Joanna Gash, the Liberal member for the South Coast seat of Gilmore, carries two petitions on her website: "No nuclear plants for Gilmore!" and "A nuclear plant for Gilmore!". There are no prizes for guessing which one she backs.

One of the biggest environmental debates of this election was supposed to be whether Australia should embrace nuclear power. John Howard enthusiastically announced in April he was putting the nuclear option on the table. "If we are fair dinkum about this climate change debate, we have to open our minds to the use of nuclear power," he said.

The Industry Minister, Ian Macfarlane, commissioned a report from three government departments which was to be ready in September. He was expected to initiate legislation to clear the way for a future nuclear industry in the last session of parliament. At APEC, Howard said Australia was joining the new United States-backed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.

But once the election had been called, debate shut down. With Howard trailing in the polls, the Liberal Party is acutely aware that the idea of a domestic nuclear power industry is hugely unpopular.

In August, Howard was forced to promise he would allow local communities to hold a referendum on proposed nuclear reactors in their areas. This prompted Labor to set up a web page called: "A Nuclear Reactor Near You?" with the claim that "Mr Howard wants to build 25 nuclear power plants coast to coast across Australia".

So far, the principal result of Howard's nuclear push has been twofold. Labor ditched its "three-mine policy", opening the way for a huge expansion of the industry. Howard has signed up to the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and international research on a new generation of nuclear power stations. But he so far has rejected any suggestion Australia will take nuclear waste from its uranium buyers.

Last week the Environment Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, battling to hold his marginal seat of Wentworth, said nuclear power was not inevitable if clean coal technology was successful.