I'll now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Stuart Tonkin, Managing Director and CEO. Please go ahead. Good morning, and thank you for joining us today. With me on the call is Chief Financial Officer Ryan Gurner and Chief Operating Officer Simon Jessop. To start, we are very pleased that De Grey shareholders voted overwhelmingly in favor of the scheme of arrangement, and we look forward to welcoming their team and their shareholders into Northern Star. I'd also like to take this opportunity to say thank you to all our employees and business partners who consistently deliver a strong performance, enabling both organic growth and inorganic opportunities like the De Grey acquisition. With gold price exceeding AUD 5,000 an ounce, it is an outstanding time to be producing and discovering gold in the stable, low-risk jurisdictions of Western Australia and Alaska. Against this buoyant market backdrop, we generated strong net-mined cash flow of AUD 295 million in the March quarter, and pleasingly, there were positive contributions from all production centres despite operational challenges at our biggest asset, KCGM. Our balance sheet remains in a net cash position, and our hedge book continues to wind down as we deliver to the set schedule. In the March quarter, gold sold totaled 385,000 ounces, at an all-in sustaining cost of AUD 2,246 per ounce. Mining of the high-grade open-pit ore at KCGM was delayed because of low productivity in the Golden Pike North area, but I'd like to emphasize that the impact to the ounces is a delay only. As we look ahead in the June quarter, the high-grade ore is now accessible, with mining efficiency on track to lift significantly. More broadly at KCGM, we remain impressed with the progress we are making at this multi-decade asset. The foundations are established, and we are commencing a very exciting period where we are poised to generate a positive step change in free cash flow generation from KCGM. As a result of recent operational challenges at KCGM, we have revised our FY2025 group production guidance to 1.63-1.66 million ounces. Partially offsetting KCGM impact, we have increased guidance at Pogo as the mine continues to deliver consistently strong performance. Turning to the FY2025 all-in sustaining cost guidance, we have increased the range to AUD 2,100-2,200 an ounce as a result of delayed access to Golden Pike North, some unplanned maintenance costs at Yandal, and also the higher royalties from the elevated gold prices. Detailed guidance information is provided on page three of the quarterly report. Continuing at KCGM mill upgrade, our project team remains very busy, and I'm pleased with the progress at the KCGM mill expansion to date. There has been significant activity during the quarter, as observed by all the structural installation of the major plant components on site. The project remains on track, and FY2025 capital expenditure guidance of AUD 500 million-AUD 530 million remains unchanged. I'd now like to hand over to Simon Jessop, our Chief Operating Officer, to discuss our operational highlights. Thank you, Stu. For the Kalgoorlie production centre, which includes KCGM, Carosue Dam, and Kalgoorlie operations, we sold 197,000 ounces of gold and Australian all-in sustaining costs of AUD 2,139 an ounce. This production delivered a mine operating cash flow of AUD 332 million. The region also spent AUD 262 million on significant growth capital projects. This included AUD 121 million on the KCGM mill expansion, AUD 37 million on KCGM open-pit mine development, and AUD 41 million on KCGM underground mine development. At KCGM, open-pit material movement was 15.3 million tonnes, with mining efficiencies being impacted by slow productivity while destacking the eastern side of Golden Pike North. Mining efficiencies have since improved, and we are confident mining volumes will increase to 20-22.5 million tonnes per quarter from the June quarter. All mined from the open-pit saw the beginning of a step change in ore volumes, with 2.2 million tonnes mined and 84,000 ounces in the quarter, a 90% increase in ore and a 100% increase in ounces compared to the H1 quarterly average. We look forward to increased ore and total material movements from KCGM as the efficiencies and opportunities return to KCGM's open-pit. Underground mining volumes at KCGM were 4% higher quarter on quarter and 29% higher year on year. KCGM's underground operations increased development to a new record of 7.4 kilometers for the quarter. The development meters will continue to increase as we begin to open up more of the Fimiston Underground and Mount Charlotte ore bodies. A new KCGM portal will be developed in the Drysdale area during the June quarter, which will be 400 meters below the surface. This platform will commence the journey of delineating the many mineralised systems at depth and is very exciting for KCGM's long-term growth. At Carosue Dam, mined ounces were consistent quarter on quarter at 65,000, while ounces sold were lower due to a smaller contribution from the underground mines, which will reverse in the June quarter. The Kalgoorlie operations, underground mines, and mill delivered to plan with a 15% reduction in all-in sustaining costs to AUD 1,892 an ounce and a 10% reduction in all-in costs over the