Saturday, September 6, 2008

New York Times Take on Free Entry Battle

Business/Financial Desk; SECTC
In Parts of Canada, Landowners Battle Prospectors
By IAN AUSTEN
1910 words
2 September 2008
The New York Times
Late Edition - Final
9
English
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved.

SOUTH FRONTENAC, Ontario -- When Peter Griesbach discovered someone had
chopped down trees at his weekend house to make crude posts staking out
a mining claim, he assumed he could rid his land of the uninvited
prospector relatively quickly. He was wrong.

Indeed, seven years later Mr. Griesbach is still campaigning to change
the provincial law that allows anyone who pays the equivalent of $23.50
to dig for pretty much any mineral on private property in much of rural
Ontario.

Historically high mineral prices have set off a new wave of prospecting
in Canada, and with it new battles over mineral laws, some of which
date to the 19th century. Under the so-called free entry system,
effective in much of Ontario, prospectors and miners have had
relatively unfettered access to private land in many areas.

Now, after decades of promises to modify the law from successive
governments, Mr. Griesbach and other landowners may finally find some
measure of relief.

After a highly publicized clash between an Indian tribe and a mining
company this year, which led to the jailing of one native leader,
Ontario's government said it would alter the law by December. But
change is so controversial that even the broad details of any
modification will not be worked out for some time.

British Columbia has had a rise in conflicts between landowners and
prospectors, too, as it experiences a similar mining boom despite
recent legal reforms in that province that have made it harder to
invade private land.

But the controversy has been most intense in Ontario, where it has also
led to increased divisions along economic, regional and class lines.

Many owners of homes and ''cottages,'' as weekend or vacation homes are
known here, as well as farmers and ranchers in southeastern Ontario,
where Mr. Griesbach has his cottage, are not keen to have their trees
chopped down, land dynamited and soil turned over.

But in the vast, and relatively unpopulated, northern part of the
province (where summer homes are usually called ''camps''), many
residents see increased mining as one of the few ways to avoid economic
ruin from the collapse of the pulp and paper industry there. Anything
with the potential to curb mining's expansion will meet with
significant opposition in that region.

Still, even some mining companies have started to feel a bit
embarrassed by the controversy. ''There's a recognition from our
members that private property owners deserve more rights than exist
under the current act,'' said Chris Hodgson, president of the Ontario
Mining Association, which represents large mining companies. ''I have a
lot of empathy for a cottage owner that's discovered someone staking
their property.''

The large mining companies represented by Mr. Hodgson, a former mines
minister, do conduct some exploration work. But most prospecting and
nearly all land conflicts involve small prospectors working on their
own or for tiny mining companies. In Ontario, anyone can become a
prospector provided they are at least 18 years old and have 25 Canadian
dollars, plus tax, to acquire a license.

''Claim staking is actually a pretty lucrative way of putting money
into your pocket,'' said Garry Clark, the executive director of the
Ontario Prospectors Association. But most people in the industry
acknowledge that the chances of any particular claim becoming a mine
are remote.

The promise of becoming rich through a mining discovery is enough for
prospectors, or their clients, to raise money through Canada's venture
markets or private investments, even though such efforts usually end in
disappointment. ''The odds are really against people,'' Mr. Clark said
from his office in Thunder Bay, Ontario, the largest city in the north.
''All we do is take money, not all of it our own, and then we gamble it
on one in 10,000 prospects.''

There are about 5,000 licensed prospectors in Ontario, but Mr. Clark
estimates that only 2,000 people actively engage in the business, and
many spend some of their time plying other trades, such as trapping or
logging.

The one in 10,000 odds apply to staked claims that show evidence of
mineral deposits. Neither Mr. Clark nor anyone else in the industry
could quantify the overall number of staked claims that become mines,
although all agree that they are small.

Canada's constitution does not provide property rights like those under
most American laws. Unlike Canada and many other countries, original
land grants in the United States included both mineral and surface
rights, making the fictional tale of the Clampett family as told in
''The Beverly Hillbillies'' at least legally plausible. While the
mineral rights were sometimes sold by landowners over times, most state
laws place limitations on prospecting.

Over the years, the Canadian provinces have retained various rights to
land they granted to private property owners. On some private land, for
example, the government still owns white pine trees, a law dating from
the era when their timber was valued as naval ships' sailing masts. The
law is no longer enforced.

More commonly, particularly in the north, the government retained all
the mineral rights underneath privately owned land.

Some landowners, mostly in the populous southern and eastern parts of
Ontario, were given both the surface and mineral rights to their
properties, depending on when the land was settled. But in many cases,
the mining rights reverted back to the government after an owner at
some point over the last 150 years or so failed to pay mining as well
as property taxes.

What owners do once they find out the limitations of their rights
varies.

After learning that the prospector had the right to wander around his
cottage and chop down trees, Mr. Griesbach, a real estate appraiser who
lives near Kingston, Ontario, initially responded by taking out his own
prospector's license.

Metal tags on the stakes on his land indicated that they had been
placed of behalf of A. David Houston, the president and chief executive
of Graphite Mountain, a company that was actually controlled by another
of Mr. Houston's firms, Diamond Lake Minerals.

(While incorporated in Utah, Diamond Lake was headquartered at Mr.
Houston's home in Warkworth, a town in eastern Ontario.)

Believing that Mr. Houston had not properly followed all of the
government's staking rules, Mr. Griesbach used his prospector's license
to file a counter claim on his own land. That challenge set off what
became a series of seven hour drives to Sudbury, Ontario, to attend
hearings before the Provincial Mining Recorder.

To further dissuade prospectors, Mr. Griesbach had part of his land
registered as a private firearms range with the federal government and
posted suitably frightening signs saying, in effect, that anyone
wandering on his land was in danger of being shot.

Down the road from Mr. Griesbach, Donald T. Loucks and his wife, Mary,
had also discovered Graphite Mountain's stakes on the lands surrounding
Long Pond Lake which they had gradually acquired over several decades.
The private lake had originally been the couple's summer cottage site
but they built a house and became full-time residents after Mr.
Loucks's retirement from the insurance business in Toronto.

The mining stakes were just the beginning. A woodlands preservation
group backed away from an agreement with the Loucks when it learned
about the mining claim. Shortly afterwards, Graphite Mountain moved
heavy mining equipment onto a claim across the road from the Loucks's
land and began blasting and drilling. For two summers, aerial survey
planes buzzed overhead.

''It was like being under siege,'' said Mrs. Loucks, whose husband died
just over five yearsago.

The situation drew to a legal stalemate and the exploration stopped.
While Graphite Mountain still holds claims in the area, the company
became inactive last September after the death of Mr. Houston.

By contrast, the dispute over a uranium mining claim not far from the
Griesbach and Loucks properties in North Frontenac, Ontario, continues
to escalate.

Frank and Gloria Morrison mounted a different counterattack than Mr.
Griesbach, after stakes from Frontenac Ventures appeared in 2006 on 100
acres of land they had retired to from Ottawa.

Much of Eastern Ontario, including North Frontenac, is the subject of a
complex and longstanding land claim launched by the Algonquin Indian
tribe. The Ardoch Algonquin First Nation, the local branch of the
tribe, soon joined in protests against the uranium mining project after
being contacted by Mr. Morrison.

Frontenac Ventures, a privately held uranium mining company based in
Oakville, Ontario, eventually obtained a court injunction to keep
protesters out of the areas it was exploring. But Bob Lovelace, the
chief negotiator for the Ardoch Algonquins and a lecturer at Queen's
University in Kingston, defied the order. He argued that he was
governed by Algonquin law. That defiance led to a six month jail
sentence and a 25,000 Canadian dollar fine against Mr. Lovelace.

Ultimately Mr. Lovelace served only 102 days in prison before the jail
order and fine were both struck down by an appeals court in a decision,
released in July, that rebuked the trial court for ignoring earlier
rulings related to native land claims. The appeals court also
criticized the current mining act for being ''remarkably sweeping.''

The ruling has not ended the dispute. Nor has it reduced Mr. Morrison's
resolve to block the project, a crusade that, he acknowledged, has
divided him from neighbors, generally lifelong residents of the area,
who see the mine as a potential source of jobs.

''We've got our life savings right here in this land and now it's
worthless,'' said Mr. Morrison, a professional musician and former
employee of the Canadian Police Association. ''I now understand what
makes a person an anarchist and what makes a person break the law.''

Exactly how the government will keep both the prospectors and
landowners happy with its revised mining act is unclear.

Michael Gravelle, the minister of mines, said the bill will only be
drafted following another in a long series of consultations now
underway. Any legislation, he said, will have to contain ''an
appropriate balance'' between landowner and mining interests.

George S. White, the president of Frontenac Ventures, which has spent
about 4 million to 5 million Canadian dollars on its project to date,
said it would be a mistake to limit miners and prospectors,
particularly in the current buoyant minerals market.

''The mining business in Ontario has been the backbone of the economy,
it has served the province well for 150 years,'' he said. ''In a
situation like this, the responsibility is on the landowner to find out
what they bought. We shouldn't be held up to ransom by somebody who
doesn't want mining.''

And although Mr. White has little sympathy for Mr. Morrison in
particular, the two men do share one thing: frustration.

''Had I known that this kind of opposition would develop, I would not
have got involved in the project,'' Mr. White said. ''It's something I
don't think anyone foresaw.''

PHOTOS: Peter Griesbach found trees on his property chopped down to
stake a mining claim. Years later, he is still fighting the
prospector.; A claim stake on Mr. Griesbach's property in Ontario.;
Like Mr. Griesbach, Mary Loucks also found claim stakes on her land.
After a legal wrangle, the exploration stopped. (PHOTOGRAPHS BY IAN
AUSTEN FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES)

Sunday, August 31, 2008

Media on Mining Act RdShow, Lovelace Confident Supreme Ct Will Vindicate Decision

Mining Act

August 29, 2008

THE PROVINCIAL MINISTRY OF NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT AND MINING WAS IN KINGSTON LAST NIGHT TO DISCUSS POSSIBLE UPDATES TO ONTARIO'S MINING ACT.

