Bill Gallagher is also a LAWYER . Funny how the article doesn't mention that...

Funny how Gallagher NEVER mentions Noront. Perhaps for the reason that the east west route does not involve 49 members from NAN?

Looks to me like his client is NAN. I wonder how much tax payer money NAN is handing over to Bill Gallagher?

Bill Gallagher, can pound his chest when he mentions: I have been a strategist to the most daunting IBA negotiation in Canada’s resources history at Voisey’s Bay in Labrador – likewise once in the project death zone.

But, the truth is...comparing Labrador-Voisey and the ROF is like comparing oranges to elephants. Labrador did not have a treaty like treaty 9 which has surrender of land a mere 22 times.

Bill never mentions the folks that lost their jobs over at Cliffs when it shut down it's camp. He never mentions the unemployed in the area that have been hoping for a ROF job for years. He doesn't give a crap about Cliffs's losses which trickle down to the shareholders. He doesn't care about the individual investors in all of these ROF mining companies...He doesn't care about the image this is creating for mining in Ontario...He just doesn't give a crap. He cares only about NAN. The only logical reason I could think of as to why is .....none of the folks mentioned above are paying clients!@

Bill Gallagher Sept. 15, 2014 ...he has the ridiculous comment of....

He suggests the Wynne government designate half of its $1-billion infrastructure fund to buy Cliffs’ chromite properties and then deed it to the Nishnawbe Aski Nation chiefs for a nominal fee.

Set aside the remaining funds for any regulatory and environmental requirements, and allow the First Nations to partner with a mining company of their choice."

Bill Gallagher April 30, 2014

"But Gallagher said they’ll have to make significantly more progress on Native issues, including fully engaging the larger Nishnawbe Aski Nation."

Bill Gallagher February 7, 2014

"Contrary to popular opinion, I drew attention to the fact that the ‘elephant in the room’ was none other than Nishnawbe Aski Nation (NAN), which represents 49 First Nations in northern Ontario. I said it was delusional for Ring of Fire planners to think that if only Cliffs could get Matawa tribal council on board, we would be off to the races.

Indeed, it will take the support of way more than Matawa’s nine First Nations (which are also members of NAN) to reboot the Ring of Fire, as supply lines, hydro sites and transmission, rail and road, concentrate processing, and environmental cumulative impacts are broader, deal-making factors. Simply, all these factors make developing the Ring of Fire a pan-northern resource extraction process.

I also proposed a breakthrough idea to further this end. Why doesn’t Ontario start negotiating a Ring of Fire impact benefits agreement (IBA) with NAN? This process would proceed in lockstep with Cliffs’ IBA negotiations with Matawa, so it would be one IBA for Matawa and another IBA for NAN. The province would now engage through its new body corporate (Ring of Fire Development Corporation) and NAN would likewise engage as a body corporate. These IBA negotiations would be based on contractual rules of interpretation, always keeping the dialogue squarely within business-case scenarios.

Since I have been a strategist to the most daunting IBA negotiation in Canada’s resources history at Voisey’s Bay in Labrador – likewise once in the project death zone – I can say from experience that this is where success has to materialize in the downtime. That’s how the star-crossed nickel project recreated its (second) window of opportunity, which ultimately saw a major mine move forward, leaving behind all the grief and project impediments that currently encumber such progress in the Ring of Fire.