quarter. Processing volumes at KCGM were lower due to its planned major shutdown and lower availability and utilisation over the quarter, impacting gold sales. A higher head grade for Q4 is expected as ore volumes from the open-pit and underground sources all increase. The KCGM mill expansion project is 46% complete at quarter end, on time and within budget. We remain very pleased with the on-ground construction activities as the project transitions from concreting into structural and mechanical installation. Total engineering progress for stage one is at 89%, while all design reviews are now complete. The concrete pour is 65% complete, with an impressive 19,000 cubes poured to date. At our Yandal production centre, including Jundee and Thunderbox, we sold 120,000 ounces of gold at an Australian all-in sustaining cost of AUD 2,398 an ounce. This production delivered a mine operating cash flow of AUD 210 million, while we spent AUD 91 million on growth capital projects. At our Jundee operation, development advance increased to 7.9 km, with over 3.7 km in development drill platforms completed year to date. Lower mine grade was from the Griffin Underground development ore commencing, with milling grades forecast to remain at similar levels in the June quarter. Griffin development continued to ramp up over the quarter as a future new ore source, while processing was again on plan. The Thunderbox operation mined 64,000 ounces for the quarter. The Wonder Underground mine continued to ramp up ahead of plan, with 1,552 meters developed, with one jumbo averaging 517 meters per month. In the open-pits, the Otto Bore mine was completed at the start of the quarter, while the Bannockburn open-pit commenced mid-quarter as an important long-term feed. At the Thunderbox process plant, we milled 1.43 million tonnes and sold 56,000 ounces of gold. The mill throughput averaged a new quarterly record of 839 tonnes per hour, 12% above nameplate. A major shutdown was completed within the quarter. For our Pogo operation, we sold 68,000 ounces of gold at an Australian all-in sustaining cost of AUD 2,292 an ounce. This production delivered a mine operating cash flow of AUD 126 million. During the quarter, I visited Pogo for my second time and met with the team to understand the current operational status and their opportunities. I was very impressed with the quality of the work the Pogo team is undertaking, while also seeing significant opportunity for growth at this asset in time to come. Development lifted 10% quarter on quarter to an average of 1,500 meters per month, while the operation is now mine-constrained with milling on demand. I would now like to pass over to Ryan, our Chief Financial Officer, to discuss the financials. Thanks, Simon. Good morning, all. Northern Star remains in a great financial position. Our balance sheet remains strong with net cash of AUD 181 million at 31 March. Figure 9 on page 10 sets out the company's cash, bullion, and investment movements for the quarter, with key elements being the company generating AUD 846 million of operating cash flow, a 22% lift on the prior quarter. After deducting capital of AUD 529 million relating to the KCGM expansion, plant and equipment and mine development, AUD 58 million of exploration and lease payments, quarterly free cash generation was AUD 201 million. In relation to our FY25 growth capital projects, the KCGM expansion project remains on track with spend of AUD 121 million during the quarter. Activity included progress of engineering design work, construction, concrete pours, and steel erection. All major equipment items have now been delivered to site, and forecast capital expenditure for the year remains unchanged at AUD 500 million-AUD 530 million. Accelerated activity across the Australian portfolio has driven our FY2025 forecast growth capital expenditure, excluding the mill expansion, higher to a range of AUD 950 million-AUD 1.1 billion. This includes, at Yandal, development advance ahead of plan at Wonder Underground and Griffin, as well as higher material movement at Orelia whilst in development. At KCGM, development advance ahead of plan at Mount Charlotte, additional costs associated with finishing the east wall remediation works, and greater activity in the Fimiston South cutback due to delayed access to Golden Pike North, which has also driven some efficiencies and higher unit costs. Today, we have flagged that our exploration expenditure will be higher for the full year from the previously guided AUD 180 million to AUD 230 million, with additional funds allocated to further advance underground drill platforms across KCGM, Pogo, and Jundee. This investment will pave the way for enhanced drilling programs across those assets in FY26 and FY27. On other financial matters, year-to-date depreciation and amortization of $803 per ounce is at the midpoint of the guided range and is expected to remain within the range for the full year. For the quarter, non-cash inventory charges for the group are a credit of AUD 44 million, primarily from the increase in stockpiles at TBO, CDO, and KCGM. AUD 8.5 million Northern Star shares were bought back and cancelled during the quarter. Sorry, that's AUD 8.5 million, apologies, were bought back and cancelled during the quarter, and the company is 89% through the AUD 300 million program. As previously highlighted, the company has now begun paying corporate tax on its Australian operations. The current estimate for Q4, which will depend on gold price, is between AUD 60 million-AUD 80 million for the Australian operations and AUD 30 million-AUD 40 million for Pogo. Also, a reminder that we will pay interest on the notes in Q4, which will amount to $18 million. The company's committed hedge position at 31 March is set out on table five, page 10. During the quarter, the company delivered 135,000 ounces into contracts and did not add any further commitments. 