IT IS THE FOURTH STOP ON A FIVE CITY TOUR.

PROTESTORS CONCERNED ABOUT URANIUM EXPLORATION WERE ALSO THERE.

NEWSWATCH'S DARRYN DAVIS REPORTS.

ONTARIO'S MINING ACT IS OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OLD AND IN THE OPINION OF THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IT'S TIME TO UPDATE AN OUTDATED SYSTEM.

A LARGE GROUP OF RESIDENTS FROM SHARBOT LAKE ALONG WITH MEMBERS OF THE ARDOCH ALGONQUINS FIRST NATIONS GATHERED AT OUTSIDE THE RADISSON HOTEL WHERE PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS ON THE MINING ACT ARE BEING HELD.

THEY'RE PROTESTING URANIUM EXPLORATION THAT'S OCCURRING IN THEIR AREA.

BOB LOVELACE SPENT OVER THREE MONTHS IN JAIL FOR PROTESTING WHERE FRONTENAC VENTURES IS EXPLORING FOR URANIUM ON LAND THE ARDOCH ALGONQUINS HAVE AN UNSETTLED LAND DISPUTE ON.

THE MINING EXPLORATION COMPANY IS NOW APPEALING THE DECISION THAT SAW LOVELACE RELEASED FROM PRISON.

BOB LOVELACE

"FRANKLY WE'RE ACTUALLY PLEASED THAT IT'S GOING TO THE SUPREME COURT BECAUSE THE APPELLANT COURT DECISIONS WERE SOUND AND THEY REMINDED PEOPLE THAT PUBLIC DECENT AND ABORIGINAL LAW IS A PART OF CANADA AND A PART OF THIS DEMOCRACY."

PROTESTORS SAY THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE A MORATORIUM ON URANIUM MINING AND EXPLORATION.

WHILE THAT DOESN'T SEEM LIKELY REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MINISTRY OF NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT AND MINING SAY THEY ARE LOOKING FOR AS MUCH PUBLIC INPUT AS THEY CAN GET AT THEIR PUBLIC CONSULTATION MEETING.

KATHY NOSSICH

"THE MINING ACT DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THE TYPES OF MINERALS FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPLORATION SO IF PEOPLE HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT URANIUM EXPLORATION INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS THEN WE WELCOME HEARING THOSE CONCERNS."

BUT WILL EXPRESSING THOSE CONCERNS AT THE MEETING HAVE ANY EFFECT?

ROB MATHESON A KINGSTON CITY COUNCILLOR RECENTLY MET WITH THE MINISTER FOR NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT AND MINING AT A MEETING OF THE ASSOCIATION OF MUNICIPALITIES OF ONTARIO.

ROB MATHESON

"THE PROVINCE IS GOING AHEAD WITH THEIR NUCLEAR AGENDA SO TO SPEAK AT THIS POINT WHICH I CERTAINLY HOPE THEY'LL RECONSIDER, GIVEN THE AVAILABLE RENEWABLES AVAILABLE THAT WE KNOW CAN WORK THAT IT WOULD BASICALLY BE HYPOCRITICAL TO PUT A MORATORIUM ON URANIUM MINING AT THIS POINT."

THE RESULTS OF OF THE PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS WILL BECOME MORE CLEAR IN DECEMBER, WHEN THE GOVERNMENT IS EXPECTED TO TABLE IT'S MODERNIZED MINING ACT.

DARRYN DAVIS CKWS NEWXSWATCH KINGSTON.

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Frontenac Applies for Leave to Appeal in S.Ct.

wonders never cease, wonder who is financing this? Where there is a
junior there is a major in the background.

Proverbs 10:7

The memory of the righteous is a blessing,
but the name of the wicked will rot.

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Former Harris MNR Minister Hodgson( of Ipperwash fame) Stakes out Industry Line on Mining Act Change

((Existing mining tax revenue streams are a miniscule basis for First Nation revenue sharing.Let's hope NAN, tribal council and first nation brain trust has their eyes on the prize,

OMA hypes the 40 agreements with First nations but what do they say?

here's what they say( at the early exploration stage),
first we are sorry that we never thought to notify you( after all it is "free entry) when we flew those airborne surveys, disturbed your traplines and staked your lands,

but now that you have the internet and are even working with enviros and human rights activists and all matter of troublemakers and can read all our promotional nonsense and look at our maps and go online and check out mndm claimsmaps we better meet with you and offer to maybe( no firm promises) employ a few line cutters and drill helpers and an environmental monitor,

respect you if you say no to our project? see you in court.

Pay for your technical and legal advice to review our workplan? not on your life, if you have lawyers where would all the fun be?,

Archaeology? Maybe OK as long as it is not peer reviewed and we can use our tame consultants who write what we say,

Use your hotel and community cooks? better to make an exploration camp far from community view, outside of any oversight by MNR or health authorities and spill our fuel and human waste to our hearts content,

compensation for impacts on your treaty and aboriginal rights? are you kidding this is all low impact,maybe we won't work during the fall and spring hunt if you press us,

joint venture to act on all that partnership talk? what would you bring to the party? your land? We thought you surrendered your land. take up that jurisdiction matter with the government.

we will promise that if we ever find anything on your land we will make another agreement to maybe share some part of our pie
share in the huge run up in our stock values? no, that gravy is for our directors and brokers ))


COMMENTARY; OMA stakes out position on Ontario's boreal plan
Chris Hodgson
1186 words
11 August 2008
Northern Miner
4
English
Copyright 2008 Business Information Group. All Rights Reserved.

--In July, the Ontario government announced plans to bar development in about half of the province's boreal forest. The following is a letter from Ontario Mining Association President Chris Hodgson to OMA member companies that maps out the association's position on the plan.

Recently, Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty made an announcement concerning the launch of the Far North Planning Process. A land-use plan for the Far North has been requested by various groups for years and the lead-up to this announcement has taken some time. A fundamental principle of the Ontario Mining Association since its inception in 1920 has been to workproductively with the government of the day and, in keeping with this, we have been engaged in an ongoing dialogue on this issue.

You may recall a memo that was sent on June 21, 2007, outlining the points of concern regarding a proposed Far North Planning Initiative that the OMA discussed with various ministers, members of the civil service and political staff. Since that memo was sent, our discussions with the government have taken on greater depth and, lately, more urgency. But the essentials remain the same. The government is faced with a large task, which requires management of many competing interests. Recent media reports have given rise to mounting expectations for a radical overhaul of the rules around access to land by resource companies. While the OMA supports changes to improve the systems in place, our concern has been that the scope of the initiative not become overwhelming. If that happens, the task would be drawn out and largely unmanageable, resulting in irrational decisions and regulatory uncertainty.

The OMA directors had an opportunity to discuss some of our concerns and proposed messaging at the most recent meeting of the board. Over the last weeks, I have taken this message to various ministers and deputy ministers, the premier's office, as well as members of the environmental community, including the Canadian Boreal Initiative. The purpose of the meetings was to find common ground on a way to approach the complex issues involved in land-use planning in a way that is manageable for the government, environmental non-governmental organizations and the industry. I believe that the premier's announcement reflects some measure of this consensus on key issues for our sector.

Until recently, political statements and media reports were calling for a significant overhaul of the Mining Act. The OMA argued that the inevitably prolonged legislative uncertainty would significantly undermine the investment climate in the province. To retain some sense of certainty, we asked that the re-view process be tightly scoped and conducted over a limited time-frame. The wording of the announcement, as well as follow-up conversations with senior policy advisers at the premier's office, have confirmed that the review process will be focused on dealing with private land issues and aboriginal participation.

The consultation process on the Mining Act review is set to begin in August and proceed on a tight schedule. Given prior discussions on the issues at hand with the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada, the Ontario Prospectors Association, and a wide group of stakeholders involved on the Ministers Mining Act Advisory Council, we believe that workable solutions are in sight. Nonetheless, even with the limited scope, we foresee an intense consultation process and we ask that our members offer up their expertise, so that we have a strong presence at the discussion table.

In proposing to protect 50% of the Far North boreal forest, the government has stated that existing land tenure, claims and leases will not be affected. It is also recognizing the fundamental need to strike a balance between conservation and development for the future. This precludes arbitrary selection of protected areas and calls for a rational approach to planning, which is supported with substantive data on the region's biodiversity, carbon sequestration potential, aboriginal cultural heritage, natural resource and mineral potential. Both the OMA and leading environmental groups like the Canadian Boreal Initiative support a rational approach to land-use planning. This is reflected in the government's commitment to comprehensive mapping of the region, which is expected to take 10 to 15 years.

Meanwhile, I urge OMA members to take an active part in the multi-stakeholder discussions on creating a framework for the government plan. Mining has a miniscule footprint on the landscape, but it does depend on broad-based access to land to identify mineral potential at the early exploration stage. I believe that there are useful jurisdictional models, including the Yukon and Northwest Territories, which demonstrate how certain low-risk activities can take place with limited or no screening, while overall stringent environmental protections are maintained.

Modern mining practices stress environmental protection and ecological conservation. There are numerous examples of progressive practices to protect species at risk -- the De Beers Canada woodland caribou study in the Attawapiskat area comes to mind -- in addition to other measures to protect the environment, which we can bring to the table in the interest of working out the best possible land-use plan for the Far North.

The mining industry has done much to develop productive and respectful relationships with aboriginal communities. More than 40 impact benefit agreements have been signed between mining companies and First Nations, providing for employment, infrastructure and economic development. We welcome the move by the government to clarify the rules around consultation with the First Nations. We expect that this will take place as part of the Mining Act review and that a consultation template will be embedded in the revised Act.

