Ideas on things that could be done to help facilitate the GGG ML approval, page-2

I think there needs to be much more work done by the company in Relationship building with the local population and in particular the locals.
Quite A few of past posters "No longer Posting" were quite dismissive of the current issue Environmental and the Uranium issue. Also very importantly of the views regarding Uranium.

Clearly they were wrong on that point.

The company has an approved EIA subject to PH and final approvals to get the ML
There have been substantial advances in safety and the use for Energy in particular in this new aspect the further use of tailings for the production of energy and that it is fertile and can only be used in energy production.
Also reducing the real amount of railings.

Then you have the local population Inuit who are fearful of change many youngsr one's left so older ones could be negative. (REMEMBER PAST POSTERS SAID ONLY FEW PROTESTERS AND UNIMPORTANT)
the Inuit population is spread across the Northern Arctic many thousands working in mining In particular Uranium.
Canada now have a focus on producing safe New Nuclear Green Energy as a priority and a number of Canadian Provences have signed MOUs to achieve these objectives.

Therefore GML need to be much more Proactive in getting these messages across and creating a sense of excitement and Optimism. Including Inuit's from Canada who have a common language.
As Far as the current government the IA party previously have given a bit of a mixed message on Uranium from what I read also Kim Kliesen of Simuit Has also given a mixed message.
So what are the people voting for in many instances it is not quite clear.
So maybe the people should vote in a referendum once they know all the facts and benefits.

These are my thoughts More Pro Active - Clear messaging.
I think that once the election over unless IA have an absolute clear majority then we will be back to More of the same Old. Or further Negotiation.
That's my thought for today