There's probably a few "tax incentives" from the State...

First 15 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
slange

10,297 Posts.

3918

26/01/19

08:18

Post #: 37231422
Share

Originally posted by eshmun: ↑

It's not up to public companies to pay for state schools to be built full stop, no matter how needy the people in remote and rural Australian communities are. The responsibility falls to the state and the tax payers of the state unless the mine is to be built where an operating state school exists. The announcement is a bit unclear in this regard, it says

"The relocation and renovation of the currently uninhabitable heritage-listed residence will enable this historic building to be both preserved and utilised.”

Is a school currently "operating" within the affected/proposed mining area? or have past agreements between the company and the state of QLD closed down an operating school in this area?

If the answers to these two questions is no then frankly don't understand how the company can agree to this on principle, this is Australia not Africa. Where does it stop. Not just the school but tablets for the children. Are these Queenslander's running a serious show over there. They'll be asking RSG to send people up with toilet paper soon and hands to use it. Maybe Chevron or Woodside should start building state schools in the north of WA.......lol. The sooner we flip this project in this banana republic, the better.Esh

Expand

There's probably a few "tax incentives" from the State government for the company.

RSG Price at posting: $1.14 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
3 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply