A very warm welcome this afternoon from Perth. Thank you so much for joining us for South32's Annual General Meeting. My name is Karen Wood, and it's my great pleasure to chair the meeting today. Before asking Len Collard, who I'm delighted to say is with us today, to come forward and offer a Welcome to Country, I would like to acknowledge the Traditional Owners of the lands on which we meet, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar Nation, and pay my respects to the Elders, past and present, of the lands on which we're located today, and of course, the lands on which South32 conducts its business around the world. In the spirit of reconciliation and respect, we'll continue to support initiatives that strengthen the unique cultural and spiritual relationships that Indigenous and tribal peoples have to land, waters, and seas, and of course, their rich contribution to society, and to ensure their legacy continues and extends for future generations. Could I ask you now to give Len Collard a very warm welcome to conduct the Welcome to Country? Len. Oh, thanks so much, Karen. It's always lovely to be back among some of my friends here at South32, and it's good to see so many of the stakeholders, the shareholders, I understand, are here today. Along with the Welcome to Country, I always like to spin a little connection to country, just so that we appreciate the sense of place we've come to today. When I was a kid, my old people always said to me, "You got to speak in our home language." [Foreign language]. So part of the explanation is obviously the colonials called it Perth, but the Noongar already had a name for it, and I always go back to the name of its origins. Bidi is but one of the names of the many names that can be applied to the city location. In the local language of the Noongar, Bidi is the pathways. For today's exercise, the shareholders of. For all shareholders who have come today, as well as the management team and the board, of course, all roads don't lead to Rome today. Where do they lead to? They lead here, to the Swan River. The Bidi is the pathways or the roadways. And so, the idea of meeting here is, it's fitting into the feng shui, if we use that Chinese concept, or what Noongar call the Kwop Wirrin, because the rhythm of the nation is shaped by the sense of place. The land speaks and manipulates people to behave in a certain way. And so what's coming up shortly, around about the end of October, there will be a tree that will come into blossom, and it's called the Moodjar. For those people that grew up here in Perth, you might know it as the West Australian Christmas tree. Are people familiar with that? It's like that gentleman's orange shirt over there. It's a beautiful orange blossom. For the Noongar, who always read, like global peoples, they read nature, and nature informs the human beings about what is going on. The Moodjar, the famous Christmas tree, was given to me as my totemic ancestor, because I was born on the 24th of December, in the full bloom of the blossom. When I was a kid, I was given the name Moodjar, the Christmas tree. What am I getting at is that coming up in the not too distant future, the Marnaa. That is the gathering of the tribes. This Annual General Meeting is a bit like a Marnaa, really, where the tribes come together to celebrate and talk about the gossip, talking about strategic thinking, where to from here, maybe settle a few disputes, or maybe catching up with old mates, if you know what I mean. So the Marnaa is set off by the orange blossom, and it's not far away. So it wasn't too far out of the feng shui, so to speak, or the rhythm, that in the near distant future, there'll be more meetings going on here in the Noongar Boodja, which coincides with the orange blossom. And of course, Christmas was not that far away either. So keeping in mind, I'm going to play a tune to bring the Kwop Wirrin, or the good spirit, here today for the shareholders, and hopefully, that will manifest in all the good things that come out of an Annual General Meeting, including bonuses and all that sort of stuff, and growth, not contraction. I'm going to play a tune on my didgeridoo to bring the Kwop Wirrin and say thanks so much for the board for having me in today. I think I'm going to catch up with youse in a couple of weeks, I understand. I think there's going to be further visitors from all around the globe coming here to the Noongar Boodja to celebrate a whole bunch of special special things about the leadership within South32. I'm going to play a tune now to call the good spirit, and I think I'm going to be escorted out the door by Mr. Mofflin, and I'm going to leave it, too, 'cause one of the things that Karen said to me, said, "Len, I know those Aboriginal Dreamtime stories. They go on, and on, and on." Now, she wouldn't dare say something. She's too nice a lady, but I was given my five or seven minutes, and I think I've certainly had my cut of the cake, and I'm going to play a tune, and I'm going to exit out the door, and I'm going to leave the serious business of the AGM reporting. As I normally as always say, [Foreign language] I'll see you later on. Thank you. Thanks, Len. What a lovely way to describe the purpose of our meeting today. Len was referring to Graham getting his senior leadership from around the