flyby, I welcome your opinion but you don't say why you think that Cliffs won't get the easement, which doesn't stimulate debate. Please explain why you think my opinion is wrong.

Cliffs has many easement cases ongoing right now in other parts of the world. It would be wrong to assume they do not have strong legal arguments prepared, expert witnesses about to testify, strong evidence for their application, and direct experience dealing with easement.

However, I believe KWG will not even get to present their case in front of the commissioner.

The Crown has the rights to restriction KWG's mining claims to use portions of the surface rights for public benefit, period, without appeal. Ontario needs Cliff's ROF development and the jobs and tax revenue it will bring them.

Within a month or two, Cliffs will announce the Sudbury FPF. Carrabba explained last week, "...we're very close to announcements on agreements with provinces on where we're going to site the smelter and the road...". Click here to see transcript.

Cliffs will then announce the Sudbury FPF.

Ontario then will announce the $1B ROF deal giving Cliffs some of that money towards the ITS and the ministry will invoke easement.

Then, Cliffs will adjust the ToR from road to rail before they build the bridges. Cliff applies for aggregate.

The EA/EAA will probably force it to include power transmisson lines to the mine but Cliffs will say they included it for the environment and FN benefit. Cliffs then applies for power transmisson lines and feeder power lines to Marten Falls and NAN FN.

At the same time, Ontario will announce feeder roads and power lines to FN communities and a compensation package including jobs, training, education and adjustment of profit sharing on mining revenue greater than normal 1%.

KWG left in the position of making it's case for compensation for easement in front of mining commissioner and it will be compensation from the government, not Cliffs.