135

Public understanding of the industry.

Existing educational and publicity programs.

Continuing development and expansion of programs.

M

A/P: mostly supported. Should continue and expand in consultation and co-operation with landholders.

5

Continue development and expansion of programs in association with Aboriginal peoples, agro-pastoralists and conservation groups.

Minerals Council and minerals industry, Aboriginal people, conservation groups, West 2000 Plus, Pastoralists’ Association of the West Darling.

136

Industry understanding of the public.

Stakeholder participation in development decisions based on NSW Minerals Council Guidelines for consultation.

Increase participation and improve representation of stakeholder interests through permanent advisory committees.

Support research into the tribes of the W Division and their connections to land.

M

A: +3. And vice-versa.

A/P: support. All stakeholders should be represented on permanent advisory committees and support such research into tribal boundaries so the community understands the connections of various stakeholders to the land.  Bear in mind that agriculture/pastoralism is the biggest stakeholder.

M: Yes, it’s a 2 way street – see the point above.

7

Representation of all stakeholder groups  on Catchment Management Boards, Local Government, Water Management Committees, Regional Vegetation Committees,  the Western Lands Advisory Board. (I)

Initiate Aboriginal research on ”boundaries” of  tribal areas (I) (see Aboriginal table row 7).

Aboriginal elders, Murdi Paaki  and Binaal Billa Regional Councils, Local Land Councils, agro-pastoralists, conservation groups, Minerals Council, tourism industry.

137

Promote regional development.

Development approvals should favour applications that include value adding to increase employment opportunities, subject to environmental criteria being met.

R

A: +5. Rights of Aboriginal people to create an economic base and participate in regional economic development on an equal footing.

A/P: +3. Mainly supportive. Our families are also looking for off farm employment. Benefits to whole community. Approvals should include Best Management Practice. Some views support Aboriginal aspirations but holds that they must receive training to enable them to participate beneficially. Another says no one group should have special rights.

M: supported by us, but it is not possible to compel value adding as a component of development approval. It is politically wise for the industry to add value where possible.

5

Develop a proposal on the integration of  regional economic development, minerals industry, Aboriginal, agro-pastoral and tourism interests for discussion with the Minster of  Land and Water.  Mineral sands is a good focus (I).

See Tourism table: row 172.

See  row 139.

Minerals Council, DLWC, West 2000 Plus, Western Lands Advisory Board, Catchment Management Boards, Regional Vegetation Committees, Aboriginal elders, Murdi Paaki and Binaal Billa Regional Councils, Local Land Councils.

138

Multiple and sequential land use.

Establish State Conservation Reserves – land with value as part of a Representative Reserve System where exploration and mining are allowed. Resources will not be locked up unnecessarily.  Industry involved in setting boundaries.

M

A: 3+. Aboriginal people must have the right to negotiate on any proposed reserve.

A/P: some support, but some of the group does not accept the usefulness of involving too many people that lack knowledge in the demarcation and allowable uses. There is also the problem of less land being available for agriculture.  Some support for multiple land use.  One view sees the Aboriginal response as blackmail. Another is that leaseholders must be compensated at market price if land lost through this. One participant pointed out that the areas of land used for mining are so small that there is no need to quarantine large tracts permanently within reserves.

C: 3+. So long as mining and exploration do not negatively affect conservation values (eg water extraction, depletion of biodiversity).

M: All stakeholders should be involved in the process of determining reserve boundaries and allowable uses.

T: 2+. Requires adequate environmental; impact assessment and controls. Could be +ive (eg Broken Hill; or negative, eg sand mining in the south west.

8

Draft an outline of a scheme for discussion with NPWS and the State Minister. Link it to the proposal in Conservation table: row  117 for a representative reserve system (I).

Minerals Council, NPWS, Department of Mineral Resources, conservation groups, West 2000 Plus, Western Lands Advisory Board.

139

Tax policy.

Tax incentives for establishment of new mines. Incentives also for employing local people.

M

A/P: supported. Benefits whole community. Need to keep a viable population inland.

5

See  row 137.

See  row 137.

140

Data sharing.

Improve mutual access among agencies and industries to all regional data bases, social, economic, conservation and natural resources.

M

A: 3+. General information only, with cultural restrictions applied.

A/P: supported. Better information, better decisions. Too much data gathered and not used - wasteful.

C: 5+. Apply consistent methods and processes.

T: 4+

8

Establish protocols and  access (M).

Minerals Council, DLWC.

141

Improved mining and exploration development approval process.

Current approval process too complex and risky for the industry. Depending on whether the application is for  exploration, an extractive industry or mining, regulations under various Acts must be satisfied (Western Division REP No 1 under the EP&AA;  SEPP 34 of the EPAA; Rivers and Foreshores Improvement; Native Title; Mining;  Petroleum (Onshore);  Water).