world into Perth for a meeting in a fortnight, Graham? Correct. Where Len will be back to, to talk to that group. So I know everybody's looking forward to it. Thanks again, Len. As I said earlier, I'm joining you today from Perth. We do have people online, along with our Chief Executive Officer, Graham Kerr, and Company Secretary on my right, Claire Tolcon. Also on stage, on my far right, are Non-Executive Directors, Keith Rumble. Next to Keith, Futhi Mtoba, Carlos Mesquita, and then on my far left, Sharon Warburton, Wayne Osborn, Xiaoling Liu, and Frank Cooper. Unfortunately, our colleague, Jane Nielsen, is not able to join us today, but is joining us remotely from the United States. So welcome, Jane. I'm not quite sure what time of the day it is for you, but I suspect it's a fairly inconvenient time. But thank you, we appreciate you being with us. We also have members of Graham's Lead Team attending either in person today or remotely, and I know everybody's looking forward to the opportunity to talk with shareholders after today's meeting. Graham Hogg from KPMG, the company's auditor, is joining us. And this is Graham's last meeting in his official capacity. In accordance with the auditor rotation policy, he will be replaced by Jane Bailey, who is also with us today. So welcome, Jane. We thank Graham for his tremendous service in relation to our audit over the last five years. Tim Hughan from Computershare Investor Services is also joining us and has, as usual, been appointed the Returning Officer for the meeting and the scrutineer of the voting. So with those welcomes, I can confirm that a quorum is present and now formally declare the meeting open. I'll just ask Claire to run through some procedural matters before we get underway. Thank you, Karen. Today's AGM is being conducted as a hybrid meeting, which enables shareholders, proxy holders, and guests to attend in person or remotely via the online platform. For those shareholders joining us in person, please take note of the emergency exits and the evacuation information displayed on screen. If you would like to ask a question, when prompted, please raise your hand and introduce yourself to one of our microphone attendants, who will introduce you to the meeting. All physical voting cards will be collected at the end of the meeting. For those shareholders joining us online, in the event of an emergency in the room, please stay connected, and an update will be provided via the meeting platform. Written questions can be submitted via the Q&A icon on your screen or verbally by dialing the telephone number, which will connect you to the audio question line. Once voting opens, you can cast your votes by pressing the Vote icon before the meeting closes. If we experience any major technical difficulties during this meeting, updates will be provided via our website and relevant stock exchanges. Questions received in advance of the meeting will be read out by our moderator, Jenny White. If multiple questions on the same topic are received, we may group them together when we answer. As stated in the Notice of Meeting, voting will be conducted by way of a poll on all resolutions. I'll now hand you back to the Chair. Thanks, Claire. I now declare voting on all of the resolutions open, so you may begin recording your votes whenever it's convenient for you. Once again, it's a pleasure to be with you for the AGM, and we greatly appreciate your participation, whether in person or online. As we look back on one of the most significant years in our history, I want to start the meeting by reflecting with great sadness on a recent tragic event. We were devastated by the news just last month that Mr. José Luis Pérez, a contractor at our Cerro Matoso operation in Colombia, suffered fatal injuries after a fall from height. José Luis was just 29 years old and was working as part of a scaffolding team undertaking quarterly maintenance work during a stoppage at Cerro Matoso's production line when the incident occurred. He's survived by his partner and two young children. On behalf of the board, I want to express my deepest and heartfelt sympathies to his family, to his friends, and of course, his colleagues in Colombia. Graham has been to Colombia to better understand the circumstances of this tragedy, and of course, an investigation into the incident is underway, and Graham will touch on this when he speaks to the meeting a little later. As your Chair, I can assure you that improving our safety performance has been and must continue to be critical for everybody at South32. What is clear to us is that shifting our safety performance requires cultural change. That change is at the heart of our global multi-year safety improvement program, which includes the delivery of our Lead Safely Every Day program, focusing on safety leadership capability and building a culture where each one of us takes responsibility not only for our own safety, but for those with whom we work. During the year, each member of the board participated in this training. We also continued our regular site visits, which gave each one of us the opportunity to hear from team members about how they see the impact of the program in their operation. So while we're seeing positive trends in leading safety indicators designed to detect and provide advanced warning of