dial M for misinformation?!

Marathon Resources director - and former federal Labor Senator - Chris Schacht has an 'interesting' take on the Arkaroola dumping scandal, and one that's surprisingly easy to contradict, even by taking a quick glance at the the company's own 'Waste in the Wilderness' document, a mea culpa they issued in response to it!

But, nevertheless, here he is on local ABC Radio 891 on the morning of Monday the 7th of September -

It was true we made a mistake on the disposal of waste material, none of which was radioactive … I just simply say to Nicky [a phone-in caller - BJD] what happened was instead of tipping the waste out of the bags into a trench and covering it over, which was legal, we left it in the bags and that was illegal...

Firstly; not radioactive? What are they looking for, treacle? As Greens MLC Mark Parnell responded (see below) "Well, they're wasting their time drilling there then!"

To quote the Primary Industries and Environmental Protection Authority joint investigation..

The inspection of sample bags uncovered in the test pits confirmed that a number of the bags containing sample drill material exhibit radioactivity levels consistent with that of ore grade material.

The investigation confirmed that Marathon Resources did not undertake to advise or request approval from any SA Government regulatory authorities (EPA and PIRSA) in relation to disposal of potentially radioactively contaminated sample bags/waste.

just a little light littering?


One does wonder how Schacht can have felt confident making these claims in public; but with the ABC's Abraham and Bevan at the helm it seems he hardly need have worried overly much! David Bevan even persisted in trying to tease out the notion that the company was merely 'done' for littering! -

Bevan: Yeah, so your offence is you left some plastic bags there?

Schacht: Absolutely and that is a breach of the regulation of which we admit our mistake and have changed.

Bevan: It was littering.

Schacht: Yes, of course.

Let's take a look at the relevant documentation, shall we?

Firstly, here's how the PIRSA / EPA report described the waste:

Test pits excavated under EPA supervision confirmed the presence of 2 large trenches and the extensive burial of drill samples contained within plastic and calico bags.

The excavation of test pits confirmed the burial of general waste including, cardboard, plastic jars, pvc pipe, paper, packing material, a food container and wrapper within the two trenches.

The full extent of burial of sample bags and general waste was not investigated on 16 January 2008 but has subsequently been confirmed by Marathon. Marathon advises that the number of sample bags is likely to be around 22,800.

and further -

Marathon representatives admitted on-site and in other documents subsequently supplied to PIRSA by Marathon that:

Two trenches were excavated with approximate dimensions of 35m (length) x 4m (width) x 2.7m (depth) by declared equipment and filled with approximately 22800 sample filled bags together with general waste.

Marathons disposal of plastic and calico bags containing sample material does not comply with the following PIRSA approval conditions for the use of Declared Equipment dated 1 November 2006 [this is about using large bulldozers to excavate big holes when you're not supposed to- BJD ]:

Condition 2 - The work is undertaken in accordance with that described in your DEF (received 20 October 2006) and subsequent memorandum of 31 October 2006. Where there is a variation between your proposal and this approval, the conditions of this approval will take precedence.

Condition 6 - Due care is taken to prevent unnecessary environmental damage.

Condition 9 - Exploration contractors and field staff be advised of the environmental objectives of the program, and have a clear understanding of their environmental management responsibilities.

PIRSA also issued the following instructions to Marathon -

PIRSA directs that all unauthorised buried drill sample material [NOTE: NOT just plastic bags - emphasis mine] and general waste at this site must be safely excavated and removed from EL 3258. The site must be rehabilitated back to as close as possible to original conditions [NOTE: because they were never entitled to excavate these trenches in the first place].

leave it out!


In other words, Schacht's claim that it would all have been OK if they'd shaken the rubbish out of the bags is as absurd as it appears.

Marathon was not entitled to excavate 2 very large trenches in the heart of the Sanctuary and conceal all the waste in it, bagged or otherwise. They were supposed to have promptly returned the drilling waste to the original drill holes or associated sumps and mud-pits, and to have taken the PPE and other materials off-site altogether for proper disposal.

The whole idea was to minimise your impact on the local environment, guys! As the PIRSA / EPA report makes clear.