70% of the hedge commitments align to the build and early commissioning phase of the KCGM plant expansion. In relation to the recent impulse of tariffs on goods imported to the U.S., we continue to monitor and assess the impact to our Pogo operations, including country of origin assessments for the operation's direct and indirect supply chain. Finally, in relation to De Grey, the consideration value paid will be ascribed to the assets acquired, which is expected to be tax deductible from the implementation date. Northern Star may also be eligible to consolidate De Grey tax losses, which will be confirmed post-implementation. Current estimates of the landholder duty obligation from the transaction are in the range of AUD 200 million-AUD 300 million, which is expected to be payable within 12 to 18 months. As the transaction is likely to be an asset acquisition for accounting, transaction costs will be capitalized into the asset value as opposed to expensed in the income statement. I'll now pass back to Darcy for the Q&A. Thank you. Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you would like to cancel your request, please press star two. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question today comes from Daniel Morgan from Barrenjoey. Please go ahead. Hi, Stu and team. First question is just about the, I guess, the operations at the Super Pit and the delayed access in Golden Pike. Can you just describe how far is this just a delay on the business plan that was articulated a couple of years ago, and we should just be moving that business plan to the right? Or do some of these productivity issues mean that what you thought two years ago and how much you could get out of Golden Pike in, say, FY2026 and beyond? Do you have to slow down and be more selective mining? I'm just trying to get a feel for how far into the future these issues translate. Yeah, thanks, Dan. It's an important point. I guess you're right in saying that five-year strategic outlook was delivered in July 2021, right? We are at the tail end of that for that two million ounce target. It's not about if we get to two, it's when we get to two as we then add the mill expansion and then integrate Hemi into the overall outlook over future years. Our attitude is, no, the gold has not moved for three billion years. It is still there. It's the rate at which we're extracting it. We certainly have experienced some of that destacking of the multiple work areas and the congestion with the fleet at the bottom of the pit floor, which we're overcoming. It is really about now the efficiency coming back, the productivity coming back, and those tonnage rates basically filling the mill with the primary ore from the pit floor as opposed to set off with the stockpile material. It is against where we had maybe been aggressive on everything going perfectly well. Simon can talk about the confidence of the outlook, but it is really just about the rate at which we are mining at the bottom, having that east wall remediated and that waste removed from above us. Yeah, just to add to that, Daniel, really pleased with where we are positioned. Late in the quarter, we finished the difficult mining of the destack, and now we're back to just normal efficient benches mining down on the east side of the pit. It is purely a slight delay to the ounces. It's no change on the future outlook. The pleasing thing is we're past the low productivity efficiency of mining big rocks in the destack area. That's all finished now, and we're just destacking with normal benches. We're in the best shape we've been in that part of the pit. I know plans are always theoretical when they come up against hard-won experience. Just wondering if, given the time you've had in this with the physical experience of Golden Pike and mining the super pit, do you have the right number of equipment and the right resourcing to achieve your outcomes, or do you have to revisit how many trucks you need, etc.? Yeah, Daniel, I think in the commentary I'll talk about now we're past the low efficiency mining in that destack area in particular. We will revert to that 20-22.5 million tonnes a quarter from this quarter, and we've started this quarter extremely well in terms of total material movement. Now we're past that difficult part, which is behind us. We're seeing all the productivities lift, the trucking hours lift, the digging efficiencies lift. Very, very confident going forward. Just last question, and apologies. I mean, everyone on this call has got a lot of results today. I may have missed this, but I think you alluded to you lifting your exploration spending today and you're lifting some of your capital budgeting today, excuse