latent safety hazards, we can never be truly successful until each member of our workforce goes home to their loved ones, safe and well at the end of every shift. This means we must support the physical, and indeed, the psychological safety for all. Every member of your board, Graham, and each other member of the leadership team, in fact, all of those across South32, are steadfastly committed to this. During the year, the board has continued its work in overseeing the development and implementation of South32's strategy, a strategy that has led our work since formation. A key element of that strategy has been the identification and pursuit of opportunities to sustainably reshape our business for the future. I'm pleased to say that we completed two significant milestones during the year: the final investment decision for the zinc, lead, silver Taylor deposit at Hermosa in Arizona, and the sale of Illawarra Metallurgical Coal. Through these changes, we've further streamlined our portfolio towards base metals. Following the sale of Illawarra, approximately 90% of our portfolio's underlying revenue is now expected to come from base metals, including our aluminium value chain, with the remainder from manganese. This compares to just 50% of the portfolio's underlying revenue that came from these base metals at the time of demerger in 2015. Graham will shortly provide a detailed summary of our financial and operating results, but I do want to acknowledge some significant events and challenges that we faced during the year. In particular, the impact on GEMCO from Tropical Cyclone Megan in March, and the impairments recorded for Worsley Alumina and our nickel refinery at Cerro Matoso. At GEMCO, we've commenced a phased return to mining activities and continue to work towards resuming ore export shipments. The impairment expense recorded at Worsley followed the increased uncertainty created by recommended conditions for the mine development approval and associated challenging operating conditions. We continue to engage with the Western Australian government and seek approval of the project on conditions that we believe are reasonable, having regard to the necessary environmental protections and the facilitation of this important industry in Southwest WA, an area we have been working in responsibly for decades. At Cerro Matoso, we recorded an impairment expense of $264 million that reflected structural changes in the nickel market, which are expected to continue to place pressure on nickel prices. We continue to progress our strategic review of this operation in response to these issues and expect to provide information on the outcomes of this review in the second half of financial year 2025. I do want to acknowledge the work of our teams, who continue to work tirelessly to deliver the best possible outcomes for our business. Despite these challenging events, we finished the year strongly, achieving two annual production records. We delivered underlying earnings of $380 million in respect to financial year 2024, and returned $198 million to shareholders, including $163 million in fully franked ordinary dividends and $35 million via an on-market share buyback. Reflecting the group's strengthened financial position and our disciplined approach to capital management, in August, the board resolved to allocate $200 million to our ongoing capital management program to be returned to shareholders via our on-market share buyback, which we started following the completion of the sale of Illawarra Metallurgical Coal. Against the backdrop of prevailing geopolitical tensions and uncertainty, we expect some of the global volatility that has impacted the prices of some of our commodities will continue. We're focused on what we can control, which is to remain disciplined in how we allocate capital and protect our balance sheet, while maintaining safe and reliable operations and continuing to transform our portfolio for long-term value creation. Just as we're working to build and maintain a diverse workforce to foster greater collaboration, innovation, and performance, your Board, too, represents a broad cultural and ethnic background and geographic mix. During the year, we welcomed Sharon Warburton as an Independent Non-Executive Director, further enhancing the Board's range of skills and experience. Sharon is the third new Director to join the Board in the past two years, in line with our succession planning progress, which ensures we appropriately plan for the future. Today, we farewell Keith Rumble, who's stepping down as a Non-Executive Director, a role he's held since the formation of South32 in 2015. Keith has been a highly valued member of our board. His deep operational skills have contributed to our deliberations, and as Chair of the Sustainability Committee, Keith has overseen how we incorporate important sustainability considerations into our strategy. I would like to take this opportunity, and ask you to join me, to just formally thank Keith for his contribution. On Keith's retirement, we have three remaining founding directors, meaning the directors who came across at the beginning of South32's life, and we have succession plans in place for all three positions. As you might expect, we want to stagger retirements to ensure that valuable institutional knowledge that each of