Ontario Mining Association Seeks Clarification on Mining Act and Far North Act Legislation

This article was provided by the Ontario Mining Association (OMA), an organization that was established in 1920 to represent the mining industry of the province.

The Ontario Mining Association submitted its views on two important pieces of legislation today at hearings in Thunder Bay.  OMA President Chris Hodgson presented the Association´s report to the Legislature´s Standing Committee on General Government, which is reviewing both Bill 173, An Act to Amend the Mining Act, and Bill 191, An Act with respect to land use planning and protection of the Far North.  Joining Mr. Hodgson was John Blogg, OMA Secretary and Manager of Industrial Relations, along with Adele Faubert, Manager of Aboriginal Affairs at Goldcorp´s Musselwhite Mine, and Jerome Girard, Mill Superintendent at the Musselwhite Mine.

The OMA stuck to three main points on each piece of legislation.  “The OMA does have some concerns with Bill 173 and would like to seek clarification on some aspects of the proposed legislation, ensuring that there are no ambiguities impairing the ability of mining to continue to play the major role it does in the economic and social development of Ontario,” said Mr. Hodgson.  On the Mining Act, the OMA focused on the duty to consult, Notice of Material Changes concerning existing closure plans and consultation and the dispute resolution process. 

“A basic foundation of mining success in Ontario — the things that set us apart and give us an advantage over some other jurisdictions with significant mineral potential — is rule of law and certainty of title,” said Mr. Hodgson.  “For this reason, the Aboriginal consultation provisions in Bill 173 need to be clear, transparent and consistent with current case law, which states the government has the primary duty, with some exceptions, to consult with Aboriginal communities.”  The OMA also asked for greater clarity in mine closure plan consultation rules and the make-up of tribunals to handle disputes, which may arise.

Read more

[Mining Reputation] The Ugly Canadians – Shifting Sands – Mining, the Media and Public Perception – by Vivian Danielson (1999)

Vivian Danielson is a former editor of the Northern Miner and a co-author of “Gold Today, Gone Tomorrow: Anatomy of the Bre-X Swindle (1997). The following speech was given at the Mineral Economics Society 11th Symposium on January 25, 1999.

Ten years on, Ms. Danielson’s speech is still a very thought provoking analysis of industry strengths and weaknesses and many of the issues she raises continue to haunt the mining sector.

Please note that I added the term “Ugly Canadians” to the title for Google search terms. Stan Sudol

Vivian Danielson

The mining industry entered the 20th century like a lion, welcomed for its power and strength in building this nation’s economy. Many believe it will leave this century like a lamb, perhaps even a sacrificial one, laid to rest at the altar of changing public values and perceptions.

Some tough questions were asked about mining’s future during the CIM’s 100th anniversary celebration in Montreal last May. Would there be a 200th anniversary celebration? And could mining become the buggy whip industry of the 21st century, something to be studied by bright young MBA students on how not to manage an industry? Noranda’s David Goldman, the man who asked those questions, warned delegates that the industry may have lost the patience and good-will of the public, and that, for many, miners are no longer welcome in the modern world.

The industry can argue otherwise and point to parts of this country where mining remains an economic and social cornerstone. Mining is indeed welcome in Val d’Or, Sudbury, Timmins and Thompson, and in hundreds of other mining towns across this land. It is welcome in these communities because their citizens know the industry, and the people who work in it, first-hand. Knowledge leads to understanding, and understanding leads to acceptance.

Read more