Simplify and speed up the process, and redesign to reduce risk of late refusal after money and time have already been over-invested.

Develop a one-stop-shop approval process for small-scale mining operations (e.g. opal). 

M

A: 5+. Follow the Indigenous Land Use Agreement process, with the right to negotiate reinstated.

A/P: agree approvals process should be speeded up, but it should be based on good information and mining should be treated the same as other industries. Need for early information sharing and negotiations with landholders. The process is in place to protect the environment and the interests of other groups. The same improvement should apply to the process for cultivation licenses. One view is that no one group should have the right to negotiate because of  race.

C: 0. But must be supported by good information and transparent processes. Need to recognise the time-frames of other stakeholder groups.

M: These concerns are understood. Provided the one-stop-shop ensures a full development approval process there should be no worries. Mining does not expect a short cut to development approval.

T: 0. Mining should be subject to the same development controls as everyone else.

8

Develop a one-stop shop approval mechanism. Need to address  Native Title Act, Mining Act, Water Act, Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, and State Environmental Planning Policy #34, Western Division Regional Environmental Plan #1 – Extractive Industries. (M)

See Agriculture table: row 53.

Minerals industry , agro-pastoralists, NSW Farmers’ Association.

142

Improved development approval process.

Approval should take account of options lost to future generations as a result of irreversible changes resulting from mining.

R

M: This is currently happening. Question the use of the word “irreversible” as it affects perceptions of the proposal.

A/P: mining development must be carefully planned. Usually causes loss to agriculture. Land surface can be rehabilitated. Should not be left in such a state that fossicking is impossible.

5

See  row 141.

See  row 141.

143

Improved development approval process.

Approval should favour multiple and sequential land use.  Develop regional policies to streamline approval process.

M

A: No dilution of recognition and respect for Aboriginal interests and responsibilities for country.

A/P: Mining should be subject to same assessment as clearing and cultivation. +2. In favour of consideration of future land use after mining. Some support for Conservation view. Some support for multiple land use. One view is against a regional policy approach, as the Western Division would lose its identity. However, this proposal was seeing the West as one region.

C: 0. Support regional policy but would need statutory review every 5 years, and monitoring and evaluation of individual projects.

M: These concerns are understood. Provided the one-stop-shop ensures a full development approval process there should be no worries. Mining does not expect a short cut to development approval.

T: 0. Should be the same for everyone.

8

Link to one stop shop approval proposal (Mining row 141) and to the development approval policy proposal in Mining row 137 (I).

Minerals industry.

144

Environmental impact reduction.

Industry and government review of regulations to see if consistent environmental obligations are applied across all operations.

M

A: 5+ Particularly the proper consideration of Aboriginal cultural values of land and water resources.

A/P: Should be across all operations, and a monitoring and evaluation process should be in all regulations. Essential to avoid off site contamination and degradation.

C: 2+. The real need is to ensure implementation is monitored. Of equal or greater concern is monitoring for compliance with regulations. Monitoring is not adequately funded at present. There is a disparity between E NSW and the West.

M: Agree, in principle. The difficulty is in resourcing the “police”. A move to auditing of systems, rather than relying on inspections, creates the possibility for avoiding conditions.

T: 0. “Best practice may improve tourism opportunities.

8

Review of  environmental impact regulations to see if consistent environmental obligations are applied across all operations (M).

DLWC, Environmental Protection Authority, Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, Local Governments,  Minerals Council, Department of Mineral Resources.

145

Transport network.

We support the need for a diverse and improved transport system. Improve road surfaces and add to network to support minerals industry as new mines are developed. Address rail and air transport systems too.

M

A: 3+. Ensure development approval processes are followed. Careful consideration needs to be given to the expansion of the road network – involve Native Title holders in this.

A/P: supported. Improve all roads, not just to mines. Benefits whole community. Some support for conservation view.

C: 3+. The need for improved infrastructure is accepted in principle. It should be based on land capability as well as on land use. The improvement should cater for the needs of all stakeholders.

M: Pluses and minuses of other groups are noted.

T: 0. Look at non-road options. Consider each development on its own merit eg enhanced accessibility vs impacts on the quality of visitor experience.

8

Develop a transport  strategy for the region (L).

Premiers Department, Department of Regional Development,  Roads and Traffic Authority, Local Governments (and their regional groupings), DLWC, tourism industry, Tourism NSW, Minerals Council, Department of Mineral Resources.

146

Electricity supply.

Continue upgrading the grid.

M

A/P: strongly support. Benefit to all landholders.

3

Discuss strategy with TransGrid, and if appropriate develop a proposal for discussion with Minister for Energy (M).

Premiers Department, Department of Regional Development, Local Governments (and their regional groupings), tourism industry, Tourism NSW, Minerals Council, Department of Mineral Resources.

147

Royalty payments.

