State Liberals Nuke Nuclear Promise

SA Gov

The SA Liberals have broken a key election promise with just 10 months to go until the state poll, with Liberal leader Vincent Tarzia dumping his party's only energy policy.

In a stunning backdown, Mr Tarzia admitted on ABC Radio Adelaide that the Liberals' election commitment to hold a Royal Commission into nuclear energy would be dumped in the wake of the federal election:

Rory McClaren: That's what I was going to ask you… should nuclear from a Liberal Party policy perspective now be parked?

Vincent Tarzia: Yes, at the moment it's been comprehensively rejected and we know the thing is with the energy transition, in three years' time we will be in another position again.

The State Liberals made the pursuit of nuclear power their top priority, announcing their pursuit of a Royal Commission as their key commitment in their Budget Reply speech in June.

In August, Liberal Leader Vincent Tarzia appointed Stephen Patterson as Shadow Minister for Nuclear Readiness.

Now, just eight months later, the promise has been abandoned.

The 2016 Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission found nuclear power was not commercially viable in South Australia.

As put by Tom Koutsantonis

What do the South Australian Liberals stand for?

They're breaking election promises even before they've got to an election.

Only a few months ago, they were making the pursuit of nuclear energy their sole energy policy focus. Now, they've dumped it.

Vincent Tarzia must now dump his Shadow Minister for Nuclear Readiness, who has absolutely no policy offering other than the pursuit of an energy source that evidence shows will drive up bills for South Australians.

At a time when the Opposition should be outlining its policy platform ahead of the 2026 State Election, the State Liberals are instead ditching their only energy policy.

/Public News. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).