those three bring is not lost at the same time. Arguably, the Board's most important task is to oversee succession planning for senior management, including the Chief Executive Officer, to ensure that we have the right leadership for your company. This process does not stop and involves identifying talent, both internally and externally, and overseeing development plans. We're fortunate to have had a quality leadership team led by Graham, who together have transformed our business, including through the significant portfolio decisions made during the course of this year. Your Board continues to plan for the future, and you can be assured that we have the processes in place to secure the leadership skills needed to continue to deliver our strategy and to best position South32 for the future. During the year, we continued to focus on the areas of sustainability that are material to our stakeholders, our business, and our long-term future, the most material of which is responding to the imperative to address climate change. As shareholders know, we support the Paris Agreement, objectives to limit global temperature rise to well below two degrees this century, and to pursue efforts to limit that increase to one and a half degrees. In early 2025, government parties to the Paris Agreement will set their 2035 nationally determined contributions for emissions reduction. In setting these contributions, we encourage an ambitious approach to align with limiting temperature increases to one and a half degrees, but in doing so, we also encourage appropriate policy settings and commitments that recognize specific sector, commodity, and geographic decarbonization challenges to support a just transition. This is a challenge that needs to be considered on a global basis and in a way that does not drive businesses to jurisdictions without the checks and balances needed for a genuine reduction in global emissions. In 2022, you might recall, we published our goals and targets in our first Climate Change Action Plan. At that time, we committed to update the plan and put it to shareholders again for consideration in 2025. Work on that revised plan is well underway, including engaging with shareholders and other stakeholders for input. Graham will talk to the work taking place to decarbonize operations within our aluminium value chain, where the majority of our operational greenhouse gas emissions are generated. Our approach to environmental stewardship alongside climate change is a material, strategic, and governance issue for South32 that is overseen by your board. As stewards of the lands and waters on which South32 operates, it's our responsibility to minimize our impacts to the natural environment. During the year, we worked to deepen our understanding of nature-related impacts, dependencies, risks, and opportunities. With this program of work, shaping our approach to addressing nature-related risks and opportunities, which we plan to publish in 2025. As we look ahead to our tenth year and beyond, we have much to be proud of and much to look forward to as a global, diversified producer of commodities that are critical for a low-carbon world. On behalf of the board, I'd like to thank our people for their hard work and dedication throughout the year, as well as the communities where we work, our shareholders, and all of our other stakeholders for their ongoing support. Thank you. I'll now hand over to Graham. Thank you, Karen. I also acknowledge the traditional owners of the land in which we meet, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar Nation, and pay my respects to their Elders, past and present. Thank you for joining us today. Financial year 2024 was a pivotal period for South32. Building on our previous milestones, the portfolio improvements we executed during the year strengthened and streamlined our business, and I will go into further details about our work during financial year 2024. But before I do, I want to talk about the steps we are taking to improve our safety performance, which I regret to say, is still not where we need it to be. As Karen outlined, everyone at South32 was devastated by the death of José Luis Perez, a contractor who suffered fatal injuries on September seventeenth while working at Cerro Matoso. The loss of this young man's life is heartbreaking, and our thoughts continue to be with José Luis's family, friends, and colleagues. An investigation into the incident is underway so we can understand what happened and how similar events can be prevented in the future. We will share the learnings across the business and the industry and take time to reflect on what we can all do differently. No family should experience the kind of loss that José Luis's family has suffered. These incidents can and must be prevented. During financial year 2024, we continued to implement our safety improvement program, now in its fourth year, and we continue to embed our Safety Guarantee. The Safety Guarantee is designed to create a sense of chronic unease, reduce complacency, and assist in the reduction of risk tolerance in relation to safety and health. We do this by asking our people to reflect on whether they can guarantee both their safety and that of their colleagues when executing their role. If the answer is no, the expectation is that they stop and ask