And you don't have to look far to confirm this. Here's the relevant excerpt from the company's own publication,'Learning From Waste in the Wilderness'

Appreciating the risks associated with uranium exploration and mining

Marathon’s DEF specifies how its drilling program is to be managed. The DEF also specifies safety measures for planning and managing work at the Mt Gee drill sites and for managing the disposal of low-level radioactive materials and mining samples. The DEF specifies measures for the bagging and burial of drilling samples, noting that these were ‘developed and approved by the EPA’ and ‘will be implemented’. Under these safety measures Marathon was to:

Have staff dispose of used filter cartridges, and personal protective equipment (PPE) in sealed plastic bags placed in steel drums to be then removed from the site and disposed of through the general waste system away from the Arkaroola site; and

Have excess bulk drill cuttings returned principally to the drilling hole...

The DEF specifies that the bulk of material will be returned to the drill hole. [emphasis mine] It also specifies that all sampling (assay, archive and PIRSA representative samples) and down hole logging would be completed within 2 weeks of drilling, to allow rehabilitation of drilling sites to be concluded preferably within 4 weeks of drilling...

Marathon’s Radiation Safety Plan, Environmental Program and its operational procedures were not focused sufficiently on the need to exercise care with the disposal of uranium-related drilling and assay samples as well as clothing and other materials used when drilling for and handling these materials...

There were also operational and technical failures that contributed to bringing about allegations of site contamination, investigation by PIRSA and EPA and the consequent suspension of further drilling, namely:

The bagged materials associated with the drill site were not returned to the main drilling hole and adjacent drill sump at the completion of drilling (as prescribed in the DEF and EPA guidance documents)[my emphasis]. This was because of delays of up to 6 months in receiving samples back from the laboratory. Marathon’s DEF states that ‘…rehabilitation of an individual drill site should be commenced and preferably completed within 4 weeks of drilling, all reasonable effort will be made to keep to this time frame’. Due to increased industry activity, there were lengthy delays in the return of assay results and materials. However, Marathon was obliged to store the materials until each drill hole was signed-off by PIRSA and its error in practice was subsequently to dispose of the materials without PIRSA/EPA approval.[my emphasis]

The used PPE was not bagged and placed in steel cans to be taken away for disposal through the normal refuse system away from the Arkaroola site. They were instead disposed of at the Arkaroola site.

credibility


Now, the company's done a lot of hand-wringing of late, and makes vociferous claims to have turned over a new leaf after they had strayed so far from the righteous path by illegally disposing of the waste.

And yet here's one of their directors and spokespeople making claims that appear to be an attempt to belittle the scale of their own previous transgressions! How will that affect the public perception of their credibility?

Which leads us to, on a lighter note, well, I can only say... wow! Now it's the second biggest uranium deposit in Australia!

I seem to remember the heady days only a few weeks back when it was the 5th! It's amazing what you can discover when you're not actually drilling!

But I'll let Mark Parnell tease out this discussion in the transcript of the 891 discussion, printed in full below.

ABC 891 discussion part II
Tuesday 8th September 2009

David Bevan [ABC Announcer]: The debate over Arkaroola is set to generate more heat than a nuclear power station. We’ve got an unusual alliance of people wanting to preserve the Arkaroola Station forever, no mining there at all. We had Mark Parnell on the program last week along with conservative MP, Nick Minchin and Iain Evans getting together and saying … leave Arkaroola alone, no mining in Arkaroola. Yesterday on this program Chris Schacht … a Director of Marathon Resources, a mining company that’s exploring that region. He was arguing for the case … for allowing Marathon to get in there and explore and provided they meet all of the environmental requirements that the authorities impose on them be allowed to dig the stuff up, that is uranium. Now, Mark Parnell wants to challenge some of the things that Chris Schacht said to our listeners yesterday … let’s just play you a small portion of what Chris Schacht said yesterday...

Chris Schacht, former Labor Senator, Marathon Board member and lobbyist [speaking [07-09-09]:… this is at least a $5 billion deposit.

Bevan: How do you know?

Schacht: Because already what we’ve explored and what we’ve declared to the stock exchange in both inferred and indicative resource and at roughly the present price it’d be around $5 billion...

Bevan: What, uranium?

Schacht: Uranium. It’s the second biggest single deposit of uranium after Roxby Downs …

Phone -in Caller Nicky: … I wanted to ask Chris why on earth we should allow a company anywhere near Arkaroola, that in your exploration was caught red-handed illegally dumping waste? It’s a disgrace and if you think there’s any credibility for this company after that, you can’t even get the exploration part right, what makes you think that we should believe you about a full-scale mine?

