SA Mines and Energy Journal : February - March 2013
FEBRUARY/MARCH 2013 SA MINES & ENERGY JOURNAL 21 FEATURE From an industry perspective, what do you think the most stand-out development or issue was for 2012? Jim White The shift in government attention forced on them by the deferral of Olympic Dam. Larry Ingle Clearly the disappointing announcement from BHPB with respect to Olympic Dam expansion. David Christensen The downturn in financial markets. Chris Giles Olympic Dam expansion not proceeding. This is symptomatic of the problem with current government approach to mineral development. There was so much red tape to go through that the optimum time for BHP to expand Olympic Dam simply passed by while they were complying with all the government requirements. Had the government given BHP the go-ahead three years ago with strict monitoring of best practice procedures, the expansion would have been underway. As it is, the State has lost billions in investment and economic wealth. Mick Sawyer BHPB no-go for Olympic Dam. Tom Mayer BHP Billiton's decision to defer the development of the Olympic Dam expansion. This had both negative and positive implications. The negative implications are self- evident. The positive implications include the expansion of government and industry thinking to include other smaller, but essential mining industry developments. Robert Smith BHP Billiton's deferral of the Olympic Dam expansion. John Anderson Apart from our unravelling epithermal and porphyry potential in the Gawler Craton, Iron Road's port proposal. How would you improve the SA Exploration & Mining Conference in 2013? Jim White Allow questions after each presentation. Larry Ingle Leave it alone -- preserve the basics on which it was built. Reiterate that the audience has no interest in share price or share price performance over the last year and leave that for another conference. The focus is technical/geological aspects and updates of a particular project or company during the current year. The Chair and panel for questions, comments and summing up worked well this year and provides a broader perspective compared to one person, as has been the case previously. David Christensen The conference is really quite good. I would be interested in seeing greater participation from people active in the State. Chris Giles Not invite politicians to present. Mick Sawyer 20 minute talks, rather than 15 minutes. Tom Mayer I think that we have got the formula for this Conference about right (and, of course, I am a bit biased as I am a Committee Member). The record attendance in a difficult year for the Industry speaks for itself. I've had positive feedback on the range and variety of the presentations, registration price, venue, after conference drinks, etc. The only negatives were regarding speakers during post-conference drinks: this really doesn't seem to work well but I'm not sure how to resolve it. Justin Gum -- Musgrave Minerals The sessions have been leaning far too close to the investment/ mining side of things over the past few years. The original idea was as a technical meeting with a strong focus on geology. I think trying to push it back towards that side of things would be a good idea. SAREIC does the investment side of things. The other suggestion would be to have the talks broadcast to the hall with the displays, as they do with SAREIC, to allow stall holders to catch up on the talks. Robert Smith Not sure! John Anderson Keep investors out, make sure senior government reps are there. This conference is the best one for technical ideas and government engagement.
December 2012 - January 2013
April - May 2013