Competing arguments clash at hearing over contentious Central Otago gold mine

Thursday, 30 April 2026

The deep divisions created by a planned Central Otago gold mine have been laid bare at a hearing considering Santana Minerals’ proposal to build the controversial mine near Cromwell.

Supporters and critics of the mine put their arguments to a seven-member panel, chaired by former High Court judge Matthew Muir, KC, which has been appointed under the fast-track legislation to decide if the mine goes ahead or not.

Australian company Santana Minerals and its New Zealand subsidiary, Matakanui Gold, have applied for consent to build a large gold mine in the hills above the Clutha River, between Tarras and Cromwell, which includes four open pits and a 2km tailings dam where chemical waste will be stored in perpetuity.

The proposal has split the local community, and led to heated debate about its economic benefits versus environmental damage.

Read more:

• Ngāi Tahu calls for controversial Central Otago gold mine to be rejected

• Poisoning paradise? The gold mine set to tear apart a community and country

• Commissioner warns proposed Santana gold mine should be declined

Cromwell resident Bill Sanders, speaking on behalf of more than 10,000 members of the Santana Mine Supporters Facebook group he formed three months ago, said the project was “wanted and desperately needed”.

Sanders said he represented the “silent majority” who welcomed the economic injection the mine would bring to the region.

“They aren’t armchair warriors, they are people living streets away from this hearing.”

Sanders said these people were currently struggling with the mismatch between high house prices and low wages, which forced people to leave Central Otago.

“Wine and tourism are not going to save us.”

Sanders fired a shot at mine critics such as businessman Sir Ian Taylor and actor Sir Sam Neill, saying he was speaking for local working families, not people in Dunedin or Hollywood.

He claimed media had painted a picture that the mine wasn’t wanted, but this was “flat wrong” and “we are the evidence”.

The lift in wages the mine would bring to the area, and the opportunities for contractors and businesses, wasn’t “a sugar hit ‒ that’s a backbone. When people earn here, they stay here.”

Santana’s mine was a once in a generation opportunity to stop people leaving the region, upskill workers, and send a signal “this place is open for business, growth, and prosperity”, Sanders said.

And he pointed to concerns from many groups about effects on lizards within the mine’s 600ha footprint.

“Right now, it feels like the lizards have a full legal team, and the locals, they’ve got me.”

When asked by the panel whether more people coming to the region would actually further push up house prices, given Sanders had highlighted this as an issue for those currently wanting to buy homes, Sanders said the mine’s higher wages would allow people to pay mortgages.

But lawyers for Sustainable Tarras, the main public group opposing the mine, said the group also had more than 10,000 members, and represented a groundswell of opposition to Santana’s proposal.

Julian Miles, KC, stressed the group was not opposed to mining generally, “just this mine”.

He said the expert fast-track panel had one chance to get it right, and pointed to the many other mining companies who had taken out exploration licences for gold in the surrounding area.

“There is no question this is a stalking horse for a number of future applications.”

Miles alleged Santana had twice breached requirements of the Overseas Investment Office, and in the last nine months had breached the district plan at least five times.

“There’s a consistent pattern of behaviour that indicates a certain irresponsibility, a certain reluctance by the applicant to comply with its legal obligations,” Miles said. “And that’s fundamental in assessing whether this is an application to proceed.”

Miles said there were “so many unknowns, and so many heroic assumptions” in Santana’s claims of economic benefits, and the company’s projections were unrealistic.

And he described Santana’s engagement with the local community as “woeful”, pointing to it still not having answered the majority of 50 questions Sustainable Tarras asked it nearly a year ago.

Submissions were also heard from officials representing the Central Otago District Council, Otago Regional Council, Department of Conservation, and Heritage New Zealand.

All these parties agreed the mine would have significant environmental effects.

DOC’s Pene Williams said the department had “concerns there are going to be inevitable losses.

“From DOC’s perspective, the effects on conservation are significant. This is a greenfields project.”

She pointed to “unprecedented” impact on lizards in the proposed mine area, and the risk of extinction faced by one plant species.

Santana’s restoration plans were untested at this scale in a dry landscape, Williams said.

Otago Regional Council lawyer Dave Randal said while it acknowledged there would be benefits if the mine went ahead, it disagreed with Santana that there would be net ecological benefits.

Randal said it was not in dispute there would be a significant loss of biodiversity if the mine was approved.

Heritage New Zealand’s Melanie Russell argued Santana was underestimating the archaeological values of the land where the mine was proposed, and also the effects the mine would have.

There were no mitigating measures that could compensate for the widespread “modification or destruction” of 28 archaeological sites, and the area’s historical and cultural values were unique and needed protection, Russell said.

While she recognised this position would greatly impact Santana’s application, “the protection of very significant archaeological values should take primacy.”

On Tuesday in Dunedin, the panel heard from experts from Kā Rūnaka, a grouping of four southern Ngāi Tahu hapū.

It then moved to Cromwell on Wednesday, where interested and affected parties have been invited to present their submissions to the panel over two days.

On Thursday, the panel will hear from more submitters, including some of those living near the proposed mine, with Santana having the opportunity to respond at the end of the hearing.