me, in relation to, I think, some success you've had on the exploration piece. Can you just expand on that piece? Thank you. Yeah, thanks, Dan. These largely are leading indicators in development for drill platforms to feed into next year's drilling budget as well. We had AUD 180 million. We've sort of lifted that beyond AUD 200 million, largely driven by the drill platforms across Pogo, heading to the north, those north veins across Goodpaster, KCGM, including a new portal to be cut down in the west wall at Drystyle, and equally over at Yandal, big drill platforms across Yandal, Jundee, etc., and some of the new underground. It's really the lead indicator. The drilling, the actual drill meters and drill core, you'll see reflected in our reporting of our resource and our reserves coming out in a week. This is drill platforms that feeds into that as well in a month. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you. Your next question comes from Kate McCutcheon from Citi. Please go ahead. Hi, morning, Stu and Ryan. Just the guidance revisions. It is material for a $115 ounce cost increase. How much of that are you putting down to royalties? How much is Yandal at high in maintenance? How do we think about that KCGM head grade hitting the mill into Q4? Yeah, thanks, Kate. I'll start with the question on the cost. Yeah, so royalties, well, royalties and foreign exchange is likely to be AUD 25-AUD 30 an ounce. When we cut the full year numbers is where we think it'll land. Obviously, this quarter, gold price is much higher than it was the prior quarter, just the outlook there. It's probably about AUD 25 an ounce currently for the year-to-date cost base, is that? That'll probably lift with the gold price. The unplanned maintenance across the year is going to be, it's currently probably AUD 30 an ounce. We don't foresee that happening. We don't foresee additional costs this quarter at Yandal around maintenance for the processing facilities. It'll probably likely land about AUD 25, AUD 5 an ounce. In combination of those two items, they're about $50 an ounce in combination of those two year-to-date. Okay, got it. The KCGM head grade for Q4? Yeah, Kate, Simon here. Just in terms of the head grade, you can see for the quarter, we mined 84,000 ounces from the open pit at a head grade of around about 1.3. That is similar to the head grade that we were feeding into the mill last quarter. What you will see in the next quarter is the underground contributions start to kick up as Fimiston underground gets into its stoping, as well as a much higher contribution from the open pit across not just Golden Pike North, but OBH as well. You will see the head grade for the mill lift probably in a range of 0.3-0.5 of a gram per tonne in quarter four. Got it. Yeah, because I think you had previously said the undergrounds will be running at 3-3.5 million tonnes by the end of the FY. Yeah, the undergrounds are building that development piece as that lead indicator. We are still seeing last two quarters, 7.2 kilometers, 7.4 kilometers, and then the stoping is turning on in terms of Fimiston, as well as a lift out of some stoping areas at Mount Charlotte. It is not a straight line. It is lumpy with the production coming in, but really happy with the way we are setting up Union Consols, Union Jack, Golden Pike Stockworks, which is all three mines within Fimiston itself. The production fronts are building, and we are developing a lot of areas with a lot of production drilling. Stoping has commenced for Fimiston, and it will now get a real kick and lift. Okay, thank you. A question for Ryan. You noted the tax benefits from incorporating De Grey, but no DNA uplift for the group until Hemi delivers first gold. The latter part makes sense, but not so much the former. Can you just talk me through the delta or how we think about the tax impacts for the next five years, which you've called out in the results? Yeah, sure, Kate. Yeah, so you're right. DNA won't start till we start pouring gold bars. You're right there. Tax is a funny one, but a good one, I guess, for the business. I guess the acquisition value is what we pay. We'll be issuing shares at a price on implementation date. That's the value that's marked. Some things like cash that De Grey hold aren't relevant for that valuation piece on the tax base. It's going to be a significant value, but from a tax perspective, we can start, I guess, depreciating or getting a reduction in our taxable income from day one. That's the advice, and that's what we'll be doing. Now, of course, tax lags, so you won't see it day one, Kate. It'll be more so later when we do our tax return that you'll start to see that catch up. Yeah. Okay. Is there anything you can say on the magnitude? It'll be accelerated. I guess it's going to be something like between $5 billion and $5.5 billion, and it'll be deductible. 