Fact check with millie34au, at least occasionally the best...

Fact check with millie34au,
at least occasionally the best Australian(not-Nordic) expert about Dragon in the forum.

You appear to use mostly a straw man strategy, apparently trying to accuse me about
false facts. Moving the target or changing the argument will not change the issues.

"Nordic perhaps its best not to believe everything you read in newspapers or to quote them as if they are fact . Why not actually work with  the facts"
-Finnish newspapers are quite reliable, and I have I have also quoted Dragon mining country manager who has several time comments matters in Finnish media before matter is released in Australia. In case there would be a wrong fact in a news paper, it is easy to get it corrected by writing to the editor or council of public word (julkisen sanan neuvosto www.jsn.fi). The environmental premit information is publicly available. We will ask for Vaasa Orivesi decision.
-If you think you would have better information, you should give the reference. Otherwise it may considered as an opinion or "an alternative fact"

"Have any charges been made re the accidental tree clearing No"
- Agreed.  My argument  was:
The Kaapelinkulma tree matter has been or is being moved to prosecutor.
In a Finnish law system this is a notable point, because police
will have right to dismiss the case, if so considered.
Prosecutor will decide if  charges would be made.  
As far it is publicly known prosecutor  has not decided.

For the sake of clarity, I have not claimed that any charges had been made.

"Was it not the company them selves that reported the accident ? Yes"
Agreed. For sake of clarity, I have not claimed that company would not have reported it.
And the company definitely has not been reporting it in due time in ASX.

"With activists as active as your selves appealing every decision that is made  is it any wonder that they have delays in getting permits ."
Local people suffering consequences and registered environmental organization of the region
have lawful right to appeal. The people did not appeal the denial of Orivesi permit.

"But are any of their operations operating with out legal rights to operate ? No"
Agreed.  Final decisions are needed.
The end of the rights may be coming closer in Orivesi, wherein cause of denial of Orivesi permit was environmental destruction. Operations which are breaching legal norms could be also denied by ELY, which is unfortunately weak.

"Do they have a right to continue to operate while l any appeal is being heard both for or against any permitting decision ? Yes"
Agreed, on condition, that a restriction for operation/continuation would not be granted during process.
Has such restriction been applied for?  
YES, for Kaapelinkulma environmental permit and TUKES bond.
Has Dragon informed shareholders or HK about this?
NO.

"Do not any appeals to the high courts  in most  countries need a leave to appeal ? Yes  and I would think every one knows this"
This would be misleading argument, if it tries to refer to previous discussion.
Dragon has correctly argumented opposite for Hong Kong last year, that in Finland that the cases can be always appealed to Supreme administrative court.
Finland changed to more like of many other countries this year, and this is an acute new problem for Dragon at least in Orivesi.

"Until a leave of appeal would be rejected do they not have the legal right to continue operations ? Yes"
Agreed, and opposite has not been argumented.
It has been argumented that such decision may come soon, for that
Yes, The leave process is faster than the full processing of the appeal.

"Have not the recent anti mining appeals both for Faboliden and Kaapelinkulma been  dismissed in the companies favour Yes"
-Objection for "anti-mining", "pro environment" could be more fair, if such descriptive specification would be needed
-For Kaapelinkulma:
Yes, permit authority AVI denied initiative to change the permit, it had granted
BUT
NO, the following appeal of AVI decision has not been dismissed in Vaasa administrative court.
The Vaasa appeal appears not have been disclosed in ASX (not in Q1 report), but it is in Hong Kong documents with hopeful comments of the low level Finnish law expert of Dragon,
see Kaapelinkulma page 241-242 (94-95 of the Business pdf)
http://www.hkexnews.hk/app/sehk/2018/2018052305/a15436/EDM-20180523-19.PDF

-For Fäboliden one should notice, that it is the test permit, which has been handled, and
full environmental permit appears to even have been filed yet (or at least there appear to be no
release about it by Dragon, who normally does not forget inform any positive development)

"If they have the legal right to operate what legal obligations are they actually trying to avoid ?"
-There are also requirements of the Finnish and EU water laws and mining waste laws, which are not obeyed at least in Orivesi and Sastamala when just comparing the supervision results with the EU environmental quality standards. These have caused the permit problems in Vaasa.
Should we translate the Vammala/Sastamala decision here?

-There are also ethical and moral obligations, neglect of which has lead to opposition and to large extent failing to maintain so called "social permit".

"I see there is another new mine starting in Finland that followed the same permitting path as Kaapelinkulma , Sotkimo silver."
-It is Sotkamo silver, and the content of permits has been produced in much more wider
and responsible manner as explained and showed in my previous comment. They have
now also produced EIA and are going to file a new application to AVI because of changes.
There is much larger investments in water purification and mining wastes and more will be required in the next environmental permit process.
As a curiosity: Dragon tried to produce EIA in Kuusamo but failed.  

"So is the path Dragon took for permitting for Kaapelinkulma  legal  , normal and acceptable in Finland  Yes"
-Path is not the problem, other than weakness of the authorities as explained in previous comment.
-The main problem is that the permits are not on the level of requirements of the Finnish and EU water laws and mining waste laws.  That is the reason for problems in Vaasa with Vammala and Orivesi permit. This could have been avoided, if Dragon would have been more professional in the application process and willing to invest in environmental protection like other companies.