Granting of controversial mineral licences an erosion of democracy, claim campaigners

The licences, granted to four companies, permit searches for minerals — excluding gold and silver — across areas in at least three counties with the potential for future approval of full-scale mining operations.
A consultation on licence applications was published by the Department for the Economy (DfE) on May 8 and shows that out of a total of 2,163 responses, 2,153 (99.5%) were objections.
Communities Against Mining (CAM) warned that Caoimhe Archibald's decision to grant seven prospecting licences 'flies in the face of overwhelming public opposition, environmental risks, and multiple legal obligations' and accused the minister of failing to refer 'this cross-cutting matter' to the Executive Committee in line with Section 20 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
Martin Tracey said the move breaches the Good Friday Agreement's principles of partnership and collective governance.
'Ninety-nine per cent of the public responses in the consultation oppose the issuing of the prospecting licences,' he said.
'The Sinn Fein minister dismissed those objections with indifference and issued the licences anyway.'
Mr Tracey also said no Strategic Environmental Assessment or Equality Impact Assessment has been conducted 'despite evidence that rural, border communities will disproportionately bear the impact'.
'Communities Against Mining call for an immediate suspension of these licences and a full, independent investigation into the department's conduct in this matter.'
At the beginning of this year, a public inquiry into NI's largest-ever mining project in the Sperrin Mountains was suspended after Stormont failed to consult the Irish Government about potential cross-border impacts.
The move came after it was found that the Department for Infrastructure (DfI) failed to properly consult on 'transboundary' issues relating to the proposals.
Mr Tracey said the issue that collapsed the probe into the controversial goldmine 'has unexplainably been ignored by the minister' in arriving at her decision to grant seven new licences.
SDLP economy spokesperson Sinéad McLaughlin also slammed the move.
The Foyle MLA said the decision directly contradicts Ms Archibald's previous support for a moratorium on new licences.
'This is a deeply disappointing and unjustifiable decision by the economy minister,' Ms McLaughlin added.
'It is a slap in the face to the communities in these areas who made their objections loud and clear and who have now been ignored.'
A DfE spokesperson said it is carrying out a comprehensive review of mineral licensing.
'In the meantime, the process for providing a mineral prospecting licence is set out in law and cannot lawfully be contravened by a minister,' they added.
'A detailed explanation for the decisions, based on the existing legislative framework, has been published on the DfE website.
'These licences are for prospecting only. They do not allow for mining or extraction of minerals. It is also important to point out that the department has no role in the licensing of gold and silver exploration, which remains within the remit of the Crown Estate.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The National

