Involving the Public - Mining and the Environment: From Ore to Metal - page 153

government and business). Participants should be selected in a way that is not open to
manipulation, and should include a cross-section of the population - as individuals and
as groups. Some degree of random selection offers the best chance of achieving this.
However, it is important that community leaders also be included as their cooperation
is usually critical to any community interaction. The problem arises when these leaders
advise that 'It is not necessary to involve X, Y and Z because they are not important'. This
is only one of many occasions when the proponent needs to tactfully but i rmly explain its
own viewpoint and the reasons behind it.

Consultation Stops with Disclosure

A common failure is to engage in disclosure without consultation, or to complete consulta-
tion prior to making a decision. All participants should have time to become well-informed
and to understand material that is unfamiliar to them. Over-simplii cation of complex
issues should be avoided. The 'big picture' should be presented, so people can really become
engaged.

Mixed Messages

Mixed signals undermine public trust. Despite this obvious concern, mixed messages are
surprisingly common in mining developments. One of the reasons is the variety of spokes-
persons that may be involved during the 5 to 10 years that it takes to move from explora-
tion to production. Early exploration staff can have no real idea of what, if anything may
develop, and so should emphasize the uncertainties involved. In all stages of the project,
spokespersons should avoid speculative comments. On the other hand, whenever things
do become clear, they should be communicated unequivocally. All company person-
nel interacting with local communities should be well briefed so as to provide consistent
information.
Mixed message are not coni ned to the project planning stages. They may continue
through the entire project and are particularly common toward closure when spokes-
persons wish to soften the blow by de-emphasizing the bad news. It is most unwise for
employees to receive a different version of a situation from the one provided to external
stakeholders as inevitably the conl icting messages will cause confusion or worse. An
example is where one company spokesperson is reassuring the community that the tailings
system is 100% safe, while another is training employees on contingency plans for initia-
tion in the event of a tailings spill.

Mixed signals undermine public
trust.

Lack of Cultural Sensitivity

While it is most often used
with the intentions to be
both accurate and helpful,
specialized language including
technical terms and industry
jargon is marginalizing for the
non-specialist.

Information should be disseminated early and in a culturally meaningful fashion, includ-
ing using local languages, visual methods and, where appropriate, specialist communi-
cation expertise. It is important to recognize that language can be used, intentionally or
otherwise in ways which can either be powerfully marginalizing or powerfully inclusive.
Clearly problems arise when language is developed and used to tackle complex special-
ized issues, such as in mining. While it is most often used with the intentions to be both
accurate and helpful, specialized language including technical terms and industry jargon