Ken,

Well said.

Your question regarding the proceedings of the easement hearing and final decision - I have a call into my contact at the Mining Commission...will post the reply for all as soon as I hear back.

However, my understanding is that the proceedings can continue since the Mining Commissioner is an independent quasi-judicial body that makes recommendations to the Minister. The proceedings can continue and can come to a conclusion. However, I am unclear as to what happens when the Mining Commissioner makes a recommendation to the Minister of Natural Resources of a government that has been prorogued and is therefore not sitting. This is the part that I am unclear about and have therefore sought clarification.

As an aside, Cliffs cannot be feeling good about McQuity's resignation. This is a government and essentially partner with whom they were negotiating and making deals (power, smelter, tax breaks, the road) and now the leader quits and parliament as been prorogued. So much for trying to make progress on having a mine in 2016. On the other hand, this government was also a bit of a foot-dragger so maybe someone can step up to the plate and light the ROF given the jobs, tax revenue, etc that we are leaving on the table.

Gotta go...McQuity is on the phone and needs help with his resume. He used the terms 'liar', 'foot-dragger', 'bad decision maker' and 'money waster' in his first draft so I'm thinking we have to soften it a bit...unless he's applying for a job at Cliffs.

Keep Digging