what needs to be done differently to provide the guarantee. We assess our safety performance through a range of both leading and lagging indicators. Our significant hazard frequency, a leading indicator, increased by 34% compared to FY 2023, indicating a positive reporting culture and increased hazard awareness. Conversely, our lost time injury frequency, a lagging indicator, increased by 19% compared to FY 2023. Underscoring that while we had no fatalities in our operations in FY 2024, we are still seeing too many serious injuries, and we must be relentless in our pursuit of a safer workplace. At all levels of our business, we are united in our belief that everyone can and should go home safe and well at the end of their shift. We have more work to do and remain committed to pursuing continuous improvements in our safety performance. We made two changes to our lead team in financial year 2024. Vanessa Torres was appointed Chief Operating Officer for Australia, with accountability for Cannington, GEMCO, and Worsley Alumina. Vanessa was previously Chief Technical Officer, and in that role, led our multi-year safety improvement program since its inception. At the same time, Erwin Scheffler was promoted to Chief Technical Officer, having previously served as Vice President of Operations at Worsley Alumina. Vanessa and Erwin will play key roles in driving improved operational performance and better safety outcomes, as well as leading in their other areas of accountability. Turning now to our portfolio. During the year, we achieved two major milestones that have transformed our business. First, we announced final investment approval for the Taylor zinc-lead- silver deposit at Hermosa. Taylor offers a potential for a long life, low cost, low carbon operation that is expected to deliver value for our shareholders over multiple decade. It has the potential to be a top 10 global zinc producer, and with primary zinc demand growth expected to outpace production in 2032, we expect higher incentive zinc prices as Taylor ramps up to nameplate capacity. Our investment at Taylor unlocks value for future growth options at Hermosa by establishing significant shared infrastructure. These options include the Clark manganese deposit, which is currently the only advanced project in the United States with a clear pathway to produce battery-grade manganese from locally sourced ore for the North American electric vehicle battery market. Recognizing Clark's potential, Hermosa was recently also selected for a $166 million award negotiation from the U.S. Department of Energy, which will support the potential development of a commercial-scale manganese production facility. While subject to further study, construction of the facility and the development of Clark represents a significant opportunity to establish a North American supply chain of battery-grade manganese in a phased approach in line with market development. In addition to Taylor and Clark, we are continuing further exploration programs at the Peake Prospect to test the potential for a continuous copper system connecting Peake and Taylor. Shortly after the Taylor final investment decision was made, we announced the sale of Illawarra Metallurgical Coal for up to $1.65 billion. This transaction completed in August and unlocked significant value for our shareholders. It has simplified our business, strengthened our balance sheet, and reduced capital intensity, unlocking capital to invest in our high-quality growth options in base metals. As Karen mentioned, financial year 2024 was not without its challenges. From a global perspective, the period was marked by a mix of recovery and volatility. Interest rates remained high, and inflationary pressures persisted in some regions. Severe weather also affected our business, with Cannington impacted by Tropical Cyclone Kirrily in January, and Australian Manganese being significantly impacted by Tropical Cyclone Megan in March, resulting in the temporary suspension of operations on Groote Eylandt. Cyclone Megan was a severe weather system which resulted in widespread flooding and significant damage to critical infrastructure, including wharf and port infrastructure and critical bridges connecting northern pits of the Western Leases mining and the processing plant. Implementation of our operational recovery plan at GEMCO is ongoing. We continue to progress a substantial dewatering program and a phased mining restart, and remain on track to resume production from the primary concentrator this quarter. We also continued our investment in mine repairs and infrastructure, including a critical bridge on the wharf. Subject to maintaining construction productivity during the upcoming wet season, sales volumes are expected to progressively increase over the fourth quarter of FY 2025. Since 2019, the Worsley Mine Development Project has been subject to a comprehensive state and Commonwealth government environmental approval and public review process. Throughout this process, Worsley Alumina has consulted extensively with government, the community, and other stakeholders, outlining in detail how we will minimize our impacts to the environment and rehabilitate areas that we do disturb. We have listened and responded to concerns and altered the project in response to feedback. We know we have an