A proportion should be paid to local government, not all to State government as at present.

R

A: 5+. A negotiated portion should go to Native Title holders through Indigenous Land Use Agreements.

A/P: support. Local government now charges rates based on level of production, so is already in place effectively in Incorporated Areas. A greater proportion needed for Local Government. Two views suggest a portion should go to the landholder; whereas another  says no one group should be favoured.

M: A mining company pays a set royalty to the Crown. How it is divided up is a Government decision.

3

Lobby Minister for Mineral Resources (L).

Local Governments and their regional groups.

148

Maintaining relevance and effectiveness of legislation.

Regular reviews – every 10 years. Minerals industry involvement in the reviews.

M

A/P: reviews must be associated with monitoring and evaluation process. Continue reviews for Best Management Practice.

5

Lobby Minister for Land and Water

Minerals Council, Pastoralists Association for the West Darling, NSW Farmers’ Association.

149

Access to and efficient use of water.

Put a user charge on clean water to promote re-cycling.

M

A: 5+. Aboriginal economic rights to water in NSW.

A/P: Mixed response. Positive views are that it increases efficiency. Opposing  views: the IPART process is already reviewing water charges. It is making water more expensive to use. Another – everyone should have equal rights to water. Another is that stock and domestic water should be exempt, but agrees with charges on other uses.

7

Discuss with DLWC then lobby Minister for Land and Water if appropriate (M).

Minerals Council.

150

Access to and efficient use of water.

Continue to develop the water trading market to promote the most valuable use of water.

M

A: 5 -. Aboriginal people have rights and interests in water in NSW under Native Title, social justice and human rights.

A/P: mostly supported. Benefit is in promoting water use efficiency and growth of crops with highest returns/ unit of water. However, stock and domestic use must be assured. An opposing view is that farmers and graziers may get out-traded.

Too many competing uses at present. Water trading rights and a trading market should not be developed until the Cap for the MD Basin and flows from Queensland have been determined.  Current priorities of access for stock and domestic use must be maintained.

C: Appropriate environmental flows need to have precedence over marketed flows. Environmental flows should not be chargeable or marketed. If they are, we rate this proposal as 5-.

M: Ownership of water will be a background issue. Whoever has a licence would be in a position to enter into commercial arrangements with other parties (eg Mining industry). Environmental flows are already considered when water is allocated. There should be no trading across catchments.

T: 4+ for environmental and aesthetic reasons . A downside is that tourism may not be able to compete in the market for water. The need for a water market is accepted.

8

Stakeholder groups keep engaged in the water reform process – influence it while you can (I).

All stakeholder groups.

151

Access to and efficient use of water.

When new ground water is found, the finder should get unrestricted access for a period and at no charge so as to promote water exploration.

M

A: - 5. No, never.

A/P:  Mainly against. Could lead to depletion. No unrestricted access, and all users should be treated the same. Goal is sustainable management. Unrealistic. Increased production is already a reward. An alternative view is that this could benefit remote communities.

C: - 5. All environmental and economic costs should be accounted for – ie user pays. There should be no unrestricted access.

M: Suggest water use charges should be discounted by water exploration costs, $ for $, for newly discovered resources.

T: - 5. No – water use must be accounted-for – ie, user pays. Maybe exploration and development costs could be deducted? 

8

Lobby Minister for Land and Water (M).

Minerals Council.

152

Access to and efficient use of water.

Review of water licenses to see if they are still active, and water use is efficient.

M

A: must consider NT rights before there is any new legislation.

A/P: Generally supported. Already happening. Current rates of use should be taken into account.  Water will be much more expensive under a cap. That will enforce efficient use. Trading is an inherent part of water reform. The length of time elapsing before a license is seen as inactive needs to be agreed. One view is opposed review on the grounds that licenses belong to the landholder, whether they are used or not, and they can be traded if wished. Another is that water use efficiency should not be the criterion.

M: This is about licenses, not legislation, but consideration of NT is OK in principle.

5

See  row 150.

See  row 150.

153

Rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation Security Bond under the Mining Act is returned only when rehabilitation is satisfactory.

Initial deposit should be varied over time to take account of cost changes. The Bond is attached to the operation, so if the operating company is sold, the credentials and past record on rehabilitation of the purchasing company should be considered and the amount of the Bond changed accordingly. This is already happening, but without the credentials and past history parts.

M

A: 5+. There is a responsibility to restore land, and to recognise and respect Aboriginal responsibility for country.

A/P: supported. Credentials and past record on rehabilitation of the company should be a pre-requisite. Potential benefits to agriculture.

M: The need for Aboriginal involvement in conservation and rehabilitation is accepted, and so is the need to take account of Aboriginal interests.

7

Discuss with Department of Mineral Resources, and if appropriate lobby the Minister  about changes to the Mining Act.

Minerals Council.