Well, good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us today at Paladin Energy's 2026 Investor Day. Really appreciate you taking time out of your schedule to join us, both in person and via our webcast. Today is an opportunity to step back from the normal quarterly cycle and the quarterly updates to spend a bit more time talking about what we're doing at PLS. What I hope to achieve today is to get everyone across more of the detail of our strategy, of our asset, our people, and the growth opportunities for Paladin. You can read that at your leisure. There will be a few forward-looking statements today. All the normal disclaimer bit's in there. Joining me today, I have to my right, Alex Rybak, our Chief Commercial Officer; Scott Barber, our Chief Operating Officer. We've got Dale, our President, Canada; Andrew, our geoscientist, and online we've got Anna Sudlow, who is joining us from Perth today. This last 12 months was, I think, a really significant year for us. We successfully completed the ramp up of Langer Heinrich Mine, and we delivered production at the upper end of our revised guidance range. We strengthened our balance sheet, and we continued to advance the PLS project through several important permitting and development milestones. We also made significant exploration discoveries at Atlas, and I think Atlas highlights the potential emerging scale of the PLS district. While Langer remains the foundation of our business, the primary objective of today is to deepen the market's understanding of Patterson Lake and its ability to create substantial long-term shareholder value. We believe PLS is one of the highest quality undeveloped uranium projects globally, located in Saskatchewan, one of the world's premier uranium mining jurisdictions. PLS is the cornerstone asset within our portfolio, and it will transform the scale of our production platform. The management team presenting today brings decades of experience across uranium mining, project development, construction, operations, exploration, finance, business development, and commercial contracting. Collectively, they've been involved in successfully developing and operating major mining projects globally, and more recently, bringing the collective experience to effect at Langer Heinrich, and now will bring that to PLS. This afternoon I will begin with an overview of Paladin's strategy and how we're positioning the company for long-term growth. Following my remarks, Anna will review the FY 2026 performance and discuss our capital management approach and financial position. Alex will then provide his perspective on the uranium market, including supply and demand fundamentals, customer contracting activity, and the broader market outlook. We will then turn our attention to Langer Heinrich Mine, where Scott will discuss the successful completion of the ramp up, and operations, and FY 2027 guidance. Following a short Q&A and break, we will then focus on the PLS project. Scott will be joined by Dale, President, Canada, and they will discuss the significant progress that we've been made since acquiring Fission at the end of calendar year 2024. They will also outline the path forward as we advance PLS towards development and what we see as a compelling long-term value creation opportunity for our shareholders. We will then conclude the formal presentations with a Q&A session. Sorry, before that, we'll go onto exploration and growth opportunities across the portfolio, particularly in Canada where the recent success at Atlas has reinforced our belief that Patterson Lake South has the potential to become much more than a single project development. Andrew will discuss the opportunities we see to expand the resource, make new discoveries, and unlock broader district-scale potential of the PLS region. Following that, we'll have a Q&A. When we think about Paladin today, we're a company that has successfully transitioned from development and restart story to an established uranium producer with a significant growth platform. As we look ahead, we believe the combination of world-class asset portfolio and a highly experienced leadership team positions Paladin exceptionally well to execute the next phase of growth. We're proud of the progress that we've made, and we're actually more excited about what lies ahead for us. With that, let's get started. Today, Paladin's a very different company than it was just a few years ago. We've successfully transformed from a restart story to a growing uranium producer with a clear pathway forward for long-term value creation. The foundation of our strategy is actually very straightforward. We're leveraging a supportive uranium market, delivering sequenced production growth, and maintaining a disciplined focus on operational and financial performance. What makes Paladin unique is the combination of production today and growth tomorrow. The investment case for uranium continues to strengthen. Around the world, we're seeing increasing recognition that energy security, electrification, decarbonization cannot be achieved without significant expansion of nuclear power. Governments are responding accordingly. We're seeing commitments to expand nuclear generation across the United States, China, and India, alongside broader international support through initiatives such as the COP28 pledge to triple nuclear production by 2050. We're seeing at the same time, emerging demand drivers, particularly artificial intelligence, data centers, and electrification of transportation and industry, are increasing for future electricity requirements. Against this backdrop, we continue to see a compelling long-term outlook for uranium demand and increasing recognition that new sources of supply will be required to support that growth. This slide captures what we believe will be one of Paladin's greatest strengths, a diversified and long-duration growth pipeline. Langer Heinrich in Namibia is generating production today. In Canada, Patterson Lake South represents what we believe is one of the premier undeveloped uranium projects globally, and a significant future growth opportunity for the company. Importantly, we don't see PLS as simply a single development project. We see it as a foundation for long-term scalable Canadian uranium business. The Atlas discovery reinforces our view that the broader prospectivity of the district, while our exploration portfolio across the Athabasca Basin provides additional opportunities for future growth. Together, these assets create a multi-decade pipeline spanning production, development, and exploration. It's interesting to look back on the last 12 months, and I think what we've seen is, I think to me, what stands out is the breadth of our execution across the business. Operationally, we successfully completed the ramp-up of Langer Heinrich and delivered production at the upper end of our guidance range. We advanced Patterson Lake South through several key milestones, including the provincial EIS, and we achieved regulatory sufficiency status with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, targeting now a decision by the end of calendar year 2027. Importantly, we strengthened the leadership team with a number of key appointments, and bring substantial industry experience across operations, development, finance, and project execution. I think these milestones demonstrate our ability to systematically execute a strategy with a high level of operating discipline. Our assets are clearly important, but one of our greatest competitive advantages is our team. As I said earlier, across Paladin, we've assembled experienced team with leaders who have extensive experience in uranium mining, project development, engineering, operations, stakeholder engagement, project financing, and commercial management. The successful restart and ramp-up of Langer Heinrich provides a recent demonstration of what Paladin can do. With our expanded organizational capability, we believe that we're well-positioned to develop a Tier 1 project. Our strategy is very clear. I think it's focused, and it's very actionable. First, we maximize the value from Langer Heinrich. The ramp-up is complete, and our focus now is on safe, reliable, and efficient production while continuing to optimize performance. Secondly is to unlock Patterson Lake South. This remains our most significant organic growth opportunity, and our current focus is on continuing to de-risk the project through engineering, permitting, and stakeholder engagement activities. Thirdly, to continue advancing our exploration portfolio. We see substantial opportunities to create additional value through near mine and regional exploration, particularly in Canada. Underpinning all of this is a commitment to operational excellence, financial discipline, and responsible development. I think in simple terms, our strategy is to generate value from our producing assets today while building the next stage of growth for tomorrow. With that, I'd like to hand over now to Anna Sudlow. Paul, and good afternoon, everyone. Firstly, I'd like to apologize for not being in Sydney in person. Unfortunately, I broke my ankle, and I haven't been able to travel, b ut I can do the slides from my office in Perth. If we look at FY 2026, we had a number of objectives at the beginning of the financial year. The first was to complete the ramp-up at the Langer Heinrich Mine. The second was to strengthen our balance sheet and our liquidity position. The third was to position for growth. What my slides are going to focus on today are really around our performance over FY 2026 and how we're positioned for growth. I think what we've demonstrated is meaningful progress across those objectives, and I think the end result at the end of the financial year is pretty evident. We've delivered on the completion of the Langer Heinrich Mine ramp-up. We have operating cash flow. We've significantly strengthened our balance sheet, and we've got flexibility on the finance front. As far as FY 2026 performance, we had a very strong operational performance in FY 2026. As Paul mentioned, over 4.8 million pounds of uranium produced at the upper end of our revised guidance, and consequently, significant sales revenues of over $300 million from the sale of the product and also the higher realized price that we achieved over the period. A cost of production at the lower end of our guidance range, and a gross profit principally at the LHU level of over $50 million. Closing the year with a strong balance sheet of over $265 million. I think we're really pleased with the operational performance we had in FY 2026. What this has translated into is really robust financial performance over the financial year. We did release our full-year financial results last week, and if you compare some of the metrics, compare FY 2025 to FY 2026, you can see some significant shifts. Calling out a couple of these, particularly firstly, the average realized price. You see a significant uplift there reflecting the strengthening uranium spot market pricing, as well as our approach to lowering contracts over time. Secondly, revenue, as I mentioned, so increase of over 70% when compared to FY 2025, reflecting the higher volumes and the price, and then the gross profit outcome. So shifting from a gross loss in FY 2025 to a gross profit in FY 2026. And then finally, operating cash flows over $30 million. So I think what you can see is that significant operating improvement translating into our financial metrics for FY 2026. Safety and sustainability remain a core priority for us, and I think that's reflected in our FY 2026 metrics also. The group TRIFR for Paladin Group for the year was 3.2, reflecting the strong safety operating performance during a period of significant activity. Over 99% of our employees in Namibia are Namibian nationals, and that really reflects our commitment to local employment, developing skills, and engaging with the community in Namibia. We executed over 55 community programs in Namibia and Canada. And some of the particular items included in those programs are around health, education, youth development in Namibia, and in cultural and sporting events in Canada, and education. And then finally, a key regulatory milestone for us was the EIS approval, and I know that Scott and the team will talk at length about what this means for us. But it is a key milestone. It does validate the extensive work that we've done on our environmental program and with stakeholders over the period. So we continue to see safety and sustainability as a core priority. One of our key objectives this year is to ensure that we have the financial capacity to deliver our growth. So we do this through a number of ways. Firstly, through the strong balance sheet, so the $265 million worth of cash. We've got an undrawn revolving credit facility, which we did restructure at the end of last calendar year, and we continue to maintain