Three observations can be made about protesters who attempted to block delegate access to the International Mining and Resources Conference in Melbourne last week.

First, they had every right to voice their opinions and concerns.

Second, they had no right to block access or to abuse, assault and intimidate delegates.

Finally, in attempting to block delegate access, the protesters did not help the environment. If anything, their actions were detrimental to better resource sector practices in regard to the environment, mine safety and mine operations.

On the first point, people’s ability to express views and concerns is part of a free society. This includes the right to protest and to voice opposition to mining or any other activity.

Further, we do need to manage the environment responsibly and transition to a low carbon economy – albeit with this needing to be done in a measured way as part of a long-term plan.

Moving to the second point, however, protesters did not have a right to block access or to abuse or intimidate those trying to enter. Just as protesters have a right to be heard, those attending the conference had every right to do so without being subject to treatment seen on media reports last week. People have a right to attend conferences and events within their chosen industry. Those who tried to block access last week failed to respect this.

Moreover, in attempting to block conference access, protester actions were detrimental to the objective of having a resources sector which not only operates more safely and effectively but does so with better environmental stewardship.

In any sector of the economy, industry conferences are a wonderful opportunity for delegates and attendees to learn about emerging developments and to share and promote best practice strategies through seminars, workshops and case studies. In addition to areas such as identifying emerging opportunities and improving business management, in mining this also includes strategies to help resource companies to make practical improvements in their operations regarding performance, safety and environmental stewardship.

Blocking access stops these learnings from being shared and prevents delegates from learning practical strategies which they could apply in their own operations.

Consider some of the talks given last week.

On the environment specifically, the conference included six presentations on clean and renewable energy. Amongst others, these included an address from Richard Day from South Australia’s Department of Energy and Mining about that state’s roadmap to clean energy; a presentation from Australian Renewable Energy Agency’s Matt Walden on how mining companies can employ clean energy options and reduce carbon emissions within their operations; a presentation from Simon Malin from engineering consulting firm Hatch about how the resource sector can develop a roadmap to lower carbon emissions through more efficient operations and use of renewable energy and an address from solar energy and battery storage supplier SIMEC Energy’s Marc Barrington on his company’s renewable focus in 2020 and beyond.

That’s right folks. Last Wednesday, protesters calling for clean and renewable energy tried to prevent conference delegates from entering the venue and attending six sessions on clean and renewable energy.

Beyond clean energy specifically, there were also sessions at the conference which looked at workforce diversity and inclusion, occupational health and safety, local community impact and engagement and environmental, social and governance (ESG performance). One presentation looked at understanding cultural and spiritual values of Australia’s indigenous community. Another covered employee well-being. Another yet dealt with how we can ensure the sustainability of local economies after a mine is closed. Why anyone would seek to prevent the sharing of ideas in these areas is difficult to understand.

 Of course, the conference was not all about ‘doing good’. As would be expected of any worldwide resource and mining industry conference, there were sessions about emerging market opportunities, mergers and acquisitions, developments in mine finance, mining methods and operations, and recent developments in mining related technology.

Even in these areas, however, there are spin-off benefits for safety and the environment. By applying technology and embracing best-practice modes of operation, resource companies should be able to improve the performance, efficiency and control of their operations. Along with bottom line returns, this should deliver better outcomes in operational performance, safety, emissions and risk management.

Moreover, even in these conference streams, there were presentations dealing directly with environmental management. The steam about plant operations and processing, for example, included a presentation by Dr Ben Adair from CRC ORE about strategies to reduce emissions and water usage across the value chain in mining, processing and waste disposal.

All this is helping to deal with sustainability and climate change at a practical level.

To be sure, dealing with climate change at a political level is important. Overarching targets and policies which political leaders across Australia and elsewhere adopt are a critical component of dealing with climate change effectively. Spreading the message to policy makers that many in the community support climate action is imperative (so to is spreading the same message to leaders in industries such as mining).

Beyond this, however, the transition to a low carbon economy – and the move to safer and more inclusive work practices – requires action at the practical level. Through the sharing of emerging technologies and best-practice strategies, industry conferences play a crucial role in arming delegates with things they can do in their own projects. By attempting to block access, the actions of last week’s protesters were detrimental to lessons being shared and delegates being armed with tools and strategies which they can apply to improve the operational, safety and environmental performance of their facilities on the ground.

Two final points must be addressed.

First, some may feel that mining itself is inherently harmful no matter how many best practice strategies are shared and learned. Indeed, the impact of mining cannot be underestimated. One recent UN report found that extractive industries such as mining and farming are responsible for half of the world’s carbon emissions and 80 percent of its biodiversity loss.

Blocking access to mining conferences, however, will not change this. Rather it will inhibit the sharing of ideas on how to do things better.

Second, some may feel that demonstrators have communicated an important message both to conference delegates and to policy makers. This, they may hope, may help lead to movement away from particular types of mines such as coal which these groups view as most harmful.

This, however, could have been done by protesting peacefully and respectfully. It did not require blocking access or abusing, intimidating and insulting conference delegates.

On any issue, those who wish to protest peacefully have a right to do so.

So too, however, those who wish to attend industry conferences and events have a right to do so without being abused, insulted or intimidated or having their access blocked.

Blocking access to these conferences prevents the sharing of ideas and strategies which can be applied through better practices.

That does not help the environment.