‘n Mosie deur verskeie partye in die Nederlandse Tweede Kamer (Parlement) is gister met ‘n klein meerderheid verwerp, terwyl die Minister van Buitelandse Sake baie positief was oor die mosie.

Die mosie het veral gefokus op die plaasmoorde in Suid-Afrika en die diskriminasie wat teen die boere van die land plaasvind.  Verskeie partye, waaronder die SGP, PVV en Groenlinks het onder andere gepleit dat internasionaal kennis geneem moet word van die plaasmoorde in Suid-Afrika en dat die Nederlandse regering selfs kundigheid moet aanbied om die probleem te help oplos.

Die Sosialiste en Arbeidersparty het die mosie in ‘n stemming laat sneuwel, maar die Minister van Buitelandse Sake, Rosenthal,  het verklaar dat hy die mosie “omhels”.

“Al is die mosie afgestem en daar geen hulp aangebied kan word nie, beteken dit tog dat daar toenemend kennis geneem word van die haglike omstandighede waaronder ons boere moet probeer voedselsekerheid handhaaf”, sê TLU SA se president, mnr. Louis Meintjes in reaksie op die gebeure.  “TLU SA is verheug daaroor dat daar deurbrake kom in sy aksies om die wêreld se oë op die vergrype teen Suid-Afrikaanse boere te laat fokus.  Ons wil nie graag ons vuil wasgoed voor die oë van die internasionale gemeenskap was nie, maar as die Suid-Afrikaanse regering nie self iets aan die saak wil doen nie, het ons geen ander keuse as om die wêreld in te lig en daardeur druk van buite af uit te oefen op die Suid-Afrikaanse regering,” sê mnr. Meintjes.  TLU SA sal hierdie aksie van hom voortsit, want die voortdurende moord op die boere kan nie langer stilweg aanvaar word nie.

Farm Murders generate international attention

Whilst a motion by various political parties in the Dutch Lower House (Parliament) was yesterday rejected with a small majority, the Minister of Foreign Affairs was very positive about the motion.

The motion focused on farm murders in South Africa and the discrimination against the SA farmers.  Several political parties, including the SGP, PVV and Green Left, among others, advocated that the international community should be made aware of the farm murders in South Africa.  They asked the Dutch government to offer expertise to help solving this problem.

The Socialists and the Labour Party voted against the motion, but the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Rosenthal, declared that he "embraced" the motion.

"Allthough the motion had been voted down and no assistance will be offered, it is a fact that international awareness of the appalling conditions under which farmers try to ensure food security, is increasing" said TAU SA president, Mr. Louis Meintjes in response to the events. "TAU SA is pleased that there are breakthroughs in its’ actions to draw attention to the unacceptable circumstances facing South African farmers. We do not want to wash our dirty linen in the international arena but if the South African government does not do anything we have no choice but to inform the world about local conditions and thus mobilize pressure from outside to be brought on the South African government," said Mr Meintjes. TAU SA will continue with such actions, because the continuing murders of the farmers cannot be accepted.

SA’S NUCLEAR ENERGY – IT’S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!

At the end of May last year, TAU SA published a Bulletin on the ditching by the SA government of the South African-developed Pebble Bed Nuclear Reactor. Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (Pty Ltd. had grown into one of the largest nuclear reactor design and engineering companies in the world. At the time more than 1 000 South African scientists and engineers were involved in the project, which also embraced universities, private companies and research institutes.

Most of South Africa’s coal-fired electricity is generated by large-scale plants built near the pit-heads of two coal-producing areas, both of them far inland on the eastern side of the country. This requires long power lines from the coal-rich areas to load centers away from the pit-heads, which in turn implies high capital costs and transmission losses.

These and other factors prompted Eskom to investigate small electricity-generating nuclear plants that could be placed near the points of demand rather than near water: the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) concept has a short construction time, a low operating cost and fast-load-following characteristics, and was considered to be the ideal option.

This unique process developed by SA’s scientists caught the interest of overseas governments. The Tsinghua University and Chinenergy Co. Ltd. of China entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with PBMR in March 2009. Korea and Japan also expressed interest, as did Canadian oil sands producers, while the USA’s Westinghouse took up a partnership in PBMR because of PBMR’s advanced technology.

This advanced technology eliminates the need for cooling by water and the plants can thus be situated anywhere in a country. It is High Temperature Reactor (HTR) technology and South Africa is acknowledged as the world leader in the development of this process. The Senior Vice President and chief technology officer of the US’s Westinghouse Dr. Regis Matzie said that “the South African PBMR technology will become the world’s first successful commercial generation IV reactor”.

