DECEMBER 2022
The Minister’s Assessment of the Project was released on 24 November 2021. The Minister stated that the IAC was “strongly of the view that the project should not proceed” and that he agreed with the IAC’s recommendation that “The environment effects of the Fingerboards Mineral Sands Project cannot be managed to an acceptable level and the Project approvals should not be granted.”
Page 77 of the Assessment gives the Minister’s summation. “My overall conclusion is that the project will result in unacceptable environmental effects and that the project should not proceed. The unacceptable effects relate primarily to effects on native vegetation, biodiversity, air quality, agriculture and horticulture, and social values of the project area and surrounds. I have also concluded that the project poses an unacceptable risk to surface water values downstream of the site.
The project would clear a very significant tract of native vegetation and many large old trees. Having regard to the extent and conservation status of the ecological vegetation classes represented in the vegetation proposed to be cleared, the clearing would result in an unacceptable impact to biodiversity. The project’s potential adverse effects to listed threatened species and communities have also contributed to my conclusion that the project’s effects on biodiversity would not be acceptable.
The proximity of the project to sensitive receptors and an important horticultural district, and with a reliance on adaptive management to only just comply with airborne dust criteria, will likely result in effects to air quality and risks to agriculture and horticulture that are not acceptable. The flow on effects to the local community’s sense of place, cohesion and wellbeing, in circumstances where it has already experienced significant disruption through the initial mining exploration phase and statutory assessment processes, are also considered to be unacceptable.
The Minister went on to say “The IAC made a number of recommendations for decision makers to consider should they wish to proceed with project approvals, against the conclusion and primary recommendation of my assessment.”
(Earth Resources refusal to participate in the IAC hearings was unjustifiable – MFG trusts that they at least listened to all the evidence and have read the assessments properly – in particular the Minister’s 43 recommendations.)
Kalbar claims the 43 recommendations (page 78-83) made by the IAC open the door to the project proceeding. The recommendations clearly demonstrate just how inadequate the EES was and cover such areas as rehabilitation, bond calculations, radiation, dust, water availability, potential contamination (including through the use of flocculants with centrifuges), human health, agriculture and horticulture, Aboriginal Cultural Heritage, baseline data, traffic and transport, and biodiversity.
Kalbar have been required to report to the Commonwealth under the EPBC
Kalbar submitted their 2022 Annual Report to ASIC on 16 November. The report indicates they were hoping for a change of government in Victoria to allow them to push ahead with the project. ( Interestingly their report claimed that Jaclyn Symes was Deputy Premier despite her never having held that position.)
MFG were concerned before the election because although the local National Member had been saying ‘wait for the EES’ he had never come out in support of the community, and appears unconcerned about the enormous toll the process has already taking on the community (and local Council). Indeed he appears to be more than willing to subject the community to yet more of the same if Kalbar comes up with another proposal. It seems very strange that although the Victorian Liberal National Party (LNP) stated their opposition to an EES being granted for AGL’s gas import jetty, they did not oppose Kalbar’s EES.
Bizarrely, despite the clear evidence presented during the panel hearing about the multitude of other, more viable, and less destructive, alternative sources of the minerals, it appears some politicians and decision-makers still believe Kalbar’s claims about the ‘size’ of the resource. It is a shame they have not bothered doing any of their own independent research instead of relying on Kalbar. Those of us who saw them in action through the EES and the Panel Hearings are very familiar with that company’s ‘have a very loose association with the truth’. We are reminded again of their QC’s refrain that Kalbar had ‘no onus of truth’ throughout the process. Effectively they could lie or mislead with impunity as there is no requirement to tell the truth during this type of hearing.
Kalbar’s 2022 Report makes for interesting reading. Despite their stance over the past 8 years that the community should ‘wait for the EES’ they are now claiming that because their proposal was rejected the EES process threatens mining in Victoria and requires urgent overhaul. “The Minister’s assessment has, however, raised concerns across the minerals industry in Victoria, as it was the first time that a mineral sands project had an adverse finding after an EES, and it followed an adverse assessment in late 2020 by the Minister regarding the development of AGL Resources’ Liquified Natural Gas terminal in Westernport Bay. While the impacts on these two projects are quite different, the two assessments back-to-back have highlighted an increased risk to approvals through the EES process in Victoria through which all significant resource projects proceed and flags the need for an urgent review of the overall project approvals process. For this reason, it was the view of KOPL’s management and the respective Kalbar Group boards that approvals for the Project are unlikely to be moved forward within the term of this parliament (the Victorian State election will occur on 26 November 2022). This viewpoint remains unchanged at the end of the 2022 Financial Year.” (Page 3)”Immediate priorities for the Kalbar Board are to ensure the completion by KOPL of the re-scoping of the Project, by the end of November 2022, to reflect the recommendations of the IAC report and the ESG reset, in readiness for post-election government engagement to move forward with the approvals process for the Project on realistic timelines.” (Page5)
NEW OUTLANDISH CLAIMS FROM KALBAR ABOUT VALUE OF THE PRODUCT
The financial report reinforces the immediate need for some real expertise in Earth Resources so that officers can actually read and understand figures put forward by mining companies. It also highlights the need for experienced, independent engineers who can determine how much of mining companies proposals are sheer fantasy (which seems to be the case with Kalbar).