Search Documents

By G S. C Murray

Major mining projects are developed with the assistance of lending institutions who provide hundreds of millions of dollars in funding over several years, and of course expect those funds to be returned with interest. Two Australian banks have adopted the Equator Principles, an emerging financial industry benchmark for assessing and managing environmental and social risk in project financing. Project financiers have encountered environmental and social issues that are both complex and challenging, particularly with respect to projects in the emerging markets of Asia-Pacific and elsewhere. There are many recent and historical examples of failures by resource companies to effectively manage their environmental, social, safety and security risks, some of which have caused the project to fail completely, and some of which have caused the temporary cessation of production. These events put the financial institutionsÆ funds at risk through inadequate management capacity and non-compliance adversely affecting the ability of the borrowers to repay the loans. They can also reflect adversely on the reputation of the lending institutions. In assessing these risks, lenders are increasingly looking at the track record of the borrower in its country of origin and in other countries where it operates. Lenders are wary of companies that have one standard for operations in a developed country, where the regulatory environment may tightly control what they do, and another standard for operations in countries where the regulatory regime is perhaps less stringent. Lenders may require environmental and social reviews or audits to be conducted on their behalf by competent third parties prior to a loan being approved, and annually over the life of the relationship. The mining industryÆs concept of the unwritten æsocial licence to operateÆ is highly relevant in relation to the delivery of community benefits that are sustainable post-mine closure. This paper provides examples of recent practices that support financial viability and sustainable development, as well as examples of some failures that have put lenders at risk.

Jan 1, 2007

By Dean McDonald

The Committee Bay Greenstone Belt extends over 300km and is one of the largest unexplored greenstone belts in North America with excellent gold and diamond potential. Committee Bay Resources Limited holds over 550,000 acres of land with prospective geology in the Committee Bay area southwest of Melville Peninsula, Nunavut. Committee Bay is a typical Archean greenstone belt comparable to the Yellowknife, Red Lake, Kirkland Lake and other prolific gold belts. Drilling during 2003 at Committee Bay resulted in: 1) the discovery of high-grade gold-bearing quartz veins with silicification and sulphidation at Three Bluffs, and 2) the continuation of high-grade gold mineralization in the hinge area of the iron formation at Inuk. Gold mineralization at Three Bluffs is identified in iron formation and adjacent sediments and has been traced by drilling for over 700m. The Three Bluffs iron formation is open to depth and along strike where is has been traced on surface for over 6km. In January 2004 Committee Bay and joint venture partner Gold Field?s announced a $7.1 million exploration program for the Committee Bay project in 2004. A total of 8,000m in exploration drilling has been approved for the expansion of the Three Bluffs to the resource stage and drilling of at least five new target areas. Additional mapping, sampling and geophysics will be used to identify new gold targets along the very prospective Committee Bay belt.

May 1, 2004

By Robert B. Parsons

"""I would be a rich man if I had a dime for every man hour spent by the bureaucracy on changing tax legislation."" Anonymous.The mind of a cynic might very well conjure thoughts about ""change for the sake of change"", given the protracted saga of federal sales tax reform in Canada. The latest chapter unfolded this summer when the Commodity Tax Review Group released its important report. Whatever sales tax changes, if any, are finally adopted will have profound effects on many aspects of doing business. The capital-intensive mining industry will not escape these effects.IntroductionThe Federal Sales Tax Review Committee, established by the Minister of Finance earlier this year, has published a report that is sharply critical of the government proposals to shift the incidence of federal sales tax from the manufacturer level to the whole sale level (sales to retailers). The Report recommends a continuance of the present manufacturer's tax, for the present, but with significant changes that would increase the tax cost on certain imports, smooth the administrative machinery and make appeals and determinations more open and equitable. For the longer term, the Report recommends a shift of the tax base to the retail level.Reform of the federal sales tax system has been under consideration for several decades. Briefly the history is as follows: 1940 Report of Rowell-Sirois Commission-proposed the eventual elimination of federal sales tax1956 Report of Federal Sales Tax Committee-proposed a shift in tax from manufacturer to wholesaler level1966 Report of Carter Commission-proposed shift to a retail tax1975 Discussion Paper on Federal Sales and Excise Taxation-concluded that retail tax conceptually best but provincial agreement/administrative problems present a major hurdle-proposed wholesale tax as best practical approach1977 Report of Commodity Tax Review Group"