strong relationships with our existing lenders, as well as starting to build new relationships to support us going forward. We appropriately allocate capital, so we ensure that we're continuing to sustain and grow the Langer Heinrich operating asset through investment in improvement capital through a cost focus. We are looking closely at allocation around the PLS project development as a key future growth plank in Paladin strategy. And then we also continue to underpin exploration opportunities, particularly at the PLS project, and you will have seen our exploration release today. And then the key objective being a return to shareholders, so maximizing cash flows from operations. Very pleased to be in the S&P/ASX 100. O ur S&P/ASX 100 and TSX listing provide us with an opportunity to broaden our investor base and strengthen our marketing in those regions. So we continue to ensure we have the financial capacity to deliver on our strategy. One of the questions I am asked often is how we're going to fund PLS, and the key answer at this time is we've got time, we've got flexibility, and we're not reliant on a single funding pathway. There's a couple of reasons for this. Firstly, the PLS project economics are really robust, so that puts us in a very strong position. We also have credibility as an operator, and there are a number of counterparties and stakeholders that see that as a key differentiator. We've got a dual listing, we've got existing and new debt relationships, and they all give us considerable flexibility in considering how we fund PLS. The other thing is government support. Paul touched on this around support from the World Bank, U.S. policy, but there is a lot of global government support for nuclear due to the drive for decarbonization. What again, that provides us with is potential opportunities for PLS, whether that be through export credit agency engagement, whether it be through access to grants, whether it be access to infrastructure funding. They're all potential opportunities for us to consider as we move forward. The other one is around our offtake. We have, as you're aware, got a number of relationships in place with Tier 1 global utilities. What we're looking to do is continue to build on those relationships to underpin PLS, and that's both economically, but also potentially on a project financing or alternative structures that could be underpinned by strong offtake outcomes. Then I think another opportunity for us is around a strategic partner. We are happy to develop PLS on our own, but it is a world-class asset. There is quite a lot of interest in PLS. That again, is another opportunity for us to consider as we go forward. I think just to summarize where we are now, our immediate focus is on a project financing. The reason for that is really that that is the longest lead transaction, and we'd like to retain it as an option. We've got a range of debt financiers we're engaging with on this, with the principal purpose at this point really an understanding of what the appetite is and what the potential offtake requirements are around a project financing. But we'll continue to maintain flexibility as we de-risk the PLS project. In conclusion, I think what we've delivered in FY 2026 is very strong operational and financial performance at Langer Heinrich with operating cash flows generated. We've closed the year with a strong balance sheet and liquidity and good relationships in place, with new relationships being built, and we're well-positioned for growth with flexibility and optionality in how we think about how we fund that. On that note, I'll hand over to Alex Rybak to talk about funding. Thanks, Anna. Thanks everyone for joining us this afternoon. Today, I will talk about the uranium market. In doing so, I will cover the global and the geopolitical backdrop, expanding on some of the things that Paul said earlier. I will talk about the drivers, the demand drivers, the structural deficit that we are seeing, how we have built our contracting book and our contracting and shipping and logistics activities. Then I will finish off with some observations on the uranium price as an outlook. With that, I think this is really important, because it really sets the scene for what we are seeing at the macro level. There is a real disconnect between uranium requirements and uranium supply. Top three countries, in terms of consumption, in 2028 will be U.S., China, and France. In fact, China is really making strong inroads and expected to be the largest consumer of uranium by the end of this decade. Those top three countries account for about 60% of uranium consumption annually. Top three countries in terms of production are very different: Kazakhstan, Canada, and Namibia. There is that distinct disconnect. What we have done is we have really positioned our assets in the top uranium-producing jurisdictions, being Namibia, Canada, as well as Australia. We have targeted, from our sales and marketing activities, customers in the U.S., China, and Europe. There is a real tug of war at the moment that is happening between the Chinese utilities and the U.S. utilities in terms of the supply that they are chasing. More recently, as you know, India has entered the mix. Russia has always been there consuming quite significant volumes of uranium, despite not having significant domestic production. That is really the key point of the uranium market. The countries that need uranium do not have it. Countries like China, Russia, the big U.S., the big consumers of uranium do not have significant domestic production. Kazakhstan has been the linking point amongst all this, supplying both the East and the West. They are producing, as you know, at full throttle to meet that demand. If they could produce more, they would probably produce more because the demand that is coming from China and Russia, and India more recently at the moment, is very significant. What that means is that uranium that Kazakhstan produces, that marginal pound, is not going to the Western utilities. There is a real opportunity for producers like Paladin to leverage that. Competition for global supply is intensifying. We are seeing that from our discussions with utilities. Paladin is really well placed to maximize the value of every pound that we produce. Turning to some of the demand drivers. It really quite simply is driven by electricity growth. Electricity growth is in turn driven by population growth, electrification, decarbonization, and more recently, artificial intelligence and data centers. Electricity production and consumption is expected to double by 2050. Consequently, because nuclear is expected to stay at around 10% of that mix, is also expected to double in terms of generation, leading to doubling of uranium demand. The key point here is that 10% of global mix. It is quite possible that that 10% actually is higher than what is currently being baked in into base case forecasts. If nuclear takes a larger share of the pie in terms of, say, AI and data center demand, we could see an incremental growth in demand for uranium. The demand story is really strong, and it is really underpinned by the global reactor fleet that is in operation today and is under construction. We have about 440 reactors in operation and about 80 reactors under construction. China is really leading the way in terms of reactors under construction. More recently, as you know, India has announced very significant ambitions. Russia is also building reactors domestically, as well as in its country's sphere of influence. U.S. is the next cab off the rank, and we are seeing already a number of policy initiatives in the U.S. that will support the nuclear build-out in the U.S., like the Trump's executive orders and the plans to quadruple U.S. nuclear generation from 100 to about 400 gigawatts. The U.S. government JV with Westinghouse and Brookfield, and $80 billion of associated funding for AP1000 reactors, as well as the recent U.S. DOE funding package of $17 billion for 10 AP1000 reactors for Westinghouse. All those factors will stimulate and will unlock, I believe, the nuclear rollout in the U.S. In our experience, what the utilities are really waiting for is for some more certainty on cost and the cost overrun insurance that they are asking for U.S. government to provide. That is something that we are watching very closely. If that happens, we will see some more large-scale build-outs in the U.S. In the U.S., of course, we have the SMRs that are already being built and being planned. But what we are really looking for is that large-scale build-out to happen in the U.S. In terms of the demand, it is really underpinned at the moment by the existing reactor fleet, reactors under construction, and that is the base case. In terms of the upside, there is AI, data centers, and SMRs. What we are seeing, and this is based on independent forecast by WNA, is a significant structural deficit. This is well-publicized. According to WNA, about 180 million pounds of new supply has to come to the market to balance the market in 2035. If you take all the projects under development and you assume they all happen on time, on budget, you probably get to about 50, 60 million pounds. It is unclear where that is going to come from, and that will certainly need higher uranium prices for that to happen. On the flip side, utilities have been under-contracting to date, and they have got about 800 million pounds of uncovered requirements over the next decade. But interestingly, in our recent discussions with the utilities, we are starting to see a change of approach. They are looking at the same data that we are looking, so they are seeing this supply-demand deficit. There are certain things that I would note. First of all, they are contracting much longer tenors. In 2030s, we are being regularly asked for supply now in 2030s. Secondly, they are willing to pay a premium price for base escalated contracts in excess of U.S. GDP IPD escalation. We have recently secured a contract with that premium escalation in place. Thirdly, they are also asking for equity stakes in the project, which is something quite new. We have been asked with the utilities for equity stakes in the PLS project. Utilities are moving, what I would say, as I said on the call last week, from just-in-time to just-in-case type contracting, which is very encouraging. In terms of our contracting activities, as you know, we have built a book to underpin Langer Heinrich production, and we have really positioned it to have leverage to the uranium price fundamentals over the medium to longer term. Over 85% of our production on a life of mine basis is either exposed to market prices, spot prices, or is uncontracted. We have 14 Tier 1 customers in our book, and they account for over 50% of global uranium consumption. We have built those relationships, and we are delivering uranium to very high-quality counterparties that really appreciate supply from Namibia. We are realizing prices in excess of our competitors, such as Cameco and Kazatomprom, and we are really well-placed to capitalize on the deficit in the 2030s. Touching a little bit on the shipping and logistics activities. We ship uranium to four primary destinations around the world. Our Western deliveries go to North America, and that is the Metropolis facility owned by ConverDyn and Solutus, the Cameco Port Hope facility in Canada, and then in Europe, it is Orano's Malvési facility. Then, of course, we ship to the Port of Shanghai for our CNNC deliveries. The working capital cycle is a little bit different in each case. With the Western deliveries, we deliver the material, we do a book transfer to a customer account at that conversion facility, and we get paid between 14 and 30 days after that. With the Chinese deliveries, it is much shorter. We get paid the minute the material is dispatched from the Port of Walvis Bay, and that makes it very attractive for us. What is interesting is Langer has produced and delivered over 50 million pounds of uranium to customers over the operations over the last 12, 13 years. It has done so despite the challenges that we have encountered. Obviously, with the post-Fukushima period and Langer going into care and maintenance, our ramp-up challenges, and then the floods in Namibia. Throughout all those challenges, we met all of our delivery obligations, and we delivered uranium to our customers, and we have built a very solid reputation on the back of that. As we restarted Langer Heinrich, we rebuilt our sales and marketing capability, we rebuilt our shipping and logistics capability, we rebuilt our customer relationships, we built a contract book at Langer Heinrich for Langer Heinrich, and we proved that we can supply uranium reliably to our customers despite operational and external challenges. This positions us really well for further contracting at LHM in the longer term, and at PLS at the right time. We will be