Senate Economics Legislation Committee [Part 2], , 3:44:08 to 3:54:44
Review of the staffing within the Critical Minerals Office and concerns regarding the lengthy timeframes for mining project approvals.
Topics: Public service staffing, EPBC Act
Speakers: Senator Susan McDonald, Speaker 23, Speaker 26, Speaker 20, Geoff Mason, Speaker 22, Speaker 25
>> How many ASL are located in the critical
>> Senator, good evening. Crystal Oilinski, currently general manager of the critical minerals strategic reserve policy branch. Um, from the budget uh outcomes, we received 24 ASL for the critical minerals branch. We currently have 17 people working in the team and we are um ongoing recruitment.
>> Senator, if we could just clarify your question, were you asking about the critical minerals office or the critical minerals uh grouping within the division? So, there's three branches which are responsible for critical minerals.
>> Uh well, it was the critical minerals office because I assume that's the one who's engaging with investors and
>> uh No, that would be mine and I apologize, Senator. I just realized I didn't introduce myself properly when I started. Jeff Mason. I'm the general manager for critical mineral security. Um so there's between myself um and and the critical mineral strategic reserve I've got about 23.5 and then I think
>> yes I've already given numbers >> we also have the critical minerals office which undertakes a lot of industry engagement and through that supports the activities of the financing
apps. Senator, the number for the critical minerals office at 30 September is 29 ongoing FTE.
>> Okay. So, I'll just >> pause here. Critical minerals strategy. Uh, no. Security
>> security.
>> Security and critical minerals.
>> Strategic reserve.
>> Strategic reserve. And you have 17 in your team. And you have 29 in your team
>> in the office.
>> In the critical minerals office. >> Yes. >> And and what do you all do differently
>> Senator, I'll answer that one. Um so in the minerals and resources division we have the critical minerals office which is um was established by uh the government a few years back. Um its role is to uh steward if you like the critical minerals strategy, the critical minerals list and uh as you be well aware >> and industry engagement um and administer the programs and policy advice on critical minerals uh in the domestic setting >> um tax incentive. >> Oh and uh development of the critical minerals production tax incentive. The critical mineral security branch has a international focus. It engages with our um partners on national security and our key uh investment partners um Japan and Korea and the US, Canada and G7. Um the critical mineral security branch also um is the area that looks after advice to government in partnership with DEFAT and export finance Australia on a critical minerals facility. Um and then there is the critical mineral strategic reserve function which is recently established in Daer. Um and that branch has a policy branch and an assessments branch and they are busily establishing the reserve and operationalizing it and will provide advice to government on reserve
>> Okay. So we've got the critical minerals office which is doing the strategy, managing the list, doing policy advice to government on incentives and encouragement to more critical minerals production in Australia. >> and then we've got the critical minerals security which is securing investment and flogging it off overseas. And then we've got the critical minerals office which is doing
>> sorry the reserve.
>> Oh sorry the critical minerals reserve not I'm sorry I've just renamed you there. The critical minerals reserve which just manages the reserve. >> And you've got okay. And so I guess this remains best focused to you, Mr. Mason. So around the world, everybody's having the same problem. It's all China. They're monopolizing the market. they've got lower costs of processing or they're investing in countries like Indonesia that have lower costs of production because they don't have our restrictions on emissions reductions and you know maybe environmental standards and the other things that Australia cares about. Um is there anything else that I'm
Uh, I think that it come down to a number of different factors, Senator. Um, I haven't got and I think this is similar to the question from earlier with Indonesia is that I don't have a sideby-side comparison that I could draw on to provide you with spec specific factual information here right now, but it's something we could take on notice.
All right. Look, uh, I think that is an important discussion to have. Are we just not a good place to invest in anymore? And we did have
>> I don't think there's any evidence of that, Senator McDonald. And and there is
I can report Fraser Institute. I can
report back from what we had at IMARK and the unbelievable interest there is from uh our international friends in investing in Australia and uh there are some runs on re on the board which is important uh but we know that there's an enormous appetite out there and in the round tables I had uh what they go to is what they're looking for and why Australia remains an attractive place um is what they talk about internationally the permitting system what we'd say approvals and obviously uh we've made significant reforms in that area. Uh the stable political environment uh the skilled workforce uh that we have uh and the knowhow that we have around mining. So uh there is no doubt that Australia remains uh a highly attractive uh place uh for people to want to come and do business when it comes to uh critical minerals and rare earths.
>> Okay. So okay so this just on the approval system um the sustainable minerals institute tells me that over the last 10 years around 6 months every year has been added to the time taken to build a mine due to a company due to a combination of government and companies regulations and process. predecessors. So that's another six years that has been established has been added to the time to get a mine up in the last 10 years. Is the department aware of that? >> Who should I look to for that? Critical
>> I haven't seen that report. Um there are various assessments of time it takes. It varies by state and territory. Um, and it would vary by mine, location, complexity, all of the above. So, I'd have to have a look at that report to understand what that was based on.
>> A group of mining executives told me the other day, I said, "Well, I'm still working on 16 years from discovery to first ore." They said, "It's 16 years for a small, fairly straightforward mine, but a complex big copper mine, 30 years.
Senator Samantha Robertson, critical minerals office. We work very closely with states and territories around I guess you know their permitting systems. A lot of them have got new regimes in place to fasttrack a lot of their permit systems. It becomes a combination of readiness of the company to be able to um provide the relevant material at a particular time. We do have high ESG standards and part of that is the assessment process. But I think there are there is a lot of um there is a lot of LE versus L AW out there around the time it takes for mines these days and it's one of the projects that we're working on with them at the moment.
>> Terrific. So, if you could on notice provide me with what data sets the department has on approval times to get a mine approved in Australia and I guess it's not just approved, it's to first because we've got examples like Mcfilamese that was approved and then unapproved now another approval give and then that overturned and now they've got to go through their approval process again.
>> Senator, in taking that on notice, that is work that's still underway. We haven't completed that with the states and territories as yet.
>> So, you have no data on approval times
>> I don't in the department at the moment, but it's something that we have engaged with states and territories on to actually get to actually share with each other. So, that we are working with with actual data rather than than people's
>> Do you think my opinion's wrong?
>> I don't I wouldn't say that, Senator. I would need to see the data that sits behind the report that you quoted.
>> I think I think you'd also have to qualify that by determining how much of that approval time is in the hands of the consent authority and how much is in the in the hands of the applicant because there are often mining projects or any type of project that can sit for a long time with applicant because they're not yet confident about their investment decision.
>> Oh, that's an entirely reasonable point to make. Uh but I guess what we're trying what we're discussing here is whether or not at the moment with high demand for critical minerals, apparently available investment, a government that's willing to throw billions of dollars of projects, we should be fasttracking approvals and saying we want to we want to have the investment, the employment and the taxes here. And so that's what I'm seeking to understand.
>> And I understand the sentiment.