Schacht: It was true we made a mistake on the disposal of waste material, none of which was radioactive … I just simply say to Nicky what happened was instead of tipping the waste out of the bags into a trench and covering it over, which was legal, we left it in the bags and that was illegal and we accept that, we made a mistake. We have restructured the company, there’s been changes to the board, we’ve issued a major policy statement on what we’ve done to change the company as a result …

Bevan: Are you saying Marathon was guilty of nothing more than littering with some plastic bags?

Schacht: No, no we broke the regulation.

Bevan: … is that effectively what you did, you left some plastic bags?…

Schacht: No, no, we left the stuff in the plastic bag and buried it.

Bevan: Yeah, but you could have just tipped it out and it would have been fine.

Schacht: But that’s what the rules allow.

Bevan: Yeah, so your offence is you left some plastic bags there?

Schacht: Absolutely and that is a breach of the regulation of which we admit our mistake and have changed.

Bevan: It was littering.

Schacht: Yes, of course. [End excerpt]

Bevan: Okay, that’s Chris Schacht yesterday … Mark Parnell … why do you take issue with what Chris Schacht was saying?

Mark Parnell: There were two main things but I’ll start by saying Chris said none of it was radioactive. They’re wasting their time, they’re looking for uranium, if it wasn’t radioactive what they’ve pulled out of the ground then what on earth are they doing there?

But really the two things that I take issue with, the first of all is it is $5b. Now, people who hang around the stock market and mining companies understand that there are a number of scales of confidence that you can have when you’re looking for minerals. You’ve got things called indicated resources and you’ve got inferred. Inferred is not much more than a guess. Now, Marathon reported to the stock exchange in July this year and then had to put a correction in because they got their figures wrong. Their latest figures are four mega tonnes indicated, 47 inferred. So that 47 is not much more than guess work based on people sitting at computers screens imagining what the resource might be. So it is a long way away from saying this is a $5b resource.

The other thing I take exception to is this idea of waste, that it was just a few plastic bags … the littering. Well, goodness, there were drums, there were bags, there was a backhoe which was taken to part of the national estate. There was plenty of –

Abraham: What, they buried a backhoe or they used a backhoe?

Parnell: … they basically dug their trenches –

Abraham: Well it was 35 tonnes according to ABC News.

Parnell: - 22,000 bags of waste and it’s not just a question of it being the bags that were the pollution, the core samples are supposed to be put back down the core sample poles.

But the backhoe I referred to was referred to in the EPA and the Primary Industries report, basically it was vandalism of a national estate listed geological monument. And this is the so called fluorite deposit. They’ve never found where the material ended up, it’s worth an awful lot of money. [see the Case of the Missing Minerals]

So it wasn’t just a simple matter of littering, there was incident after incident of illegal behaviour and for Chris Schacht to just say … ‘It was just a minor thing and we’ve changed our ways’, I don’t believe him at all.

Phone-in Caller Anne: … I’m very disappointed with the fact that they’re trying to get mining there. It’s worldwide famous for its beauty. There’s plenty of uranium in the Northern Territory … it’s basically glowing with the stuff and I’m very disappointed in Chris Schacht for supporting it.

Phone-in Caller Peter: … the reason why we allow mining in Australia and let these leases is so that the people of Australia can get access to these minerals … in reality the people of Australia can’t get access to these minerals because the plan is to export it. So Australians don’t need the mining to happen.

 

Has Marathon run its race?

Marathon Resources is a company that, despite frequent protestations of its deep commitment to maintaining a 'social licence to operate' (as the industry jargon goes), never does seem to have grasped that what they are trying to do might be, in the eyes of others, alarming.

It probably says much about the kind of mindset that cannot really quite see what all the fuss is about - hell, it's only a uranium mine into the middle of a wilderness sanctuary, after all! - that it also cannot ever quite grasp the likely consequences of its actions in a more general community where that's a very big deal indeed!

Firstly, it almost beggars belief that the dumping scandal could ever have happened. In a marginal situation of the utmost environmental - and political - sensitivity the company should have drummed the importance of being seen not only to be toeing the line, but willingly exceeding it, into all its employees and contractors with monotonous regularity.

Instead we discovered not only the 22 800 bags of waste - some of it radioactive - buried in large trenches in the heart of the sanctuary, (along with laboratory paraphernalia!) No, we also saw a cavalier and utterly unwarranted assault on a geological monument - the Mount Gee fluorite deposit - by a Marathon employee. Don't think this was trivial; this combination of a contemptuous act and lax supervision has cost this company dearly! We'll see why shortly.


a notice of entry


On Thursday morning Marathon Resources served a 21 day 'notice of entry', a statement of intention to bring its 'declared' equipment back to the Arkaroola Wilderness Sanctuary, on its owners, Doug and Marg Sprigg.