catching up with our utility customers next week in London, at the WNA symposium, and it is going to be really interesting how those discussions go. Despite the industry lull, the Northern Hemisphere summer, we have already had a number of utilities reach out and seeking supply from Langer Heinrich, and already asking for supply from PLS. Finally, I will just talk a little bit about the uranium prices. At an event like this, I think it is useful to zoom out a little bit and see what happened historically, because history does tend to repeat itself; not always, but sometimes. I think what you can draw from this is shifts in uranium prices, significant shifts in uranium prices, have all been as a result of fundamental nuclear build-out activities. They took some time, but they happened. In the 1970s, the oil price shocks of the 1970s have resulted in build-out activities led by Japan, really building its nuclear reactor fleet, followed by Germany, and U.S. and Russia also expanding their nuclear build-out activities. That led to uranium price going to above $230 a pound in today inflation-adjusted terms. The early 2000s saw China enter the global nuclear world stage, and they really started building reactors and procuring material. That, in combination with some supply disruptions like the Cigar Lake floods, led to the uranium price going above $200 a pound again in today inflation-adjusted terms. Where to from now? I am not going to give you a uranium price forecast, but what I am going to say is that uranium represents less than 10% of utility generation cost, and that compares to 40%, 50%, 60% with things like coal power generation and gas generation. What that means is that uranium can go 4x, 5x, 6 x higher from here before it is considered expensive for the utilities. That is a really good setup where not only utilities need supply in the future, but they are not really impacted by much higher prices. We think we are in a very good market. We are in a good uranium setup. We think it is early in the cycle. The utilities still have a long way to contract. We are starting to see shoots of increased contracting activity, and we will maximize the value of production from Langer Heinrich and PLS. Thank you. With that, I will hand over to Scott. Thanks, Alex. All right, operations, the fun part. Just reminding everybody, we are partway through the quarter. This is not an update on the performance quarter to date, it is more of an overview of the site. All right? Langer Heinrich. Some of you have been to site. For those that have not, it is in Namibia, obviously, the west of southern Africa. We are about 85 km inland from the Walvis Bay port. When Alex talks about the shipping route, that is where all of the material that comes into the country and goes out of the country via ship lands. 85 km on a really good road network as well, so it is easy to get our product on truck to the port, and then Alex can take it over and deliver it to the customers. As Alex said, Namibia provides 13% of the world's uranium. I think that is where it is important for us is that most of our employees come from other mines in the region. Yeah? The metallurgical expertise, they have worked at other uranium mines. They understand the Namibian uranium, and I think that is really important for us. The ties with the local government, I will talk about that in a second, in the next slide, but the support that we have in Namibia for mining and for industry is absolutely stellar. We have met with the governor of Erongo. We have met briefly with the president in a recent mining conference. Both knew about LHU, or Langer Heinrich Uranium, and they were very supportive of the work that we are doing in the region and in Namibia. Thinking of the meeting, we hosted the governor of the Erongo region and toured her and her team. One of the things she said was she really likes the way that LHU supports the community, works with her office and the local stakeholders. We are not just splashing cash around for the sake of it. We want to make sure that we add value to the community that we operate. Whether that is through vocational training, scholarships, small infrastructure projects, healthcare, it is the things that really matter in Namibia and in the region that we operate that we are trying to support. The important thing there is when we talk about PLS later on, you will hear a very common theme. We are not just saying that that is what we are going to do, or that we are doing that in Saskatchewan. We are already doing that in Namibia. We can show you how we want to operate in Saskatchewan and how we will operate in Saskatchewan. As Anna mentioned, 99% of our workforce in Namibia are Namibians. We have one expat from Australia and a few people that are from neighboring countries, but the rest of the workforce are actually Namibian citizens. Safety. Graph on the left, as we have been ramping up, you see the black line going upwards. That is the mining fleet. Drill and blast starting as we got into actual full mining operation. With all of the equipment operating on site, we have got more hours of work happening. We are also expanding TSF 6, so we have got contractors doing that work. We have got a lot of hours on site. The good thing is the injuries and the safety performance has not declined, despite the fact that we have got a lot more work going on. I think that is a testament to the leadership and the safety culture on site. We want to be productive. We want to get the pounds and the tons, but we only do it when we can do it safely. On the right, you have seen those numbers before. As the plant ramped up, we are at full production at the end of the last financial year, and we are continuing that through this quarter. The mining. Open-pit mining is pretty standard. I have run a lot of operations, large and small. My background, I have started a lot of open-pit mines and I have finished a lot of open-pit mines. Those are the most complex part. That is when the challenges really happen. In the middle is pretty steady state. We have just finished the G pits. We are progressing and we were developing the J pits. That is the challenge that the team are having right now on site. As J pit gets going, then we get into the heart of that. We then will be moving over to H, and you can see the four different operations or the four different areas. H pit on the far western side of site. Once we get through the stripping and we are into the heart of H pit, then we will move TSF 1. A lot of people ask about that. That is right in the middle. Then we can access the F pits. That is when the mining phase stops. Like most metalliferous mines, that is the way that the operation runs. We mine the high grade, we process the high grade now, we stockpile the lower grade, and at the end of the mine life, we reclaim the low grade through the plant, and that is the end of the mine. It is not any different. We do contract all of the load and haul and drill and blast, but then everything else is owner operator and everything that happens in the plant is done by our team. Processing plant. Over 10 years of successful operation, like I said, the team over there, they know every pipe, every nut, and every bolt. They really know that plant really well. It is a pretty standard layout. Crushing, grinding, classification into the leaching circuit. It is an alkaline leach. A lot of people ask about our sulfuric acid usage and supply. Although we do have a little bit of sulfuric acid in the process, it is supplied locally from a neighboring site, so it is not imported, and it is a very small portion of what we actually use on site. Then the final recovery to U3O8. That is an upgrade that we did when we put in the kiln as part of the startup. We do produce U3O8 drums. Like I said before, we put it on a truck. The trucks go right to the port of Walvis Bay. A couple notable upgrades, I suppose, is through the ramp up. Our industrial water comes from NamWater, with groundwater coming from the Swakop River. We have got two bladders, large bladders, as well as an Evaporation pond that we try to keep full. If there is an outage on the water inbound, we have got that to keep the plant running. We could do that with those bladders and the Evaporation pond being full. We can operate for a couple of weeks without any inbound water. We did have a desalination plant shutdown at the beginning of June. It was a five-day shutdown that was planned. We knew about it. We bridged through that. That is no problem. There is another one coming up in October. Again, normal maintenance for NamWater, and we do not see an issue with that either because we have got the supply on site. As for power, we have got a 66 kV line coming into site. We do lose power from time to time. I lived in Kalgoorlie for the last four years. Trust me, we lose power in Kalgoorlie all the time. We have got six backup generators that if we do lose power, lightning strike, bird hits a transformer, whatever, we can get the site back up and running, and we can operate the entire plant with those generators. Then when the inbound supply is ready to go, we can turn them back off and go back to mains power. As I mentioned, the boiler burner upgrade to get the kiln up and running. The FY 2027 guidance. The biggest thing that I will talk to here is the 5.1-5.6 production. We mentioned it before, I will reiterate, it is much lower in the first half than it is in the second half. In fact, first quarter, second quarter, second half. That is just the nature of we have had a week-long shutdown. That was already done in July. It was successfully completed. That means that we have a week of no production compared to the quarters prior. We are also still developing the J pit. As the J gets into the higher grade, we get better grade, in the second half, without those large shutdowns, we have got a lot more operating time. Higher grade, more tons through the mill, gives us more pounds at the back end. Conversely, costs higher in the first half, lower in the second half. The denominator makes a big difference there, but also maintenance costs more money than just normal operating. When you have a shutdown, you get a double whammy. Key capital expenditures, the tailings ponds. Right now, we are doing a lift on TSF 6. We are currently depositing into TSF 6. We are putting a lift on that. After that, we are going to build a new pond called TSF 7. We have got a surface pond coming up in a couple of years, TSF 8. The idea there is that we are going to be constantly building tailings ponds until we finish the H pit, then that is our last big place to deposit tailings. That does keep going for the next few years. That is the overview of Langer Heinrich. Q&A. Does that count? Yes. All right. Before we get to a break, I am happy to take any questions so far before we come back and then kickstart into PLS. Yeah, Andrew. For Alex and Anna. That is a pretty bullish outlook, Alex, on the uranium market, and I love your little references to $200 uranium price, as you know. But if that is right, how do you get the balance right, flexibility between contracting now, locking your prices in? You do not want to end up in a Cameco situation with a contract book without the money. You do not want to lock yourself into financing PLS with offtake agreements that do not look so good in 10 years' time. How do you get that balance right? On another similar matter, how do you introduce to the market, it is now a seller's market, not a buyer's market. How do you introduce to the market more transparency on uranium pricing so that investors can get more comfortable with what prices actually are? Yeah, good questions, Andrew. I might start, then might get Anna to add. On the first question, I think the simple answer is you do not over-contract too much too early. Obviously, Anna can talk to funders' requirements on offtake, and that is really going to drive our initial contracting activities, as well as the need to underpin initial operations. I think, as you said, it is a seller's market, so we are approaching it as such, and are discussing and testing some concepts with utilities that are a little bit outside of the standard approach, if you like. We are not getting significant pushback on that because of the tightness of supply and because utilities recognize that we have got supply and we have got experience, and we can deliver production into the market. I do not know, Anna, do you want to add anything else from a financing perspective? Yeah, sure. Thanks, Alex, and thanks, Andrew. Look, I think, Andrew, the approach we have taken historically, where we have layered contracts into a rising market, will continue to be the case. We are doing that piece of work with our lenders at the moment around what does the offtake requirements look like for a project financing. We are anticipating, though, as part of that process, that we will definitely