Jan 1, 1983

Jan 1, 1932

During the year Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 1916, 962 applications for member-ship in the Institute were received, as compared to 558 during the corresponding period in 1915. The lines along which the Committee has, worked during the year, group themselves under seven principal heads. Large Companies.-Early in the year a letter was addressed to each member of the Institute who is the executive head of an organization, pointing out to him the advantages that would accrue to that organization through having as many of its subordinate members as were qualified participating in the activities of the Institute. This was followed by a second letter to those who made no reply to the first. The response to these letters was very gratifying, 12 new members having been secured at a single plant, and smaller numbers at others. This was effectively supplemented by our President, who wrote the executive heads of some of the largest mining and smelting companies, pointing out to them the advantage to be derived from sending some of the junior members of their staff to attend the Arizona Meeting. One organization sent 24 of its younger men, many of whom were not members of the Institute, but who, subsequently sent in applications for membership. It is to be hoped that the precedent thus set' will be acted 'on in -fuller measure in succeeding years.

Jan 2, 1917

C. R. CORNING, Chairman. ADOLPHE E. BORIE, First Vice-Chairman. THOMAS T. READ, Secretary, Woolworth Bldg., New York, N. Y. Vie-Chairmen. JOHN H. ALLEN, GEORGE M. COLVOCORESSES, RICHARD M. ATWATER, JR., ROBERT PEELE, GEORGE D. BARRON, CHARLES P. PERIN, A. CHESTER BEATTY, JOSEPH A. VAN MATER, J. PARKE CHANNING, ARTHUR L. WALKER. D. C. Bard, Howard Eckfeldt. Philip N. Moore, W. de L. Benedict, R. C. Gemmell, T. H. O'Brien, John C. Branner, F. Louis Grammer, James J. Ormsbee. Palmer Carter, Ernest A. Hersam, Edward W. Parker, Allen J. Clark, Edwin C. Holden, John B. Porter, F. Crabtree, William L. Honnold, R. DI. Raymond, George G. Crawford, Reginald E. Hore, Robert H. Richards, O. C. Davidson, C. Colcock Jones, LeRoy Slash, E. V. D'Invilliers, Eugene P. Kennedy, Frederick H. Sexton, James S. Douglas, Chester F. Lee, Henry L. Smyth, Walter Douglas, Richard S. McCaffery, F. W. Traphagen, Howard N. Eavenson, James F. McClelland, Elton W. Walker. Milton H. McLean, The Chairman of the Committee on the eve of his departure frog -,he country for an extended stay, addressed the following letter t ,he President of the Institute NEW YORK, N. Y., APRIL 19, 1913.

Jan 5, 1913

Jan 1, 1935

Jan 1, 1941

Jan 1, 1941

Jan 1, 1935

Jan 1, 1935

Jan 1, 1935

Jan 1, 1935

Jan 1, 1935

The Committee on Nominations is as follows: Pope Yeatman, Chairman, B. B. Thayer, Henry Landes, Robert J. Grant, F. V. Desloge, Albert Burch, C. K. Leith.

Jan 6, 1919

Jan 1, 1934

Executive A R LEDOUX, Chairman ARTHUR S DWIGHT CHARLES F RAND E P MATHEWSON J V W REYNDERS Membership E DEGOLYER, Chairman W Y WESTERVELT, Vice-chairman WILLIAM H BASSETT H G MOULTON C MINOT WELD Finance WALTER H ALDRIDGE, Chairman GEORGE D BARRON GALEN H CLEVENGER Library GEORGE C STONE,' Chairman JOHN H JANEWAY ALEXANDER C HUMPHREYS, ROBERT LINTON FREDERICK F SHARPLESS

Jan 1, 1923

Jan 1, 1916

Executive A R LEDUC, Chairman ARTHUR S DWIGHT R V NORRIS EDWIN LUDLOW E L DEGOLYER Membership J V W REYNDERS, Chairman E L DEGOLYER R M RAYMOND EDGAR RICKARD W Y WESTERVELT Finance WALTER H ALDRIDGE, Chairman GALEN H CLEVENGER J V W REYNDERS Library Chairman JOHN H JANEWAY GEORGE C STONES ROBERT LINTON ALEXANDER C HUMPHRLYS, - BRADLEY STOUGHTON

Jan 1, 1923

Jan 1, 1918