The OMA believes that all those impacted by mining activity should benefit from the prosperity that the industry brings. For that reason, we have been recommending that the government create a system of revenue sharing with First Nations communities that support mining as an acceptable land use on their traditional lands and territories. We have proposed that a base fund be established and be supplemented annually from existing mining tax streams. We have stressed that these contributions come from the existing taxes and that no tax rates be increased and no new taxes be added, as this would undermine the competitiveness of the sector. A similar proposal, which takes the OMA position into consideration, has been endorsed by the Ontario Mineral Industry Cluster Council. We welcome the government's plans to provide a down-payment towards Resource Benefit Sharing this fall.

In all, the OMA appreciates the level of access to government decision- makers that we have been granted over an extended period of time and the openness with which our positions on land-use issues and the proposed Mining Act review have been received. Ultimately, I believe that the Ontario government is taking a measured approach to a complex set of issues and we look forward to participating fully in the consultations that will inform the government's decision- making. To be truly effective, we will need significant input by our members, and we welcome your comments, suggestions and participation.

Industry Lines in Mining Act Change Process

1. Existing Mineral "tenures" will not be Disturbed( no matter the failure to discharge the duty to consult)

2. First Nation Land Use Planning will not Compromise Mineral Potential( consider govt expenditures on programs to map mineral potential and compare them to government programs for first nations)

3.Revenue Sharing Will Not Come out of Industry Profits( or we will take our money and run to some authoritarian state where the military can enforce industry property rights)

same as it ever was
advantaging the advantaged and disadvantaging the disadvantaged

It Happened in S Africa, why not First Nation economic empowerment?

Black firm gains De Beers stake
South African miner
Black workers are too far down the job ladder, the government says
South Africa diamond giant De Beers has announced the sale of 26% of its mining operations to a black empowerment firm.

The deal represents the biggest change to De Beers' ownership since the company's foundation in 1888.

South Africa's government has embraced black economic empowerment (BEE) as a means of giving economic as well as political power to the black majority.

Critics say the policy has only benefited a small elite of wealthy people close to the ruling ANC.

The deal announced on Tuesday appears to have been designed at least partly to address these concerns.

Not the 'usual suspects'

Ponahalo Investment Holdings, which will acquire a 26% share in De Beers Consolidated Mines (DBCM), will be 50% owned by South African-based De Beers employees and pensioners.

The shareholders include three "broad-based trusts" benefiting disadvantaged women, people with disabilities, and the communities living around DCBM mines.

"Ponahalo wants a qualitative change and, in partnership with De Beers, to bring in the value to make a change in the lives of people," Ponahalo chairman Manne Dipico said.

Mr Dipico is a prominent figure in the governing ANC party, and was formerly premier of Northern Cape province, in which De Beers' flagship Kimberley mining operations are situated.

However, Mr Dipico has not been a prominent player in previous BEE deals.

Speaking after the announcement of the sale, Minerals and Energy Minister Lindiwe Hendricks expressed satisfaction at the plans to bring benefit to communities, and also that the "usual suspects" associated with many previous BEE deals were not involved.

The government has previously accused De Beers of being slow to change.

Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) is a program launched by the South African government to redress the inequalities of Apartheid by giving previously disadvantaged groups (black Africans, Coloureds and Indians who are SA citizens) economic opportunities previously not available to them. It includes measures such as Employment Equity, skills development, reverse racism, ownership, management, socio-economic development and preferential procurement.
Rationale

After the end of Apartheid in 1994 and with the advent of majority rule, control of big business in both the public and private sectors still rested primarily in the hands of white individuals. According to Statistics South Africa, Whites comprise just under 10% of the population, meaning that most of the country's economy was controlled by a very small minority. BEE is intended to transform the economy to be representative of the demographic make-up of the country.

Early reports from MNDM Consultation in timmins

((looks like it is all happening too fast for industry, meaning they are afraid, meaning what industry fears is usually engos and first nations making gains, ))

Mining Act meeting held
Posted By KEITH LACEY, OSPREY NEWS NETWORK
Posted 7 hours ago


There were a lot of diverging opinions expressed, but one common theme agreed to by virtually everyone in attendance Monday night was the process to upgrade the province's Mining Act is taking place way too fast.

"We really need a lot more time ... our group was adamant about this," said Mike Gordon, who works for the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines. He acted as a spokesman following a roundtable discussion as Timmins hosted the first of several Mining Act public consultations Monday at the Howard Johnson Inn.

"This process is happening way too quickly."

The meeting - the only one planned near Timiskaming - was attended by 60 prospectors, developers, mining company representatives, private property owners and citizens at large.

60 Day Consultation for New Mining Act

Comment Period: 60 days: submissions may be made between August 11, 2008 and October 10, 2008.

Description of Policy:

Ontario is modernizing its Mining Act to ensure that this legislation promotes fair, balanced, sustainable development that benefits all Ontarians.

Consultations will focus on five policy issues: the mineral tenure system, including free entry, and security of investment; Aboriginal rights and interests related to mining development; regulatory processes for exploration activities on Crown land; land use planning in Ontario’s Far North as it relates to mineral exploration and development; and private rights and interests relating to mineral development.
Purpose of Policy:

By modernizing the Mining Act, Ontario will ensure that it has up-to-date mining practices that support this important industrial sector. A modernized Mining Act would also address the need to ensure appropriate consultation and accommodation of First Nation and Métis communities.

Modernization will bring the Mining Act into harmony with the values of today’s society while maintaining a framework that supports the mineral industry’s contribution to Ontario’s economy.
Other Information:

This process supports Premier Dalton McGuinty’s July 14, 2008 Far North Planning announcement.

The modernization process will build on commitments outlined in Ontario’s Mineral Development Strategy, and on input and information received during previous consultations and dialogues – including ongoing discussions regarding an Aboriginal Consultation Approach for Mineral Sector Activities, the EBR-Environmental Registry posting on surface and mineral rights issues, consultations on Ontario’s Mineral Development Strategy and preliminary discussions toward the development of a Growth Plan for Northern Ontario.

Public Consultation:

This proposal has been posted for a 60 day public review and comment period starting August 11, 2008. If you have any questions, or would like to submit your comments, please do so by October 10, 2008 to the individual listed under "Contact". Additionally, you may submit your comments on-line.

All comments received prior to October 10, 2008 will be considered as part of the decision-making process by the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines if they are submitted in writing or electronically using the form provided in this notice and reference EBR Registry number 010-4327.

Please Note: All comments and submissions received will become part of the public record. You will not receive a formal response to your comment, however, relevant comments received as part of the public participation process for this proposal will be considered by the decision maker for this proposal.

Other Public Consultation Opportunities:

The Ministry of Northern Development and Mines will host facilitated public discussion sessions in Timmins (August 11), Sudbury (August 13), Thunder Bay (August 18), Kingston (August 28) and Toronto (September 8). Please visit www.ontario.ca/miningact for more information about the public meetings.

The public may respond to this discussion paper through the Environmental Registry or by emailing MNDM at miningact@ontario.ca. Written submissions may be mailed to MNDM’s office at:

Ministry of Northern Development and Mines
99 Wellesley Street West
Room 5630
Toronto, Ontario
M7A 1W3

All comments should be sent by October 10. The ministry plans to introduce legislation in the upcoming session and, if it is passed, new rules would be in place for later next year.

The ministry will be reaching out to First Nation and Métis communities for their input through meetings with First Nation and Métis leaders and organizations. In addition, we will provide copies of this discussion paper to all First Nation communities and Aboriginal organizations in the province, then follow up with direct invitations for input. Focused meetings for mineral sector and other stakeholders will be held in appropriate locations throughout Ontario.

For further information on the review and modernization process, please call 1-888-415-9845 or email us at miningact@ontario.ca.

KI on CPAC August 16th

http://cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3§ion_id=24&temp
late_id=1144&lang=e

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

Minister Bryant To Address NAN Chiefs Meeting in Constance Lake

Will he apologize to KI? Tune in to live Wawatay broadcast.

And Mining Act Reform Process Finally Begins

((First Nations need more than respect, they have have a right to say no and that right needs to be recognized by the Treaty Partner. Note the onus that is placed on companies. Companies didn't pull the trigger at Ipperwash.))

August 05, 2008

Ontario Launches Mining Act Consultations

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


McGuinty Government Aims To Ensure Balanced, Respectful Legislation

NEWS

The Ontario government is holding a series of public and stakeholder meetings about modernizing the Mining Act.

Facilitated public and stakeholder sessions will be held in Timmins (August 11), Sudbury (August 13), Thunder Bay (August 18), Kingston (August 28) and Toronto (September 8).

These sessions are the first step in a consultation approach that will also include focused discussions with the minerals industry, municipalities and other stakeholders, First Nations and Métis leaders, as well as input from First Nations communities across Ontario. On August 11, a discussion paper will be posted for comment on the Environmental Registry and the ministry's web site.

This process will help ensure that the proposed legislation promotes fair, balanced and sustainable development that benefits all Ontarians. It supports Premier Dalton McGuinty's July 14 announcement that Ontario is going to modernize the way mining companies stake and explore their claims to be more respectful of Aboriginal communities and private land holders.

QUOTES

"A vibrant mining industry adds wealth to our economy and offers tremendous benefits for our communities," said Northern Development and Mines Minister Michael Gravelle. "We want to support that industry with a Mining Act that reflects the values of today's society."