Let's step back a moment and put this in context. The company is suspended from drilling because of the waste scandal. The company has only recently completed the long and arduous clean-up. They had had considerable, protracted, and very public difficulty in finding a final destination for some of the waste, as communities down through the Ranges reacted against taking it, and only via the State Govt.s compulsory powers did it find a final home at the far distant Inkerman landfill. Primary Industries and Resources (PIRSA) has not issued its final report on the clean-up, nor can it authorise a resumption of drilling until it has done so, even presuming the Department could find in favour of the company's returning.

So the reaction - at least in that (rather large, surely?) part of the community which is not blasé about the prospect of mining in wildernesses - to a notice apparently stating Marathon's intention to return was one of genuine alarm.

The company claimed later that the notice served on the Spriggs was purely an annual formality, as required by PIRSA.


'i have no intention whatsoever of approving that'


Perhaps so. But if so, a little timely explanation might well have been in order! Because even the PIRSA Minister, Paul Holloway, seemed to be alarmed by the news. Here he is, responding to questioning by Greens MLC Mark Parnell in the state's upper house:

...[A]s far as the government is concerned, the clean-up of the Mount Gee region and exploration in the Arkaroola area by Marathon is not yet complete, and it will not be complete at least and until the department formally signs off on the work that is being done. I have certainly had no formal application from Marathon, and, certainly, I would not even contemplate one until the process is completed...

It is certainly news to me that Marathon has served a new notice of entry. As I said, I have no intention whatsoever of approving that [emphasis mine], or even considering any approach from it until the matters have been finalised to the satisfaction of the department.

The Minister was also surprisingly - and rather unprecedentedly - forthright on the topic of the chances of Marathon's returning to drill at any stage in the near future. This is where the oh-so-costly mangled fluorite deposit re-enters the discussion -

In any case, I can say to the honourable member that he would be aware that some issues arose in relation to the fluori[t]e matter that pointed to some deficiencies within the Mining Act in terms of how these matters might be dealt with.

I will be bringing some amendments into this parliament. Certainly, I would not be contemplating any further activity by Marathon at least and until that legislation was in place, and that might well be some time away...

In any case, I think that, at the very least, the deficiencies of the Mining Act that were brought to light by Marathon's activities need to be corrected. Then, I think, the government would have to give consideration to the impact of any further exploration and, in particular, any public benefit that would come out of that given the history of this matter. I am not even going to consider that until at least those two preconditions are met, and I expect it would be some time at least before the legislation would be considered by this parliament.

'Any public benefit' indeed!

Marathon must drill to prove its viability to investors. The company cannot drill in the cooler months, as this is Arkaroola's peak tourist period. Marathon's exploration lease expires in November this year. I'll leave it to the gamblers among you to determine what, in the light of the above, the odds would be of their being given another. And did I mention the state election due in early 2010?

Now, we'll never know what the Minister's response might have been without the additional spur of the news of the company delivering a 'notice of entry'. I have appended the full transcript below to allow the reader to judge for themselves.

But I can't help but think that this latest in a series of failures of imagination - an inability to perceive the likely consequences of your actions in the minds of those with different values, even where those values simply cannot be ignored - has sealed Marathon's fate.


it is a big deal


Memo to all mining companies - and particularly to all their contractors - it is a big deal! What those pet ogres 'The Greenies' think does matter. And don't be so sure that the values you dismiss as 'backward' or 'extreme' aren't in reality those of the majority of the thinking community.

And further - you really cannot, as the biblical injunction reminds us, make a silk purse out of a sow's ear! No amount of public consultancy, PR spin, or general 'greenwashing' will save a really ugly project. The problem isn't that the public hasn't been sufficiently exposed to your point of view - the corporate media (and its cowardly public analogue) ensures we're relentlessly drilled with it - it's that we don't agree with you!


let's identify all the mining exclusion zones


So now the focus changes.

As I've said repeatedly, Marathon should never have been allowed to enter the Arkaroola Wilderness Sanctuary in the first place. This was the primary error that we must now work to correct. No company, not even the Govt. backed Heathgate Resources, must be allowed to operate in the high conservation value areas of the northern Flinders Ranges.

