goodheart-r

This is to add to the reasoning given in your post

1. First, let's clear up some of the interpretation on "the AG's intention, on behalf of the government ofOntario, to intervene in the CLF Appeal case". The link below seems to have some good the info on the topic

http://www.northernlife.ca/news/localNews/2014/02/13-ringoffire-sudbury.aspx

Some quotes:

- "A statement released through the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) said the province seeks to intervene solely on “questions of law and takes no position” between the appellant and respondent."

- Another one, noting the underlined portion....Said the ministry, “Ontario remains committed to continuing focused conversations with key partners, including Cliffs and KWG, through the development corporation and the regional process with the Chiefs of the Matawa Tribal Council, and their communities to ensure smart, sustainable and collaborative development in the Ring of Fire.”

2. My personal interpretation based on what I have heard so far:

- The current Ont Government had no intention to appear to be in favour of CLF. Perhaps, CLF has some verbal agreement with our dear former Premier (who has blown a few billions dollars on various things such as the deal to pay some 70-80 cents/Kwh for electricity produced by solar and windor otherwise; the cancellation of the gas plants; almost cause the tax payers to be on the hook for another $B for the decision to scrap ONTC putting a few hundred people out of work). Apparently, the former Premier "promised" CLF a 50% contribution ($0.6B) for CLF to build a "private road" for the exclusively use CLF monster trucks only. That's why the government did not appear at the Lands Commissioner's Hearing. The Lands Commisioners has issued a verdict denying CLF application for easement on KWG claimes to build its own private road. One of the key reasons for this dismissal of CLF case was that the application does not represent any "public component", another reason was the unfairness (predatory intention) of the application,... a larger company trying to put a stranglehold on a much smaller company with the aim to take away KWG legitimate claims.

- Appeal: This is part of the bulldozing tactics, so CLF asked the Appeal Court to overturn the decision by the Lands Commissioner, and the case will be heard by the Appeal Court in June.

- AG seeking leave to appear at the Appeal Court today (28 April 2014) to provide some clarity on some fine points of the laws as discussed in 1. above.

- It's my interpretation that the (Ont) governement don't want to get caught in an awark situation in its future decision to build the transportation structure in support of the RoF. The public interest is paramount, so the private road is a no go. The government would not get stuck in the bog if it supports the private road. A firmer ground would be a much smaller public road, not for monster trucks but for service and private vehicle (there goes CLF ambition). The RR can be left for the Development Corporation (which may become a Fed Port Authority) with many potential stakeholders, including KWG, the Feds, the Prov, the FNs, other private corporations that have deep pockets to sort out. The cost of the RR of less than $2B ($1.6B compared to $1.2B for CLF private road) is no big deal for this group of people to deal with.

- CLF is broke and in turmoil anyway, so why bother stirring things up to waste the time of our court system. A better solution would be to drop the Appeal to sit down and discuss nicely with KWG for an out-of-court settlement.

Just my opinion, based on as much factual information as possible.

goldhunter