It a fine line between relevant community consultation and the...

It a fine line between relevant community consultation and the State's economic development. So I suppose it's only fair that the level of consultation required excalates as the process escalates.

An exploration licence is a very different thing to a mining licence. A State gives out exploration licences so companies will come and see what's under the ground, the companies bear the cost of this and the State gets to know what it has. But at the exploration stage all you are doing is seeing if there's something there. There isn't a lot of point in calling town meetings, whipping up concern, when all you are doing is drilling a few holes.

Take BM for example, they did 15 holes, 96mm in diameter. There isn't any point in telling people they plan to do a mine because there are many many steps in the process, and all of which may be moot if they don't find anything.

If a State makes it too difficult, too onerous, or too expensive just to explore, then companies go elsewhere and resources (and royalties) stay locked in the ground. Now, obviously this is what some groups want but the States need $$ to pay for services, hospitals, schools, roads etc.

Naturally, once you get past an exploration phase you start looking at more details and more consultation is required. I think that's only fair. Start talking to people when it looks like it might actually affect them. There's no point in whipping up emotions and fear if nothing with ever come of it.