Reflections by Shawn Kidner, COO of Gumatj Corporation

Mine closure is about much more than the end of mining operations. It is about what happens next, who carries the responsibility and, importantly, how we ensure communities are positioned for a sustainable future.

Last month, I attended the ACG Mine Closure 2026 conference in Melbourne on behalf of Gumatj Corporation. Bringing together industry leaders, governments, researchers and communities, the conference reinforced both the scale and complexity of mine closure and the growing importance of planning for life beyond mining.

For us in East Arnhem Land, these conversations are particularly relevant. As the Gove mining operation moves towards closure, our region is navigating the challenges and opportunities that come with transitioning away from an industry that has shaped the local economy for decades.

While mine closure is a global challenge, Gove offers a very real example of why getting this transition right matters.

The true cost of mine closure

One of the most significant issues raised at the conference was the growing scale of unfunded mine closure liabilities and the risk that governments, taxpayers and local communities will ultimately carry the financial and environmental burden.

Mine closure costs are often underestimated, particularly when financial provisions are established early in a project's lifecycle. Inadequate regulatory frameworks, unrealistic cost estimates and insufficient financial assurance can create significant gaps between what companies have allocated for closure and what is actually required.

Research presented at the conference suggested that actual closure costs can be up to eight times higher than the amounts reflected in company accounts or public disclosures. For me, this raises an important question: Are we adequately planning and provisioning for the true long-term costs of mining, and who is ultimately responsible when those provisions fall short?

These risks do not emerge overnight. They can begin during project development or acquisition, continue throughout operations and become increasingly difficult to address as a mine approaches closure.

While there is considerable expertise and commitment across the industry, I believe there is an urgent need for greater transparency, more realistic closure cost assessments and stronger accountability to ensure that communities are not left managing the consequences of decisions made decades earlier.

Traditional Owners must help shape what comes next

Another important takeaway was the need to place Traditional Owners at the centre of mine closure planning and decision-making.

Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is a fundamental part of this process. Meaningful engagement cannot begin when a mine is preparing to close. It needs to be established early, maintained throughout the life of the operation and continue well beyond closure.

For Traditional Owners, these decisions are about much more than environmental rehabilitation. They are about Country, cultural responsibility, economic opportunity and the future of their communities.

Traditional Owners must have a genuine voice in determining what responsible closure looks like, how Country is rehabilitated and what opportunities exist for future generations. In East Arnhem Land, this is particularly important. The decisions being made today will have long-term implications for Yolŋu communities, and it is critical that their priorities, knowledge and aspirations are reflected in the region's transition.

Building an economy beyond mining

One of my strongest reflections from the conference was that mine closure should not be viewed solely as an environmental or financial obligation. It must also be considered in the context of long-term regional economic development.

For communities that have relied on mining for services, infrastructure and economic activity, the transition presents significant challenges. But with the right planning, partnerships and investment, it also creates an opportunity to establish a more diversified and resilient local economy.

At Gumatj Corporation, this is central to our work. We are focused on building a strong, Yolŋu-led economy across East Arnhem Land by growing existing businesses, developing new industries and creating meaningful employment, training and enterprise opportunities on Country.

Our ambition is to ensure that economic opportunities extend beyond the life of mining and that Yolŋu people have a leading role in shaping and benefiting from the region's future.

This requires a coordinated approach between Traditional Owners, industry and government, with a shared commitment to long-term investment, capability development and sustainable regional outcomes.

Closure is not the end of the responsibility

If there was one overarching message I took away from ACG Mine Closure 2026, it was that responsible mine closure cannot be measured simply by whether a site has been rehabilitated or its regulatory obligations met.

We also need to consider what is left behind for the people and communities who have lived alongside these operations for generations.

Are we creating the conditions for ongoing economic participation? Are Traditional Owners genuinely involved in decisions about their Country? And are the long-term environmental, social and financial responsibilities being adequately addressed?

For Gove, these are not hypothetical questions. They are decisions that will shape the future of East Arnhem Land. As more mining operations across Australia and globally approach the end of their operational lives, I believe there is an opportunity to rethink how we approach closure and transition.

Success should not simply be defined by how a mine closes, but by the strength of the communities, economies and opportunities that remain long after mining has ended. It is a timely reminder that this is the future we are working towards at Gumatj Corporation.