important role to play in environmental stewardship, responsibly managing land and supporting biodiversity, balanced with the need to develop the resources that will support the transition to a low carbon future. In July, the WA Environmental Protection Authority published its recommendation that the project be approved, subject to conditions. If imposed in the form recommended, several conditions would create significant operating challenges. We have lodged an appeal in relation to the WA EPA assessment report. On October 15, the Western Australian state government announced it would defer regulation of greenhouse gas emissions to the federal government's Safeguard Mechanism. The change will remove policy inconsistencies that currently exist between the state and federal government with regard to greenhouse gas emissions, and is expected to be addressed as part of the appeals process for the project. We continue to work with the Western Australian government to enable Worsley Alumina to continue to meet the environment's - sorry, the state's robust environmental standards. The Western Australian Environmental Minister is expected to consider the approval of the project in December 2024, with federal approvals required shortly thereafter. Despite these challenges, I am pleased to report a strong finish to the year, with improved operating performance, a strengthened financial position, and the commencement of the on-market share buyback. We set consecutive annual production records at Hillside Aluminium and South Africa Manganese, and lifted production at Cannington by 10%. We recorded an underlying EBITDA of $1.8 billion in respect of FY 2024, with underlying earnings and free cash flow increasing in the second half of the year. Looking ahead, we expect volume growth in copper and low carbon aluminium in 2025 and 2026. Construction of Taylor is progressing to plan, and we are also progressing a pipeline of prospects in a targeted region through the drill bit, with exploration activities this year, including consolidating our position in the highly prospective San Juan region of Argentina. Reshaping our portfolio is a key element of our approach to climate change, as is decarbonizing our operations. The majority of our operational greenhouse gas emissions are generated in our aluminium value chain, which is where we are focusing our decarbonization efforts. During the year, we converted two coal-fired boilers to natural gas at Worsley Alumina. This is expected to reduce Worsley Alumina's operational gas emissions by around 10% against FY 2021 levels. At our aluminium smelters in South Africa and Mozambique, we continue to work with stakeholders and governments on identifying and securing long-term, low carbon energy solutions. I'm pleased that we reported a 6% decrease in operational greenhouse gas emissions in FY 2024 compared to FY 2023. As we enter into our 10th year, the South32 of today looks very different to the one which was established in 2015, and is focused on copper, zinc, and our aluminium value chain, representing an attractive commodity mix from which we believe we can grow. Our outlook is positive as we continue to optimize our business and to seek to capitalize on our transformed portfolio, which is more than ever focused on those commodities critical for a low carbon future. In closing, I would like to thank our teams around the world for their hard work during the year, one of the most significant years in our history, and reiterate our unwavering commitment to improving our safety performance. Thank you, and I now hand back to the Chair. Thanks, Graham. We'll now move to the formal items of business. Each resolution and the explanatory notes are outlined in the Notice of Meeting that was dated tenth September 2024. As well as consideration of the financial statements and the business before us today, we are putting forward six ordinary resolutions. As set out in the Notice of Meeting, other than in respect of resolutions in which they have a personal interest, the directors recommend shareholders vote in favor of all resolutions. I intend to vote all undirected proxies that I hold as Chair in the same manner. We'll work through each resolution in order, with a summary of proxies received to be displayed for each item of business. I'll also invite questions on each resolution.... The first item of business is to receive the financial report, directors' report, and auditors' report, as set out in the company's annual report for the financial year ended 30 June, 2024. While we're not required to approve these reports, we are tabling them for discussion. As I mentioned earlier, we have Graham Hogg from KPMG with us and available to answer any questions you might have relating to the audit. Before I ask if there are any questions or comments on the financial report, directors' report, or indeed, the auditors' report, I'd like to respond to some of the pre-submitted questions for the benefit of all attendees. So Jenny, could I ask you to read the questions that have been received in advance of the meeting and of course, those that have been submitted online? Thank you. Yes, Chair. So I have the first two questions come from Mr. Thomas Rowe, who is an employee shareholder. His first question is that, "The yearly STI incentive bonus, the option to