Trommel,
I’m not so sure about MNS using Equator Principles.
1) Yes, MNS in earlier announcements advised that they were complying with Equator Principles. However, in the announcement 25/11/2016 ‘Land Valuation Complete’ there is no mention of Equator principles. Surely any company which has gone to the length and expense of complying with Equator Principles, and subsequent qualification for Western debt finance, would emphasise that in an announcement to the ASX?
2) Reports that MNS are paying cash compensation to relocated people are at odds with the Equator Principles. Livelihoods have to be maintained by replacing income generating land with other suitable land and for income streams to be re-established. Just rehousing and paying compensation is not allowed.
Displaced: The Human Cost of Development and Resettlement
By O. Bennett, C. McDowell
Critics have also highlighted the failure of cash compensation to provide for long-term restitution for people whose livelihoods are dependent on land and on access to other natural resources. Large parts of the financial industry that invests in projects in the developing world that include land acquisition and involuntary resettlement have adopted the so-called Equator Principles (2003), which seek to ensure that any projects are developed in a “socially responsible manner.”
link
3) In a 1/12/2016 post on the KNL forum you boasted that MNS had initially used a consultant (Digby Wells) for the RAP but as the compensation cost was huge the company then did it in house, with the aid of a director’s Tanzanian company’s employees, for a fraction of the cost. Maybe you’d been party to some unreleased information? This stuck in my mind as the implications are huge for the prospects of MNS finance. 5 days later you pulled the post. If my wording isn’t correct please feel free to post a screen shot of your original post. Maybe some others remember this post?
(20min delay)