50% of it will be deductible over five years. Tax you can accelerate. That gives you some indication. It won't be linear, but it'll be something like that, remembering that we've still got to do all the work, and the final values have got to be set. That's the thematic. Thank you. Your next question comes from Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Thank you. Your next question comes from Levi Spry from UBS. Yep. Good morning, Stu and team. Thanks for your time. Yes, busy day, so details might be a bit light, but just following on from Dan and Kate there, great question. I'm keen to explore that going into sort of next year and understanding that this is categorically just a quarter delay to what we were thinking about before, that all of the destacking is finished, the underground ramp-up is on track, and that that overall head grade still hits from 1st of July. Can you just expand, Simon, on that grade piece through this quarter, I guess? Yeah, thanks, Levi. Look, the destacking, it's half-finished where we are, but we're seeing signs now in this quarter of the improvement of those productivities in Golden Pike. We're showing kind of the turning point of the performance coming out and the grade coming out. The backstop's always the stockpile grade going in, and that's the underground volumes from development all into stoping contributes. That quarterly delay is really our what we're talking about today is the FY2025 delivery of guidance. We're not talking about FY2026, but these things are they're all on a pathway to add that plus the mill expansion plus Hemi in time. Yeah, appreciate everyone wants the rest of their models filled out, but we're here just to really recap on the events of the quarter and the outlook for this quarter. In normal course, we'll be publishing in July, the June quarterly plus the outlook for FY26. We're very excited with the progress across all the assets, albeit there's some slippage on weeks and months. We're very happy with what we're seeing in regard to the outlook. Yeah, got it. Okay, thanks. Just expanding on the De Grey piece then, can you just talk us through the timelines there in terms of your plans for integration and optimization of that into the portfolio, what that could look like after May 5th? Yeah, so completion with that D listed now, the completion's the 5th of May, so I guess a week late. The integration, obviously, with the team occurs rapidly, but it's still dependent on finally on the approvals, so the regulatory approvals that have been articulated by De Grey. That's still, I guess, the FID point, but all the other works on the mill EPC, EPCM decisions and the mining contracts and all of the long lead items and the progressing sort of stakeholder engagement, all those things have been continuing in parallel with the De Grey team for a number of months now. We will basically map out what that looks like. Essentially, the CapEx will need to be reviewed, assessed, dusted off to make sure it's relevant. Our learnings from KCGM has impressed us on ability to take learnings from Fimiston mill expansion into the De Grey build as well. I'm pretty excited about those opportunities that we can bring to that. It's likely the second half of this calendar year will be giving more color on the timeline for Hemi development. Nice one. Okay, thank you. Thanks, Stu. Thank you. Your next question comes from Andrew Bowler from Macquarie. Please go ahead. Good day, Stu, Ryan, and Simon. Maybe one for you, Simon, just expanding on Kate's question about the KCGM underground. I think Kate sort of mentioned that previous commentary was a rough exit rate of 3 million tonnes per annum this year, and then sort of grinding its way up by 500,000 tonnes per annum per year over the next couple of years. Just wondering if you could just give us a fresh update on that sort of expected growth rate of 500,000 tonnes per annum that you've commented on previously. Is that still valid, or is it likely to be a little bit shy of that over the next couple of years? Yeah, Andrew, I think, look, as we normally do it around diggers in that quarter one, we'll provide a good KCGM update as to where the underground's at, the open pit, and all of the assets. It is very lumpy, as you can imagine, trying to develop from Fimiston underground. There are three mines within one we call Fimiston, but there are genuinely three mines within that particular mine. The thing we are excited about is the development of all of those levels really opening up, as well as the bypass link we're doing down to Creasy, which I've mentioned in the diggers presentation last year. Creasy is right near the surface, and we'll be getting into that with high tonnes, big productive areas early into next year. The building blocks are all happening. We're expanding very, very rapidly at that particular area. Things like Drysdale that is new, new to the, I suppose, news flow. That is 400 meters below the surface, and we get into the west wall down below 400 meters there and then really can accelerate some huge opportunities there. Pleased to provide an update on the underground really in that Q1, sort of July or August sort of area. In terms of the lead indicators, very, very happy with the underground progress. No worries. Thanks for that. Maybe just one for Ryan as well. I mean, obviously, you talked about the De Grey assets coming on the balance sheet and being able to reduce your taxable income with those day one. Just so I can understand a little bit better as a non-accountant. It sounds like you're saying on a dollars per ounce basis, you will see a lift next year in depreciation, not just a dollar million lift as well. It'll be actually over the ounces you're producing