Re: P.S.: [RML] the cost of gold: Freeport

Andrew Boyd (andrew at
Fri, 30 Dec 2005 15:37:46 +1100

Neil D. Anderson wrote:

> P.S. There are some interesting things relating to this topic in
> Freeport PTs 2004 /Economic, Social and Environmental Report /found
> at (follow the links).
> It would be interesting to hear from fish collectors and biologists
> who have actually visited and these places. Are Freeports claims of
> environmentally sound mining and concern for wildlife (including
> fishes, it appears) correct, or is the company misrepresenting, or
> even worse, distorting the facts?
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Neil,

In the interests of fairness, I had a look at the URL cited above and
did some reading. Freeport sounds like they are doing the right thing -
respecting the human rights of their employees, planting trees, bringing
in cattle, encouraging a better standard of living for the nearby
villagers. From the perspective of the local fishes, though, they do not
say enough about how they are rehabilitating local watercourses, or what
took place in the first place that justified their large rehabilitation

Freeport's website refers to a report by a not-for-profit called the
International Centre for Corporate Accountability that operates out of
the City University of New York. ICCA's website says that they are
careful who they take money from, but does not say where they do get
their money. There appear to be two sets of reports published by ICCA:
one on Freeport and one on Mattel. There seems to have been some
criticism of the report on Mattel in the press - something about ICCA
overlooking some child labour allegations. says
that ICCA was founded by Mattel. I have to say that I am wary of a
not-for-profit that does independant audits of large corporations that
is wary of telling me where they get their money from.

Perhaps I am being needlessly distrustful and should cut back on my
Michael Moore books :)

Best regards, Andrew

Andrew Boyd  andrew at