The Minister has spoken of the need form a dialogue with conservationists to identify those areas that are simply inappropriate for mining activity, as has the Chamber of Mines and Energy. Well, here's the first. And it's high time we identified the remainder.

Because this kind of unnecessary conflict is simply in no-one's best interest,be they an aspiring captain of industry or ardent conservationist!


the full parliamentary transcript thurs. feb 5th

The Hon. M. PARNELL (14:47): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Mineral Resources Development a question about Marathon Resources.

Leave granted.

The Hon. M. PARNELL: In September last year, in response to questions about the clean-up and disposal of radioactive and other waste illegally dumped in the Arkaroola Wilderness Sanctuary, the minister stated that Marathon Resources' exploration licence continued only because the company 'needs some authority in order to undertake the activities about which we have been talking, that is, the removal of the waste'. When questioned further, the minister said, 'As to the future of the exploration licence, that is something that we will have to await until the clean-up is finished.'

Last week, Marathon Resources released a statement to the Stock Exchange stating that its clean-up was completed on 18 December last year and that all rehabilitation and revegetation works relating to the formal rectification plan were completed early last month, and a report by the independent consultant verifying the work was submitted to PIRSA on 23 January. This morning, the owners of the wilderness sanctuary, Marg and Doug Sprigg, were served by Marathon Resources with a new notice of entry and notice of equipment. Now that the clean-up is complete, it seems that Marathon is preparing to resume its exploration activities once the minimum 21-day notice period expires. My questions of the minister are:

1. Now that the clean-up is complete and the company has served a new notice of entry, when will he make a decision on whether Marathon Resources will be allowed to resume its exploration activities and, in particular, its drilling activities?

2. Has Marathon Resources made a formal reapplication to resume its drilling activities, and has it submitted a new declaration of environmental factors?

3. Considering the high level of public interest in this issue, is there any scope for public comment on whether the company can resume its exploration activities?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (14:49): As the honourable member said in his questions, a report was handed to the department on 23 January. The department has not yet signed off on that issue so, as far as the government is concerned, the clean-up of the Mount Gee region and exploration in the Arkaroola area by Marathon is not yet complete, and it will not be complete at least and until the department formally signs off on the work that is being done. I have certainly had no formal application from Marathon, and, certainly, I would not even contemplate one until the process is completed. In any case, I can say to the honourable member that he would be aware that some issues arose in relation to the fluoride matter that pointed to some deficiencies within the Mining Act in terms of how these matters might be dealt with.

I will be bringing some amendments into this parliament. Certainly, I would not be contemplating any further activity by Marathon at least and until that legislation was in place, and that might well be some time away. It is certainly news to me that Marathon has served a new notice of entry. As I said, I have no intention whatsoever of approving that, or even considering any approach from it until the matters have been finalised to the satisfaction of the department. I understand that work is completed. I am not questioning that the work may not have been done satisfactorily, but that needs to be certified by the relevant authorities.

In any case, I think that, at the very least, the deficiencies of the Mining Act that were brought to light by Marathon's activities need to be corrected. Then, I think, the government would have to give consideration to the impact of any further exploration and, in particular, any public benefit that would come out of that given the history of this matter. I am not even going to consider that until at least those two preconditions are met, and I expect it would be some time at least before the legislation would be considered by this parliament.

MARATHON RESOURCES

The Hon. M. PARNELL (14:52): As a supplementary question, given the minister's response about his lack of knowledge of the notice of entry having been given, will the minister bring back to the council some advice on the validity of those notices and, in particular, the validity of the 21 day statutory periods under those notices, as well as any advice on whether, if invalid, those notices would have to be reissued at some future date?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning, Minister for Small Business) (14:52): I think that is a reasonable point. I will certainly have that looked at as a matter of urgency.

fox to henhouse - 'this time it'll all be different'

In the absence of an active drilling program, would-be Wilderness Sanctuary miner Marathon Resources seem to have elected to mine a seam of black humour instead.

How else can one explain the recent spate of hand-wringing mea culpas they've been issuing to their shareholders and the public in general?

Marathon's Chairman Peter Williams - who has been with the company since 2004 - tells us, in his open letter to Shareholders of August 15th;

I have led Marathon's review process to understand how this Mt Gee incident occurred and what we needed to learn. The results of this review, "Marathon Resources: Learning from Waste in the Wilderness", is being made public so that our key stakeholders can hear from us about our understanding of what happened and what we plan to do to ensure that these types of incidents do not recur.

