The Supreme Court has validated a decision to grant a mining lease over Helilog Road to MMG, near the miner’s proposed tailings dam site. The road is located in southern takayna/Tarkine in Tasmania, also known as Australia’s largest temperate rainforest and the second largest temperate rainforest in the world.
MMG Australia Pty Ltd is proposing to construct a tailings storage facility (TSF) to store approximately 25 million cubic metres of tailings on a greenfields site approximately two kilometres west of Rosebery, West Coast. The project would also include access roads, tailings pipelines, and a pipe and possible vehicle bridge over Lake Pieman.
The State considered the lease granted to MMG under s106 of the Mineral Resources Development Act 1995 valid, and the court’s ruling has upheld this.
The Bob Brown Foundation challenged the lease on the basis that it did not relate to mine works allowed under the Mineral Resources Development Act 1995. It asserted that the purpose of the lease was to deny access to media, scientists, protestors and the public to an area not actually part of the mining activity, therefore not allowable under the Act.
Minister for Resources Felix Ellis said the judicial summary validates the granting of the lease by former Resources Minister Guy Barnett and “rejected all of the applicant’s arguments”.
“The Tasmanian Government is a strong supporter of the project and has always said that it must comply with the required environmental and planning processes,” Minister Ellis said.
“It is disappointing, but not surprising, that the radical Bob Brown Foundation continues to oppose a proposal that would help secure 500 regional jobs.”
Bob Brown said it is not up the court to validate the Minister inventing reasons for the Minister to issue a mining lease which were not entertained by Parliament when it passed the law.
“This decision allows grounds for leases that are not what the Parliament created in the laws as passed.”
Bob Brown Foundation takayna Campaigner Scott Jordan said the ruling highlights that existing mining laws are skewed to protect the mining industry and prevent public scrutiny.
“During this case former Minister avoided being subpoenaed after resigning as Minister hours before being served. This Minister gave four contradictory accounts of the matters he considered, yet we were denied the opportunity to question the Minister under oath.”
MMG’s original application was made under an incorrect section of the nder the Mineral Resources Development Act 1995, section 78. The application was assessed by Mineral Resources Tasmania, which provided a recommendation, advice, to the minister that he should accept that and sign, which he did. A lodging error in the application was then found by the department and immediate action was taken.
MMG subsequently submitted a new lease application under section 106 of the act.