http://www.pngindustrynews.net/mining/news/1310341/bcl-panguna-extension-denied, page-6

For months the RTG supporters have been telling us that the landowners and ABG will get a better deal with RTG. On the basis of pure logic and pragmatism, I relentlessly challenged this argument on the RTG forum and got kicked off for a week for my troubles; I just can't see why the majority shareholders (ABG and Nat. Govt. 73% between them) would hand over the deposit to a third party (RTG or anyone else). I know that in PNG we have to expect the unexpected but I can't see, for the life of me, why they would take the lease off BOC, write the value of their BOC shares down to nothing and hand the lease over to an entity in which they currently hold zero ownership. This would redefine stupidity.
RTG supporters can argue about financing dilution etc but that cuts both ways. A starting point of 73% ownership of the company holding the lease (and having the support of eight out of the nine landowner groups at last count) is not something that RTG or anyone else is likely to improve upon.
Philip Miriori (aided and abetted by Duncan/Central/RTG) can grandstand as much as he likes but at some point he has to be taken into a corner and asked (as one of the founding rebels from circa 1988) how much more denial of opportunity (employment, education, health etc) does he (and his supporters) wish to inflict on young Bougainvilleans? This is what it comes down to.