Barngarla will pursue judicial review if Napandee site named.

Barngarla may seek legal review

Members of the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation (BDAC) have said the outcome of the nuclear waste amendment bill was the result they were hoping for.

The National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 was passed by the Australian Parliament on June 22.

The BDAC had previously raised concerns about the absence of a judicial review process by naming the Napandee site in the proposed legislation.

"The government sought to change the law to remove our democratic right to judicial review of their actions so that no court could ever assess what had been done," they said in a previous statement.

However BDAC chair Jason Bilney said the bi-partisan support the bill received in parliament was what they were looking for, as changes were made to the bill to reinstate the ability to pursue a judicial review of the site selection process.

The bill was initially tabled in parliament in February 2020 with the intention to name the Napandee site near Kimba within the legislation.

Now federal resources minister Keith Pitt will be required to name the host site through ministerial decision, which will allow for a potential judicial review of the site selection process in future.

Mr Pitt is also not bound to name one of the three sites currently shortlisted.

Mr Bilney said it had been a "long, hard battle" for 15 months, and that he and others were in Canberra that week as the bill went through.

"It's a good outcome for the Barngarla people, but also all Australians because it affects all Australians," he said.

The BDAC have stated since the passing of the bill that if there is a declaration of the Napandee site, the BDAC will seek a judicial review.

"The Barngarla and farmers worked together and the senate did not agree to pass any bill which removed judicial review," they said.

"We had certain demands, which amounted to removing site specification in the bill and removing Schedule 1.

"The government gave in to these demands and effectively amended their own bill to reflect what Barngarla, Labor and the cross bench had said we required.

"So, we have no issues with the new bill, as it is the bill that we demanded occur.

"Namely, it preserves judicial review.

"In simple terms, we won this battle in parliament and we are very grateful for Labor and the cross bench, including senator Hanson's One Nation, the Greens, and senator Patrick."

We even had the Explanatory Memorandum further amended to make it clear that the Minister was not limited to just the three sites in the Table and that the Table was purely a historical record.