QUICK FACTS

a.. Toronto is the world's mine financing capital. In 2006, more than 80 per cent of the global mining industry's public financings were conducted through the Toronto Stock Exchange.
b.. According to Natural Resources Canada, there are about 1,200 Aboriginal communities within 200 km of 190 producing mines and 2,100 exploration properties across Canada.
c.. The Canadian mining industry was the only industrial sector with average weekly wages above $1,000 in 2006.
LEARN MORE

Read Ontario's Mining Act
Learn about Ontario's Mineral Development Strategy
The work of the ministry's Mines and Minerals Division

Laforme Defends Owen Young after AFN Calls for His Resignation

THE WORLD AT SIX (EAST) (CBC-R), Toronto, 30 Jul 08, Reach: 528,000, Time: 18:14, Length: 00:02:21, Ref# 10556D0-8

Anchor/Reporters: BILL GILLESPIE / MAUREEN BROSNAN

CALL FOR THE RESIGNATION OF A LAWYER

BARBARA SMITH (CBC-R): Groups representing residential school survivors are calling for the resignation of a lawyer hired by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The Assembly of First Nations, the Nishnawbe Aski Nation and the National Residential School Survivors' Society all say Owen Young is a bad choice.
In March, Young represented the Province of Ontario in a case against aboriginal people opposing mineral exploration. During their sentencing, he urged the judge to impose a financial penalty that hurts. That comment has First Nations leaders saying his presence will taint the work of the commission. Karen Pauls reports.

KAREN PAULS (CBC Reporter): Alvin Fiddler is the Deputy Grand Chief of a group which represents 49 First Nations in Ontario. He says the Truth and Reconciliation Commission should let Owen Young go, to protect its own mandate.

ALVIN FIDDLER (Deputy Grand Chief of Nishnawbe Aski Nation): A lot of people, I think, have high hopes, especially those survivors who have waited a long time to tell their story. But I think, you know, based on what's happened, you know, there has to be some... some corrective action taken first.

PAULS: Mike Cachagee agrees. He represents the National Residential School Survivors' Society.

MIKE CACHAGEE (President, National Residential School Survivors' Society): I have a saying, you can't suck and blow at the same time. You can't call from the rooftops about crime and punishment and then say we're going to talk about reconciliation after the fact. I've got a lot of respect for Justice LaForme, you know. But I think of all the counsel that was available in Canada, he could have found someone else who is less contentious.

PAULS: Still, the head of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is defending his decision to hire Young as a legal counsel. Justice Harry Laforme says Young's comment is being taken out of context unfairly because for much of his career he has defended aboriginal people.

HARRY LAFORME (Head of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission): I would simply say trust my judgement and wait for the results of what we do as a commission because I fought long and hard about the right person for this job. And I believed it was Owen Young.

PAULS: Two weeks ago, the Assembly of First Nations unanimously passed a resolution urging the commission to reconsider its choice. LaForme says he's waiting for a formal request from the AFN before deciding how to respond. Alvin Fiddler hopes Young will take action before then.

FIDDLER: If he's an honourable man and by all accounts he is then do the right thing and step down from the commission.

PAULS: Owen Young could not be reached for comment. Karen Pauls, CBC News, Winnipeg.
*****

WORDS: 458 Transcript Order: 107561 Id: 10556D0-8 Sent: 01 Aug 08 09:24AM

Friday, July 25, 2008

Will Attawapiskat Chief and Council Attend De Beers Victor Mine Opening or Will Community Petition To Review IBA Give Them Pause

And best wishes on his upcoming retirement to De Beers corporate
warrior Joanathan Fowler. Jonathan goes back to the Monopros( why be
upfront and call your exploration arm De Beers when you can use the
name Monopros) days when he headed up De Beers exploration office in
Thunder Bay. Talk about a hardship post in the city of failure. I
understand, this will be Jonathan's last Attawapiskat party. Jonathan
enjoyed a few happy meetings with KI folk back in the days when De
Beers and Platinex had a collaboration going on community consultation
in KI. De Beers sampled the KI lands but withdrew following the
declaration of the moratorium.

Insiders will recall that De Beers funded the October 2005 meeting
which resulted in Chief Donny Morris saying "what part of No doesn't
Ontario understand" and a moratorium declaration by a number of far
north communities. The De Beers meeting with Far North Chiefs back in
05 set the stage for what followed. Classic unintended consequence.

Conspiracy theorists have floated the idea that De Beers deliberately
provoked the moratorium to "sterilize" the area for competitors. De
Beers are smart ( the Microsoft of mining) but not that smart. Let's
remember a lunatic found the diamonds in the NWT while they were stuck
at Blackwater Lake. Too clever by half.


De Beers to Open Snap Lake, Victor Diamond Mines

De Beers Canada will open the Snap Lake diamond mine July 25, and the
Victor diamond mine July 26. Snap Lake will become the first De Beers
mine outside of southern Africa, employ 560 people, and will have an
annual production rate of 1.4 million carats. Victor will employee 400
people during production and will have an annual production rate of
600,000 carats.

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Bad Barrel ( Mining Act/Indian Act) Bad Apples( MNDM, Mining Cos/INAC) and Barrel Makers( McGuinty/Bryant, Strahl and predecessors dating back to Treaty)

April 06, 2007
Bad Apples, Bad Barrels, Bad Barrel Makers

By Mimikatz

If you know of Philip Zimbardo, it is probably in connection with the
Stanford Prison Experiment, undertaken in 1971. In that experiment,
Zimbardo and others took carefully screened, normal college students
and randomly assigned them to be guards or prisoners in a mock prison
set up in the basement of the Stanford Psych Department. Nothing
happened at first, but after 36 hours the prisoners revolted. The
guards asked Zimbardo what to do. He responded, "It's your prison," but
cautioned them against using violence. After 6 days the situation
became completely out of control, with brutality by the guards and
psychological breakdown among the prisoners. But only when one of his
former graduate students, after seeing what was happening, tearfully
told him she was not sure she wanted to have anything more to do with
him did he decide to stop the experiment.

Fast forward to 2004. Zimbardo became an expert witness in the trial
of Ivan "Chip" Frederick, one of the MPs accused of abuses at Abu
Ghraib, where the Stanford Prison Experiment was in effect replicated
in real life. This gave Zimbardo access to documents, photos and
reports about Abu Ghraib and caused him to ponder the lessons that were
not learned from the Stanford Experiment.

The result is The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn
Evil. In this long, difficult but very informative book Zimbardo
explains both how good people come to do incredibly evil acts but why.
The core of the book is a very detailed description of the Stanford
Experiment, but Zimbardo also looks at situations such as Rwanda and
the Holocaust, along with Abu Ghraib. In a nutshell, Zimbardo argues
that we do not have the stable personalities we often think we have;
our actions are in fact much more dependent on the situations we find
ourselves in. Under the "right" conditions, almost anyone can perform
evil acts. Contrary to the typical medical and legal model, such
things as Abu Ghraib are not the result of a few "bad apples," but
happen because of "bad barrels." As the Stanford Experiment had shown,
combining absolute power, secrecy, lack of clear rules and supervision,
and boredom could create a situation in which pacifists became brutal
guards.

But are "bad barrels" accidental happenings? Zimbardo pushes his
analysis further to ask questions about the "barrel makers" (himself
included) who allow such conditions to exist. Do certain types of
systems encourage "bad barrels?" In the next to last chapter he
essentially puts the Bush Administration on trial for the conditions at
Abu Ghraib.

But if commission of evil acts is at least as much situational as
dispositional (based on the individual personality), what can be done
to resist evil? As Zimbardo shows through his own and his colleagues'
avid participation in the Stanford Experiment until challenged by a
former student, this is a very complex issue. He and all of the other
researchers got sucked into the experiment, as it deteriorated slowly
over time, thrilled at the behavioral changes they were witnessing.
She came in as a substitute on Day 6 when another researcher had to
leave for a family emergency. Moreover, she had become romantically
involved with Zimbardo once she finished her PhD. Coming into the
experiment somewhat unwillingly, suddenly exposed to the degradation
that had built up over days, she was horrified both at what she saw and
at Zimbardo's reaction when she confronted him. (He told her she would
never make a good researcher if she got so emotional.) Ultimately he
realized that she was right, that he and the others had also
internalized the institutional values of the experiment to the
exclusion of their humanitarian values, and he called a halt to the
experiment. (Their relationship survived and they are evidently still
married.)

The implications of this book, especially his observations on what
makes and what prevents situations like Abu Ghraib, and how it relates
to our resistance to the Bush Administration and the evil in our
society, are considerable. Delineating the positive lessons will take
another post. Suffice it to say that no one can look at himself or
herself with quite the same smugness after reading this book.

Why Governmental Change is Slow and Hard

There are also adverse selection effects; a notorious example is that
individuals who are particularly risk-averse often seek jobs in the
public sector. The result, as economists have long known, is that most
organizations (and especially public sector ones) are excessively
cautious; they take many fewer risks than a rational economic agent
would in similar circumstances.

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

Northern Miner, Climate Change Sceptics, First Nation Consultation Advocates and Revenue Sharing if Its Revenue Neutral to Industry

Editorial: Miners need to be wary of Ontario Premier
630 words
23 July 2008
eSource Canada Business News Network
English
Copyright 2008 Business Information Group. All Rights Reserved.

Mid-July saw the surprise announcement by the Ontario government that it would "protect" at least 225,000 sq. km, or roughly half of the province's boreal forest.

The scope of the proposal is broad. It includes: banning economic activity within at least half the province's boreal forest; holding meetings across the province with every conceivable stakeholder to come up with new land-use plans; giving local aboriginal communities veto power over proposed economic activities; revamping the way resource businesses are taxed, including more taxes going to local aboriginal communities; and building up bureaucracies to create and implement land-use plans.

The government also restated its intention to rewrite the province's mining act before 2010, including changing the process for staking and exploration. It starts reviewing the act this August.

Given that you can't trust anything Premier "I-won't-cut-your-taxes-but-I-won't-raise-them-either" McGuinty says, and that his professed environmentalism is driven by pure political expediency, figuring out what this latest proposal means for miners in Ontario is tricky.

On the one hand, McGuinty's shabby treatment of De Beers as it developed Ontario's first diamond mine -- jacking up the royalty rate at the eleventh hour, after construction was well under way -- shows the premier he has no qualms about raiding a mining company's coffers when the political fallout is minimal (after all, few hearts bleed for De Beers).