get credit for uncontracted volumes and market price-related contracts, because I think what we have proven through our Langer Heinrich process is that we back ourselves to get those transactions done over time. I think it will be a balancing act. But we are obviously conscious of retaining upside while also protecting the downside. We will continue to work through that. Thanks. On the transparency question, Alex, is there anything, as one of the major players in the market now, yourselves, Cameco Corporation, big Western producers, surely there is something you can do to get better visibility and less opaqueness in this market? Yeah. One of the things that is happening is the CME is working on a uranium exchange traded contract, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. That should be interesting. I think that will give people a lot more visibility as to what is happening in the spot market, and it will increase, potentially, the liquidity of the spot market. I think with the term market, let's see what happens, but I think you really have to be a participant in the term market at the moment to understand what is really going on. I do not think there is a silver bullet. You have to have in-house marketing, sales and marketing capability, which we do. You cannot rely on intermediaries. You cannot rely on traders. You have got to deal directly with the customers, which is what we are doing, and understanding the market intricately bottom up. Thanks. Thank you. Just on the PLS funding piece, you mentioned the partnerships that are potentially out there. I guess, how are you seeing those partnerships? Where are you seeing the opportunities there? You take an operator on as a partner, they can offer operational experience. You take a trading house on as a partner, they can help with your marketing. I guess, where do you see the biggest opportunities there around the partnership at PLS? Well, to be perfectly honest, the further we go down this pathway, the less exciting it becomes to me to bring on a partner. I think we have a demonstrated capacity to both develop projects and operate mines. So in order to bring a strategic partner on board, they need to bring something to the table that we do not really have. If we could find an operator with significant Canadian underground experience in that region, then I am all ears. If we could find a partner that brings potential lower cost financing, I am definitely all ears. So it really depends on what people can bring to the table. T he closer we get to the point of getting a license to construct, I think I am more hesitant to give away value to someone else. Yeah. Understood. Just another really quick one for Alex. You mentioned there was an opportunity for some creative indexation on the contracts at the moment. Could you just sort of explain in a little bit more detail what that is and how that sort of offsets or how that sort of helps you out with the contract pricing? Yeah. So in essence, at the moment, the standard contract structure for base escalated contracts is term price in today's dollars, which is what's published by TradeTech and UxC, which sits at around $96, $97 at the moment, escalated at typically it's the U.S. GDP IPD index, which is the U.S. producer price inflation. What we are seeking is escalation in excess of that. So U.S. GDP IPD plus X. Whatever that X is, we've now secured a contract with an X. We are certainly going to be increasing that value of X over time. Thanks. Yeah. It's Mark Wiseman from Macquarie. Just had a question on the free cash flow coming off of Langer Heinrich. At the last quarterly, Anna, I think you made the comment over and above the $44- $48 of production costs. You made a comment around the capitalized waste stripping and low grade all going to stockpile. I wasn't sure if you were going to provide more detail on that today, just in terms of the next several years and how much free cash flow's coming off. Is FY 2026 a good guide for the next few years? Yeah, Mark, I'm happy to take that. Look, I think what we said is that we will continue to have stripping costs as part of our ongoing mining. I think a good proxy for what FY 2027 looks like is probably the Q4 FY 2026 number. Similarly for the low-grade stockpile, during the mining phase, we are going to continue to mine the low-grade stockpile to be used in the later phase. Again, I think the good proxy for FY 2027 is again the Q4 2026. So those costs are going to be ongoing until the end of the mining phase. Every year we'll give an update on broadly where we think those numbers will be for the year ahead. I don't think the intent is to provide a five-year outlook on those. Okay. Thank you. Hey, Paul. It's Glyn Lawcock with Barrenjoey. Just maybe one for Scott. You talk about a big skew, obviously the maintenance, the grade. This business was obviously years ago set up for 6 million pounds. If you think about the skew, it looks like we're going to be there in the second half. Can you then think about, you've got 3 million tons of 900 PPM in the J pit, similar in the pit after that, the H pit. Is there an opportunity? Is that how you think about it? I'm just trying to think about how you want to maximize it, because obviously you want to maximize the NPV, as you said I think a few times in your presentation. Is that how we should think about this, that we will get to that number that we used to always think about, just the way the maths work? Thanks. I guess the 6 million, we've got to be careful that that is a maximum. That was the nameplate, right? You can't average the maximum. There are periods where we will be able to operate at that level. There are other periods where you've got maintenance or the grade drops or anything like that would happen and you'll be below. Y ou are pretty spot on. The first half and the second half. The second half, we're going to be pushing very hard to get into the upper end of that range and beyond. The three levers around the grade, the recovery, and the tons. The work that we're doing right now is to get as many tons through the plant as we possibly can. That then impacts grade because some of those tons may come at a lower grade. That also may come at a recovery cost. We have to get that balance just right. In the second half where the grade is up because the mining is there, we do not have the maintenance, so we get the tons. We will be close to that maximum. When you think about the pits coming up then, do you open them up and run them in parallels? Because is the 3 million tons of 900 PPM in each of the next pits, this one and the next one? Is it concentrated? Is it spread throughout? Is there a way for you to run this as a very high-grade mine for a couple of years and maximize the NPV? Sorry. I am thinking of the PLS project later on when we talk about high grade. It is high in Langer's terms. Yeah. In Namibian terms. We do need to strip H pit. The stripping in H is a lot higher than G and J. We will have to get into the H pit before we are finished J. That then allows us to get a little bit of a smoother transition than we have had between G and J. I think we mentioned last year, Trollope, the contractor, ramped up really fast and really, really well. We actually finished G a little bit before the plan. We had to get into J, and that is where we are still developing now as opposed to having gone in there early. H pit, we will be in there Probably not this financial year, but the next financial year, starting to strip. Absolutely, we will be blending and trying to maximize the throughput and the grade as much as we possibly can. The only other thing I will add to that, Glyn, is one of the challenges we do have, we have got those three key levers, that throughput, grade, and recovery. But one of the big impacts on throughput is the ore handling characteristics as we mine. Often we have to have a blend strategy that gives us that maximum or optimized handling characteristics, and that can be a bit of a trade-off on grade. That can set your ceiling on your final production volume. Thanks. Branko Skocic, JPMorgan. Just a quick question for Anna. She mentioned on the PLS funding piece before the possibility for infrastructure funding. I was just wondering if you could unpack that angle a little bit more, exactly what you are meaning by that, and how progressive your discussions there would be. Oh, look, we are just in initial discussions. There are a couple of counterparties, particularly in Canada, who will step out of, I guess, what commercial banks will do as far as, how they look at innovative structures around providing infrastructure. So early days, really just looking at it as one of the opportunities that we could consider at PLS. But still pretty early days on it. Then the second question there was just on the prospects for utility interest on project equity. I know you mentioned before there's probably less interest from you guys selling down there, but have you had similar interest for Langer Heinrich? Is that potentially an opportunity to go sell down a bit of a stake there as well? Over the years, we've had a number of, I guess, inquiries and approaches. We haven't really entertained those beyond an initial discussion. More recently, we've had some interest from U.S. counterparties as U.S. seeks to secure supply. A gain, it's not something that, Langer Heinrich is a strategic asset for us. If anything, we'd like to buy out CNNC's stake, 25%. If anything, they'd like to buy out our 75% stake. But beyond that, no. I think it's a strategic asset for us. We're not really seriously entertaining those offers. Branko, the only thing I'd add to all of that is, I think we're in a really fortunate position being an incumbent producer with existing relationships with contract counterparties. We have every option available to us in financing PLS. From project financing, probably at its most complicated and long lead time item, to all these other arrangements. One of the benefits of a partnership arrangement is it changes the financing complexity to an extent, or the degree to which we have to finance ourselves. So there are de-risking opportunities in all of that, and all of those are on the table right now. If you look at the timeline, we'll cover this off in more detail later on. We're expecting our hearings and a decision on approval of the permit license to construct by the end of calendar year 2027. That gives us about 18 months to really lock down those financing options. But at this point in time, all options are on the table to us, and we're in a really good position. Hey, good day, guys. Dan Roden, Jefferies. Just wanted to ask on, there's a bit of a narrative with the Super El Niño potentially developing over the next few years. Sounds like a lot of the water security initiatives you've done at Langer Heinrich have been quite successful, but quite temporary in their scope. If we were to see increased droughts and stuff in Namibia from a Super El Niño, have you started thinking about that? How would that impact the operations, and what are some of the things you're doing to, I guess, protect against that? If you look at NamWater's supply, NamWater has the desal plant, the Orano desal plant on the coast. The government is looking at another JV arrangement with another company to produce a second desal plant next door. There's about 20 gigalitres of capability at the desal plant, and that's actually more than enough to meet the needs of every existing project or every operation and regional authority in and around the Erongo region. The threat is unlikely, and the supply capability is absolutely fine. Only a small proportion of NamWater's supply comes from two aquifers, one to the north and one to the south. In addition to that, about 10%-15% of our own capacity comes from our own aquifer. I think we're in really good shape, and the risk is low. Just on the, I guess, pit sequencing, I guess pre-ramp up, there was a lot of discussion around potential options for expansion and extension of the Langer Heinrich mine. I guess, I know that's not the theme of the investor day today, but beyond the F pit, is there any potential for mine life expansions? How do you think about that? Given they're going to be likely lower grade, but does that require plant expansions if you're going down that pathway? If you could talk about that a little bit. Yeah. The challenge that we have at Langer is that it is a palaeochannel. It's not like what we're going to see this afternoon with PLS, where there's lots of prospectivity. What's not in the channel is not mineralized, and so it is a little bit more limited. We will start a drilling program, or we are now drilling the lease off to the far west, 172, to see if we can find where that palaeochannel continues on. I think that really our focus when it comes to big expansion is going to be the PLS. Second part of your question, though, we are still stockpiling, and we do separate out all mineralized material. So even the really ultra low grade that does have some mineralization in it does get stockpiled separately. As we get into potentially ore sorting or other technologies, we might be able to extend the life with the stockpiles that we have. I think we're unlikely to actually do a plant expansion. I think that capital's probably better used at PLS. And sorry, real quick, last one from me. Y ou said G pit's finished. Is that closed off finished? So we're not going back to G pit at all? For the most part. There's a couple little pods of low grade that we may still go and grab out of the bottom of it, and we will grab. It's just timing on when we actually do that. But for all intents and purposes, G is finished. