I am sure that there only has to be one change to the nuclear legislation and that is to allow specified nuclear powered vessels into NZ. They could specify the power plant types in a schedule or similar and that way control who can add cannot enter NZ waters on reactor safety grounds. For example the schedule could limit vessels to PWR-3 or newer reactors. That's a simple ammendment and the only ones who will get their panties in a twist will be the Greens and the far lefties. Generally the great hairy unwashed would see it as a pragmatic option.
Yes, sounds logical! Took a look at the
legislation and section 11 is quite clear that nuclear propelled ships are prohibited (no mention of nuc submarines though! So maybe there is a loophole anyway?
). IIRC the prohibition only applies to within the 12 mile limit (not eg 200nm). Anyway if we look at other parts of the legislation it talks about "government approvals" (military ship/aircraft visits in general) .... so there is leeway there (for other purposes) which means there is no reason leeway could not be applied to nuclear propelled vessels.
For example (using my laymans terms - I'm sure others here could write it better), section 11 could be amended to be something like:
"
Entry into the internal waters of New Zealand by any ship whose propulsion is wholly or partly dependent on nuclear power is prohibited." .... "
unless dispensation has been approved by the NZ Government" (or similar).
Which could apply to the RAN (and USN - thus resolving a major brickwall in NZ/US political relations and naval visits/exercises to our shores). Presumably nations would discuss this dispensation diplomatically (i.e. it wouldn't be a blanket "un-banning" for "everyone" as that would make section 11 irrelevant). If so I would imagine Australia and the USA would be the two main country's with such a dispensation. Unsure about the UK and France because I doubt they would want to bring their nuc powered subs to our shores but at least there is a mechanism there should they wish to (presumably the UK could in principal, simply to align with their AUKUS partners, and give them options should they wish to take them up). On the other hand I can't see CCP or Russia asking for dispensation!
It's also important to remember that sentiment has changed - the "fears" of the cold-war 1980's is different to today. Kiwi's are much more aware of CCP "issues" in the Indo-Pacific region (and their own imprisonment of ethnic minorities). Kiwi's wouldn't be worked up about a change in the legislation - I would say a majority would view it favorably and practical for these times. (Granted the "peace-movement and Green Party would be upset but what's new about that, there's no pleasing them, ever)!
Interestingly the NZ MSM is starting to ask similar questions. Today one of Stuff's better senior politcal journalist's Luke Malpass is raising this very subject. To quote some of Mr Malpass' fine writing:
But while it won’t affect New Zealand that much right now, it could in the long run. That in turn raises the strategic question of whether the ban on nuclear-powered (not armed) vessels should be allowed here. It is one thing to continue a ban on the Americans; it is another to effectively institute one on our closest ally.
In other words, there has been a certain puritanism about New Zealand’s nuclear stance that may have to be revisited in the new era of sharper geo-strategic competition.
www.stuff.co.nz
Another Stuff journalist Lucy Craymer gives us context to (CCP) issues in our wider region (Pacific) that is impacting Pacific Forum nations and ourselves. (My point here being Kiwi's are more aware now of issues that will and are impacting us. And they ain't gonna stand by and do nothing)!
www.stuff.co.nz
www.stuff.co.nz
Finally in another Stuff article today, Nicholas Khoo (Politics, Otago University) gives us plenty of food for thought in his opinion piece, for example:
What are the implications of these developments for New Zealand?
First, whether we like it or not, great power politics cannot be wished away. It’s high time we asked ourselves some hard questions. A few spring to mind.
Now that our top trading partner, China, is in an open rivalry with Australia, our treaty ally since 1951, do we need to make any serious changes in our foreign policy?
What is our view if China responds to Australia’s move by establishing a greater diplomatic and military presence in the South Pacific? What about a China-Fiji alliance?
www.stuff.co.nz
Finally looking through the political lens, it is somewhat fortuitous for our PM Jacinda Ardern that Scott Morrison is the Australian PM (imagine if she was dealing with a Bob Hawke or Paul Keating type)! ScoMo has an affinity with NZ and Ardern so this is a good time for the two of them to work something out (on nuc sub visits/amending legislation). It would be win-win for both nations. For Australia it means NZ won't be a hinderance and is being supportive of its ambitions (and could better partake etc). For Ardern she would need a "win" too, perhaps for example she could strike a deal with ScoMo on the 501 issue, or have Australia stop deporting people with low-level convictions (wasn't a kid deported recently, with his family still in OZ? Honestly Australia's image over here can be mud sometimes). Or maybe something dear to Ardern's heart, refugees! A win for her would see her adoring media cheerleaders proclaim her as NZ's greatest PM ever! (
)! As for the US (for USN visits to resume largely unhindered), perhaps Ardern could use it as a bargaining chip for free-trade talks? Anyway so many possibilites and opportunities are there, which Labour can capitalise on (potentially giving them the mandate to be re-elected time and time again)!
