Ann: Bird in Hand Gold Project Application Refused, page-53

You have to see it from THREE SIDES (those FOR, Those Against) and from the Government's Perspective - what would be the most popular decision?

PLUS there's a difference when you have a dog in the fight..

The case AGAINST
When you look at this Facebook page you can see a distillation of the angst felt by a percentage of the NIMBY community....
https://www.facebook.com/KeepWoodsideMineFree
There's some pretty nice work done on that Facebook page.
Would have cost a fair bit.

The case FOR the mine
And the case put by Terramin for why the mine was going to be minimal impact.
Also cost a fair bit.

https://www.facebook.com/birdinhandgoldmine

https://www.birdinhandgoldmine.com.au/

The problem is Governments want to have an each way bet. They want to be seen as economically responsible and pro-development while also being green and community minded.

In reality, the government could have had it both ways - they could have been seen to have pushed Terramin to develop a highly community and environmentally compatible mine plan that addressed ALL CONCERNS in great detail (which they did). Responsible government doing what good governments do. A missed opportunity.

Personally, I think Woodside would have been better off - they could have had the economic benefits of a working mine (local jobs and local businesses benefiting) WITHOUT any downside - at all.

That was the plan.

Fly meets ointment.