Thanks Dugsab. Yes, I agree,they are definitely separate factors,but, it is still the SAME operator with whom some doubts have been raised about his reliability, even trustworthiness. IMO, you can't sack him from the processing because you don't trust him, but, continue to engage him with the equally vital mining and transport. Seems anomylous to me, but, I certainly take your point. But, let's see how they handle it as it seems obvious that they are certainly having other thoughts re the tolling.
I'm still not convinced that the ILUA has anything to do with the Mill. It's a "people" thing and the only place that I can see the Mill being involved is if both the mining and the processing are done by the Mill owner and employment is offered to the aboriginals through that source. Hopefully not, as I understand that the operator wants nothing to do with Native Title matters. LNY will be doing NOTHING if the EOPL agreement proceeds. So, all LNY can offer is compensation and undertakings re the land use, the "LU". (SHOULD be that bloody simple!!!)
LNY, as the proponent for the ML, has to first get the Ewamian People to agree to terms and conditions of compensation for that land use before it can go any further. That's where we are now and I'm sure that the NQLC rep wouldn't be interested in the Georgetown Mill, only that 689.3 hectares in Agate Creek that "belong" to the Ewamian People.
Just frustrating for all, given, what I see, as being significant failings by LNY management throughout this process. Remember that those involved have great CVs re finance and accounting but not one shred of actual mining experience. That lack is OUR problem!! Maybe they should just stick to their knitting and sell out to a real mining company.