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks. Okay. I think we're done for questions. I suggest we take a 15-minute break before resuming. Just out of interest, outside in that area, there's actually on the right-hand side a 3D model, a 3D-printed model of PLS. You're welcome to have a look at that, and Scott and Doug can sort of talk you through that before coming back into the next presentation. Thank you. [Break] All right, folks. If we can take our seats, we'll start the second half. Thank you. All right. Thanks for coming back. Let's talk about Patterson Lake South. [Presentation] [Presentation] Excited? Good. Switching gears from Namibia and talking now about Saskatchewan and Saskatoon. The Athabasca Basin when it comes to uranium, next level. We are talking about grades that are measured in the percentages, because otherwise the number is just so large. 14,100 parts per million, 1.4%, rather than the grades that we have in Namibia in the 500 parts per million. It is a real step change. Our deposit, as you hopefully got to see out in the lobby, is very shallow, so it is near surface, and it is very high grade, as I just said. 9 million pounds over 10 years, and Andrew is going to talk about what he is working very hard to do in order to expand that. R ight now, we have got 10 years at 9 million pounds a year. To just explain this, a lot of you have seen this before, but the X-axis is the cost of production, and it is reversed. The further to the right is the lower cost. The Y-axis is logarithmic, in case you have not seen that before. The reason it is logarithmic is because when you look at the Wheeler River, Rook, and PLS, the grades are so much higher, if we did not have it logarithmic, it would be off the scale. We had to do that. When you look at PLS then, we are right in the sweet spot. The project economics, $15 a pound, all-in sustaining, and 9 million pounds a year, 93 million pounds total, puts us right in the heart of where we want to be for this project, with massive upside potential. As I said, $15.20 per pound, all-in sustaining cost, a 28% IRR and that is at $90 per pound uranium. Depending on what you think about that, the economics of this project are incredibly strong. Now, as much as I do have the right accent to talk about the Athabasca, I am going to hand over to Dale Huffman, our President of Paladin Canada, because he lives and breathes this every day, and he will take us through a bit of the project as well. Dale? Thanks, Scott. Since I am new to this forum, I am going to take just a moment to introduce myself. I am Dale Huffman, President of Paladin Canada. I joined Paladin last October, so just under a year. My job is to build and lead a team that is going to take PLS into production. I am headquartered in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. It is our Canadian headquarters, where I have lived for the last 27 years. Top of mind for me right now is we are advancing the engineering to progress the site, working towards an investment decision is number one. Two, getting the permits and the licenses in place to do that, and number three is building relationships with our indigenous communities. About me, I have spent the last 25 years at Orano. I have had a really good career at Orano. Orano was Areva, was Cogema when I first started. I got the opportunity to hold leadership positions across a number of areas. I worked on environmental assessments, project development, health safety, environment, regulatory relations. I was the General Manager at McClean Lake for five years and finished my time at Orano as the VP of Operations and Projects. Those 25 years weren't consecutive. I took a couple of years off in the middle, went exploring with a company called Purepoint. They work in the Athabasca. They actually have a property that neighbors us at PLS. I've been to Patterson Lake actually before the discovery of Triple R. Before that, I did 10 years with Atomic Energy of Canada, working on legacy uranium sites, cleaning up legacy wastes from the past. I've worked in uranium for about 35 years. I've worked in the Athabasca for about 25 years, maybe a little bit more. If you're covering uranium in Canada, you're accustomed to seeing slides that look like this, a big blob of the Athabasca up in northern Saskatchewan. You see on the east side of the Athabasca are the current operating uranium mines. On the west side is both our future and our past. Future are mines like at PLS. Our past is Cluff Lake that started back in 1980. You go farther north to Beaverlodge is 1950s startup. Saskatchewan's a good place to be in mining, and it's a great place to be in uranium mining. Saskatchewan knows that uranium is its product, is very proud of that product, and we get great support from everyone, really. It's well-supported by the citizens. It's well-supported by government. PLS sits on the traditional territories of four different indigenous nations. Clearwater River Dene Nation, Buffalo River Dene Nation, Birch Narrows Dene Nation, and the Métis Nation–Saskatchewan. We're working on building relationships with each of these nations and basing that on trust and respect. It takes some time. We're getting into mutual- benefit agreements with these nations. At the high level, an MBA is about getting consent and support for a project and in exchange for benefits that offset impacts. At a more practical level, these are framework agreements. They're framework for collaboration and how we're going to work together going forward for mutual benefit. We need these nations to supply us with sustainable businesses, we need them to supply us with a workforce, and we need their support. We're working together. We signed MBAs with Clearwater River and Buffalo River Dene Nation back in early 2025. We announced this week we signed with Birch Narrows Dene Nation. We're quite happy to have made progress. We continue to work productively and progressively with the Métis Nation–Saskatchewan. I want to emphasize these sorts of agreements, they're not a regulatory exercise. These are about building partnerships. Paladin's arrived in Saskatchewan. We're a new name in Saskatchewan, and we're going to be part of the community. There's a bit on the earlier video really showcasing our presence. We intend to be good community partners. We've been getting involved in youth sport, we've been getting involved in some culture activity, Jazz Fest. We're in the north at community events. None of these events and none of these activities really happen without some corporate sponsorship. We intend to pull our weight. We want the benefit of Paladin's presence to be felt in the communities. Very much like Scott was talking about in Namibia, following the same sort of framework and really grassroots involvement. A bit of a timeline on this slide, talking about de-risking the PLS projects as we move ahead. If you go back to Paladin acquired Fission back in December 2024, we've been progressing the project and de-risking it since then. What followed shortly after the acquisition was settling the issues on non-resident ownership policy with the Canadian government. We have a clear path that Paladin can fully own and operate the PLS property. Along with that, we were working on engineering review, really to take the work that Fission had done, and convince ourselves of the development approach and cost and schedule and economics behind that. Fission had started the environmental impact statement. It got finished under Paladin, was the work over the last few years, and got an approval in February 2026, so earlier this year. The other work stream that we're working on is getting licensing with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. In Canada, layered on top of environmental regulators and mining regulators, we also have a nuclear regulator. We're working with them to get to licensing. We got sufficiency status. Our application is sufficient for them to proceed. Back in June, we also signed an administrative agreement, administrative protocol with them that describes how we're going to work together through the licensing period to get our license to site and construct, and puts a timeline target on that so that we finish our hearings by the end of 2027. That's all good progress and reduces the risk on the project. Then we're progressing right now to finish our front-end engineering design, and then move into detailed design following that. That's an update on where we sit right now. I'm going to hand it back to Scott. Thanks, Dale. Trying to talk you through a few of the concepts around the mine, the mine plan, the processing plant and whatnot. If you saw the model outside, the end that's closest to this room is on the right-hand side of the screen. Left is the furthest. What you can see, I'm going to try to point a little bit. We'll access it via a decline. All right? Rather than a shaft. Because we are shallow, i.e. near surface, to sink a shaft, it just doesn't really make sense for us. We'll do it via decline. It's conventional mining. All right, so nothing really unusual or different. It's very conventional. Once we get into the hard rock, it's jumbo development. Into the ore body, it is either long hole stoping, as you would see in most metalliferous underground mines, or a cut and fill. I will talk a little bit more about that later on. Load and haul. All of our equipment will drive down the portal, and that is a difference. With a shaft, you have got to lower every piece of kit down. Your workshop is underground, and that truck, or loader, or jumbo will not see the light of day likely ever again. Our trucks will haul our ore to surface. Our workshop is on surface, fuel facility on surface. The trucks will tip at the ROM and then be able to go back underground to get the next load. Something that is a little bit different, though, if you are used to Australian mining, is the bulk freezing. I will talk a lot more about that in a little bit. But essentially, above the R780E and the R00E, we will have a freeze wall or a freeze tent above the ore body, and that essentially is for geotextibility and being able to mine the crown pillar. So very quick animation. This is not section view. It is a bit more isometric, so if it looks a little bit different, it has just been rotated. There are two vent shafts, one for fresh air, one for exhaust, and then the decline. We get into the 780, which is on the right-hand side, stoping. You can see where the green ore is. That is the cut and fill. Basically, cut and fill, you drive into the ore body. You develop the ore body. By developing, I just mean jumbo development. As you are mining that, you are mining the ore. Once you finish that level, cemented rock fill. When that hardens, you come in over top of that and mine the next level, and the next level, and you just keep working your way up. So again, shallow ore body via decline. Cut and fill. One thing that you will see here. Right around there dedicated drill platforms underground. As we get development underground, Andrew Fitzpatrick and the exploration team will tell us where they really want them. Like you do in normal metalliferous mines, you put a crosscut, you give them a drill drive, and then you diamond drill from underground. Why do you do that? It is a lot cheaper than mining from surface. You are already there, and you are already in the ore body, so you have got a lot more information. The ore body is open at depth and along strike. As we are developing near the ore body or under it, we can drill and hopefully extend. On-site backfill. All of the development, other than the cut and fill, is done in waste rock. The host, either the hanging wall or the foot wall. It is inert. It is benign. It has got no uranium in it at all. That material also has to get trucked to surface. We will crush it, and some of it will get ground up, mixed with concrete, and either trucked back down underground for the cut and fill or pumped underground for the long hole stopes as a cemented paste fill. Which, again, is fairly common and conventional for an underground mine. You see in the first three years, we do the development. We have got a portal. You can see, it looks like it is under RL 40, but that is on surface. The portal is done via box cut. All right. We essentially just create a hole with the ramp, and I will get to the tunnel boring machine in a little bit. The TBM starts developing in through the overburden and down into the waste rock or into the hard rock. Once that happens, you build the tunnel. Essentially, you backfill the tunnel and then backfill the box cut. All you will see on surface is essentially a building with a hole in it. As soon as you enter that building, you will just start to go underground, and that is just like you go into a tunnel on the highway. First three years, you can also see we are already into stope mining. As we are developing, we are able to mine the ore body because we are not developing to the ore, we are developing around it. By year 4, we will have our freeze walls or the freezing tent, and I will come back to how that is going to work in a little bit. Basically, through those first three years, we will already be chilling the ground and trying to freeze it. It does take a little bit of time, but then by year 4 through year 6, we will be mining underneath that freeze wall. The freeze wall is still here. I am not sure if you can see it on the screen. It is so that we just made it a bit more transparent. Otherwise, it blocks a lot of the view. All right. It stays for the life of mine. Continue developing 780. We are now over in 840, 800. Essentially, that is the full 10 years of production as well as the few years of development upfront. That is the model that you see sitting out in the lobby. Although the model looks small, that is 10 years of mining that you are looking at all in one shot. The portal. 