Read on Twitter
Dodson:
Pad Dodson: "Mr Jacques, when did you first become aware of the significance of the Juukan sites"
Rio Tinto chairman JS Jacques: "Senator, I was made aware of the significance of the site son the Sunday evening, on the Sunday the 24th of May."
The day it was blown up.
Pad Dodson: "Mr Jacques, when did you first become aware of the significance of the Juukan sites"
Rio Tinto chairman JS Jacques: "Senator, I was made aware of the significance of the site son the Sunday evening, on the Sunday the 24th of May."
The day it was blown up.
Rio Tinto iron ore CEO Chris Salisbury says that it was not possible to unload the blast holes once they had been loaded. He says they attempted to unload 8 holes, which took 10 hours and only seven were successfully unloaded.
(Mining experts, my DMs are open)
(Mining experts, my DMs are open)
Jacques is asked why Rio chose option 4 to for the mine pit.
"The difference between option 4 and the other three options was 8 million tonnes of high grade iron ore. The economic value at the time of the decision was around $135m of net value at the time of the decision."
"The difference between option 4 and the other three options was 8 million tonnes of high grade iron ore. The economic value at the time of the decision was around $135m of net value at the time of the decision."
For those following at home - Rio Tinto in 2012 considered four options to design the Brockman 4 mine pit. Three of those options would have avoided damage to Juukan Gorge. They chose the fourth.
I am now worried that I have misheard "billion" as "million," will fact check.
Matt Canavan asked about the partnership agreement with PKKP.
The agreement, first signed in 2006, said the PKKP could not object to any s.18 applications provided Rio "used all reasonable endeavours to minimise the impact of those works on the site".
That's industry standard.
The agreement, first signed in 2006, said the PKKP could not object to any s.18 applications provided Rio "used all reasonable endeavours to minimise the impact of those works on the site".
That's industry standard.
JS Jacques just named the Burrup Peninsula to illustrate his point that "We usually get it right."
Rio owns the port on the Burrup. And, this isn't recent, I know there are agreements in place now, but petroglyphs were moved to build that port in the 1970s.
Rio owns the port on the Burrup. And, this isn't recent, I know there are agreements in place now, but petroglyphs were moved to build that port in the 1970s.
It's just a weird site to name as an example of good heritage management, when it's a. extraordinarily and obviously significant to the naked eye of the lay person and b. were still massively impacted by many resource companies early on, and continue to be damaged by some today.
Salisbury said they removed explosives from 8 holes "because although we couldn't save Juukan at that point we wanted to protect the other sites that the PKKP had alerted us to that were further down Juukan Gorge".
Importantly: they didn't have s.18 to destroy those sites.
Importantly: they didn't have s.18 to destroy those sites.
Js Jacques just casually throwing Chris Salisbury, who is on the call with him, under the bus.
He said he was first notified on 21 May that there was "an issue" on the Brockman site - by another executive who called him and asked if Salisbury had called him. He hadn't.
He said he was first notified on 21 May that there was "an issue" on the Brockman site - by another executive who called him and asked if Salisbury had called him. He hadn't.
Jacques said he first spoke to Salisbury the next day at a pre-scheduled meeting. He said the "there was no discussion of the cultural heritage issue, the issue was a question of timing and a request by the PKKP".
Jacques: "I heard on the Sunday 24th [of May], the evening, of the cultural heritage significance on the back of the draft release of the press release by the PKKP of the press release on this issue".
Q about former CEO Simon Walsh telling the Fin that he issued instructions in 2013 that the gorge not be destroyed.
Jacques said they have gone through the records and "no communication as referred by Mr Walsh in the press has appeared by any fashion". https://www.afr.com/chanticleer/walsh-told-rio-not-to-mine-juukan-caves-20200806-p55jav
Jacques said they have gone through the records and "no communication as referred by Mr Walsh in the press has appeared by any fashion". https://www.afr.com/chanticleer/walsh-told-rio-not-to-mine-juukan-caves-20200806-p55jav
George Christiansen is asking a very tough line of questions.
Were none of Rio Tinto's senior executives aware of the significance of the caves prior to the blast?
Jacques: "That is correct senator"
(He's not a senator, but meh)
Were none of Rio Tinto's senior executives aware of the significance of the caves prior to the blast?
Jacques: "That is correct senator"
(He's not a senator, but meh)
Christiansen: what was the point of no return?
Salisbury: "The point of no return was actually when the blast holes were loaded on the 13th of May."
Salisbury: "The point of no return was actually when the blast holes were loaded on the 13th of May."
Salisbury: "Can I just add by the 21st of May when I was informed, I was aware there was significance of the site which was conveyed to us via email… but I was not aware of the archeological report at that point."
The cultural heritage officer seems to be the only one who read the report before the site was destroyed.
He read the summary, and only in that week of May 18-24 - after the PKKP raised issues.
He read the summary, and only in that week of May 18-24 - after the PKKP raised issues.
Anika Wells MP:
"When were the PKKP made aware that there were three other options [for the Brockman 4 mine pit]?"
Jacques:"The PKKP was not made aware that four options were available in 2012-2013, and at the relevant meeting in 2013 only one option was presented to the PKKP"
"When were the PKKP made aware that there were three other options [for the Brockman 4 mine pit]?"
Jacques:"The PKKP was not made aware that four options were available in 2012-2013, and at the relevant meeting in 2013 only one option was presented to the PKKP"
Wells: "They were not made aware that there were three other options that did not involve the destruction of the caves?"
Jacques: "That is absolutely correct."
Jacques: "That is absolutely correct."
Wells: what do you say to the view from other independent experts that it was possible to remove the devices?
Chris Salisbury: That's not consistent with our advice nor our experience… In this case I can confirm that it was not safe or practicable to remove the devices."
Chris Salisbury: That's not consistent with our advice nor our experience… In this case I can confirm that it was not safe or practicable to remove the devices."
Matt Canavan: Is Rio reserving their right to take legal action against the PKKP if any information they provide to this committee breaches confidentiality arrangements
Jacques: "We have no intention to take any legal actions against the PKKP at all."
A very important point!
Jacques: "We have no intention to take any legal actions against the PKKP at all."
A very important point!
Chair Warren Entsch says they will call Rio Tinto again on another day, and he says they will also call Rio's senior cultural engagement officers - the people who actually spoke to PKKP.
When Rio is back, it will be for the whole day – so they can take as long as they need.
When Rio is back, it will be for the whole day – so they can take as long as they need.
As with every conversation about Juukan Gorge, there's a huge disconnect between people saying "how could this happen?" and people who work in this space (currently bureaucrats from the WA department of Aboriginal affairs) trying not to say, out loud, that it wasn't that unusual.
Apologies this is the National Indigenous Australians Agency speaking now.
