You are on page 1of 4

Ms Dixon was raped and murdered on her walk home from a comedy show in the Melbourne

CBD last Tuesday night. A passer-by discovered her body in the middle of the soccer pitch on
Wednesday morning.
On Monday morning, firefighters were forced to remove paint markings from the memorial after
they were discovered by police during a routine patrol about 3.50am.

Huawei goes on front foot to deny to


MPs it is a national security risk
 Share via Email
 Share on Google Plus
 Post on facebook wall
 Share on twitter
 Post to Linkedin
 Share on Reddit

Huawei board members John Brumby and John Lord have written to federal MPs to
reject claims the Chinese telecommunications company poses a national security
threat. Wayne Taylor

 Share on Facebook
 Share on twitter
by Andrew Tillett
Controversial Chinese telco Huawei is hitting back aggressively over spy agencies'
efforts to veto it on national security grounds from involvement in the construction of
the 5G wireless network, lobbying federal parliamentarians directly that its exclusion
would push up costs for consumers, result in an inferior service and threaten the
company's future in Australia.
In a letter to MPs and senators, chairman John Lord and directors John Brumby and
Lance Hockridge say that the criticism Huawei poses a security risk is "ill-informed
and not based on facts", with a number of other Western nations including Britain
incorporating the company's technology in their networks within their security
frameworks.

"To completely exclude Huawei from 5G in Australia means excluding Huawei from
the entire Australian market and we don't believe this would be in Australia's best
interest," the letter stated, a copy which has been obtained by The Australian Financial
Review.
Aware of the sensitivities, Huawei is not asking to be involved in the core 5G network
but only in less sensitive areas like radio antennae and switches – the same model as
in Britain and Canada.

The Financial Review revealed last week that Huawei and fellow Chinese company ZTE
were all but certain to be banned from supplying equipment for the 5G networkbecause
security agencies remained concerned over links to the Chinese government.
While Huawei has insisted it is a 100 per cent privately owned company, experts
have pointed to Chinese laws which allow Beijing to order businesses to "support,
cooperate with and collaborate in national intelligence work" as a reason to be wary.

But the Huawei board is determined to contrast Australia's approach – and that of
the US – with the cooperative model used by other close US allies, particularly
Britain, to deal with security issues.

The Huawei letter, which is accompanied by a company factsheet, said Britain,


Canada and New Zealand – partners in the Five Eyes intelligence network – had
taken up the offer to evaluate the company's technology to ensure it met their cyber
security protocols, while security officials had also visited China to better understand
its equipment. The company has also offered to build an evaluation and testing
centre in Australia to ensure independent verification of its equipment.

Huawei is also pointing out recent suggestions in Australia that the British were
having second thoughts related to a 2013 parliamentary report whose concerns have
since been addressed, resulting in annual assessments giving Huawei a clean bill of
health.

That includes reports from an oversight committee chaired by GCHQ, the British
government's main cyber security agency.

It argues a refusal to allow any participation in 5G would devastate its Australian


business and be far more serious than the decision to block it from participation in
per cent to close at $4.65.
The Redstone offer is not conditional on due diligence, financing, regulatory
approval or further internal approvals.

Atlas said its board would evaluate the bid and give shareholders a
recommendation "in due course". The Atlas board advised shareholders to
"take no action in relation to the Hancock offer until they receive further
advice" from it.

In a statement, Hancock Prospecting said the offer was 41 per cent higher
than Mineral Resources' proposal as at June 15 and gave investors greater
certainty as it was in cash.

"The directors of Redstone consider that the all‐cash offer, with its premium
pricing and low conditionality, represents a significantly superior proposition
to the [Mineral Resources] proposal and that the offer should therefore be
viewed as a compelling opportunity for Atlas shareholders," Hancock said.

Tad Watroba, exceutive director of Hancock, said Atlas Iron's assets had long-
term synergies with Hancock's.

"There is potential to unlock value through the future development of


Atlas resources as part of our wider system of operations," he said.

"If we obtain control of Atlas, we intend to conduct a strategic review to better


understand the most appropriate time and means to develop and integrate
Atlas into the existing operations of the Hancock Group."

Mr Watroba said the Hancock group produced iron ore priced off the 62 per
cent iron content index.

Mineral Resources said in a statement it was "considering its position and will
advise its intentions in due course".

RELATED ARTICLE

MINING
Fortescue makes a move on junior miner Atlas Iron
Add t o shortl ist
Mr Watroba said: "Some of the Atlas deposits contain elements that have
complementary characteristics providing optionality and opportunity to
improve the non‐iron elements of ore quality further.

"The remainder of the Atlas resources could serve to extend the life of existing
Hancock iron ore interests."

In its bidder's statement, Redstone said that in the short term, it intended for
Atlas to keep operating in the same manner it had over the past year. It said its
strategic review would "consider the disposal of assets which are not
considered to be of long term strategic value" to the Hancock group.

Redstone said it would assess the ongoing operational needs of Atlas in its
strategic review. "This may lead to the maintenance of the current workforce
or a need for greater or fewer numbers of employees within the existing Atlas
business. Should the strategic review result in the need for fewer Atlas
employees, the HPPL (Hancock) group will seek to redeploy those Atlas
employees into other parts of the HPPL group's business, where practicable."

Redstone said there were compelling reasons for Atlas shareholders to accept
the offer, including that it was "100 per cent cash, which will be paid to you
promptly", the offer price delivered a premium to Atlas shareholders, the offer
had a low level of conditionality, and Atlas shareholders would receive certain
value for their shares at a fixed cash price.

If Atlas shareholders did not accept the offer Redstone said they faced a
number of consequences including uncertainty about the ongoing viability of
Atlas, uncertainty about whether the Mineral Resources proposal could be
completed on its current terms, the price of Atlas shares could fall, and
shareholders could be left as minority shareholders of Atlas with limited
influence on the miner. Redstone said the latter would happen if it acquired
more than 50 per cent of Atlas shares, but not enough to proceed with
compulsory acquisition.

 Share on Facebook

You might also like