The complaints against Anderson and others based on their 'sellout' of ARU are in my view false. At the very least, they are debatable. I suggest we start looking at the positives of the new board and encourage them in a positive direction. These guys may not have spotless white hats but they definitely bring something good to the table or this agreement would not have been reached.

For those of you who are not familiar with Ecuadorian politics, read the following and you will understand why I believe Anderson and others were very astute to allow themselves (ARU) to be acquired by a major Gold Company at $5.00 +/- per share.

Extracts from Equador mining news.

Washington D.C., October 13, 2008 — The questions below were asked by international journalists during president Correa’s press conference last September 29th, just after the country approved its new constitution. Non-mining related questions and answers are excluded. EMN has reordered the questions according to their importance for the mining issue. It has also translated questions into English and edited or amended questions to give readers a better understanding. The content of answers, however, has not been altered.

The approved constitution stipulates that the state will participate in at least equal parts of non-renewable natural resources firms’ benefits. Does this mean that the MMP, which proposed royalties between 3 and 8 percent, would have to adjust such royalties to meet this constitutional principle? Would the mining law be approved this year?

The mining law draft is ready. But, the Constitution principles have to be incorporated within the new law. I think that royalties of only 8 percent are rather low. They must be revised. But I have not yet personally reviewed this law. Nonetheless, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the law contradicts the Constitutional principles, which gives the state 51 percent of the profits. We have to consider all the taxes that already exist for this industry, for instance, the windfall tax.

So, the windfall tax (WFT) will be included in the mining legislation?

The WFT has to be included in the law, so it can always rule for the industry. These are technical issues, which I will personally make when reviewing the law. This law is urgent, because this industry represents the country’s future. But obviously, I’m talking about mining companies that pay taxes, respect the workers, and develop social and environmental responsibility projects.

And the government relationship with the oil company Repsol?

The government has every right to demand a greater share of the windfall tax due to high oil prices. It should be noted that this tax didn’t exist previously. Therefore, certain oil companies including Repsol have complained that in the past 10 months they have generated losses. But they profited before. In this sense, this tax serves as a kind of compensation.

And aren’t you afraid that international oil companies would stop investing in your country as is happening in Bolivia?

If they leave, Petroecuador [the state oil company] will have to assume the operations.

Is there a risk of nationalization of Ecuador’s natural resources?

No, because non-renewable natural resources belong to the state. With the existing contracts, the country assigned the natural resource to companies. Now, under service contracts, we hire a company to exploit our oil.