FAST FORWARD

Fast forward to the South Africa government’s baffling reaction to this enterprise – last year, funding for the PBMR was stopped. Top South African engineer and nuclear scientist Phillip Lloyd found it “extraordinary that the government has pulled the plug on PBMR”. At the International Atomic Energy Agency meeting in Vienna in 2009, SA’s PBMR technology attracted universal praise. As a result of the funding stoppage, hundreds of SA scientists were made redundant and many were offered lucrative posts in the American nuclear energy industry. “Westinghouse has a scoop”, declared Lloyd. “They are picking this up for a song. PBMR is being promoted in North America as the next generation of nuclear technology”.

Why would the South African government make such a bizarre move, destroying a home-grown technology as it mulls over extensive and long-term energy plans for the country? As the detectives say, just follow the money! Former president Thabo Mbeki’s ANC government spent more than R60 billion on armaments the country didn’t need. Millions found their way into crony bank accounts, but cover-ups were quick and those whose pockets were lined were never brought to book. The ANC nailed its corruption DNA to the mast, so it was not difficult to predict the change of heart with regard to South Africa’s nuclear power options.

IT’S THE MONEY!

In our May 2010 Bulletin, we predicted that the French company Areva was on the cards to tender for a nuclear-powered reactor which would cost billions and is not as advanced as the PBMR process. This has come to pass! The French reactors are water-cooled, so their power stations must be built on SA’s coasts. Selected articles referring to Areva as a possible nuclear provider were already appearing in the press last year, and France’s Electricite de France (EDF) declared that “South Africa is ready for nuclear power”.

Why the ditching of PBMR and the seduction by the French? It’s all about the money, of course. As with the arms deal, here is a lucrative opportunity for the South African powers that be to cream off considerable pickings in a deal which could cost one trillion rand. It is worth more than ten times the arms deal. France has been courting the responsive South African politicians since 2007, according to leaked diplomatic cables from the US embassy in Pretoria. Competition at the time was between the US and France, but France knows how to lobby. Mr. Jacob Zuma has been on two state visits to France since becoming president: French President Sarkozy laid on lavish dinners, functions, tours and receptions designed to dazzle and flatter the gentleman from Nkandhla. In February 2008, Sarkozy made a state visit to South Africa, praising the country’s new democracy and promising undying “cooperation” between the two countries.

Sarkozy cannot be blamed for this approach – as a former colonial power, France knows too well how to flatter Africa. Sarkosy’s visit was “impeccably timed”, noted a cable, because it occurred shortly after the closing date for tender submissions but before Eskom’s board was due to make its recommendations on the preferred supplier of nuclear power. (Mail & Guardian 7.10.11)

Areva supplied the existing nuclear power facility at Koeberg, and wasn’t going to allow a South African process, no matter how advanced, to thwart its plans to sell its product to the ANC government, well known for its empirically-documented venality. The ANC’s modus vivendi over the past seventeen years has shown it is more important to line one’s pockets than to defer to any other consideration, least of all to acknowledge the advanced nuclear PBMR process developed by South African scientists.

THE COST

South Africa is poised to issue the largest tender in its history (M&G 7.10.11). This contract could account for as much as 20% of the world’s total nuclear spending over the next twenty years. China appears to be in the process of providing the finance for the Areva tender. This duo appears to be the front-runner. Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe was feted in China on a state visit recently: the partying has started, and South Africans can be assured that “commissions” previously unheard of in this country will be widely distributed as a result of a successful tender.

With the nuclear option being downgraded because of the Japanese nuclear disaster following a tsunami, France’s Areva needs a big contract to survive. Something clearly not being taken into account by the ANC government is that France’s track record on the construction of new reactors is poor. Its flagship, a new generation of reactors named EPR, under construction in Finland and France, is struggling with thousands of technical and safety problems, delays and billions in cost overruns. Similar issues arise in China. According to Dr. Rianne Teule, an expert on nuclear energy working for Greenpeace Africa, “combining the French and Chinese nuclear failures in a potential joint bid for the R1 trillion tender is a recipe for disaster”.

But who in the government is worried about this? There are some lucrative bank account transfers on the cards, so it’s onward with the estimated payment of one trillion rand from a country whose total tax collection for 2010 was R674 billion! And it will be 2024 before all of these coastal reactors come on steam, while it is estimated the PBMR process could be ready within two years, if some of our scientists could be persuaded to return to South Africa.

Given the state of corruption, incompetence, nepotism and the government’s cavalier attitude towards the taxpayers of this country, the prognosis doesn’t look good, either for nuclear energy provision or , more insidiously, nuclear safety. The Fukushima nuclear disaster became so much more dangerous when the reactors heated and couldn’t be cooled – the PBMR process eliminates this problem. It doesn’t need water for cooling. Will there be cadre deployment in these new facilities? Perish the thought, given the current lamentable performances in the country’s civil service.

While sewage in the streets, the plundering of state budgets, dolled-up matric results and the other vagaries of life under ANC rule are lamentable, they are not life-threatening. A nuclear programme of water-cooled reactors under trade union control, government deployment of political friends and, of course, the inevitable cost overruns, the French/Chinese nuclear projects in South Africa could be a bridge too far!