Daniel Wills: The people have skewered a political class they feels governs for itself instead of them

THE nuclear dump citizens’ jury — and election of Donald Trump — have given voice to a simmering frustration about the competency of our political class and the tactics it employs, writes Daniel Wills.

• Citizens’ jury overwhelmingly rejects nuclear SA waste storage facility
• Weatherill will be forced to abandon nuclear waste storage plan
• Should SA be home to the world’s largest nuclear waste dump?
• Nuclear Dossier: The controversial proposal explained
• Greg Barila: Jay’s Citizen Jury model a total fizzer

PREMIER Jay Weatherill’s nuclear citizens’ jury was to test what he called “the most powerful force that we have”, which is “the common sense judgment of ordinary, everyday citizens”.

Regardless of one’s views about the prospect of a nuclear disposal industry itself, Mr Weatherill was proved stunningly correct by the astute political analysis of 350 members of the public.

In a savage statement of their inability to “trust” the Government, the jury’s report gives voice to a simmering frustration about the competency of our political class and the tactics it employs.

As if that rejection wasn’t bad enough, the debate now appears at a premature end, after Opposition Leader Steven Marshall declared the idea of a nuclear dump in SA “all but dead and buried”.

“Personally, I have a much greater ambition for SA than becoming the world’s nuclear dump,” Marshall told The Advertiser after visiting nuclear sites in Finland this week.

There had previously been bipartisan support to push forward. Mr Weatherill now accuses Mr Marshall of shattering that co-operation before all community consultation is complete.

Premier Jay Weatherill walks through the tunnels of the underground nuclear waste facility being built in Finland. Picture: Calum Robertson

The Government’s quiet hope was that the citizens’ jury would give a green light to further investigations of a nuclear industry and afford it the freedom to later pin down the details.

The jury sensed this and, more than giving the nuclear idea a thumbs down, hit back with a savage analysis that emphatically repudiated any attempt to use them as political cover.

NUCLEAR DOSSIER: ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW

Mr Weatherill holds a genuine and deep belief that our political culture, and the influence of important institutions, are being eroded as cynicism becomes the ruling mood of the age.

Fixing this was the pitch he made in his attempt to become Labor leader, and much of the energy and passion expended in his five years as leader has been directed to its repair.

The citizens’ jury was meant to be one tool by which change was made.

Many on the jury instead thought the process itself was a political manipulation, making that cynicism worse.

Their report states that some jurors were concerned the Government may not accept their recommendations as binding, and the entire consultation was biased toward a green light.

“If the proposal proceeds, we are concerned that Government will fail to provide for

current and future generations to have meaningful and ongoing engagement in the

decision-making process,” the report states.

“It was raised that it is hard to have trust in a process that is currently unknown and potentially multi-step over a number of years.”

This helps explain why the final result was so overwhelming.

Jay Weatherill dines with Finnish officials during his visit to inspect the nuclear waste facility.

The Royal Commission made several recommendations to the Government about how it should firm up the proposal before taking further steps, that included talking to client nations and seeking host communities.

Presented with none of this, the jury detected something was afoot.

Fearing the Government would take and later spin any conditional approval, they shut the whole show down.

It is a striking level of political insight that proves the perceptiveness of the public.

Had the Government done more homework and come to the jury with a location, a plan, and an offer of money from a real country instead of projections, the result may have been different.

Whatever happens to the nuclear project in the coming weeks, Mr Weatherill deserves high credit for having been prepared to take on such a controversial topic and investigate it seriously.

While partisan politics and tactical manoeuvering are never absent from any action of a government, his openness and daring led to a sophisticated state discussion about something which could have transformed it dramatically.

That debate that will run for many years to come.

It does nothing to aid today’s turgid but impotent politics if commentators pile in to kick a man who was prepared to have a go and try something different.

That only sends a message that the best way to avoid political failure is never attempting anything ambitious in the first place.

The citizens’ jury also need not be seen as a failure.

While it sought opinions on the nuclear industry, it has instead uncovered something this is equal parts depressing and invaluable.

The jury members effectively lined up every political leader the state has had since the reform period of Don Dunstan for a dressing down about the inadequacy of their performances.

“The State Government has failed to be transparent in their engagement with the community, to manage large economic issues in the past, and has a perception of not acting in the best interest of the South Australian community around significant economic issues,” the report states.

“The State Government has a track record of poor performance.”

Opposition Leader Steven Marshall addresses the annual Liberal state conference in Adelaide.

The current Labor administration was lashed for the indefinite delays on the new Royal Adelaide Hospital, the Liberals got bashed for selling ETSA when they were last in power and the jury’s long memories even stretch back to the State Bank disaster that has echoed for two decades.

This is a message no one in State Parliament will want to hear.

However, in the whole report, it may be the single most important statement and one that’s most fundamental to our future.

The people, through the jury, skewered a political class they feels governs for itself instead of them. It sees a Parliament that has mixed up who the bosses and servants are in this relationship.

They think even the jury, for all the frippery about it being real and meaningful consultation, was just another top-down attempt to impose the government’s will on its subjects.

They also just think the men and women who slide through Cabinet offices and parliamentary benches simply haven't had the basic competencies that are demanded by their pay and titles.

This worldwide trend captivated the US election campaign which saw Donald Trump become president and triggered the rise of populist or nationalist movements around Europe.

It has now been nakedly revealed much closer to home.

If this Government, and those Liberals who seek to be so one day, are really listening then they must enact dramatic change to not just this nuclear policy but their entire mode of conduct.

Trust has been destroyed over decades, and may take just as long to ever repair.