Interesting...Thanks for bringing up the subject of the other...

Interesting...

Thanks for bringing up the subject of the other influential local mining interests.

This may actually add another piece to the puzzle.

I'm under the impression that there are two types of tenure for mining projects in the Philippines. In a basic overview the FTAA allows a totally foreign entity to undertake a mining project if it is valued at at least US$ 50 million. Additionally it allows external arbitration in any dispute between the entity and the Philippines Government. Sweet.

The second requires the entity to have at least 60% of shareholders to be of Philippine nationality, with no right to external arbitration.

Without the FTAA Oceanagold cannot operate. If it wished to operate Didipio without the FTAA, it would need to take on a local partner that has at least a 60% interest in the project. I suppose they would have to accept. A 40% share of something is better than 100% of nothing. The Philippine partner would then have a mine and the ability to draw on foreign expertise to develop and operate it.

I imagine it could be worded by the Government this way...

"We must promote the use of Philippine companies to develop Philippine resources. We must nurture our own local industries and keep our profits at home instead of sending money away to rich foreign lands."

I suggest that the local mining industry would favour the scrapping of any future renewals of the FTAA, as this would remove any advantage foreign firms would have over local firms. Additionally it would force foreign firms that already have resources on the ground to be amenable to a majority local partner. Long term however that would discourage future foreign investment, but people and Governments often don't care about the far future.