Australian mine warfare reignites tensions over Aboriginal heritage | World News

Australia is trying to better balance Aboriginal heritage and mining

*

Mining group says application of laws worsens sovereign risk

*

National revision of monument protection laws already a year too late

*

Miners must prepare for stricter regulation, warns law firm

By Melanie Burton

MELBOURNE – Wiradjuri elder Nyree Reynolds calls her home west of Sydney the Valley of the Bilabula, the Indigenous name for its river. The river features in Wiradjuri stories about the creation of her land, she told state planning authorities: “And no one has the right to destroy this.”

Over their objections, the Australian government in August ordered mining company Regis Resources to find a new dam site for a A$1 billion gold project, saying the proposed site for storing rock and chemical waste would interfere with the river would irreparably damage the associated culture.

Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek's decision, under a rarely used Aboriginal cultural heritage protection law, has sparked an outcry from mining groups who say Regis followed all legal procedures and the decision increases sovereign risk for developers.

The government's action adds to the uncertainty miners have faced since iron ore giant Rio Tinto legally destroyed ancient Aboriginal rock shelters in Juukan Gorge four years ago, and increases the urgency to strengthen laws protecting cultural heritage revise.

At least three other resource projects, like Regis, are facing review under Section 10 of the law, which allows Aboriginal people to apply for protection of areas important to them when other legal options have failed.

“You can get all the state environmental permits and all the federal environmental permits and at the end of the process a Section 10, … essentially a federal minister can … make your project unviable,” said Warren Pearce, CEO of the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies.

“That is the definition of sovereign risk.”

While Reynolds objected to the Regis mine, a local Aboriginal group representing the Wiradjuri people and authorized by the state to advocate for cultural heritage concluded that the project's impacts could be managed.

Regis said in August that it was reviewing its legal options after writing down the value of its project by more than $100 million.

The decision on the Regis project was the second the government had made in as many months to support indigenous groups over miners.

ERA, majority owned by mining giant Rio Tinto, is suing the government on procedural fairness grounds after it failed to renew the miner's exploration contract for uranium-rich land.

Government officials and some investors say developers need to work earlier and more intensively with indigenous groups when planning projects, but new heritage protection laws that would aid that process are still pending.

The government has not said when it expects to finalize the legislation. Only Western Australia has implemented some heritage reforms, leaving the industry to rely on a patchwork of old state laws to manage heritage protection, while Australia markets itself as a purveyor of ethical metals.

VOICES AT GAME

Resource projects with open Section 10 objections include miner Bellevue Gold's plan to dig beneath a desert lake and Woodside's Scarborough natural gas project, which will power a gas plant in a region rich in ancient rock art and which the government nominated for inclusion on the UNESCO World Heritage List. Both projects are located in Western Australia.

But not all objections are equal when it comes to policy, particularly as the centre-left Labor government faces an election in 2025.

Woodside is unlikely to suffer the same setback as Regis, said Saul Kavonic, senior energy analyst at MST Marquee, as the $12.5 billion Scarborough gas project is “politically extremely important to the Labor government in Western Australia”. .

Plibersek's office said it could not comment on the Scarborough project because the matter was still under review.

Both Woodside and Bellevue said they take their responsibility for managing Aboriginal cultural heritage seriously.

Bellevue said it had permission from the Tjiwarl indigenous group to dig under the lake as part of a heritage management plan.

The government's move came after it failed last year in a referendum that sought to give Indigenous Australians special recognition in the country's constitution and an advisory voice to lawmakers.

Some people believe the government is now acting to appease East Coast voters in inner cities who supported the referendum and may be more likely to vote for the Greens rather than support mining.

“Here is a government trying to make itself look good because it has completely taken away our ability to have a voice in parliament,” said Wonnarua man Scott Franks, who is facing three Section 10 challenges to developments in the coal-rich area Hunter filed the state's Valley Region and lost them all.

Asked whether she had accommodated Green Party voters with her decision on Regis, Plibersek told reporters on August 28 that she had consulted extensively: “I made the decision based on facts.”

Australian Minister for Indigenous Australians Malarndirri McCarthy said the government was working intensively with Aboriginal groups on new laws to protect cultural heritage.

“The Australian government is deeply concerned about the destruction of First Nations heritage across Australia,” McCarthy said in a statement to Reuters.

Stricter rules on the way

A key issue that needs to be addressed is making clear exactly who developers must consult to ensure that projects do not harm important sites on traditional lands or indigenous group lands.

“Our whole goal is to remove this kind of uncertainty that people are struggling with, to make it clear who speaks for the country,” Plibersek told Australian Broadcasting Corp on August 28.

Regis said it consulted 13 different groups and individuals during the approval process.

“Regis takes its relationship with Aboriginal stakeholders in our operations very seriously and has engaged extensively with Aboriginal parties early in the approval process,” it said in a statement to Reuters.

To help miners conduct consultations to protect Aboriginal heritage while the rules are revised, the Responsible Investment Association Australasia, which counts 75% of the country's institutional investors as members, worked with First Nations, the government and the Mining giant BHP on best practices.

“Current laws remain inadequate, which is why investors and companies must take action themselves,” said the association’s co-CEO Estelle Parker.

In its recommendations, the association calls on miners to adhere to free, prior and informed consent, which can be withdrawn at any time.

The guide is “ambitious and probably unrealistic,” law firm Ashurst said in a 2024 report, but recommended miners familiarize themselves with it.

“Be aware that federal heritage laws will change. If this happens, it will be closer to the expectations expressed in these recent publications than to the current legal framework.”

This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without any modifications to the text.