which part was public interest?

"This is all about government systems to ensure the orderly development of deposits," Mr Walsh said........isn't that what the Mining Act is for - giving to RIO would only development uncertainty and open a hornet's nest of claims from past decisions

"Quite clearly when you're making the sorts of investments that we're making, it's all done on the basis that you've got surety to mine your future orebodies."......don't leave as a EL then!!

Mr Walsh said Rio had drilled out the deposit in the 1980s, but the government recognised that its high phosphorous content made it a long-term development prospect......why is it decribed as a rich deposit earlier in the article

Rio had also clearly demonstrated its intent to renew the leases before the deadline, paying the renewal fees well in advance and despatching the documents to a courier a week before the due date.......haven't found the term intent anywhere in the Mining Act, only deadlines, renewal dates, supplying paperwork with $$$$

"So I think we had signalled our intent, the Government was well and truly aware of our intent, and I guess Mr Bowler is now working through that process and I'm sure he's got the State's Solicitor's Office very closely involved in that," he said......the only intent he has signalled here is that get ready for a protracted battle - an FOI on the State's Solicitor's Office would be interesting

"From where I sit, I think we have argued a very sensible case."......more like crossing every finger, toe, leg

All in all very little reference to benefiting the public interest of WA....that was the basis of their submission wasn't it