Throughout the review process, I came to the difficult realisation that this incident may in fact have been symptomatic of our culture and Marathon's overall approach...

Our conclusion after the Mt Gee issue was that these incidents indicated we had not instilled the appropriate level of awareness about the importance of our social licence to operate. When the company formed in 2004, we should have worked harder to instil a culture, capability and systems for managing exploration in a way that was sensitive to the community and the environment. We needed management and communication that were up to delivering us this culture and approach.

Of course, one can scarcely argue with this admission that they certainly haven't made the grade in Arkaroola.

(As for 'Learning from Waste in the Wilderness'!? Give me a break!...)

But, equally obviously, this is all part of a strategy aimed at convincing us that they're reformed characters now, and that if the state government and community would only be prepared to let them back into the Arkaroola Wilderness Sanctuary to drill again they'd be the bestest little environment and community friendly mining company ever -

To win the right back to drill, we must first change our understanding of the priorities for an exploration company in a sensitive environment. We must be able to rebuild support with key stakeholders through better management and communication. We must ensure our standards of behaviour are exemplary and that we deliver our exploration program to the highest safety, environmental and community standards.

'Delivering the highest safety, environmental and community standards'. Haven't I heard this somewhere before? Haven't they been saying that's what they were doing all the way along? And look what happened!

But now they're back, and this time they're really, really on the wagon!

Frankly, I don't buy it, and I doubt that anyone else will either. Can they really expect to be taken seriously if they more-or-less say "Oh, we've suddenly realised we really had to not screw up if we were going to be allowed to prospect for Uranium in the heart of a Wilderness Sanctuary and one of the state's major tourist drawcards!"?

"Well, duh!"

The company knew perfectly well what it was getting into in Arkaroola. They knew that prospecting to establish a mine, and a Uranium mine in particular, was always going to be highly controversial, and that the state government - already under intense community scrutiny for allowing them access in the first place - would have no choice but to rigorously hold them to account.

the lessons of 'wild dog'

They'd already been through the whole 'Wild Dog' experience: Marathon had attempted to prospect for Uranium in the Myponga Reservoir catchment on the Fleurieu Peninsula near Adelaide. The local community were not at all impressed, and the Premier himself intervened directly - as he has conspicuously failed to do in this instance - making it quite clear that there would be no Uranium mine on the Fleurieu Peninsula.

How could they not have 'got' that Uranium prospecting is unpopular, and that prospecting in areas that the public have a great attachment to is doubly so?

The answer is that they did get it. And they also knew perfectly well that as they shifted their focus to the Arkaroola Wilderness Sanctuary the rigorous scrutiny would only increase. They even quoted Minerals Minister Paul Holloway in their own press release of November 2006 acknowledging that they wouldn't be pursuing the Wild Dog prospect at Myponga -

However, it needs to be understood that any new mines across the State will be developed within South Australia’s stringent regulatory framework of best practice environmental management and community consultation.

Now, that's pretty clear, isn't it? And they've published it themselves.

the company, in its own words

In fact, a quick spin through their own website reveals a continual litany of claims to adherence to the highest standards with regard to the environment and the community from that point on. I've included a number of examples below -

29th January 2007, Quarterly Activity Report

Marathon is acutely aware of its environmental and social responsibilities and this part of the scoping study is recognised as crucial and requiring attention at the earliest possible stage of the project. The Company is committed to exploration and mining with minimal environmental and social impact, recognising that its social license to operate depends from the outset on maintaining an environmental and social balance that is as close to original as practicable.

13th March 2007; CEO John Santich delivers a presentation to InvestorTV -

Obviously we’ll be going through the normal processes, and there’s going to be a lot of attention on Mount Gee. We’re going to be looking at the political, social, environmental considerations, but we’ll just have to pay a lot of attention to them.

3rd of April 2007; Mt Gee Uranium Project Update -

Dr Santich said that the Company was committed to environmentally sustainable mining at Mt Gee and to thorough exploration of the Paralana Mineral System. “Indications are that we already have a viable mine,”he said, “but we believe that we have only scratched the surface.”

“We consider the Paralana Mineral System has the potential to be one of the great uranium systems in Australia,”said Dr Santich. “We are committed to both the environment in the Flinders Ranges and to adding shareholder value through best practice mining,”he said.

