Environmental groups are again raising red flags as the second round of overseas public consultations on seabed mining gets underway in Queensland, Australia, citing the Cook Islands government’s refusal to allow independent environmental experts to present alongside its delegation. Despite repeated calls from groups such as Te Ipukarea Society (TIS) and Korero o te Orau, the Cook Islands Seabed Minerals Authority (SBMA) has excluded local environmental advocates from directly participating in the official programme in Australia. Prime Minister Mark Brown, in his capacity as the Minister responsible for Seabed Minerals, led a Seabed Minerals Authority delegation to New Zealand in November last year to consult the Cook Islands diaspora there on the country’s plans regarding seabed mining. This week, PM Brown is leading a 11-member delegation to Australia for a similar consultation, focusing on an “open dialogue” on seabed exploration activities. TIS president June Hosking says she only found out about the Australia meetings last Friday. In an email to SBMA, she reminded them of earlier discussions where she had requested the inclusion of at least one or two members of the Marae Moana Technical Advisory Group (TAG) — individuals with environmental and scientific expertise — in the consultation presentations. “The aim was simple: so that your audience hear both sides and can be well informed, thus able to give free, prior, informed consent, as per the UNDRIP (United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples),” Hosking told Cook Islands News. She said the response from SBMA to her was disappointing and made clear that the programme would remain exclusively government-led. Hosking added that the response, which stated TIS was free to engage with the public independently during this time, was “a real insult in my book”. “I say insult because she (SBMA staff) knows full well it is extremely difficult and expensive (if we were able to be present at each consultation in Australia) for us to engage with the diaspora they’ll be reaching out to. Whereas, they could swap one of their ‘extras’ for one of us, at no extra cost and for better use of public money,” Hosking said. SBMA was contacted for a comment on the concerns raised by TIS. TIS and Korero o te Orau have long criticised the government’s consultation approach, arguing it lacks balance, transparency and the critical environmental context necessary for informed decision-making. “From the Christchurch consultation I have seen photos of the SBMA slides and listened to extremely long recordings of the speakers. I have also heard from attendees across NZ (for those who sat through the painful three or so hours) that presentations were repetitive and biased. In fact, I found only one sentence on one slide that referred to environmental risks, with no specifics,” Hosking said. “SBMA consultations are not transparent. If they were they would ensure the other side of the coin was well presented. People can’t ask questions without enough prior information. “SBMA do not adequately seek feedback. If they wanted feedback they would cut presentation time at least in half, thus allowing time for honest discussion. Which is only possible once people have heard both sides.” Prime Minister Brown has previously defended the consultations, saying the government remains in the exploration phase and no mining decision has been made. Brown also highlighted that representatives from both TIS and Korero o te Orau were present at the consultations in NZ, giving them an opportunity to voice their concerns and provide feedback. “It was a healthy exchange, and their representatives were able to raise questions and concerns, allowing us to address them directly,” the Prime Minister told this newspaper last year. Brown had also emphasised that the government’s approach to seabed mining is based on scientific research and not ideological positions. “We have a scientific approach to how we will manage the seabed. While TIS and Korero o te Orau have their ideological stance against seabed mining, we are committed to informing and consulting with our people, including those who oppose the process.” However, environmental advocates maintain that “true informed consent” cannot be achieved if the public is only hearing one narrative. They continue to urge the government to include independent voices and scientific experts in future consultations. Australia consultations – Sydney: Thursday 29 & Friday 30 May – Belmore Bowling Club; Brisbane: Monday 2 June – Hosanna Logan City; Gold Coast: Tuesday 3 June – Upper Coomera Community Centre; Melbourne: Thursday 5 June – Clayton CICC Church Hall; Melbourne: Friday 6 June – Itiki Sports & Recreation Club, Glenroy.