2 days ago

• The National

Holyrood governing body defends 'unfair' trans toilet ban

In May, Presiding Officer Alison Johnstone announced that access to the parliament's facilities would be based on biological sex, not gender identity, after the Supreme Court judgment on the definition of a woman. Following the ruling, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) issued interim guidance that banned transgender people from using the bathroom of their acquired gender. READ MORE: John Swinney tears into 'weak man' Anas Sarwar at FMQs The move led to MSPs and staff writing to Holyrood's governing body expressing 'deep concern' over the decision, but the policy has remained in place. Westminster, Stormont, and the Senedd have not changed their polices and allow transgender people to use the toilets of their acquired gender. On Thursday, Scottish Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie raised the issue during SPCB questions. He noted that the SPCB previously said it 'remains committed to providing an inclusive environment' at Holyrood. (Image: Scottish Parliament) Harvie pointed to letters written to officials from LGBT+ groups the Equality Network and Scottish Trans which demonstrated 'the opposite is the case' and the changes will make trans people feel 'less welcome' at the Scottish Parliament. 'I am also aware that the response to colleagues in the staff union, representing staff in the Scottish Green parliamentary group, has also not addressed the substantive points they raised. 'They say it didn't address the lack of initial consultation, specific negative impacts on trans staff members or on gender non conforming people, the violation of privacy and dignity, criticism the EqIA [Equality Impact Assessment] and other points. READ MORE: Protesters take to Holyrood amid 'deadlocked' Ardrossan Harbour deal 'Given that the corporate body is now well aware that it has not achieved its intention of an inclusive workplace, surely it is time for the corporate body to think again and rescind this unclear and unfair interim position until a full position can be consulted on.' Responding on behalf of the SPCB, Scottish Tory MSP Jackson Carlaw insisted the governing body had 'legal responsibilities'. 'Our job, even though we are politicians, is not to debate the politics of an issue, but to ensure that we are implementing the law as the law is communicated to us,' Carlaw told MSPs. (Image: Scottish Parliament) 'Now having said that we recognize the interim stance to fulfill those legal responsibilities is a change. So let me acknowledge on behalf of the SPCB and Mr Harvie that for some this has proved both upsetting and a cause for anxiety and concern for their own wellbeing. 'With this in mind, managers were asked to immediately engage with their teams to discuss the interim stance, to identify any concerns about its impact and to support individuals who may be personally affected. 'This is an ongoing process, and we are committed to the wider wellbeing of our staff, which is embedded in a number of our policies and our management approach.' Carlaw added that the Scottish Parliament was working to 'improve inclusivity' and any further policy changes would take into account the EHRC statutory code 'once it is finalised'. READ MORE: 'Impossible to say' when MV Caledonian Isles will be fixed, says CalMac Scottish Labour's Carol Mochan asked Carlaw to explain why the SPCB chose to introduce changes now before the EHRC's full guidance was published. 'Officials took urgent steps following its publication to review the judgment in detail and consider its implications for services and facilities at Holyrood,' he replied. 'Now this is in line with the EHRC statement that those duties under the Equality 2010 act need to comply with the law and should be urgently reviewing what changes need to be made to their existing policies and practices. It's a matter for others to determine how they address their responsibilities.' Scottish Tory MSP Pam Gosal noted that anti-trans campaign group Sex Matters have 'warned they will come after organisations refusing to follow the ruling' and a challenge would leave 'taxpayers footing the bill'. (Image: Scottish Parliament) 'Therefore will the Parliament commit to following and implementing the interim update issued by the EHRC on the protection of single sex spaces,' she said. 'It is the responsibility of the corporate body to implement the law and the advice that we receive. That is what the corporate body's duty is. 'I've said, of course, that it's an interim position, and that there's a consultation taking place. 'That we remain committed to inclusivity, and that that is the primary objective of the work that we are doing.'

Rhyl Journal

3 days ago

• Rhyl Journal

ECHR must be reformed to restore ‘fraying' public confidence

Shabana Mahmood told the Council of Europe in a speech in Strasbourg the ECHR 'must evolve' to respond to new realities. It comes as the Government also seeks to tighten the interpretation of the human rights laws in the UK. On Wednesday, the Lord Chancellor said: 'Across Europe, public confidence in the rule of law is fraying 'There is a growing perception – sometimes mistaken, sometimes grounded in reality – that human rights are no longer a shield for the vulnerable, but a tool for criminals to avoid responsibility. 'That the law too often protects those who break the rules, rather than those who follow them.' 'This tension is not new. But in today's world, the threats to justice and liberty are more complex. They can come from technology, transnational crime, uncontrolled migration, or legal systems that drift away from public consent.' Ms Mahmood told European ambassadors the UK was committed to the ECHR, but that was 'not the same as complacency'. She added that when the application of rights 'begins to feel out of step with common sense', that is where trust begins to erode. Her call for change comes as the Government plans to tighten the use of Article 8 of the ECHR, the right to private and family life, in immigration cases in the UK. This includes cases involving foreign criminals. Under the plans unveiled in the immigration White Paper last month, the Home Office will bring forward legislation to try to reduce the number of people claiming 'exceptional circumstances' under Article 8 to stay in the UK. Ms Mahmood said: 'The right to family life is fundamental. But it has too often been used in ways that frustrate deportation, even where there are serious concerns about credibility, fairness, and risk to the public. 'We're bringing clarity back to the distinction between what the law protects and what policy permits.' She also said judges cannot be asked to solve political problems and so reform must be a 'shared political endeavour' among member states. The Lord Chancellor added: 'The European Convention on Human Rights is one of the great achievements of post-war politics. It has endured because it has evolved. Now, it must do so again.' Following Ms Mahmood's speech, a No 10 spokesman said it should be for Parliament and the Government to decide who has the right to remain in the country. 'We want to ensure the right balance is made in migration cases in relation to the national interest,' the spokesman said. The Lord Chancellor was making a broader point that 'now is the time for countries to work together to ensure the ECHR can evolve to meet the challenges facing modern democracies'. But, he added: 'The Government has been clear that Britain will remain a member of the ECHR, it underpins key international agreements on trade, security, on migration, on the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement.' A Tory spokesman said Kemi Badenoch had been clear that 'we would do whatever is necessary to ensure the supremacy of UK laws, and set a number of clear tests, including the deportation test, and made clear that if necessary, we would leave the ECHR'. But responding to the speech Sacha Deshmukh, chief executive of Amnesty International UK, said that any reform of the ECHR must 'shore up universal protections, not chip away at them'. He said: 'If the UK starts picking and choosing who merits protection from torture, family separation or arbitrary removal, it will undermine not just its moral authority but the rule of law itself, weakening its hand when speaking out against rights abuses abroad.'

