RE:RE:Just an observationNick2021 wrote: In reality, the people you are talking about are the ones who live there, and have for a very long time. The mine was permitted presuming competence on the part of management; as we can see, a very generous assumption, and one that was not fulfilled by Victoria's team. When you're a guest in someone else's community, it's your responsibility to avoid making a huge mess. When you lose money because your company screwed up, don't blame the people who agreed to the mine being built.
If Victoria didn't want to be responsible for cleaning up a potentially catastrophic environmental disaster and making the local community whole, the way to do so was to manage the mine competently.
You must be one of them...
1. The mine was permitted because the chiefs got the compensation they wanted, not because of some goodness of their heart.
2. Based on what I've gathered, management has set up a profitable and competent operation - although the feathered folk will likely say otherwise on CBC. It'll be easy for them to claim incompetence, same as you have, given that they are experts at doing nothing, and are fully dependent on government's handouts.
3. According to the article I've mentioned, nothing has been ascertained to-date and yet a whole lot of people - including politicians, locals, and even some here - claimed that this is "one of the most significant disasters in Canadian history".
4. Was there even a "community" before this mine became operational? Don't know but am sure that the chiefs will cry victimhood in order to squeeze out enough fines money for a casino and some liquor stores.
5. As the article said, no damage was ascertained to-date. Also, I saw nothing to suggest that management are refusing to clean up any damage that was caused.
Regardless, I'm not invested in this company and give zero $%#$s about the outcome.