from the other assets, you'll see an increase in D&A next year. Is that correct? No, Andrew, the opposite. We will be getting a tax shield from day one, which you'll see in cash flow. From a DNA P&L perspective, no. We won't have any depreciation until we start pouring gold bars at Hemi in the future. The DNA next year for the business won't be really any different to what it is now. It is only when we start pouring gold bars that you'll see a depreciation amortization step up or change. It's about tax cash now that we get the benefit from. Oh, okay. Copy that. It is more the built-up losses that have happened within De Grey already more so than obviously depreciating the asset. Okay, yeah, copy that. Appreciate it. That is all from me. Thank you. Your next question comes from Ali Harvey from JPMorgan. Please go ahead. Yeah, morning, team. I suppose you have mentioned that you are coming up to the end of your five-year timeline for the FY26 target. I suppose just wanted to get a sense on when we might get an update on the next five-year outlook and how things might have changed given high gold pricing environment, how that's changing, how you're thinking about potential further growth. Maybe just, yeah, an overview on that would be helpful. Yeah, thanks. Thanks, Ali. Yeah, today is not the day to do that. I know it's a very busy day for reporting, but as you know, our sort of July guidance outlook for 2026 and around Diggers where we present the outlook is probably a good timing to give a bit more flavor. I would say the 2021 five-year outlook, what has changed? We've seen great stabilization, performance improvement from Pogo. We've seen delivery of expansion and continuity across Yandal. The Kalgoorlie operations have been firing on all cylinders, as does KCGM with cash flow generation. It's really KCGM around that east wall remediation, which was an unproven plan when we committed to it, but we're a long way through it. It's really on top of that, the mill expansion you've seen being approved, and we're over halfway through it, as well as now an inorganic opportunity with the addition of Hemi to the portfolio. A bit has changed, but fundamentally, it's very positive change. The gold price has lifted AUD 3,000 an ounce in that same period. If we hadn't changed something or hadn't improved stuff, we'd probably be mad. I think it's just a much stronger outlook, and we will certainly be looking at the next sort of three years fundamentally when all those catalysts come back in and really look at that active portfolio management and really looking at the best highest margin ounces. A lot of the decisions we made in previous years are still correct and right under the current gold price environment, and we're executing and delivering on those. We were aware that they were multi-year commitments, and we're still charging through the actions to stabilize and make that sustainable because we're looking at a multi-decade outlook. Yeah, we're pretty excited, and you'll get an update this calendar year on our outlook for the next few years. Sure. Thanks, Stu. Thank you. Once again, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from Matthew Frydman from MST Financial. Please go ahead. Sure. Thanks. Morning, Stu and team. Can I ask on Hemi, and you've obviously highlighted that the next key step is more around state and federal permitting. Can you give us a bit of, I guess, a more in-depth update on how that's tracking from your perspective? I'm particularly interested in how that process goes, particularly through the state and federal election periods, potentially some movements in the various bureaucracies there. Wondering how that is kind of playing out and how you expect that to potentially play out, particularly through the federal election period. Secondly, I guess in terms of your internal permitting team presumably taking over some of that work that the De Grey team has been conducting. Obviously, you've got an external driver, which is the state and federal ministries, but there's also an internal driver there in terms of you guys getting up to speed with all of that work and, as I say, potentially taking over some of that responsibility in liaising with those departments. It does seem like the timelines continue to push out a little bit on this process over time. Is there a timeline that you're currently hopeful to working towards in terms of final approvals? When do you expect to get a decision around that? Thanks. Yeah, thanks, Matt. I think De Grey had been articulating what the timeline was, and we're not indifferent to what that is and what was published in the scheme documents. We were perhaps a bit more conservative and had a bit of a buffer, which fundamentally doesn't change returns outlook or timing. In fact, the neatness of teams moving from FIM into Hemi is very strong. Now, we're not till completion and we're there, we'll be engaging with all the stakeholders. We've stayed very close to decisions to date, but likely in the next quarter, we'll have feedback from regulators after doing site visits and after doing reviews and stakeholder engagement. This calendar year, we'll be getting updates and passing that through to the market as we learn those things. Fundamentally, we don't see any federal or state, obviously, stability