350 meters. The tunnel boring machine will put a 350-meter portal access. It will go another 50 - 65 meters into the bedrock. Once that is complete, then the TBM can come out of the way. We drill, grout, get it all ready, and then the jumbos go in, and it is basic jumbo development beyond that. Certainly not boring, but it is conventional. You know that. Basically, it has got a high pressure. You can see at the front of it, as it is cutting, there is a pressurized section. That is keeping the water out. Then it is a sealed concrete that gets lined in the back of it. It is essentially creating its own tunnel as it continues on. It is sealed, it is watertight, and then that will be the access. Again, it is maybe a little bit different for mining, but a lot of tunnels are a lot larger than this. Driving around cities, mountain passes, TBMs are not exactly a unique piece of kit. It gives us efficient and year-round access. All right? Just drive down the tunnel. The freezing. This is, again, very different to Australia, but in Canada and in the Athabasca, a lot of mines use this technology. All right? Not even just in uranium, but in other commodities as well. The process is you have got a freezing plant on surface. We will develop the freeze drives and essentially put pipes up into it. The picture on the top right is trying to show the freeze pipes going in above the ore body. A brine is pumped through those pipes, roughly 35 degrees Celsius below zero. That, over time, freezes the ground around it. The brine doesn't freeze. What's in the brine keeps it liquid to about -55. Then that just continually happens through the life of mine while we mine underneath it. For us, it's done for geotech stability. You can see the bulk freeze again on the model in the bottom right. Standard underground fleet, trucks, loaders, or if you're in Canada, scoop trams, jumbo drills, long holes, and all the normal kit, aggies and shotcrete sprayers and all that sort of stuff. It is, once we get past the initial decline with the TBM, very conventional underground mining. Like I said, those trucks, at 1,000 tons a day, nominal rate, it's 30 or 40 loads a day of trucks going to the surface. That's pretty standard. The process plant. We talked about the Langer Heinrich process plant. This isn't going to be the same process, although it is very, very similar. One key difference is this is an acid leach. Where the Langer process is an alkali leach, this is an acid leach. You'll see on the next slide, we do have a dedicated acid plant to make the acid for us. We stockpile the ore on surface. It gets reclaimed, put into the grinding circuit, into the leaching circuit, CCDs. It's very, very similar. Again, it's conventional of what's normally happening in the Athabasca. 1,000 ton a day. Put that into perspective. That's 350,000 tons a year. We do more than that in a month of throughput at Langer. That said, we do 9 million pounds here because, again, the grade is just so much higher. The plan is that the tailings does get treated before we deposit it on surface, and I've got a slide on the tailings pond coming up. General site overview. One thing that I'll point out on this, we have made the buildings transparent. If you've not been to a processing plant in Canada, almost all of them are inside the building. When it's -35, -40 and snowing, things need to be covered up and kept warm. From the air, all you're going to really see is big boxes and connected by tubes. So we've just blanked that out so you can see inside it. The ROM feed goes into the plant, grinding into the leach circuit, CCDs. We do have the acid plant right there, and the ore stockpiles, like I said, on surface because they come to surface via the truck. One thing that's not on this map, there's an on-site camp. It's about 2 km to the north. That'll be built. It's roughly 230 rooms. That means that our workforce, the fly-in fly-out workforce, has ready access to the site, and it's not a long transport. Tailings facility. It's pretty conventional tailings. Multiple liners. There's leak protection and leak detection. Basically, we will excavate a small amount, build the buttress around it, and it's just like most tailings ponds that you've seen. One difference that you'll see when we build it at PLS, rather than seeing the spigots and the beachhead and the way that the sand essentially decants the water off it and the water's brought back to the plant, our tailings pond will just have 3 meters of water covering it, and it'll be barges that'll actually deposit the material. The question as to why do you need 3 meters of water over it was a couple different reasons, but the biggest one is when it's -40, the water on the pond will freeze. My experience, I've not seen ice much more than a meter or 1.2 meters thick. So with 3 meters of cover, when the weather is very cold, you will get ice on the top of that pond. By about a meter, it creates its own thermal layer. The water underneath it stays liquid, and so that way, the tailings can still turn over. You can still decant under the ice back into the plant. One other thing. This is a 7.2 million cubic meters is the original design. If Andrew does a really good job in his presentation, you'll understand that there is some upside and some length of extending the life of mine. The tailings pond that we've got designed, we can put lifts on, and we can build additional cells. So as per design, it's for the 10 years. We've got expansion capability. Non-process infrastructure. We are very fortunate. We're located about 2 km off the Provincial Highway 955. I will admit, that is a picture of the highway. It is a highway in Northern Saskatchewan. It looks a lot better when it's in the winter and we've got the winter pavement on it. That means that all of our logistics, our U3O8 drums, will be able to be transported very easily down through La Loche and down to Saskatoon. It's all connected by that highway. Power, either by LNG or LPG, still working through the study. On-site power generation. Dale's also working on future options with the government of Saskatchewan to try to get a power line into the site, and we'll be on mains power. Regardless, we'll have our LNG or LPG. Water, something that Canada's rather flush with. Fresh water, we've got wells around the site, and so fresh water's not going to be an issue in Canada, I can tell you that. A permanent camp, like I said, 230 beds located a few kilometers just north of the site, so it's a nice distance away. Gives quiet and gives seclusion from the operation. That said, it's only a few kilometers drive and you're at work. Dale's talked about the key regulatory steps, so working through the CNSC process in order to get the construction license by the end of 2027 or very early 2028. We're also working through the FEED, Front-End Engineering and Design, which will then lead into detailed engineering. When we get the construction license, then we'll be able to progress into FID. Targeting commission in 2031. That's PLS. We'll go into the questions later on, but it is a really exciting project for us. It is where all the focus is right now. That said, exploration is where it gets really fun, right? Yeah. Paladin's got over half a billion pounds of resource in our portfolio, and 40% of that is either at Langer Heinrich or PLS as it stands right now. The main focus for exploration is PLS, as you are going to see, and there is a very good reason why. It has the massive prospectivity. We do some resource drilling at Langer, as I mentioned earlier in the first session, but PLS is the main focus. We did do 5,000 meters this last summer. The summer program just wrapped up at Michelin. Michelin being in Labrador on the east coast of Canada. With our Australian assets, it does give us future growth opportunities, depending on the landscape in Australia going forward. We have Carley Bore and Manyingee in W.A., and then Mount Isa off in Queensland. That is a fairly sizable deposit as well. That said, if you really want to get excited about exploration, Andrew is the guy to get you there. I will hand over to Andrew. Thank you, Scott. A little bit about myself. I did a PhD and then worked for Geoscience Australia in Canberra, and then moved over to Perth with the CSIRO, where I led the geophysics group there. In 2011, I actually joined Cameco. At Cameco, I was promoted to chief geophysicist global. I have spent a lot of time in the Athabasca Basin, both in -40 degrees and +30 degrees. Amazing place to operate. The last seven years, I was at IGO looking for nickel and copper, and then I joined Paladin last year in July. Part of the reason I joined was when they announced that they had the Fission acquisition. I was like, "Yep, I want to be part of this." Some of the guys have already talked about the Athabasca Basin already, so I will just go through it. I refer to it as the Champagne region of global uranium exploration. It is where you go to find the big, massive deposits. Obviously, low cost, super high grade. This cross-section you have seen multiple times. I guess the main thing I want to point out is the Triple R thing. It just stops at about 300 meters. More of a function that we just have not drilled much further than that. When you look at things like Eagle Point, even Cluff Lake, and Rook, these things do extend typically down to 800 meters to 1 km, which is part of the upside story we are going to see at PLS. Exploring in Canada is very different to Australia. To give you a bit of context, you can explore all year round. In fact, we have basically been doing nine months of exploration continuously at PLS to date. The team are going to have a break shortly, a well-earned one. They basically break it into what they call their summer season and their winter season. When I first went to the Athabasca Basin, I thought the guys were crazy because you actually do more in winter typically than summer, because it is actually easier to drive around on snowmobiles over snow for exploration. They drag their drill rigs around with these big tractors and things like that over frozen lakes. It is actually quicker to explore in winter than summer, but that said, you can explore all year round, and that is obviously what we are doing. Primarily, we always do diamond drilling for uranium exploration in the Athabasca Basin. Again, Australians love RC drilling and so forth. That is what we do at Langer Heinrich in Namibia. But just with the tillite and the overburden in Canada, it is very hard for RC to be very effective through that overburden. So it gets costly and starts becoming cost competitive with diamond drilling. The other thing with uranium exploration is you typically cement the holes after you have drilled them. So we really want as much geological information out of that hole as possible, and you cannot get much better than diamond core. Lastly, what is unique to uranium and other commodities out there is, and I am a geophysicist, so this is where I really get excited. We have this thing called a gamma probe. So you stick that down the hole after you finish the drill hole, and it is basically real-time assays. So we do not have to wait