrieved by the decision to move closer to a nuclear deal.

"It's a dangerous move, it's not been canvassed with the Australian People," he said.

"It's part of John Howard's plan to use APEC to to appear like a world statesperson."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/20/1983593.htm