purchase further company shares through the Equate Plus holdings or Computershare holdings? Thanks, Jenny, and thanks, Mr. Rowe, for your question. It's terrific to see our employees taking an interest in their shareholding in South32. We currently don't have any mechanism for South32 employee short-term incentive payments to be automatically converted to South32 shares, but we do, of course, have the opportunity for anybody who's employed in the organization to buy South32 shares while following, of course, the appropriate company protocols. Thank you. The next question from Mr. Rowe is that, "A reinvestment of dividend plan be introduced to the South32 company share scheme? Thanks, Jenny. This is a question we have had from time to time. We don't currently have a dividend reinvestment plan, and I know, some shareholders would find that helpful, but our analysis of it, that it's a costly way of raising capital, and we don't think, therefore, it's to the benefit of the shareholders, as a whole. Again, of course, shareholders can use their dividends to reinvest by buying South32 shares. The next question is from Mr. Edward Platt, and he asks, "Can I be provided with more explanation as to why reinvestment is only offered via Computershare? Is it, for example, that South32 does not wish to increase the total number of shares?" Thank you. Thanks, Jenny, and it's really the same answer that I gave Mr. Rowe. We do think that a dividend reinvestment plan is a costly way of raising capital, and we think the better value for our shareholders as a whole is the buyback process that we use as part of our capital management framework from time to time. However, as Mr. Platt mentioned, Computershare does offer a service for dividend reinvestment, and it's one I understand quite a lot of people have taken advantage of. The next question comes from Miss Celestine Eckerick, and she asks, "Why not restrict the generosity of the Remuneration Committee to reflect a realistic capitalist attitude rather than a corporate manner, which is by far too generous to the CEO and KMPs in relation to performance and dividends declared for ordinary shareholders? Thanks, Ms. Eckerick, for your question. Again, it's one we get often. Look, we think our Remuneration arrangements at South32 are fit for purpose, and Wayne Osborn, who chairs our Remuneration Committee, makes sure that we are constantly benchmarking where our Remuneration sits across our sector and beyond. We have three elements of pay: We have fixed pay, we have short-term incentives, and we have long-term incentives. And it's called, of course, the long-term incentive or share awards when they vest, that really does align the shareholder experience with the experience of our executives. But I can say that as a company operating around the world with the complex portfolio that we have, we have to be able to attract the right talent, and I'm happy to say we have, and we have to be able to retain that talent in the face of pretty fierce competition out there. So, while on the face of it, I know some people feel like the Remuneration arrangements are generous, we think they are fit for purpose, as I said. Thank you. And the next question is from Mrs. Helen Haysom, and she asks: "When will the directors' earnings be reduced to no more than what the Australian Prime Minister receives? Thanks, Mrs. Haysom. This is such an interesting question, is that I'm sure, like so many of our shareholders, I have family members who are teachers and family members who are nurses, and so I often think about the relativity of pay, and sometimes it doesn't make sense, even the relativities with that of the Prime Minister. But as I said earlier, as a company operating around the world with, let's face it, a complex portfolio of assets, we have to attract and retain the best people to do our work, and that includes the best people sitting around the board table so that the operations of South32 are governed by the people with the right level of talent. The next question is from Mr. David Bryce, and he asks: "Is South32 as dependent on how China's economy performs as many other mining companies, or has South32 a far greater diversification of customers than others?" Thank you. Thanks, Mr. Bryce, and thanks, Jenny. Our customer base is a very diverse one. Our current commodity mix, as it is, means that our reliance on China for downstream processing and consumption of our materials is actually significantly less than our peers. In 2024, just the last financial year, we generated approximately 11% of our revenue from China. So notwithstanding that, however, there is sentiment obviously attached to the performance of the Chinese economy, and we can't help but be impacted by that sentiment up or down, as it fluctuates. The final pre-submitted question before I move on to the online questions comes from Elizabeth Schultz, and she asks: How does your company engage with indigenous communities to ensure their rights, knowledge, and concerns are respected in your water extraction practices? And what steps do you take to prevent negative impacts on their traditional lands and water sources? Thanks, Miss Schultz. We appreciate that question, and we've talked often about the importance of indigenous, traditional, and tribal peoples as partners for where we do our