Billion-dollar backtrack by fast-tracked seabed mine

The economic windfall promised by a seabed mine off Taranaki was an incentive to use the fast track, but the company’s own claims about its profitability have had to be retracted.
On Monday, Manuka Resources claimed its Taranaki seabed mine would contribute a billion dollars a year towards New Zealand’s export earnings. On Tuesday, the company formally walked that back in an announcement to the Australian Stock Exchange. 
The project has been slated for inclusion on the Government’s Fast-track Approvals Bill, overriding a decade of community protest and multiple rejections in court.
Trans-Tasman Resources (owned by Manuka Resources) has fought local opposition to its Taranaki seabed mine for a decade. Its consent has been denied previously on the grounds of environmental impact, including in a unanimous 2021 Supreme Court decision.
The seabed mine, along with a handful of other previously denied ‘zombie’ projects, were just some of the 149 projects announced to be listed in the fast-track bill for first consideration by an expert panel. 
The panel is bound by the purpose statement of the fast-track bill, which does not include mention of the environment, and will have to prioritise economic and developmental benefits. Whether a project is expected to have nationally or regionally significant benefits is also something the panel considers.
The economic windfall advertised by Manuka’s Trans-Tasman project has been significant, with the final fast-track list describing the project as a way to bring in “up to 50 million tonnes of seabed material per year”, most of which would be dumped back to the bottom. 
The prize catch would be vanadium, and a goal of 11,000 tonnes per year would see New Zealand rise to the world’s third-biggest producer, following China and Russia.
Newsroom previously reported the company hoped to gross $450m a year with this catch. 
The area open for mining also quietly quadrupled in recent months, after the company pulled out of Environmental Court proceedings in the weeks leading up to the fast-track opening for applications.
Then, on Monday, the day after the fast-track list was made public, the company announced to investors on the Australian Stock Exchange the deposit “has the ability to contribute $1 billion annually to export earnings”.
Within 24 hours, this was walked back. The company admitted it “does not have a reasonable basis to provide this information” and advised investors not to rely on the forecast.  
Previously, it had claimed it was “formally invited” to apply – another statement that had to be retracted. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop said this was “misleading” in April, as he had sent over 200 letters of notice regarding the fast-track, including to Trans-Tasman Resources.
It is not known what the company said on its application to the fast-track, but according to an application document for a different fast-track project, economic benefits were part of the discussion. 
An application filed by a ski village near Coronet Peak showed applicants are asked if their project will “deliver significant economic benefits” alongside considerations for regional development, employment and housing. A dollar value did not appear to be among the requested information.
Nevertheless, the report released today – prepared for ministers by the advisory group – listed fact checking as a limitation of their work.
“While applicants were required to certify that the information given in the applications was true and correct, this has not been independently verified,” said the report. It noted this was “not unusual at this stage of a process such as this”.
The group was also unable to consider environmental impacts, Treaty settlement concerns, commercial viability or third-party expert analysis. Their recommendations to ministers were based solely on the applications received. 
According to documents released under the Official Information Act, the advisory group raised concerns about the veracity of applications as early as May.
In the meeting notes for its May 10 meeting, there was “a discussion about reliance on what the applicant has said is accurate in their applications”. The group noted the applicants had to sign a declaration alongside their application, and recommended their report should phrase things as ‘the applicant has said’ rather than framing it as fact.
Kiwis Against Seabed Mining chairperson Cindy Baxter wondered if “this big made-up number influenced the decision to include it on the fast-track list”.
She cast doubt on prior statements made by the company, including its decision to frame a unanimous rejection by the Supreme Court over the same project as “a pathway to a successful resumption of proceedings with the EPA”.
In a chairman’s address at their 2023 AGM, the company framed the Court’s decision as being “in support” of the project.
That did not appear to be a barrier to entering into the application process, and its record of demonstrated rejections was explicitly said to be a non-issue by the advisory group, as was true for any applicant. 
Earlier in the year, Resources and Oceans Minister Shane Jones said he had been in discussions with the Cabinet Office about recusing himself from the Taranaki seabed decision due to the potential for a perceived conflict of interest. However, Trans-Tasman Resources did not appear on the final list of Jones’ declared conflicts.
Newsroom understands Jones sent a letter to the Cabinet Office and sought advice as he had indicated, but ultimately did not recuse himself from the project.
Conflicts of interest have been raised as a point of contention, as three ministers were personally responsible for selecting which of the advisory group’s projects would make it onto the final baked-in list.