Leader Live

3 days ago

• Leader Live

ECHR must be reformed to restore ‘fraying' public confidence

Shabana Mahmood told the Council of Europe in a speech in Strasbourg the ECHR 'must evolve' to respond to new realities. It comes as the Government also seeks to tighten the interpretation of the human rights laws in the UK. On Wednesday, the Lord Chancellor said: 'Across Europe, public confidence in the rule of law is fraying 'There is a growing perception – sometimes mistaken, sometimes grounded in reality – that human rights are no longer a shield for the vulnerable, but a tool for criminals to avoid responsibility. 'That the law too often protects those who break the rules, rather than those who follow them.' 'This tension is not new. But in today's world, the threats to justice and liberty are more complex. They can come from technology, transnational crime, uncontrolled migration, or legal systems that drift away from public consent.' Ms Mahmood told European ambassadors the UK was committed to the ECHR, but that was 'not the same as complacency'. She added that when the application of rights 'begins to feel out of step with common sense', that is where trust begins to erode. Her call for change comes as the Government plans to tighten the use of Article 8 of the ECHR, the right to private and family life, in immigration cases in the UK. This includes cases involving foreign criminals. Under the plans unveiled in the immigration White Paper last month, the Home Office will bring forward legislation to try to reduce the number of people claiming 'exceptional circumstances' under Article 8 to stay in the UK. Ms Mahmood said: 'The right to family life is fundamental. But it has too often been used in ways that frustrate deportation, even where there are serious concerns about credibility, fairness, and risk to the public. 'We're bringing clarity back to the distinction between what the law protects and what policy permits.' She also said judges cannot be asked to solve political problems and so reform must be a 'shared political endeavour' among member states. The Lord Chancellor added: 'The European Convention on Human Rights is one of the great achievements of post-war politics. It has endured because it has evolved. Now, it must do so again.' Following Ms Mahmood's speech, a No 10 spokesman said it should be for Parliament and the Government to decide who has the right to remain in the country. 'We want to ensure the right balance is made in migration cases in relation to the national interest,' the spokesman said. The Lord Chancellor was making a broader point that 'now is the time for countries to work together to ensure the ECHR can evolve to meet the challenges facing modern democracies'. But, he added: 'The Government has been clear that Britain will remain a member of the ECHR, it underpins key international agreements on trade, security, on migration, on the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement.' A Tory spokesman said Kemi Badenoch had been clear that 'we would do whatever is necessary to ensure the supremacy of UK laws, and set a number of clear tests, including the deportation test, and made clear that if necessary, we would leave the ECHR'. But responding to the speech Sacha Deshmukh, chief executive of Amnesty International UK, said that any reform of the ECHR must 'shore up universal protections, not chip away at them'. He said: 'If the UK starts picking and choosing who merits protection from torture, family separation or arbitrary removal, it will undermine not just its moral authority but the rule of law itself, weakening its hand when speaking out against rights abuses abroad.'