Here are some of your comments on the 10%.....hal2000 Post #:...

Here are some of your comments on the 10%.....

hal2000
Post #: 8959146

So there can be no confusions as to what the letter is referring to note the following comments.

When the former tenement holder )Madison) was in administration/liquidation there were numerous discussions between Kare land owners and the Mineral Resources Authority and the court appointed liquidator over 2009-2010 in relation to the above subject matter.

At that time the liquidator was in the process of disposing of the Mt Kare Project (EL1093).

The Law in PNG permits the State to take a fully paid equity/benefit in a mining project by making a payment to the project holder calculated at a pro rata rate basis of up to 30% of sunk costs.

The approval given to Summit Resources in 2010 for transfer and renewal of the tenement was on the basis that at the end of the day, after the mine was established, and after all capital costs were paid for by Summit/Indochine, the State would forgo its right to a fully paid equity contribution to the project.

Instead, Indochine would free carry a 10% equity contribution for and on behalf of the land owner communities of Mt Kare (all relevant parties).

The idea was that the community at Mt Kare, long forgotten by the State, would have an interest in seeing the project succeed, as also in the case of Summit/Indochine.

In return, the state would leave equity participation matters solely between the community and the proponent/developer.

That is not to exclude state infrastructural contributions.