31st August 2007; Update on mount Gee, announcing the formation of their new Community Consultation Committee -

A visit was recently undertaken by the CEO, Stuart Hall, to meet local community members in the vicinity of Mt Gee in preparation for the formation of a North Flinders Community Consultative Committee (NFCCC).

The NFCCC comprises local members from the State and Federal Government (or their alternates) and representatives of local landowners, graziers, tourism operators and the indigenous community. The aim of the Committee is to act as a forum for the company and the local community to regularly meet and discuss progress at Mt Gee and any issues of concerns that may arise.

walking the talk

25th of September 2007; in the Company's Annual Report we find the Chief Executive Officer's Report, which is worth quoting at some length -

We are confident in our ability to develop and operate the Mt Gee project in a safe and environmentally benign manner with careful consideration of the social, cultural and financial impact on local stakeholders.

Our vision is to make the operation a strong positive influence on the local community. We have adopted a four-pronged approach to ensure that this occurs:

1. Community
The principles of our approach to the community are:
• Engagement
• Openness
• Honesty
• Acknowledgement of alternative views
• Contribution to the community
• Earned respect

We believe that it is vital that the local community hear first-hand from Marathon about our plans and our progress. It is equally important that people have an open and transparent mechanism to air any concerns.

For this reason we have established the North Flinders Community Consultative Committee [ see above ]...

2. Environment

The principles of our approach to the environment are:
• To strive for best practice
• To be proactive in planning
• To stay ahead of community standards

As the proponents for the development of a uranium mine, we recognise that the community and the Federal and State Governments expect Marathon to consistently achieve the highest levels of environmental excellence.

Accordingly, our approach to environmental issues is reflected as a priority in our corporate values, in our recruitment and in our selection of consultants and contractors.

Marathon has offered to prepare a full Environmental Impact Statement of Mt Gee and to allow full public scrutiny of this document. This will lay the groundwork in establishing our environmental credentials and ensuring the highest standards are maintained throughout project development.
…
4. People

The principles of our approach to people are:
• Technical excellence and experience.
• To build a team of like-minded people.
• To ‘Walk the talk’.
• To develop suitable induction and training for our contractors and new staff.

Marathon will successfully implement our strategy with the full engagement of our staff. We intend to provide them with the appropriate training and tools to inculcate a culture of excellence in community liaison and environmental and safety standards.

So, all the same bases as those now being sold as the 'new improved' version of the operation are already specifically covered.

'Best Practice' in the environment, listening to the community, ensuring staff and contractors know exactly what its all about, acknowledging the legitimate intense scrutiny and highest expectations from both state and federal governments.

It could hardly be clearer. They had their chance - a chance many of us, after all, feel no company should ever have been given in Arkaroola in the first place - they knew exactly what was at stake... and they blew it, and got themselves suspended from drilling

environmental issues

Interestingly, the Directors Report section of this same Annual Report Document, signed by Peter Williams himself, contains the following

Environmental issues

The Group’s operations are subject to environmental regulation. The Group is satisfied that no breaches of environmental regulation have occurred.

Let's move on, shall we?...

15th of November 2007; Chairman's address to the Annual General Meeting, delivered by Peter Williams -

Marathon is also conscious of its need to gain a social “licence to operate”. We are confident in our ability to develop and operate the Mt Gee project in a safe and environmentally benign manner with due consideration of the social, cultural and financial impact on local stakeholders...

We have taken a four-pronged approach encompassing the community, environment, safety and human resources to ensure we gain stakeholder confidence and acceptance.

Building a world-class project with world-class environmental and safety standards is a challenging task, but we believe we have the right systems in place to achieve our goals.

Then, in December, Leigh Creek Police and the Sanctuary's owners make a first foray into the vast piles of material, including radioactive waste and left over laboratory personal protective equipment[!], buried in blatant contravention of the terms of the company's Exploration Lease, right in the heart of the Wilderness Sanctuary! And the rest is history...

It is abundantly clear that despite being fully aware of the inescapable centrality of maintaining their 'social licence to operate' from the first, and despite constant assurances that they were meeting the highest standards, the company couldn't, or wouldn't, in fact rise to either.

It is also abundantly clear in the light of this that the state government's policy of allowing mineral exploration in a Wilderness Sanctuary in the first place was irrevocably flawed. One cannot put foxes in charge of henhouses and claim to have the welfare of chickens at heart! There can be no 'second chances' - the Arkaroola Sanctuary must be fully protected now and for ever.