six weeks or eight weeks or 12 weeks to get our assays from a lab. We still do that as part of reporting requirements, but we have these very fancy calibrated probes. Actually, we are the only commodity in the world that is actually allowed to present what we call equivalent U3O8 estimates from these tools as a proxy for grade, because they are actually that accurate. Today's ASX release has reported grades from gamma probing. So we could get those results out for today. All right. So, a bit of a timeline here just to give a bit of a background, because I do not think people understand the true upside at PLS. Everyone says there is always upside with exploration. I have said it numerous times in my career. But there is amazing upside at PLS. Because Fission came along, unfortunately at the wrong time, when they had this amazing discovery, they basically drilled enough to generate a 10-year mine life with good production and so forth. Then obviously, they had to put their money into PFS and feasibility studies and so forth. Fortuitous for Paladin, we came along and acquired Fission and this great project. When we started looking what they had done, they had done a fantastic job, but they just basically stopped exploring many years ago around their project while they focused on going down the development route. So, since we have had it, we have recommenced exploration. We have continued looking at Saloon East, and we announced that last year that it is looking really good. I call that the smoke. We are seeing a lot of smoke. We have not found the fire yet at Saloon East, and so we are going to try and do that in the last 6 months. At the same time, following up a lot of greenfields targets that have not been tested. Lo and behold, the first one we followed up, we hit Atlas, and we announced that in June this year. Then we obviously got distracted with that one and just sent all the rigs to Atlas and left Saloon East to itself. So, what is coming on now is basically in FY 2027, we have got a 30,000-meter budget for PLS. Probably two-thirds of that is going to be on Triple R, and then a third on following up the Atlas discovery. So, we break exploration into pillars. I actually start at number three because Greenfields Exploration, we have 100 targets generated in regional exploration opportunities. We test them with a drill rig. Maybe those 100 targets become 10 targets that actually have uranium mineralization in it. Maybe not even economic. If they are economic, we then call them a prospect, and then we will start drilling intensively around those prospects to create a resource to form the deposit that hopefully then turns into a mine. As we go down the value chain, we are adding value, we are reducing the risk as we go along. Atlas was sitting in number three up until June this year. It has now been upgraded to number two. Similarly, Saloon East, it is in number two. Then obviously, number one is the Brownfields program, pretty well around Triple R. The other thing I want to point out on this map is there are all these orange lineaments. These are these structures that we like to find. To date, we have only really tested two main, what we call corridors. That is when we know there is now uranium in there. But in the Greenfield space, there are all these other structures we have not even tested. We could find a third corridor, a fourth corridor. It is too early to say. Even along a single corridor, we can have multiple discoveries. It is very early days for the whole project as a whole. You have seen this section a few times today. One thing to point out is this is the resource model, and what you are looking at on the outside is the reserve, the actual mine plan. What is not out there is 1515W out on the west, and neither is 1620 out in the east. They are in the resource category, and we are working on that to get it into the reserve. We have 130 million pounds in the resource. Triple R is 93 million pounds in the reserve. We are hoping we should at least be able to get another 15 million pounds into reserve over time by doing what we are doing right now with the resource extension drilling. This is doing multiple things. We are trying to convert resource to reserve with additional drilling. We are also trying to find additional resources. Yes, because this is all true Brownfields. The other thing is, like I mentioned and I will show it in more detail shortly, is that there is upside at depth, even just along strike and even parallel to the current ore body. But our focus for this financial year is really de-risking the early-stage mine production at 780, doing extra drilling there to make sure that we are going to see the grades when we start mining on day 1, as well as obviously grow that asset. Geologists love these things called cross-sections. We are looking through the Earth now. Triple R is the one on the left. I have got a histogram showing the amount of drill holes that have been drilled at Triple R. There are about 540 in the NI 43-101 report. You can see that number, 149, 148. Like I said, most of them have been down to 300 meters. We have not drilled much further than that, and there seems to be a very good correlation that the more holes we have drilled, the more uranium we have found. If we drill more holes at depth, we should find more uranium. The section on the right is showing you this Rabbit Lake or Eagle Point deposit over on the east of the Athabasca Basin. This is a Cameco deposit, and it was always called their second-tier target deposit. This thing has been mined for 40 years, and they have mined 200 million pounds out of this thing to date. They call it the Energizer Bunny because it keeps going and going. This is part of the story of that we have hardly even scratched the surface at Triple R. The image on the left is the long section of the resource. Keeping in mind the three ore bodies in the middle is the 3D model outside. The gray layer is the shear zone where we have drilled some holes. Even between these ore bodies, they are actually untested. There might be one or two holes. What we will see is 1515W on the far west. I am going to show you some results that we just presented this morning on what this resource conversion work we are doing now. What does it actually add to the growth of this story? We have potential even along in the shallow part at Triple R, untested. We have the potential at depth, which we will probably test once we have got drive developments in, as Scott alluded to. It will be cheaper to do it from underground. Then in cross-section, it is full 3D, you can actually test parallel structures. When we look at Eagle Point on the other side, the uranium does not occur on one shear zone, it occurs on multiple ones, parallel structures. They call them flower structures because it looks like a flower, the multiple streams. Again, there is just so much room out here. It is just basically untested ground and makes the team's job in Canada great. Very exciting stuff. Going to that 1515 part of Triple R. Like I said, this one is not in the reserve. We have been drilling around it to get into reserve, and we are having really good success. That is a plan view, but I prefer the section. That is the current resource model. All the new holes just in the last 12 months are the black lines you can see. All the drilling is there. The old stuff is done in light gray, so it just does not dominate. All these little blue circles is anything greater than 0.1% uranium, which is again, high grade and you cannot really see it here, but there is high grade, 3%-4% in that area. The drilling we have done to date is extending the size of R1515W already. What is really exciting is actually this hole here is 100 meters away from R1515W. There are no holes in between and there is a hole there. It is like we might have just missed it because we are looking in 3D. We do not know if these join up yet, but this is super exciting because that is super high grade and showing you the extensions we are going to see at Triple R over time once we start developing and continue on. Then we are moving into our prospect delineation stage when we have success, and this is where Saloon East and Atlas come into play. The idea at Saloon East today was just to keep stepping in from the east and west of the Saloon intersects and try and get into the middle. At the same time, we had a rig drilling this anomaly. It wasn't called Atlas. They give them weird numbers. That thing hit some really good juice, and then we moved the rigs off Saloon East and just went to Atlas. We've parked Saloon East for now to focus on Atlas, but Saloon East still needs to be followed up in the future. This is the Atlas discovery, and so far to date, every hole has hit mineralization, which is absolutely fantastic. It's a great story. The release we did this morning was basically to say we've had the highest hole to date. I'd like to think of grade thicknesses. We say 43% meters, so that means it could be 43 meters at 1%, it could be 22 meters at 2%. It's just a way of trying to get your head around different thicknesses and grade. That's phenomenal. That surpassed our discovery hole by twice the amount. Very good. We're just getting better results. Again, in the long section. In the initial release, we showed the stars in this long section of the high-grade intercepts of grade thickness, and they're all the assay results. What we presented this morning was the assay data from the gamma probes. You can see the size of the area just keeps getting bigger and bigger. Like I said, it's open in every single direction at this stage. We're just going to keep going there. Saloon East discovery, again, like I said, the idea was to keep tuning in from either end of those hits. This is where, like I said, we're finding smoke, but we haven't found the fire yet. Even this year's last results in the last six months are still the best results to date. We're getting large, thick smoke, amounts of smoke sitting around about 0.1%. We are not seeing our 1%s that we like to see at Triple R yet, but it's still very early days. To keep the CFO happy, we'll focus on Triple R and Atlas for the next foreseeable 12 months. Lastly, regional exploration. This is parked again because we're just having success. I've never had this issue before. We've got multiple other targets elsewhere. We're collecting geophysical data, all the tools we use to help target these things. We're getting coverage over time. In two years, when we're probably allowed to go back to regional exploration again, we'll have those targets to follow up. We've got so much in our portfolio and our target ranking so far, like the regional stuff. Yeah, probably two years, we'll get out there again. As well as the other projects we have in the entire portfolio. This is just obviously PLS. I'll throw it back to you, Scott. Thanks, Andrew. I told you. Again, just to summarize, over 500 million pounds, half a billion pounds in our portfolio right now. Again, 40% of that is either at Langer Heinrich or PLS. I think you have heard the story of the potential upside. 30,000 meters this year. We have just finished the summer program. As Andrew said, we will take a short break, let the ground freeze, and then we can go out onto the lake and finish up the winter drilling program. We will keep you updated as we get more results back. The two new discoveries, to reiterate, we will be able to further delineate the Triple R as we develop the mine. We are still drilling from surface, and infill drilling and resource conversion. But the depth, once we are down there, we will keep extending it. How many mines have you heard started with a 10-year mine life 40 years ago, right? That is the idea that we are looking at for Triple R. But as Andrew said, there is also the prospects or the discoveries, and we have had two on the project out of two, essentially. Being Saloon East and Atlas. To put things into perspective, that model out there is a little over 1.5 km Long in reality. Right? If you go out there and you imagine how long that model is, double it up towards the lifts. That is where Atlas is. Right? It is not a long way away. It is 3.5 km away. So that is the PLS property that we are working with. As Andrew has outlined, there is a lot of upside. I think with that- You start? Q&A or do you want to do the closing statements? No, go with Q&A. All right. Q&A. Thanks, Scott. Happy to take any questions. James Bullen from Canaccord. Just a question. When you acquired Fission, there was a bit of conjecture around whether the regulator and the First Nations would be supportive of a second mill in the area. That sort of chatter has died down. Where is that at at the moment? Has there been any positive signs? Well, I think broadly, we've probably demonstrated through delivery of all those milestones that we're more than capable of progressing the project. We have very broad support. 