of the political landscape changing this. We have very good experience through the Section 38 at KCGM recently with that experience with regulators. We are very familiar with the process and engagement with those regulators throughout the Hemi approval process as well. Yeah, all considered, all understood, and nothing is different to what we expected, I guess, when we announced this deal late last calendar year. Got it. Thanks, Stu. Is there any sort of, I don't want to say drop-dead date, but any sort of timing that you're conscious of in terms of making long lead item decisions or design decisions around the project whereby you'd really need to have some kind of firmness around approvals come in before you go down that path, or you're pretty flexible with the timing in terms of some of those design decisions? Yeah. I think importantly, this was all done well before announcement and the due diligence period we completed, good reviews of all of those, the flowsheet designs, the comfort with the mining volumes and the plans, etc. Now, you do not want to change things because you are resetting clocks on approvals, right? Fundamentally, it is what is being put in. We are happy with that, and it is going through the approvals process. Leaving technical boffins looking at stuff, they will continue to tamper with it. We have definitely frozen it and understood that it is a good plan, and it is what is being approved, and we are okay to follow that and execute it on that timeframe once approved. Some of those timelines, I say out of our control, they are understood and they are predictable in Australia, which is why we love tier one jurisdictions and understanding of that regulation, but we cannot speed it up. I guess we're going through the due process and doing it prudently, and therefore, we're not going to recut and rechange and modify because it will add time to resetting some of those time-honored approvals, which we won't do. There is a very strong understood business case that De Grey have articulated. There is some refining and optimisation as you go, but it's really on the margins as opposed to wholesale changes to that DFS plan. Yeah, understand. Thanks, Stu. Maybe just finally, again, coming back to the kind of integration piece, can you remind us, I guess, what the vision or the plan is in terms of how much of that work you internalise back onto Northern Star teams, or how many kind of teams or members of the De Grey team will continue to sort of conduct the work that they were doing previously? I guess, yeah, how do you see the division of responsibilities in terms of progressing the project forward? Thanks. Yeah, we're well-rehearsed at integrating assets along the journey, as you can sort of see by history. There's roughly 120-odd De Grey people that have been building up this asset over the time. They come in as a Hemi project under Northern Star banner. There's no island or isolation or silo there, and they're enhanced by our corporate oversight team, the shared services that are here. I'll remind people, with our 350-plus geologists, with our 250-plus mining engineers, we have more technical prowess than any contracting external house. In-house, we have that. We have that skill, and that's what we bring for De Grey shareholders to an asset like this to de-risk it, as well as a net cash balance sheet fully funding the build of this, plus the outlook of dividend paying day one. All these things are the merit as to why we got a 99.6% approval on the votes that were put on this scheme of arrangement. I think it's our job now to demonstrate why it's de-risked and how we can move this project forward on a lower-risk basis. That's because of our bench strength. We've got nearly 7,000 employees with our contracting partners. De Grey has 120. I think it shows that we're going to be able to help assist this project better than anyone. Yeah, understand. Thanks, Stu. Yeah, looking forward to more updates later in the year. Thanks. Thanks, Matt. Thank you. Once again, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from Hugo Nicolaci from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Morning, Stu. Ryan, Simon. Apologies for technical issues earlier and if some of these points have been subsequently covered. Just picking up on some of the earlier questions, you've obviously highlighted some of the new term challenges at KCGM and the accelerated growth spend ahead of plan in some other areas. I guess looking forward, if we take your revised guidance midpoint into the fourth quarter, it's implying a gold production run rate of about 1.8 million ounces. Based on some of the comments today and operational improvements, it sounds like that should probably be trending upwards. I guess marrying that up with some of the comments you've previously made, Stu, around having levers across the portfolio to deliver that 2 million-ounce target, how should we interpret those four key rates into FY2026 and then relative to that 2 million-ounce target going forward? Yeah, thanks, Hugo. I think earlier in the call, I reiterated we're not providing FY2026 guidance today. We're updating on the March quarter, and as you've just done the maths, quarter four shows a 440-450 kind of quarter, and therefore, obviously, 1.8 million ounce per annum run