Member Info for EricDraven

Afternoon Aug. I suppose big Stef could now direct Baylo to approve our concession, which would also be in line with the MI recommendation of many moons ago . Lol.

Not sure why a green project such as ours has been kicked down the road for almost an eternity, but there's still time for those in power to reverse this nonsense and come good for the good people of Jokkmokk and the wider.

No point in Baylo waxing lyrical about green transition then reverting back to what seems like a hidden agenda after he's finished speaking on the matter, playing his part in ensuring the exact opposite of what he preaches occurs. Nothing! Not for us anyway. Why is that?

I don't have any answers, but it appears that common sense has not prevailed throughout this entire process.

The Greens not supporting a green mining project which will create prosperity for an entire areas sounds a bit ridiculous too.

Doh!

All in my humble bumble.

That's true Roller. Not sure what will occur next, or when.

Sorry if I've killed the mood. Somebody please say something. Or are we all numb?

Hi Maddog. Yes, I'm trusting LKAB will want a part of this, makes absolute sense, but if and when Kurt gains the concession then LKAB should still be placed in the melting pot of suitors, just like anyone else with an interest. I know in the past Kurt has indicated that LKAB is the natural owner of the project, but we've had an unusually unnatural journey to this point, so I feel it merits a bidding war, not a given guarantee to LKAB that it can and will simply step in. JV or otherwise.

Concession first. Then let the bargaining officially begin.

That one is for Aug. Lol.

Wots, I'm hoping that Kurt is throwing the book at them now. We need a resolution.

Ok Pocko. Ah, that answers it.

Not sure what will happen now, what our next move may be. I mean, we could quite possibly keep seeing changes in Government make-up every few years and never receive a concession decision.

I think we've waited long enough.

Sooz, as Wots says, the applicant company must be the Government, as it's that lot who be askin' for the comments.

Unless the applicant company is LKAB. Lol.

Funny translation perhaps.

Sooz, if you read the that reply to Lars, it mentions "both the applicant company and Beowulf Mining plc."

"The Ministry of Trade and Industry received the statement from Unesco on 7 June 2021, after which a copy was sent to representatives of both the applicant company and Beowulf Mining plc. After that, disclosure matters received by the Ministry of Trade and Industry were handled."

Wots, I think Kurt has come to expect this type of thing at our AGMs now. Infiltration by the anti-miners. They've done this before. Things are hotting up now that the UNESCO comments are in. Baylan is, in my view, wriggling in quicksand after Kurt's last letter. Lol.

They were anti-mining questions which were answered comprehensively. In my opinion.

....everything....

Aug, well said. Not to mention old Baylo did not set a timescale either, within which UNESCO should give its comments on our application. A most abnormal approach. The conclusion could be drawn that he is complicit with those who hold bias against our Company, or, if not the Company, against the mining industry, innovation and enterprise.

Cough cough.

I do feel Kurt's next move, if no response from Baylan within a month, is to then set a date of our own, by which the Government must give its decision and inform Baylan, lay it on the line. We have already been lied to regarding a decision being 'prepared' or 'forthcoming'. Baylan knows this.

In my humble. It's getting to the stage for me, where we could perhaps just consider suing these charlatans. I can't see us being able to gain an environmental permit after the concession, even if we did everthing and more required on that front as well.

Meanwhile, poor Jokkmokk crumbles.

Yes, good RNS. I think that's what he's done at this point, spelled it out without threatening to sue. Baylan's move now.

Aye Sooz, we shall. x

Hiya. I missed the drama yesterday so had a brief look only at the RNS and then today's response from Kurt. Seems to me that UNESCO still hasn't come up with specific facts as to what exactly and how. One could argue that if the Sami decided to herd their deer 500 miles in any direction out of the WHS that upon their return things would be the same within Laponia and with the deer etc. It's all general guff, in my view, and it's taken UNESCO seven months or so to come up with more generalised padding that will halt our progress, yet absolutely shouldn't. When we completed the voluntary HIA according to UNESCO guidelines, nobody at that point batted an eyelid.

Furthermore, the KU report is totally valid. The Government failed to have an administrative measure in place for at least three years, to move our application along, and then Minister Baylan did not set a deadline by which time UNESCO had to return its comments on our case. This being most unusual in itself, so now after seven months we have only generalities. Nothing factual, but all certainly detrimental to BEM, who has only ever completed everything necessary, and more, to the T.

UNESCO effectively has taken it upon itself to interfere with a mining decision, in my opinion, when we are nowhere near or any threat to the WHS. We would only be a potential threat if the Sami herders drove their deer trucks through Kal's fenced boundaries, and surely that could be seen as criminal damage to our business property. Neither do we have any intention of venturing into Laponia.

All of what is occurring to us is one-way traffic to our detriment and completely unjustified. Green, sustainable mining that will create jobs and not pollute the environment, not near Lap and it was decided no need for a buffer zone for Lap, in spite of Kal being a deposit, so I'd press Baylan for a decision now. He's in a tight spot.

Nobody has yet mentioned about UNESCO doing its own survey or HIA re Lap in relation to Kal. The other way around. If UNESCO is going to make comments that affect a potential private business then we need proof of why it is that the status of the WHS is under threat. Let somebody else do the work and come to us. We are the ones doing all the work and are getting nowhere.

Seems a foul game all of this. Lol.

Best wishes everyone. I'll be staying until we win this battle, then the war. I'm confident a legal team can cut right into UNESCO's offering, if necessary, and throw it back at the Government.

Only my thoughts.

Pmsl.

Weird isn't it Prof. Maybe they are all buys, including that recent whopper at 3.2p. Not sure why anyone would sell that many, even if it's a former buyer at the 3.16p discount fundraise price. Not much of a notch up if it's a sell. We've had a resource upgrade and people are selling large amounts after that news seems a bit unusual.

I'm clueless again matey.

Hi Aug. Yes, I feel that's spot on. UNESCO can make comments but not recommendations on our case, considering this is to do with a mining project that is located well outside of their WH site of interest and surely nothing really to do with them. Any recommendation would quickly be classed as unreasonable interference, as a bare minimum, by Kurt.

Only my view.

Kallak, I agree that he has no intention of getting them in yet, because we still have a strong chance of a decision coming after the UNESCSO comments, and he hasn't done so prior, because it would have made our position in Sweden very difficult. Now though, we have a Boliden precedent, climate change emergency and focus globally on that, and if forced into it, as in, if Baylan instigates some further nonsensical delay, Kurt, in my view, will take action in order to protect our interests. If it is clear that Kallak will never be allowed to be mined with us involved, albeit one could argue that is already the case. So, I was saying he doesn't intend to, but he will take action if the avenue to mine Kallak is continually being obstructed, without an end in sight.

After UNESCO, what else can possibly prevent a decision, based on all known and emerging factors in favour of a mine?

Hi Sooz. Yes, and I think we've established that communication isn't always two-way. As long as we keep our communication going we are doing the right thing. x