TREADING A MINEFIELD

Forest and Bird, Volume 19, Issue 1, 1 February 1988, Page 15

TREADING A MINEFIELD

wv ww ww ww ww ww wa wa » tlh es ee Mining companies are taking a more assertive stance in their quest for precious minerals; the conservation movement is proving equal to the task, having mounted a petition to reform mining laws. Guy Salmon outlines why the reforms are needed.

believe the mining industry is too powerful for the good of New Zealand. Under New Zealand's existing laws, the mining industry is given a privileged status. It is the only land-using industry which: © Can operate without the consent of the landowner © Is exempt from the Town and Country Planning Act © Pays a special low tax rate and retains other tax privileges © Does not pay royalties for Crown resources it uses, namely gold and silver © Can clear forest and disturb land in national parks and conservation parks. The number of listed mining companies operating in New Zealand has doubled since last year and there has been an explosion of prospecting acitivity, much of it in conservation parks and national parks (see map). A large proportion of the mining companies involved have come from Australia, where

they are accustomed to operating in desert regions with little or no environmental control. The Australian mining industry has recently won major campaigns to open mines inside national parks, and to deprive aboriginal peoples of the right to say no to mining on their lands. We have reason to fear what will now happen in this country. The Australian mining industry's established attitudes and practices are a distinctly unwelcome import into New Zealand. We have too much at stake in this country, both in terms of our race relations and the quality of our natural environment, to allow the mining industry to develop the sort of unbridled power it has in Australia and many Third World countries. Unfortunately, our mining laws at present Offer little protection for the values we cherish in this country.

Nationwide petition

The conservation movement has decided to mount a major effort to reform New Zealand's mining laws. A nationwide petition,

the Wharepapa Declaration (see box) has been launched by the Native Forests Action Council. The aim is for this petition to be of similar size and historic impact to the Council's earlier Maruia Declaration petition on native forests. It should be stated at this point that while we must reform our mining laws, there can be no room for an anti-mining attitude. Modern society clearly depends on the products of the mining industry; equally clearly, there are a number of reasonably responsible mining companies. We must encourage companies of that sort. It is unfortunate however that the New Zealand Mineral Exploration Association has become dominated by those who take an aggressive stance in opposition to conservationists, planning authorities and even private landowners. It is this hardline stance by the mining industry which has to date stymied efforts to

reform the mining laws. A series of meetings held last year between industry representatives, conservationists, Maori interests and government officials came to nothing.

The Hearn Report

There is no lack of desire by all parties for the mining laws to change. But the mining industry wants more freedom including the guaranteed right to override other land users. The Treasury and the Department of Trade and Industry are pressing for the privatisation of the Crown's mineral resources and the operation of a free market in minerals. For advice on the conflicting arguments on the planning and resource laws, the Government last year appointed Mr Anthony Hearn Q.C. to prepare an independent report. Mr Hearn’s report was published in August. Following the ideas developed in the Treasury, the Hearn Report favours privatising the Crown’s mineral resources and thus getting the Crown out of any decison-mak-ing role in relation to the licensing of new mines. The Town and Country Planning Act would be the only direct means of control

over mining, and this Act would be amended to provide that mining was a matter of national importance. The Conservation Act and Reserves Act would also become subject to the Planning Act and the Minister of Conservation would lose her power to say no to mining. Environmental assessment procedures are also unnecessary according to the Hearn Report. Under the Hearn scenario, the mining industry would have a field day, especially in provincial areas where local authorities favour mining as a means of boosting business on main street. Conservation organisations want the Government to reject the proposals in the Hearn Report. We are anxious to retain ultimate political accountability for decisions to open land for mining. There are precious few good features about the present mining laws, but political accountability is one of them. The Government has the power to say no to the mining of Crown minerals even when the Planning

Tribunal has recommended in favour. The Government does not, however, have the power to water down any conditions and safeguards attached to a Tribunal recommendation. Unfortunately the Tribunal operates under a law whose object is to facilitate the development of mineral resources. Power to say no Nonetheless, the Government retains a broad reserve power to say no, a power which might rarely be used but remains important. The Minister of Conservation also has the power to consent or refuse a mining privilege on lands controlled by the Department of Conservation. The department has recently published guidelines for mining and prospecting which represent a brave effort to ensure such activities do not compromise the value of its lands. Submissions on the proposed guidelines are due with the department on 30 March. There can be little doubt that the present Minister will be conscientious in the exercise of her responsibilities, but conservationists worry about what could happen in future. With the wrong sort of Minister and a continued lack of legal protection for national parks and conservation parks, the guidelines could be pushed

over like a card house. What is really needed is for these prime natural areas to be exempted by law from mining. The conflict between the mining industry and our great conservation parks like Northwest Nelson and Coromandel is a prime example of the difficulty of applying a more market approach to such matters. The very high value of some gold deposits can readily be expressed in money terms. Mining companies can aggressively demand that those money values must be weighted against the values of park lands and water which, on the face of it, seem to have little tradeable value. Yet most New Zealanders would be in no doubt about the intangible values which these areas have for the protection of native forest and for public enjoyment — the purpose for which they were set aside in the first place. Closed to mining Decisions about mining in such areas obviously cannot be left to market mechanisms. Nor can they be left to Planning Tribunals to adjudicate, unless we are prepared to abandon the non-political, judicial character of the Tribunal. One solution is to take a collective decision as a nation that our national parks, conservation parks and reserves will actually be closed to mining. It

is a great credit to the conservation spirit of New Zealanders that nine out of every ten people approached are willing to sign a petition calling for just that solution. More than 80 percent of New Zealand's land area would in any event remain open to mining, and here there is some greater scope for using market mechanisms. For example, the rights of landowners to undisturbed enjoyment of their land can be reinforced by removing the override provisions in the Mining Act and thereby leaving the winning of landowner consents to the market. The payment of substantial bonds by mining companies and the extension of liability for mines and tailings dumps long after they have ceased operation can provide powerful market incentives for good environmental management by the mining industry. Conservationists would not stand in the way of reasonable measures to reduce administrative procedures and delays, but we feel the Planning Act should apply to mining on private land, just as it does to other industries. In the end, however, an adequate reform of New Zealand's mining laws must accept that some areas of New Zealand should never be mined, and accordingly, that the minerals in those areas should be left in the ground. 4