After nearly six decades living and working in Gove, I have witnessed its evolution from a remote mining outpost into a resilient regional community. 

As a long-standing industry participant, a former public servant, and now CEO of Gumatj Corporation, I have seen first hand both the benefits mining has delivered and the responsibilities it leaves behind. For us, mine closure is not an abstract policy debate. It is personal. It is economic. And it is cultural. 

The closure of one of the Northern Territory’s largest and longest-running mines after almost 60 years of continuous operation has created understandable anxiety across Nhulunbuy and the wider Gove Peninsula. For a Traditional Owner company such as Gumatj Corporation, the ramifications are significant and long term. This is not simply the winding down of a project. It is the reshaping of an entire regional economy. 

Across Australia and internationally, history offers sobering lessons. Communities built around a single major resource project often struggle, and sometimes collapse, when that project ends. Without deliberate planning, economic diversification and coordinated action, contraction is not a risk, it is a near certainty. 

Our circumstances are further complicated by land tenure. All major operations in the region occur on leased land – Special Purpose Leases, Mining Leases and Section 19 leases – situated on Traditional Owner land. This layered framework creates legal, commercial and regulatory complexity rarely encountered in most regional towns. It can make attracting new industry extraordinarily difficult when access to land, port facilities, housing and other infrastructure remains uncertain pending closure processes and tenure transitions. 

Investors require clarity. Without it, opportunity stalls. 

The economic implications extend well beyond the mine gate. Lost wages, reduced business revenue, the cessation of mining royalties and the end of statutory royalty payments will create significant financial pressure for Traditional Owners. That pressure will inevitably flow into the broader community. No matter which crystal ball one consults, the outlook is challenging. 

But we are not standing on the shoreline watching the tide go out. 

Traditional Owner groups are engaging actively with government, the mining company and potential industry partners to secure a softer landing than projections suggest. Planning is underway to mitigate economic shock and lay the foundations for diversification. 

Recent concerns by Traditional Owners following the closure of the Argyle diamond mine offer an important lesson. Closure cannot simply be declared complete because regulatory benchmarks have been met. If Traditional Owners do not believe Country is safe, stable and culturally restored, then closure is not truly complete. 

That reality raises fundamental questions. Who defines what “successful rehabilitation” looks like? At what point is land or infrastructure considered fit to return? And critically, do Traditional Owners hold real authority in making that determination?

These questions do not sit solely with the mining company. Government regulators carry equal responsibility. It is not sufficient for Traditional Owners to be consulted at arm’s length while decisions are shaped within technical or regulatory frameworks. Engagement at the final approval stage is far too late.

Traditional Owners must be involved throughout the entire closure process. In planning, in monitoring, in decision-making and in the delivery of closure works themselves. We must not simply sit at the table and be briefed on decisions already taken. We must share decision-making authority. Joint governance mechanisms, transparent data sharing and co-designed closure criteria are not optional extras; they are essential safeguards. Without them, final sign-off risks becoming a procedural milestone rather than a shared and informed agreement.

Participation must also extend to the work on the ground. Closure and rehabilitation present a practical opportunity for Traditional Owner businesses and workers to restore Country in ways that align with cultural priorities. That involvement builds capability, strengthens economic continuity during transition, and ensures cultural knowledge informs outcomes. Final relinquishment should reflect collaboration from day one, not a document presented at the end.

Large mining companies operate within systems shaped by budgets, internal processes and shareholder expectations. As closure approaches and revenue declines, those systems can narrow focus toward compliance and cost control. There is a genuine risk that closure becomes an exercise in meeting minimum standards at minimum cost.

Traditional Owners, however, remain long after corporate staff move on. The land that generated decades of profit is and always has been Indigenous land. That truth must remain central to every decision made in the final years of operation and beyond. Corporate systems must never override enduring social responsibility. True accountability recognises that profits came from Country and that closure outcomes must reflect that continuing relationship.

Despite the challenges, Gove retains significant strategic assets: deep-water port infrastructure, an operational airport, substantial warehousing, fuel storage facilities, and an established township with government support services. Such assets are rare in remote northern Australia. Any transition must carefully assess not only their strategic value but also the costs and risks attached to them, including whether they represent opportunity or the transfer of legacy liabilities. Allowing this infrastructure to remain underused or to deteriorate would be a profound lost opportunity. One that could otherwise anchor long-term regional development and economic resilience.

As a Traditional Owner organisation, we are committed to maintaining the viability of this region. Our people are not leaving. We are investing time, energy and resources to shape a sustainable post-mining future.

What this process has reinforced for me is that mining closure must be treated as a whole-of-life obligation, embedded from the outset, not left to the final hours like a funeral arranged without a will or succession plan. The region cannot afford uncertainty or delay.

Meaningful transition now requires action on three fronts. 

First, we must replace the “decide, advise, defend” model with genuine partnership. Traditional Owners, government and the mining company decision-makers must sit at the same table with the authority to act. Senior leaders with delivery-focused governance, transparent data sharing and co-designed closure objectives must drive outcomes. 

Second, there must be clear and enforceable agreement on land and asset transfers, including defined timeframes, standards and accountability mechanisms. Certainty around tenure and infrastructure is essential to unlock new investment. 

Third, we need a binding framework that enables investment while maintaining service levels and providing long-term certainty for the community. Without this foundation, diversification efforts will struggle to gain traction. 

On a personal note, I have spent my entire working life and most of my supposed retirement contributing to the growth and development of the Gove Peninsula. I have witnessed its successes and its hardships. Ensuring it remains strong and viable for future generations is not just a professional responsibility, it is deeply personal. 

Gove is, and always will be, my home. TQ