Iron sand mining appeal finishes

The finely-balanced decision to consent to seabed mining off the Taranaki coast might have swung the other way if the decision makers had properly considered some factors, a lawyer says.

Eleven parties have appealed against the 35 year consents that were granted last August to TransTasman Resources Ltd.

These would allow the mining up to 50 million tonnes of seabed material a year in the South Taranaki Bight to extract iron ore for export.

The appeal hearing in the High Court at Wellington wrapped up yesterday with Justice Peter Churchman reserving his decision.

The final speaker was Davey Salmon, a lawyer for Greenpeace and Kiwis Against Seabed Mining, who said the consent decision had been as finely balanced as it was possible to be.

The Environmental Protection Authority had appointed a fourperson decision making committee.

When the committee was deadlocked the chairman had the deciding vote, so even though members of the committee were split two against two, the outcome was that the consents were granted.

Salmon said the committee had not had enough information and did not give proper weight to issues that counted against allowing seabed mining. The chairman had a legal obligation to exercise the casting vote favouring caution where information was lacking, he added.

Trans-Tasman Resources’ lawyer, Justin Smith, QC, said it was unlikely the chairman was meant to change his vote because another committee member disagreed with him.

Even if the judge found against Trans-Tasman Resources on one or more points, it did not mean the decision had to be quashed, Smith said. He asked for a further hearing to discuss the consequences, if the judge intended to allow the appeal.