Fingerboards mineral sands project faces fresh scrutiny as critics label it 'a turd in glitter'

Victorian government considers renewed mining bid after rejecting almost identical proposal in 2021, planning expert claims

By LineZotpaper
Published
Read Time2 min
Sources2 outlets
The Victorian government is facing accusations of manipulating its own planning system to fast-track approval for a mineral sands mine in eastern Victoria that it rejected five years ago, as a leading planning expert and local residents condemn the latest proposal as essentially unchanged.

The Fingerboards Mineral Sands Project, proposed for the Lindenow Valley 270 kilometres east of Melbourne, was rejected by the Victorian government in November 2021 on the grounds it would "pose a significant risk to the environment and valuable horticulture industry". The government is now considering what it calls a "new and modified" bid from the company behind the project, Gippsland Critical Minerals (GCM), which was previously known as Kalbar Operations.

RMIT emeritus professor of planning and environment Michael Buxton, who spent more than a decade at the state planning department, said the government had failed to follow proper process by accepting the application for a second review. "The minister could have just refused to consider this application — and in my view, should have," he said, adding that the description of the proposal as new and modified was a "blatant deception".

Local organic vegetable grower Kane Busch, who has fought the mine for years, was blunt about the revised plan. "All they've really done is rolled a turd in glitter to make it look shiny," he said.

GCM rejected the claims and said its new bid included significant changes. The company said the site was a rich source of minerals deemed critical by the Australian government.

Miners have explored the Lindenow Valley for mineral sands, which contain rare-earth elements, since the 1970s. Global demand for such minerals doubled between 2015 and 2023. Dr Buxton argued Australia's strategic focus on critical minerals was behind the renewed push for the East Gippsland site.

§

Analysis

Why This Matters

  • The outcome sets a precedent for how the Victorian government balances environmental protection and horticulture against the push to secure critical minerals for national security and economic reasons.
  • Local farming and horticulture industries, which depend on the region's high-quality soils and irrigation, face potential disruption if the mine proceeds.
  • The dispute tests the integrity of Victoria's planning system, with critics alleging the government is circumventing its own rejection process.

Background

The Fingerboards Mineral Sands Project has been in development for nearly two decades. Kalbar Resources (later Kalbar Operations) first proposed the mine, but after almost a decade of environmental review, the Victorian government rejected it in 2021. In 2023, the company rebranded as Gippsland Critical Minerals and submitted what it describes as a rescoped proposal. The federal government has identified critical minerals, including rare-earth elements found in mineral sands, as strategically important for economic sovereignty and defence.

Key Perspectives

Local residents and horticulture industry: Oppose the mine, arguing it threatens prime agricultural land and the region's vegetable-growing industry. They see the revised proposal as a cosmetic repackaging. Gippsland Critical Minerals: Maintains the new bid includes significant modifications and that the site is a valuable source of critical minerals essential for Australia's strategic interests. Planning experts and critics: Contend the Victorian government is manipulating its own processes to reconsider a project it already found unacceptable, undermining planning integrity.

What to Watch

  • Whether the Victorian government accepts the GCM application for formal assessment and what conditions it imposes.
  • Any legal challenge from opponents if the government does proceed with the approval process.
  • Federal government signals on critical minerals policy, which could increase pressure on states to fast-track such projects.

Sources

Zotpaper

Written by software from the reporting listed above, scored by an automated standards desk, and published without a person reading it first. If something here is wrong, tell the editor and it will be put right.

How we workSubscribe