75% of all First Nations group in the region support the project, and we're still working very closely with the last group. That's all in good shape. Recently, Dale and I met with the President of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, and they're very supportive of the project. They have no concerns about having two mills in close proximity. There are other areas in Canada where there are two mills close together on the western side. Of course, here in Australia, we see that all the time. In the Bowen Basin, there are coal mines in close proximity. Western Australia got two Yandis close together around BHP. It's not uncommon. We're finding that local communities, all stakeholders, are very supportive of our presence there. With NexGen being so close, is it appropriate now to start discussions about any form of infrastructure sharing, or is that just not possible? We're all ears. We think the neighboring project is an excellent project. We'd like to see it developed. I think it makes absolute sense to have things like power generation or even transmission capability, airports, roading, camps. There's a whole range of infrastructure potential that we could be collaborating on. We're more than willing to collaborate. Thanks. Paul, we had a presentation, well, sort of presentation from your next-door neighbors last night. Well done to you for turning up and taking questions. One of the differences, you have made a virtue out of not having tailing storage underground. They have made a virtue out of having tailing storage underground. I know you do not like talking about other people's projects, but just compare and contrast. What is the advantages, disadvantages, why are they going that route? Why are your tailings on the surface? I guess I will start with our project. Tried and tested is our preference. I think we are a company that says what we are going to do, and we do what we say. I think we run above-ground tailings facilities in Namibia quite well. We know how to operate them and similarly in Canada, through Dale in particular, we have got expertise. My preference is to take that low-risk, known pathway into production. Probably would not comment on what our neighbors are doing, but I think our process is tried and tested and more reliable. Hey, Paul. I feel probably a little bit like a kid in a candy store with everything you have got up there in front of you. T wo questions. Firstly, when do you think we could see the next resource update for PLS? Secondly, how are you thinking about the way forward from here? You have got one plant, but you have now got three discoveries. Are they close enough such that you just expand the plant? Do you add it on the back? I know I am trying to put the cart in front of the horse, and we are a long way to go. But this is going to get quite big by the looks of it. Just trying to think, how are you conceptually thinking this looks? Longer life? Double the size? What are you thinking? Thanks. I think initially, we are developing the plant to have significant sprint capacity. But you are right. The first prize is let's get up and running. So we are progressing the permitting process. We expect to get licensing towards the back end of calendar year 2027, early 2028, and we will get our 9-million-pound per annum average production facility up and running. Between now and then, we will continue exploring. I kind of like the idea of Scott to progress an underground road to the Triple R, 3.5 km away. We will go through a permitting process. There will be a whole bunch of work to do to get there. But we could potentially have a 3.5 -kilometer underground all-weather roadway to access Atlas Discovery. That is possible. Whether the sequencing is before that 10-year life of mine or post 10-year life of mine, we are still open. Let us get the first Triple R deposit up and running. There is no scope for you to change the plan now? What is in train through the permitting through CNSC has to stay. Otherwise, you just keep putting yourself losing time. I think if we change our course now, it will just introduce delays. I think that the track we are on is the right track, and we will progress it at that 9 million pound per annum average rate, all the way through to this permitting phase. F inal question then. What would you prefer? Would you prefer life extension or obviously just try and expand it? Is that the easier option, do you think, in terms of permitting later on? Ton is always king, but what I'd rather is actually just get up and running. I'm keen on de-risking the project and, yeah, 9 million pounds per annum initially, but we'll see. Thanks, Glyn. Thanks. Alistair Rankin from RBC. Just on the number of drill holes and the meters that you've drilled there so far at PLS. I guess, how does that sort of compare to your one key neighbor, just across the lake? How many meters have you done so far, versus how many they've done? We've done 24,000 meters last financial year, and we're doing 30,000 meters this financial year. But keep in mind, we've got other projects. We've done probably another 10,000 meters at Michelin, 5,000 meters this financial year. We're doing 13,000 meters at Langer Heinrich. If you add it all up for this FY 2027, we're looking like our neighbors from the drill meters. It's just spread on a few other projects, right? Our historical drilling is about 220,000 meters. We're a little short of our neighbors, but we're gaining rapidly and we're having a I think what we're having is a high degree of success with every hole we're drilling. Yeah. I guess just on as well, those slides on 62 and 63 that really showed that Triple R deposit. Clearly you are doing the underground later once you get under, well, the lower stuff a bit later once you get underground and can do it in a cheaper way. But are you looking at doing those shear deposits or the shear holes as well, near term? Or is that something going to come a bit later as well? We are not doing everything binary. It is not this or that. There is a deep pod in the resource, just indicated below 840. You will see it in that green thing, the little faint thing at depth. Again, that never got followed up. We are going to follow that one up first with a few deep holes. But we are not going to drill deep holes everywhere, but we are just trying a few sort of scientific ideas before we go too hard. Because just because there is so much other things we can chase up that is easier. So why would not we do that? Everyone wants me to do this in the next 12 months. I thought I was given three years. But we will see how we go. Just one last one quickly on the TBM. Is there opportunity there? I mean, what do you sort of have to do? Do you have to get a new one? Is there a way you can get a secondhand one, or is there somewhat? I guess, what do you have to do to get a hold of a TBM these days? There is actually a whole bunch of secondhand TBMs available, and we went out for quotations. What we are also finding there is a number of new producers who are available to deliver them within the timescale that we need. So, and in particular, there is Chinese producers that have a high capability. So there are options. Typically what you would normally do is decide on the diameter that you are looking for, and then go out and specify your tunnel boring machine to be built to suit that. The alternative model is you roughly know what you want and go out and see what is available in the secondhand market refurbished. What we are seeing, is that new build Chinese ones built to your design, are similarly priced to secondhand European TBMs of about the right size. Thanks. Probably just on PLS. One thing we haven't spoken about is the CapEx number. You updated that last year. Just keen to understand, I guess, the level of confidence you've got in that number, the work that you've done to progress it over the last 12 months, and if we should expect an update there on a 12 - 18 month view ahead of FID. Yeah. Good question, Branko. I'm absolutely confident that it will go up. No projects get cheaper the closer you get to construction. We have an update from the engineering update that we did just over a year ago now, and we're going through the FEED works. At the end of the FEED study, I expect that we'll have an update of our concrete prices, steel price, labor rates, component cost, and we should have an update shortly after the FEED is finished. Between FEED and detailed design, I probably expect that we'll have another update. Things will continue to get more expensive. When we finish detailed design moving into production, I expect that we'll have an updated estimate then. What you should expect to see from us, and I think what has become our typical style, is a level of transparency that continues to update you as soon as we have a basis for providing you with more accurate information. Oh, that makes sense. Just closing out on the Métis Nation, can you just talk to the level of progress you've made over the last six months and when you're hoping to have, I guess, an agreement in place ahead of that end calendar 2027 hearing? Sure, yeah. The Métis and Paladin each have a negotiating committee. We have been meeting fairly regularly. We are making steady progress on our mutual benefit agreement, but I do not think I can speculate on when it will be completed. These things will take the time that they take. As I said earlier, we are really focused on making sure that we are building respectful, trustful relationships because you get into these agreements, and these are life of mine type agreements. We are putting a good foundation in place. I guess I would like to follow on from that. What are the key sticking points you are working through at the moment? What are they pitching to you? These are confidential agreements, so I cannot share those items. We are working quite constructively. What I will say, in addition to that, is that we recognize that all stakeholders must benefit out of our presence in that region. I think that we are a company that values the stakeholders. We build long-term relationships, and we are very supportive of the people whose lives depend on our presence there. I think the Métis Nation are doing an excellent job for their constituents and, as Dale said, it will take however long it takes. These also need to be sustainable from a company perspective. It is progressing very well. Thanks very much. Chris Creech from Morgans. Looking at the project approval, can you get the same sort of project opposition as to what you could find from, I guess, Queensland Coal sort of opposition where talking about New Zealand, New Acland. Would you be expecting or could you expect similar opposition in Canada to the PLS project approval? You want me to talk about the hearing process of proponents and opponents? Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry, Canadian, not- That is fine. familiar with the example. The process that we go through with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, it is a public process. There are opportunities for interveners to chime in and oppose the project. Like I said earlier, we have resoundingly good support for uranium development in Saskatchewan, and there are a couple of other proponents that have been down this path recently as well. We can pretty much predict what we are going to see. What we will generally see is good support for the project. With our Métis Nation–Saskatchewan partners, they actually come out to support us, right? They put positive interventions in to support the development of the project. I think that is what we will see. Too easy. Thanks so much. Before I close, a couple of things I probably should have mentioned earlier. We have Cliff with us today, Chairman of our board, so feel free to catch up with Cliff afterwards. I would also like to thank, as we have a couple of people here today, Andrew and Mark, thanks for making your way from Darwin on the red-eye and being with us. I think today's presentations have highlighted, I think, a company that is executing today while building for tomorrow. At Langer Heinrich, we have completed our ramp-up, and we have created a strong platform for future growth. At Patterson Lake South, I think we have achieved a number of milestones that are continuing to de-risk the project. With exploration, you have heard from Andrew. His enthusiasm is absolutely contagious, and what he puts forward is a very compelling picture of the future for the PLS region. Paladin today combines production, development, and exploration, I think in a way that very few other uranium companies can match. Importantly, we believe we have the assets, the balance sheet, the customer relationships, and the team to create meaningful value through the next phase of our growth. Thank you very much for your support and your participation, and I really appreciate you being here today with us. Thank you.