Introduced as a way to ensure the timely development of natural resources, including everything from oil and gas to iron ore and diamonds, the laws reflect a unique aspect of how Australia manages what lies beneath the surface of the land and sea.

Unlike some other countries, including the US, all below-ground resources are deemed to be the property of the Crown – they belong to the Queen and/or her representatives, that is, state and federal governments.

Miners and oil companies can be awarded a licence to develop resources for a fee, generally in the form of royalties, but no company or individual ever actually owns the raw material.

That might seem a curious way to run a country but what it means is that government, in some form, always has the right to revoke a licence if it’s not happy with the way a Crown resource is being developed or managed.

So, when Forrest last week demanded a tougher government approach to the way in which oil and gas leases were managed he was wittingly, or unwittingly, lifting the lid on a Pandora’s Box, which could result in something nasty biting him in a soft spot, such as his wallet.

What Forrest wants is for a speedier development of gas deposits that have been discovered by explorers off the coast of WA so he can buy cheaper gas to power his iron ore mining business.

At first blush it sounds like a reasonable request.

There are trillions of cubic feet of gas in reservoirs around the coast waiting for their discoverers to make them available to local industry, or to convert them into an exportable product such as LNG.

In an ideal world, the one that Forrest can see, an abundance of gas would cut his fuel bill in half, with the price of gas falling from its current $A7 a gigajoule to around $3.20/GJ.

Forrest reckons companies with undeveloped gas deposits in their licence areas should be told by the Crown to get on with the development process, or hand back the tenements, or sell them to someone who will develop the gas – hence the name, “use it or lose it”

Oh, if it was so simple.

What would really happen if governments did strictly enforce use it or lose it, without taking into consideration practical issues, such as commercial reality?

What Forrest (and others before him who want access to Crown-owned resources that are licenced to someone else) fail to appreciate is that there are always reasons why someone has not developed a resource, with the most easy-to-understand reasons being money – who pays for the project and will it be profitable.

If Forrest got his way and gas prices to power iron ore mining did fall from $7/GJ to $3.20/GJ he would be outrageously happy – and the owner of the gas project would go broke.

Governments, fortunately, tend to understand the commercial realities of resource development and also understand why one company wants cheap services, which might damage another company.

They have also shown great patience in waiting for development opportunities to mature to a commercially acceptable point and do not like punishing explorers who took the initial risk in making a discovery.

One of the few examples of use it or lose it actually being applied was by the WA government over the Ellendale diamond field.

Rio Tinto made the discovery but said for several decades that the diamond grades were too marginal to be a long-term commercial success.

Pressure from Kimberley Diamonds (a different company to the current one of the same name) eventually saw Rio Tinto succumb to government pressure and sell Ellendale, a move that yielded it a small profit – and which caused Kimberley to invest heavily in a mine that has struggled to survive, therefore proving Rio Tinto’s commercial view.

Another problem for Forrest’s campaign to invoke use it or lose it is that he is also wide open to a claim under the law because the company he controls, Fortescue Metals Group, is said to be sitting on a whopping 57,000sq.km of ground potentially suitable for iron ore mining.

At some point, if the use it or lose it genie is released from Pandora’s Box, one of the first people liable to a claim is Forrest himself.

Sometimes it’s wise to keep your bright ideas to yourself.