Experts are not surprised that MPRDA deadline will be missed
REPORTS that Parliament will miss the December deadline to pass amendments to the Mineral Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA) have come as no surprise amid lengthy delays in the process, legal experts said.
The MPRDA, which governs the acquisition, use and disposal of mineral rights, was referred to the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) last year, and there had been confusion in the select committee on land and mineral resources about the right procedure to be followed.
On Tuesday, Olifile Sefako, chairperson of the select committee on land and mineral resources, said the bill would now be passed in January and February.
“It cannot be a matter that can be concluded this year, and we must be honest and shouldn’t raise unnecessary expectations,” Sefako said.
Peter Leon, partner at Partner and Africa co-chair at Herbert Smith Freehills, said this had resulted in lengthy delays in obtaining negotiating mandates from the nine provincial legislatures, each of which had to conduct a public participation process in addition to one conducted by the select committee itself.
He said the negotiating mandates for the MPRDA Amendment Bill were only lodged earlier this month, by eight provinces; the Western Cape intends lodging its mandate in “due course”.
“While all of these eight provinces mandated their NCOP delegates to vote in favour of the MPRDA Amendment Bill, seven of them made their support conditional on specific concerns being addressed. These include that the powers of the Minister of Mineral Resources may be too wide and that mine-affected communities are not given a sufficient say in decisions that affect them.”
Leon also cautioned that the select committee would have to give these concerns due consideration, which would be difficult to achieve before the end of the year, adding that this fuelled uncertainty.
“The additional delay, as well as the fact that the NCOP may decide to make more changes to the MPRDA Amendment Bill, do not improve the regulatory uncertainty that has plagued the industry since it was first introduced five years ago. What is more concerning, however, is that the whole process appears to have deviated from Parliament’s rules.
“The only constitutionally acceptable solution now, in my view, is to withdraw the MPRDA Amendment Bill in its entirety and start again from scratch,” he said.
Deloitte leader for Energy and Resources Africa, Andrew Lane, said the delay did not surprise him.
“Government is a bit distracted at the moment. I don’t think it will surprise the industry. The industry has developed a bit of a healthy scepticism about government’s ability in this regard. Uncertainty remains,” said Lane.
The Chamber of Mines said on Wednesday that it had noted Sefako’s comments. A chamber spokesperson said: “Finalising the MPRDA bill as soon as possible would promote certainty and confidence in respect of the industry’s regulatory framework, provided of course that the amended MPRDA will be legally unassailable and workable.”