Of more concern to the little guy, McGuinty's crushing of landowners and developers who tried to fend off his government's creation of the greenbelt around Toronto shows the premier has little regard for basic property rights.

Be forewarned: McGuinty holds the creation of the greenbelt as a model for his boreal forest plan.

On the other hand, it will takes years just to hold discussions with interested parties about how to establish a framework for more discussions.

McGuinty himself says the whole process could take up to 15 years. The thing may never happen.

It looks like much of the seeming haste to come out with this latest boreal-forest proposal is fuelled by the provincial government's larger agenda to boost taxes and increase the size and reach of government by using the global warming hoax as a pretext.

McGuinty is pitching Ontario's boreal forest as a major carbon sink that presumably could be used to the provincial government's benefit during upcoming rounds of carbon-emissions trading it is committing itself to.

It's remarkable that, as more people realize that there isn't a single bit of evidence that human activity is causing dangerous global warming, we see the rhetoric from the theory's proponents is getting more hysterical: in promoting this boreal forest plan, McGuinty is now saying with a straight face that we can expect Ontario to be 8 degrees Celsius warmer within a century.

This kind of foolish talk is another great argument for small government.

More pertinent to the mining industry is the very real revamping of the provincial mining act.

Now is the time for miners to keep up the lobbying for the maintenance of a sensible regulatory regime for mineral exploration and mining in the province.

In particular, the mining industry needs to keep pushing the government to live up to its obligation to consult with aboriginal communities prior to the granting of exploration rights to mining companies, as it so spectacularly failed to do in the messy case of Platinex and the Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug (KI) First Nation.

We like the idea of local communities getting more of the taxes from resource industries active in the area, but only if it matches simultaneous reductions in provincial taxes.

Former Bryant Advisor Predicts Quiet Revolution in Indian Country, Let's Not Forget that Revolutions Are Made By Revolutionaries and Not Politicians

Quiet revolution in relations with natives TheStar.com - Opinion - Quiet revolution in relations with natives
July 23, 2008
Douglas Sanderson

[Douglas Sanderson, BA (Hons) (Simon Fraser University) 1998, JD (Toronto) 2003, LLM (Columbia) 2004, hails from the Opaskwayak Cree Nation. In 2004-2005 he was the Senior Policy Advisor to Ontario's Minister Responsible for Aboriginal Affairs, the first Aboriginal person to hold that position. From 2005 to 2007, Douglas served as a Senior Policy Advisor, to the Attorney General of Ontario, the Hon. Michael Bryant. Douglas' work as a policy advisor included files on Aboriginal land claims, application of the Powley decision to Ontario's Métis, reform of Ontario's Human Rights complaints system (the Human Rights Code Amendment Act, 2006), and issues related to self governing professions, victims of crime, and brownfields redevelopment. Douglas' current interests relate to the theoretical foundations of Aboriginal law, and a return to first principles as a way of righting historic injustices. In the 2003/2004 academic year, Douglas was a Canada-US Fulbright scholar at Columbia University in the City of New York. Contact: d.Sanderson@utoronto.ca]

On July 14, Premier Dalton McGuinty announced Ontario's intention to protect half of the great northern boreal forest.

At the same time, the premier also announced that any new mining in the North would require the consultation and consent of affected aboriginal people. This news was met with cautious optimism by First Nations, and a surprising degree of acceptance by the Ontario Prospectors Association.

In the past six months, Ontario's First Nations and the mining industry have gone head-to-head in court, with several First Nations leaders being sent to jail for protesting mining companies' attempts to prospect or to test drill on the traditional aboriginal lands.

First Nations people are asserting the right to be consulted – rights that have been confirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada – and which now require that aboriginal people be involved prior to any government action that could materially affect their aboriginal or treaty rights.

Ontario's Mining Act was passed into law in 1873, and the basic structure of the act remains unchanged. Under the act, prospectors can stake claims on Crown land, and then the prospector registers the claim, thereby earning the right to mine.

However, most crown land in Ontario is also in the traditional land base of First Nations, and so the Mining Act's outdated provisions have collided head-on with a developing jurisprudence on the duty to consult.

As it stands, the Mining Act grants rights to prospectors regardless of whether or not First Nations have been consulted, and the results have played out in Ontario's courts and in fevered protests pitting mining companies against First Nations.

McGuinty intends to change all that by announcing the province's intention to revise the Mining Act. Because the act will affect the aboriginal and treaty rights of Ontario's First Nations, First Nations will have to be consulted.

The act will have to require early consultation with affected First Nations, and so McGuinty's announcement is, essentially, that he intends to revise the Mining Act so it complies with decisions of the nation's highest court. The decision to revise the Act is neither revolutionary nor prescient – it is simply a matter of doing what the law already requires.

Lost in the announcement, however, was the province's intention to create a stream of revenue sharing that would accompany any mining in the North and that will be paid to affected First Nations. The revenue will be paid to First Nations by the province out of licensing and other fees, and not by mining companies themselves.

At the announcement, McGuinty said that the province is already beginning to set aside money for this revenue-sharing scheme – a sign that Ontario is serious.

This, combined with Impact Benefit Agreements – private contracts between resource companies and First Nations to mitigate the environmental impact of development, to require job creation for aboriginal communities, and sometimes oversight of the projects themselves – could provide a much needed influx of jobs, income and stability in Ontario's north country.

It is easy to pan small steps, but it's important to remember it was less than 15 years ago that disputes with Indians in the province were settled the old fashioned way: by the Tactical Response Unit which shot Dudley George to death.

The premier's announcement to revise the Mining Act is a small step forward, not a giant leap, but it is part of a pattern of small steps taken by the premier and Aboriginal Affairs Minister Michael Bryant which together signal that, as between First Nations and the province, we may already be in the midst of a quiet revolution.

Douglas Sanderson is a visiting scholar and fellow in aboriginal law at the University of Toronto.

Monday, July 21, 2008

Platinex remains in Bizarro World( see Superman comics) Platinex "rights" to 57, 400 acres on KI lands are imaginary.

Platinex Supports Go Green Ontario Initiative

TORONTO, July 18 /CNW/ - Platinex Inc. (TSX.V:PTX) today announced its support for the Ontario Government initiative to create a protected area in the boreal forest north of 51 degrees latitude and provide local First Nations with more capacity to participate in exploration and development of the non-protected portion of the area, as part of Go Green Ontario (www.gogreenontario.ca).

James R Trusler, President and CEO of Platinex Inc. stated, "Platinex holds some 57,400 acres in the McFaulds Lake-Big Trout Lake Belt which is starting to look like a huge nickel, chromium, platinum group element bearing structure. We are one of the larger land holders in the area and providing an environment to allow parties to partner cooperatively is something that Platinex has advocated for a long time. This announcement appears to promise the first step."

About Platinex Inc.

Platinex is a Canadian exploration company based near Toronto. Platinex focuses on carefully selected Platinum Group Element targets in settings analogous to the JM reef (Stillwater Complex, Montana) and the Merensky and UG2 reefs (Bushveld Complex, RSA). Platinex is determined to find platinum sources to be used in the campaign to eliminate the threat of global warming. Shares of Platinex are listed for trading on the TSX Venture Exchange under the symbol PTX.

To receive Company press releases, please email shirley@chfir.com and mention "Platinex" on the subject line.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS:

Except for statements of historical fact, all statements in this news release - including, without limitation, statements regarding future plans and objectives, are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate; actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements.

THE TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE HAS NOT REVIEWED AND DOES NOT ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE.

%SEDAR: 00014019E
-30-

/For further information: Platinex Inc., James R. Trusler, President & CEO, Tel: (905) 727-9046, Email: jim@platinex.com; CHF Investor Relations, Cathy Hume, CEO, Tel: (416) 868-1079 ext. 231, Email: cathy@chfir.com/
,

In Ontario Prospector Fantasy Provincial Land Use Planning Dollars Used to Subsidize Industry Mapping of Mineral Potential

Garry Clark appears to be suffering from a flashback brought on by follies in his long passed youth. If the OPA think that the Land Use Planning dollars will become yet another Operation Treasure hunt subsidy for the industry they will be sadly mistaken.There is a new reality out there Garry. Have another donut.

Ont. plan to save boreal forest could benefit mining industry
Peter Koven , Canwest News Service
Published: Thursday, July 17, 2008

TORONTO - The Ontario government's move to block development of half the province's boreal forest ranks among the biggest land-protection initiatives in recent memory. But in a strange twist, it is also a potential positive for the mining industry.

The details are still hazy, but Premier Dalton McGuinty announced this week that 225,000 square kilometres of the forest would be set aside for tourism and aboriginal use. All industrial development, including logging and mineral exploration, will be banned on the designated land.

Over the next 10 to 15 years, the government will undergo a huge mapping and land-use planning process to identify the places that most need protection.
Email to a friendEmail to a friendPrinter friendlyPrinter friendly
Font:

* *
* *
* *
* *

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

In so doing, prospectors are confident they will also find promising mining regions that no one knows about.

"Right now, there's no good mapping in the North outside of some rivers and tributaries," said Garry Clark, executive director of the Ontario Prospectors Association (OPA). "If the government feeds a bunch of data in there and can get us better (drilling) targets, then we're way better off."

He is confident that if the government puts enough money into the initiative, those targets should be found.

"We're not 100 per cent sure they're going to do it properly, so we've got to give it a chance," he said.

All the same, the premier's announcement made some of the mayors of northern mining towns nervous, as they fear any kind of slowdown in activity. Many of them witnessed first-hand the downturn in the forestry sector, which devastated some communities.

But Michael Gravelle, Ontario's minister of northern development and mines, said development should continue at full force. He said all previously approved activities will be allowed to continue, and the amount of land that will remain open for development is still massive.

