article in the age, page-16

The whole point of this excercise is really staring us in the face.

"Anvil... However, it did not have an independent umpire (ideally, an international non-government organisation) to verify any efforts to protect the community or whether its community benefits were governed by the local community and allocated fairly.

can anyone say "protection money shakedown?"

i.e. you need to pay us (read: Oxfam or similar), or else all sorts of nastiness gets written about you.

I never thought NGO's played this dirty, I am definitely getting the sense that Anvil didn't play there game.