rate. They are all good signs and good signals as to what the outlook can be. As I said, it's not necessarily if, it's when the overall 500-quarter plus-plus with the mill expansion and Hemi's addition in future years. These are just checkpoints because it's not a straight line of growth. Yeah, we're not providing 2026 today. In due course and normal time, we'll be assessing that and likely the July announcement with the June quarter and the FY2026 guidance with costs will come at that point. Right. Fair enough. Thanks, Stu. Just picking up on the comment you made a little bit earlier around active portfolio management in the current gold price environment, are there any assets in the current portfolio that you think maybe do not have the same medium-term opportunities as others in the portfolio or maybe are not being appropriately valued in the broader portfolio context? Yeah, good point. We probably don't think any of them are being appropriately valued at this gold price, but they are all contributing to our cash flow balance sheet strength and the investment we're putting back into the assets. The recognition is really part of what we've done always is just looking at our highest margin ounces, where our investment's made, and that future outlook. Yeah, it's just part of how we think around the being business-first and not having to just be hoarders and collectors. We're certainly wanting to make it most efficient for our shareholder returns. That'll be part of the review at the back end of this year. Got it. Thanks. Just lastly, if I can, just on the reserve and resource update, should we still expect that in the coming weeks, consistent with sort of the timing over the last few years? Yeah, I think I said in the coming week, but I should have said coming month, just to correct that. We close it at the end of March, and we're doing that assessment work presently. Yeah, typically, in short order after that, we'll be releasing the resource reserve. It could be in May, is probably more like the timing, could be at the back of May. Right. Thanks for that, [uncertain]. Thank you. Your next question is a follow-up from Daniel Morgan from Barrenjoey. Please go ahead. Hi, Stu, Ryan and team. Just a question on the hedge strategy. I mean, I don't want to be Harry Hindsight and go back and rerun the tape on gold prices and what we could have or should have done. I just note that you've had two quarters now where you've allowed the hedge book to run off. Is that some recognition that the hedge strategy is perhaps not working or dated now that you're a larger, more diversified company? I'm just wondering whether you might continue to let these hedges roll off over time and reduce your hedge book in time. Yeah, thanks, Dan. We're still within policy, so it's not indifferent to our policy. The hedges were placed at the right time for the right purpose to achieve the right outcome. Things like Fimiston FID, the hedges that were placed at that point equally were $500-$600 above the FID decision amount. Yeah, we certainly aren't saying Captain Hindsight says we're out of the money. If you plug in the spot price or whatever number used for mark-to-market, you'll get plus $10, minus $3 is essentially what you'll end up with. It is what it is, and people understand it, and it's visible. I think you've seen us unwind the last two quarters, not add forwards. Yeah, thank you. Maybe just a follow-up separately. I mean, the gold price is up, quite simply, bananas versus anything that we would have thought several weeks, months, or a year ago or two. Just wondering how that feeds into how you manage your business. If at all, do you let this gold price fall to the bottom line, or do you look at the fringes of your ore bodies and things and go, "Well, let's expand mine lives and change grade decisions over time"? Just wondering how you think the gold price feeds into running your business. Yeah, look, I'd say it doesn't change, certainly doesn't change near-term decision-making. We've been set on some rails of some good long-term investment decisions under any gold price environment. They're all working to try to get our unit costs down, economies of scale up, and they absolutely get enhanced to survive those decisions at a higher gold price. Albeit, the high gold price, as we see across the sector, drags up costs. That's the part, plus the tariff turmoil. Those are the things that we have more focus and understanding of protection against than gold price. They're the things that directly hit margin and bottom line. That's probably where more of the attention looks at and cut-off grades, etc., rather than gold price, and it's always been the case. Yeah, no one's wholesale changing mine plans because of where the price is at. We're certainly just looking and observing as we go. Okay. Thank you, Stuart and Tim. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand the conference back to Mr. Tonkin for any closing remarks. Look, thanks all for joining us on the call. Appreciate it. It is a very busy reporting day. We'll make ourselves available over the coming days to address any of the outstanding matters. Thanks very much for joining us on the call. Look forward to updating you soon and have a great day. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.