Minerals Council of Australia CEO Tania Constable warns of Clive Palmer emergency law fallout for WA Government

Minerals Council of Australia chief executive Tania Constable has warned the WA Government that State Agreements can't have retrospectivity attached or it could ward off future business investment in WA. The peak mining body’s call comes after the introduction of emergency legislation against Clive Palmer and his bid to extract $30 billion from WA. As Brazil and African countries with iron ore deposits fire up post-pandemic, Ms Constable has warned that WA has to remain competitive and reliable, claiming State Agreements play an vital role in creating that environment. Emergency legislation to stop the Queensland mining magnate passed Parliament’s lower house last nightbut must be approved by the upper house. WA Premier Mark McGowan claims the billionaire is seeking the damages across two claims relating to his Pilbara-based Balmoral South iron ore project in August 2012 and June 2013. Mr Palmer yesterday cautioned that if the WA Government pass the legislation designed investors would become wary of doing business in WA. At the helm of the peak industry body of Australia’s exploration, mining and minerals processing, Ms Constable represents the sector's interests and was wary of what the WA legal quarrel could mean for future investment. "No State agreement should have any retrospectivity attached to it," Ms Constable told The West Live host Jenna Clarke. "The circumstances around this particular issue are a matter for the Western Australian Government. We would hope that no precedent is set. "We probably will see Brazil and African countries that do have iron ore deposits get going again shortly so we need to make sure that we're competitive (and) that we remain reliable. "(When the pandemic hit) investments continued to occur but if I look at the recent Reserve Bank figures — just to sustain investments in Australia around about $100 billion of new investment is required. "(That's) just to sustain what we have in our current projects over the next five years. "So you've got to work hard to make sure the right environment is there. "I'm sure that the Premier has his reasons for the new legislation being issued but first and foremost when we're looking at any project around Australia — State agreements are really important. "It's really important that those State agreements are followed. "They give certainty for proponents and they attract investment in the longer term but the Palmer situation that's a specific circumstance and has unique issues. "The point that I would make from a mining industry perspective is that we won't be a certainty in the way that State agreements are introduced and followed. No retrospectivity applies." The “unprecedented” Bill seeks to amend the 2002 State Agreement of Mr Palmer’s Mineralogy company to void an ongoing arbitration. Opposition leader Liza Harvey said the Liberals broadly supported the Government’s legislation but there was no reason why it should not be scrutinised by a “short, sharp” select committee which could finish its work by mid-September. The Nationals WA leader Mia Davies said while the party supported the legislation they had a “duty to ensure the State doesn’t find itself in this situation again”. “We have long called for a review of State Agreements to improve transparency and accountability of the State and proponents to the people to WA. The owners of these non-renewable resources. A review by a bi-partisan Parliamentary Committee would provide much needed oversight,” she said. Yesterday, it was revealed Mr Palmer offered to drop his hard border challenge in exchange for the State Government agreeing to arbitration hearings being shifted from Perth to Canberra. Mr Palmer’s lawyers made the offer in a letter which WA Attorney-General John Quigley tabled in parliament. “He just wanted to bring the border down and risk the lives of West Australians so he could get money out of us,” Mr McGowan told parliament.