why i have my house on caz

To set a few things straight that have been said (and I fully expect people to knock this post but if you do are please actually quote exact circumstances otherwise stuff off you know nothing)

FACTS
1. It is LICENCE and he cant give it back to RIO. He can refuse CAZ app and then make RIO’s new ML’s 1st in line. There has not been a single case in WA where someone has had an exploration licence that has expired returned to them by the State. They may have been lucky and got it back by waiting the 90 days cooling of period or by getting a friendly party to pick it up, but a ‘restoration’ that was hinted at by TIGERTEN can not happen in an expiry. The Mining act was amended after the Pancontenential debacle to allow for ML’s to be given back but it is strictly only for ML’s (read section 111 of the act anybody).
2. The underlying principles of the act are ‘use it or lose it’ and ‘1st come 1st served’. Unlike other juristictions it is not whover can use it best it was who ever is 1st. This is clearly CAZ. There is also a strong argument that RIO were not using it (not sure if it would be enough for a plaint to succeed though)’.
3. Paying your rent prior to the anniversary and not lodging the form means nothing in fact it is noted on the tenement that RIO lost that the rent is been refunded.
4. RIO must PROVE that it is in the state interest for them to have it back. The burden of proof is on them.
5. BHP have mined to within a few hundred metres.
6. A decision is unlikely before December. CAZ have until about the 25/10 to lodge a submission then they get to see RIO’s submission and VICE VERSA and both have a further 2 weeks to lodge rebuttals. There is no way that these Minister will see all of the paperwork until Mid November. He will not make the decision quickly.
7. If the Minister goes against CAZ juniors may as well leave WA to the big boys. It brings in soverign risk. Who would spend money on picking up land if the government can just give it to one of the big boys.
8. Tenements expire all the time. There were 5 other tenement expire in August, the same month that RIO’s did.
9. A Junior explorer should be oportunistic in picking up land. Its called been pro-active. I would much rather put my money into a company that is trying to find the Company maker than one that sits on its hands.
10. According to the guidelines on DOIRs website a company only has to have regard to their expenditure commitment on other tenements.
11. That Technically the Minister should not be looking at Cazaly’s past performance on other tenements, only what they commited to this tenement.
12. To uphold the principles of the ACT the Minister must refuse RIO’s submission and grant to CAZ

OPINIONS
CAZ will get the land. If they do it will create jobs (that’s actually a fact). If they do the only person losing their job is the guy who was responsible for lodging the form and my guess is hes already gone.. Give it back to RIO and they will just sit on it. CAZ could make a go of it look at Midwest deal of a couple of days ago. If the State wants to bring in new players to the Iron Ore game rather than have a duopoly this is the perfect opportunity. They are only upholding the Act