"It's 225,000 square kilometres, which is one-and-a-half times the size of the Maritimes. It's almost like people don't understand how large the far north 1/8of Ontario 3/8 is," he said in an interview.

Currently, only about three per cent of the boreal area has been staked by prospectors and mining companies, said Chris Hodgson, president of the Ontario Mining Association.

That activity is concentrated in a few large mining camps, especially Sudbury, Timmins and Red Lake. McFauld's Lake (near James Bay) also emerged as a hot area after a discovery by Noront Resources Ltd. last year.

The government is not providing details of what areas will be off-limits to development until the land-use planning process gets underway, and it has a better idea of what needs to be protected.

"In essence, it hasn't been picked. It's 50 per cent, that's it," Gravelle said.

The boreal forest initiative will be introduced along with an overhaul of Ontario's Mining Act, which mining companies and First Nations groups alike have criticized for a lack of clarity.

Saturday, July 19, 2008

Why KI Said No

We nedd a new "development" model.

The Big Questions About Mining and "Resource" Extraction

worth watching!

Time for Premier to Take A Boat Ride in the Boreal( at KI)

During a round of disarmament negotiations in Geneva, Switzerland, in
1982, American negotiator Paul Nitze and his Soviet counterpart, Yuli
A. Kvitsinsky, went for an informal stroll in the woods. That led to an
arms agreement between the negotiators.
I think it is time for the premier to take Chief Morris up on his offer
of dialogue.No need for fanfare, no press releases, no entourage, just
quietly fly in and get in a boat with the Chief and take a ride and
have a talk. Might be the best political move of his career.

Friday, July 18, 2008

Donny Morris on McGuinty Announcement-Invites Premier to Dialogue-Governent to Government

http://www.kitchenuhmaykoosib.com/

compelling!

PLATINEX WELCOMES FIRST NATIONS' ADVISOR, CHIEF GLENN NOLAN

>
>
> PLATINEX WELCOMES FIRST NATIONS' ADVISOR, CHIEF GLENN NOLAN
>  
> TORONTO, ONTARIO, July 17, 2008- Platinex Inc. (TSX Venture: PTX)
> today announced that it has
> retained the services of Chief Glenn Nolan to facilitate contact with
> First Nations communities and
> provide a hands on aboriginal perspective for the Company. Chief Nolan
> brings a wealth of knowledge
> and experience to his role as Advisor. Interestingly, during the late
> 1970s and '80s, Chief Nolan worked
> extensively in exploration, conducting geophysical surveys throughout
> Canada, which gives him valuable
> insight into the programs and procedures Platinex aims to employ on
> its properties in cooperation with
> First Nations groups.
>  
> Chief Nolan is the elected Chief of the Missanabie Cree First Nation;
> currently serves as the second Vice
> President of the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada; and
> is President of Learning
> Together, a nonprofit organization sharing information and experience
> with Aboriginal communities
> across Canada and internationally.
>  
> James Trusler, President and CEO of Platinex, stated, "Chief Nolan has
> demonstrated strong leadership in
> both the First Nations community and the mineral exploration industry;
> he is a distinguished addition to
> our Platinex team."
>  
> About Platinex Inc.
> Platinex is a Canadian exploration company based near Toronto.
> Platinex focuses on carefully selected
> Platinum Group Element targets in settings analogous to the JM reef
> (Stillwater Complex, Montana) and
> the Merensky and UG2 reefs (Bushveld Complex, RSA). Platinex is
> determined to find platinum sources
> to be used in the campaign to eliminate the threat of global warming.
> Platinex also focuses on
> opportunistic acquisitions in non-PGE projects which show promise of
> near term improvement in value.
> Shares of Platinex are listed for trading on the TSX Venture Exchange
> under the symbol PTX.
>  
> For further information please contact:
> Platinex Inc. CHF Investor Relations
> James R. Trusler Cathy Hume
> President & CEO CEO
> Tel: (905) 470-6400 Tel: (416) 868-1079 ext. 231
> Email: jim@platinex.com Email: cathy@chfir.com
>  
> To receive Company press releases, please email shirley@chfir.com and
> mention "Platinex News" on the subject line.
> FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS:
> Except for statements of historical fact, all statements in this news
> release - including, without limitation, statements
> regarding future plans and objectives, are forward-looking statements
> that involve various risks and uncertainties.
> There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be
> accurate; actual results and future events could
> differ materially from those anticipated in such statements.
> THE TSX VENTURE EXCHANGE HAS NOT REVIEWED AND DOES NOT ACCEPT
> RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE.
>  
> Michael Heintzman
> Media Relations Officer
> Nishnawbe Aski Nation
> 710 Victoria Avenue East
> Thunder Bay, ON  P7A 6Y3
> Telephone:  (807) 625-4906
> Cell: (807) 621-2790
> Toll Free:  (800) 465-9952
> Fax:  (807) 623-7730
> Website:  www.nan.on.ca
>  

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Is it Consent or Consultation? Time For Bryant to Be Clear

Bryant, aka the Harvard Kreskin, knows very well the difference between consultation and consent. Yet he still can't speak to the issue clearly. Is it consent or consultation? And by definition your burials are in your territory.


http://www.thestar.com/News/Ontario/article/461007

Ontario First Nations demand firm right to say 'no' to mining developments



Government's pledge draws skepticism
Jul 16, 2008 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (2)
Kerry Gillespie
Queen's Park Bureau

On the day in May that native leader Bob Lovelace was released from jail after spending 100 days there for blocking mining exploration, he was asked if he'd do it again.

He replied: "If you don't have the right to say, 'No,' you have no right at all."

This week, the province has said it's giving First Nations that right through land protection for the Far North and changes to the outdated mining act.

"We think exploration and mine development should only happen when there's been early consultation and accommodation with local aboriginal communities," Premier Dalton McGuinty said Monday when he announced half the province's vast Northern Boreal region would be protected from development.

If native communities "permit" mining on the lands left open to development, they'll "get a piece of the action" under resource revenue sharing agreements that will be part of the reformed mining act, McGuinty said.

But the lawyer for Lovelace, an Ardoch Algonquin, and six members of the Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug (KI), who were also jailed for opposing mining, isn't so sure the political language will turn into firm commitments when the legislation is introduced in the fall.

"Consultation and accommodation can take many forms," lawyer Chris Reid said in an interview. ``What we've said is make it very simple and clear: No staking, and no exploration without the consent of affected First Nations communities. Are they saying that? Not that I can see in the announcement."

The specific language hasn't been written yet. It will be worked out, in collaboration with First Nations, in the coming months, Aboriginal Affairs Minister Michael Bryant said.

But the intent is to ensure that native people don't go to jail to stop mining, he said.

"We want to avoid that from ever happening again," Bryant said in an interview yesterday. He is to address the Assembly of First Nations meeting today in Quebec City.

Under the Ontario Mining Act of 1873, anyone 18 or older can obtain a prospector's licence and stake mineral claims on land in Ontario. Companies can explore without consulting native communities.

Under the reformed act, "there will be no situation where exploration will take place on traditional territories or sacred burial grounds without the consent of First Nations, without the consultation of First Nations and that is a very, very significant shift," Bryant said.

New Look Chiefs of Ontario Refers to Colonialism and Bay Street Profits in Responding to McGuinty Mining Reform and Cloak of Green

COO now sounding like 70s lefties.The release has a nice retro
feel.Reminds me of Ed Broadbent or using my way back machine David
Lewis and the corporate welfare bums campaign.

July 15, 2008

ONTARIO REGIONAL CHIEF SUPPORTS PROGRESS TO ADDRESS FIRST NATION
INTERESTS AND THE CONSERVATION OF BOREAL FOREST

July 15, 2008 - Following Premier McGuinty's announcement yesterday to
protect the Northern Boreal region, Ontario Regional Chief Angus
Toulouse stated, "reconciliation and conservation are imperatives for
all peoples of Ontario. I am pleased to see the Premier taking steps in
this direction."

Regional Chief Toulouse commented that the Ipperwash Inquiry report
tabled in May of 2007 continues to point the way forward towards a new
relationship -one that is just, fair and recognizes First Nation rights
and jurisdiction. As Justice Linden said "we are all Treaty people" -
action is required to make this a reality. Such action includes
fulfilling the original understanding of mutual respect and harmony in
the best interests of both First Nations and the newcomers.

Regional Chief Toulouse added "I take the Premier's words to mean that
the evolution of development in this province has to change. This
change must bring to an end development driven solely by colonial
interests and capital gain."

We must all recognize that environmental preservation as well as
justice and recognition are imperatives that must be satisfied prior to
development. We can no longer tolerate the protection of Mother Earth
or the livelihood and well-being of our people taking a back-seat to
profit-margins on Bay Street."

We have much work to do together. The First Nation leadership in
Ontario is ready and able to take on this work. We look forward to
clarifying the challenge and the steps ahead together with the
Government of Ontario.

First Nations have advanced our clear position on the duty to consult
and accommodate as directed by the courts. First Nation leadership have
also set out an agenda to engage with the Government of Ontario on
Treaty implementation, land rights including resource revenue sharing
and revising the Ontario Mining Act, and First Nation jurisdiction and
capacity building through joint governance of the New Relationship
Fund. The Premier's announcement is a positive response to this agenda
and an indication that we can begin this work in a respectful and
action-oriented fashion.

Regional Chief Toulouse concluded stating that "I believe that the
stakes are high for everyone right now. We simply can't afford to keep
going down the same old path. The signs in the environment are clear
and so too are they in our communities. Our people are tired and
frustrated with the lack of progress and of being ignored. We've all
seen that conflict is real and very possible. Only through a broad
commitment including engaging First Nation governments at every step of
the way will we be able to see progress. A commitment to land-use
planning and the requirement of First Nation consent in this process is
a critical first step."

Union of Ontario Indians Adopts Skeptical Tone in Responding To Boreal Protection and Mining Reform Announcement

Union of Ontario Indians demand consultation with First Nations

Quebec City - First Nations within the Anishinabek Nation welcome the
Government of Ontario's plan to protect Ontario's north and to open up
economic opportunities to First Nations. However, we are greatly
concerned that it will be done in isolation of important treaty
relationships with Ontario First Peoples."

"We welcome any changes to the Ontario Mining Act, but change has to be
done in partnership with First Nations," says Anishinabek Nation Grand
Council Chief John Beaucage. "We want economic sustainability for all
First Nations and for all people in Ontario."

Last week, Grand Council Chief Beaucage met with the Northern
Development and Mines Minister Gravelle and discussed the development
of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) where government and First
Nations would agree on a process to jointly draft legislative changes,
agree upon a development of a joint consultation strategy, and enable
and engagement process with First Nations on a treaty-by-treaty basis.

"This would be the start to a comprehensive treaty-based discussion,"
says Beaucage. "This is a rights-based matter and it is important for
Government to work with our First Nations on a treaty-by-treaty basis."

"Our goal is to ensure these changes enhance the treaty relationships,
clarify the rules and environment for sustainable development," added
Beaucage.

The Grand Council Chief also welcomes a province-wide resource benefit
sharing agreement similar to the $3 billion over 25 years Ontario
Gaming and Lottery Commission agreement ratified in February. However,
there is also a need to develop a resource benefit framework based on
the treaties.

"We cannot continue to be lumped into one homogenous group, even as
First Nations. Our people have unique relationships when it comes to
treaties. The government has unique obligations when it comes to
implementing the treaties. First Nations also have unique needs and
goals when it comes to resource development," said Grand Council Chief
Beaucage. "We strongly encourage the government to come to the table
and work with us on a new, modern treaty implementation framework."

The Anishinabek Nation incorporated the Union of Ontario Indians as its
secretariat in 1949. The UOI is a political advocate for 42 member
First Nations across Ontario.

Tuesday, July 15, 2008

Blakes Law Firm On Ct. Of Appeal reasons

August Law Firm Blakes on Implications of Ct of Appeal Frontenac Decision-No More $10 Billion SLAPP Suits by Mining Cos.

The Court of Appeal made a clear statement in Frontenac that it would
no longer be acceptable for private parties to seek injunctions as a
first response to prevent protest action by First Nations with
legitimate aboriginal rights or land claims and then institute contempt
proceedings against protestors for failure to comply. The Court of
Appeal applied the Supreme Court of Canada's established jurisprudence
and held that there is a duty on the Crown, as well as private parties,
to negotiate with indigenous communities in order to resolve
conflicting interests. Following these decisions, it will be
increasingly important for private stakeholders in Ontario with an
interest in property over which an aboriginal rights claim has been
asserted to be cognizant of, and sensitive to, those indigenous
interests.

Why the Ontario Prospector Association and Mining Industry are Not Worried About the Boreal Announcement

Garry Clark, Ontario Prospectors chief apple shiner for the junior mining sector says they have staked up all the good ground up North.Sure pal.Enjoy your negotiations with International Nickel Ventures.It's a new day with the hammers McGuinty and co have given Neskantaga.Chris Hodgson of Majors lobby group Ont. Mining Assoc. was not so sanguine.

From todays Toronto Star

" A rush on staking in the Far North won't be a problem, said Garry Clark, executive director of the Ontario Prospectors Association.

"There's no road access. It's either float plane or helicopter access. It would cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars to go and randomly stake, and if you don't do any work on it in two years you lose the claims," he said. Besides, the industry has been in a boom in recent years, he said. "If it's good looking rock, we've already staked it."

There are about 6,000 mining stakes in the Northern Boreal region, according to ForestEthics.

Reading the Tea Leaves of the McGuinty Announcement- my comments in ( ) No Protected Areas without First Nation Consent

1. Ontario will protect at least 225,000 square kilometres of the Far
North Boreal region under its Far North Planning initiative.(this is
more than simply an aspirational goal it is an endpoint).


2. Scientist, First Nation and Métis communities will collaborate to
map and permanently protect an interconnected network of conservation
lands across the Far North. ( As a matter of protocol I would have put
First Nations first to send the right message that this process will be
community led. Metis in the Far North?Huh?)

3.The McGuinty government will work with all northern communities and
resource industries to create a broad plan for sustainable development.
( Key phrase is broad plan, signals a framework agreement with NAN.)

4.As well, local plans will be developed in agreement with First
Nations. ( NAN communities either sign or opt in to larger framework
agreement [referenced above as the broad plan} and then individual
First Nations or groups of First Nations develop local/regional land
use plans. The key phrase here is "in agreement with First Nations". I
read this as with First Nation consent.

5. And new mining development in the Far North would require early
consultation and accommodation with local Aboriginal communities.
( I assume this means beginning at the early exploration stage, likely
post staking. Wondering how this interim measure will be regulated.
MNDM officials in the NAN bilateral could not figure a way to make this
so under current Mining Legislation. I guess Court of Appeal gave them
new insights. If Ontario continues with the positions they have taken
in their policy docs and in court and negotiations with KI on meaning
of consultation and accommodation we could be in for some tough
times.Not all First Nations want simply consultation and accommodation
, many want the right to say no, especially while planning is taking
place.

Comment on Ontario Backgrounder.

A, The Framework Agreement with Scientists, First Nations and Industry.
Later this year, we'll engage with First Nation and Métis communities,
northerners, the resource sector and scientists to create a broad
framework for our plan, which will be completed by the spring of 2009.
( Again Scientists first in the list signaling that scientists will
represent the larger public interest and perhaps be the stalking horses
of the environmentalists. Very ambitious time frame-spring 2009.
Industry( since it is the far North read mining) now gets a seat at the
table.A significant departure from the Ontario-NAN bilateral approach.
First Nations are no longer in a government to government set of
negotiations.

Land Use Planning Process.
B. Each year, a number of communities will complete these local plans.
To ensure proper planning and community input, new forestry and the
opening of new mines in the Far North would require community land use
plans supported by local Aboriginal communities.(Each Year? Pikanagikum
took 5 years I think to complete their plan. The key phrase is "land
use plans supported by local Aboriginal communities." I read this as
requiring community consent. Ontario may read differently.

C. Do the following phrases add up to First Nation consent? I report, you decide.

"a much greater say on the future of their communities and traditional
land"
"Planning at the community level will be a true partnership. Because
any decision on development has the greatest affect on communities,
local planning will only be done in agreement with First Nations."

( Very close. Might be too close to tell the difference given the
phrase "only done in agreement". My only concern is the phrase "a much
greater say". A say is not the right to say no.I give my kid a say, but
then Dad decides.

Comment. It looks very close to a First Nation veto on land use
planning/protection decisions, but no veto on mining exploration simply
consultation and accommodation.Of course there will be a First Nation
veto on a mine. But mines once found by exploration are hard to stop in
the poorest region in Canada.

D. Resource Benefits Sharing

D. We will create a new system of Resource Benefits Sharing and we will
consult with Aboriginal communities immediately on ways to provide
greater economic benefit to Aboriginal communities from resource
development. This fall, we will provide details on a down payment to be
made by the Ontario government towards Resource Benefits Sharing. ( I'm
not too keen on resource benefits as a phrase. But maybe First Nations
get resource revenues, an economic development fund and guaranteed
training and jobs[benefits].The idea of a "down payment" is simply an
act of early good will to get buy in.Once again we have no agreement on
the definition of how much pie will be shared and where the streams of
pie will originate.Government?Industry? Combination of both?
Immediately is a good time frame.Don't want to derail Ontario's last
best economic hope of mining in the face of S.Ontario
deindustrialization and the collapse of the forest industry in Northern
Ontario.

E.Reforming And Modernizing Ontario's Mining Act

Our plan will ensure that mining potential across the province is
developed in a sustainable way that benefits and respects communities.

We will ensure that our mining industry remains strong — but we also
need to modernize the way mining companies stake and explore their
claims to be more respectful of private land owners and Aboriginal
communities. The Ontario government believes exploration and mine
development should only take place following early consultation and
accommodation of Aboriginal communities.

To ensure that mining practices are up to date in the far North and
across the province, we will review the Mining Act.

Consultations will begin early next month. We will introduce
legislation in the upcoming session and new rules would be in place for
later next year.

(Modernize likely means phased in map staking( beginning in S Ont. and
consultation and accommodation with First Nations post staking.I would
say that infringements that trigger aboriginal and treaty rights and
hence legal obligations re consultation and accommodation begin
pre-staking at airborne, but Ontario sees it differently.And as we all
know the legal right to accommodation is not the right to say no and/or
a moratorium while land use planning is ongoing. The problem will be
how to reconcile disputes when no accommodation agreement is arrived at
with the First Nation. Likely Ontario will stay the course and put the
onus on the companies re consultation(only companies understand their
projects and can explain them to communities is the rationale for
making industry the pointy end of the consultation spear). Ontario will
try to make industry pay for the cost of consultation and compel them
to deliver the jobs, training and benefits of accommodation to
communities. And all this needs to get done by December 2009.Time to
start those First Nation line cutting companies.

Monday, July 14, 2008

NAN, Give Us Right Revenue Sharing Deal, Community Planning and Compulsory IBAs and Were In

The ONLY Measuring Stick of the Land Use Planning and Mining Reform Announcement-First Nation Consent

We need ask ourselves only one question: Do activities on the land (
mining exploration, land use planning, mines, hydro corridors) require
the free, prior and informed consent of the First Nations?

If yes under the McGuinty offer then all is well.If no, no justice and
no peace in Treaty No. 9.

Nothing less will do. Jurisdiction and Self government.

First Nations must be masters in their own house. And until then they
will not rest.

NAN-uvut!

BackGrounder on McGuinty Land Use Planning Mining Reform Announcement

BACKGROUNDER
Office of the Premier

PROTECTING A NORTHERN BOREAL REGION ONE-AND-A-HALF TIMES THE SIZE OF THE MARITIMES

Ontario Fights Climate Change By Protecting Carbon-Absorbing Forests
July 14, 2008

Ontario’s Far North Boreal Forest is one of the last, great, undeveloped spaces on the planet and a vital carbon sink. The forests and peat lands in the Far North store about 97 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide and absorb around 12.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year.
It is also one of the world’s largest intact ecosystems. The Northern Boreal region contains more than 200 sensitive species of animals — including polar bears, wolverines and caribou — as well as many species of migratory birds.
Although it is 43 per cent of Ontario’s landmass, the region is home to just 24,000 people living in 36 communities. Most of these people are First Nations, living in remote communities far beyond the end of Ontario’s road and infrastructure network.
The Far North Boreal Forest has remained virtually undisturbed by humans since the glaciers retreated. But as pressure for new resources and new places to live increases, that will likely change. We need to take this opportunity to guide and plan for that development. It is our responsibility as global citizens.
We will only get one chance to get this right.
That’s why the Ontario government is launching a Far North Planning Process —bringing together various experts and groups to create a plan for the Northern Boreal Forest.

What is Being Protected?

Scientists have said that in order to preserve a healthy ecosystem in the Far North, a minimum of half of the land be protected while allowing carefully managed sustainable development in remaining lands.
The Ontario government will be protecting more than 225,000 square kms — or more than half of the Northern Boreal lands — in an interconnected network of conservation lands. Priority will be given to protect lands with key ecological features such as habitat for endangered species or important carbon sinks. These lands will be permanently protected through the Far North planning process. Activity on these lands will be restricted to tourism and traditional Aboriginal uses.
Preserving these lands also protects the core cultural connection of the Aboriginal people who live there — their connection to the land, clean water and abundant hunting and fishing.

How Will The Plan Be Developed?

Our goal is to strike the right balance between conservation and development.
Later this year, we’ll engage with First Nation and Métis communities, northerners, the resource sector and scientists to create a broad framework for our plan, which will be completed by the spring of 2009.
At the same time, we will also work with individual Aboriginal communities to begin a local land-use planning process. Each year, a number of communities will complete these local plans. To ensure proper planning and community input, new forestry and the opening of new mines in the Far North would require community land use plans supported by local Aboriginal communities.
To support this planning, the Ontario Government is undertaking scientific mapping of the region’s biodiversity, carbon sequestration potential, Aboriginal cultural heritage and mineral and natural resource potential.
The entire process will be completed in the next 10-15 years.

A New Role For First Nations In The Far North

This planning process for the Far North will enshrine a new respect and working relationship with First Nations. In addition to a much greater say on the future of their communities and traditional lands, the process also creates opportunities for economic development in these remote communities.
Planning at the community level will be a true partnership. Because any decision on development has the greatest affect on communities, local planning will only be done in agreement with First Nations.

Resource Benefits Sharing

We will create a new system of Resource Benefits Sharing and we will consult with Aboriginal communities immediately on ways to provide greater economic benefit to Aboriginal communities from resource development. This fall, we will provide details on a down payment to be made by the Ontario government towards Resource Benefits Sharing.

Reforming And Modernizing Ontario’s Mining Act

Our plan will ensure that mining potential across the province is developed in a sustainable way that benefits and respects communities.
We will ensure that our mining industry remains strong — but we also need to modernize the way mining companies stake and explore their claims to be more respectful of private land owners and Aboriginal communities. The Ontario government believes exploration and mine development should only take place following early consultation and accommodation of Aboriginal communities.
To ensure that mining practices are up to date in the far North and across the province, we will review the Mining Act. Consultations will begin early next month. We will introduce legislation in the upcoming session and new rules would be in place for later next year.

Premier’s Media Office: 416-314-8975
ontario.ca/premier-news
Disponible en français

Ontario's Announcement on Protection/Mining Reform

Framing. Headline is all about forest protection.The 50% protection target( and it is only a target to be achieved 2 elections or so from now.) is direct from ENGO community( 50 % goes back to ecological biologist Michael Soule[google him]).

Appears to be primarily an environmental announcement.Political audience is the ENGO community and S. Ontario supporters and secondarily a recognition that achieving these protection goals will require First Nation buy in/and or consent via land use planning and on accommodation( read deals ) at the early exploration stage.
Significant that the announcement was made in Toronto and not on Premier's northern Ontario road show.

Announcement made by McGuinty and not Bryant, Gravelle or Cansfield. King has decided.Bryant and co will now act on King's wishes.



Questions.

1. Did anyone in First Nations leadership have a heads up or role in the announcement? Appears Not.
2. What will Ontario's role be in consultation and accommodation at the early exploration stage?
3.Who will fund consultation and accommodation talks?Industry in a user pays model?
4.Say communities 1-7 undertake planning and protect only 20%.Will other communities have to protect more than 50% to get to the 50% target?Or will 50% be imposed on an area and planning will be about how to get to the 50% goal?
5.What happens as in Platinex vs KI case when consultation and accommodation talks break down?Who will be the referee? Courts?Jails?


Postives.No new mines without First Nation consent[call them the De Beers principles].Hearing compulsory revenue sharing of new mines with First Nations. Consent means an impact and benefit agreement with company.

Weak positives. Compulsory consultation and accommodation in early exploration satge .I hear post staking. The First Nation demand is right to say no. Or free, prior( read prior to creating legal interest via staking or impacts via airborne surveys pre-staking), informed consent.Revenue sharing may be easy for Ontario if the pie to shared is only corporate pie and not government pie.

King McGuinty had guts to make the announcement. Shows leadership, even if I disagree with hsi methods.Profs to him.
Likely McGuinty expects some negative comment from mining( although they will like the certainty) and first nation folks which will affirm that he pissed both off and therefore made the right decision.

Finally Mining Act review has a start date.

Negatives. No prior agreement by Chiefs to overall protection goal, not to mention cultural gap on understandings re definition of a park.First Nations often see Parks as some kind of European fantasy not in accord with their land ethic.
No First nation right to say no, just right to consult and accommodate.
No respect/recognition for community moratoriums.
Leaves Northern Table with NAN bypassed.

This is a long road.The devil really will be in details.

Sunday, July 13, 2008

Ontario's Definition of Consultation

Consult: To seek approval for a course of action already decided upon.
Ambrose Bierce

Saturday, July 12, 2008

Jesus - Master Legal Tactician-from the teachings of Walter Wink

Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a
tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. But if
anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if
anyone wants to sue you and take your outer garment, give your
undergarment as well; and if one of the occupation troops forces you to
carry his pack one mile, go two" (Matthew 5:38-41).


Jesus' second example deals with indebtedness, the most onerous social
problem in first century Palestine. The wealthy of the Empire sought
ways to avoid taxes. The best way was to buy land on the fringes of the
Empire. But the poor didn't want to sell. So the rich jacked up
interest rates—25 to 250 percent. When the poor couldn't repay, first
their moveable property was seized, then their lands, and finally the
very clothes on their backs. Scripture allowed the destitute to sleep
in their long robes, but they had to surrender them by day (Deuteronomy
24:10-13).

It is to that situation that Jesus speaks. Look, he says, you can't win
when they take you to court. But here is something you can do: when
they demand your outer garment, give your undergarment as well. That
was all they wore. The poor man is stark naked! And in Israel,
nakedness brought shame, not on the naked party, but on the one viewing
his nakedness. (See the story of Noah, Genesis 9.) Jesus is not asking
those already defrauded of their possessions to submit to further
indignity. He is enjoining them to guerrilla theater.

Imagine the debtor walking out of the court in his altogethers. To the
question what happened, he responds, That creditor got all my clothes.
People come pouring out of the streets and alleys and join the little
procession to his home. It will be a while before creditors in that
village take a poor man to court! But, of course, the Powers That Be
are shrewd, and within weeks new laws will be in place making nakedness
in court punishable by fines or incarceration. So the poor need to keep
inventing new forms of resistance. Jesus is advocating a kind of
Aikido, where the momentum of the oppressor is used to throw the
oppressor and make him the laughing stock of the community. Jesus is
not averse to using shame to kindle a moral sense in the creditor.

Platinex Continues to Diss KI As it seeks access in other Treaty No. 9 areas-Dumb and Dumber

PTX Platinex focuses on Shiningtree, McFaulds South
Stockwatch
265 words
11 July 2008
Canada Stockwatch
English
(c) 2008 Canjex Publishing Ltd.

Platinex Inc (TSX-V:PTX)

Shares Issued 25,891,548

Last Close 7/10/2008 $0.22

Friday July 11 2008 - News Release

Mr. James Trusler reports

PLATINEX UPDATE

After unparalleled efforts to gain access to the Big Trout Lake
property were not met with the needed co-operation of KI, Platinex Inc.
management decided that diversification into other properties was
necessary. Commencing in late February, Platinex staked seven very
prospective platinum group element properties and optioned one gold
property. Further details can be found on the newly revamped Platinex
website.

Reports for the various properties are being prepared and will be
published shortly.

Recently a suit was brought against the Ontario government for its role
in causing damages to Platinex and its shareholders during the
continuing legal issues at Big Trout Lake. Some background for this is
provided in the company's recent management's discussion and analysis
and an article in the First Nations Yearbook, an aboriginal journal;
both can be found on the company's website.

The company's efforts going forward in the near term will stress
pursuit of exploration on the Shining Tree gold property, which is
located on several former gold developments, and the McFaulds South
property near the recent Noront discoveries. The company's approaches
to first nations bands in and around these new properties have been
very encouraging and the company believes it will receive much support
from local first nations going forward.

Please visit the company's website for press release information and
details about its new properties.

Document CNSW000020080711e47b007sq