work, because so often, of course, we're doing our work for which they are important custodians. And in doing that work, we try very hard to make sure that we're using culturally appropriate methods. But most importantly, I think like all of the communities where we work, what we're trying to do is to build relationships based on transparency and on trust, and that, of course, includes in relation to water stewardship. We have published our approach to water stewardship that outlines our commitment to working towards sustainably managing water resources within our operations and, of course, addressing water-related risks and challenges in the catchments where we operate. Thank you. I have two general questions, submitted online from Mr. Stephen Mayne. The first question is, at the past two AGMs, I've asked the South32 directors to bring forward a constitutional amendment which regularizes the requirements for external candidates nominating for the board by removing the current excessive barrier to entry, which requires a candidate to secure nominating support from a hundred shareholders or support from the holders of 5% of issued capital just to get on the ballot. This entrenchment provision makes it practically impossible for the board to face competition for their positions and therefore reduces accountability. Less than 5% of ASX-listed companies have such a provision, and if any company attempted to install it, it would be voted down by the shareholders and proxy advisors. Please name other ASX 100 companies which operate with this provision. Why won't you operate like a normal ASX-listed company instead of sticking with this undemocratic provision slipped into the Constitution by the BHP directors at the time of the demerger, just because they were annoyed that Mr. Mayne ran for the BHP board in 2009 as part of a successful campaign to pressure them to walk away from the foolish proposed takeover of Rio Tinto? Thanks, Jenny, and thanks, Stephen, for your question. I'm not sure I can shed any light on some of the history that you mentioned, but it is a question, as you say, you've raised before, and it's certainly a question we've thought about as a board. We didn't see any need to make that change. You know, we haven't seen a demand from shareholders for a change of that kind. You know, we wouldn't take anything off the table. If shareholders had a strong view about this, then, of course, we'd be happy to entertain thinking about it, but we certainly haven't seen that pressure to date. You asked me to name other ASX companies who do it. I can't do that because I don't know. It is an interesting question, and perhaps, Claire, you might have a look at that down the track, and we can perhaps provide that information a little later. But thanks for the question. The second question from Mr. Mayne is: Did any of the five main proxy advisors, AS, ACSI, Ownership Matters, Glass Lewis, ISS, and ASA, recommend a vote against any of today's resolutions, including this Remuneration report item? If so, what reasons did they give? Please don't say they are confidential. It is standard for companies to be across this detail on the voting recommendations and inform shareholders where relevant. Also, at next year's AGM, will you disclose the proxy to the ASX along with the formal addresses in line with emerging market practice in order to inform the market in a more timely manner? Otherwise, we are left asking questions in the dark, unaware if the big end of town investors and their proxy advisors have any concerns that us retail investors should be able to discuss. Thanks, Stephen, for that question and Jenny, for running through it. There's no doubt that recommendations from proxy advisors are informative, and they obviously play a very important role. The only one of the main proxy advisors that Stephen mentions in his question to recommend a vote against any of the resolutions is the Australian Shareholders Association, who recommended a vote against Resolution 6. That's the resolution relating to leaving entitlements, and as a matter of policy. I suspect we've got. Do we have John? Oh, yes. Great. John is here, and I'm sure he'd be happy to chat to any shareholder about that policy, after the meeting. But as part of my engagement with shareholders every year, I meet the proxy advisors. We have very fruitful conversations. We sometimes disagree on things. Wayne joins me in those meetings because often those conversations are about Remuneration matters, and I'm happy to say that we have, you know, very engaging conversations about the issues. But just coming back to the central point of the question, the Australian Shareholders Association was the only one of the main proxy advisors to recommend that vote against that one resolution. Insofar as the second part of the question about the release of proxy votes before the meeting, we do follow the standard practice of releasing those results to the Australian Stock Exchange after the meeting. We think that's consistent with prevailing practice and, of course, consistent with the legal requirements. But again, as I said earlier in relation to that other question, we'll continue to monitor market practice and take note of your question as we think about the go-forward process. No further general questions online this time. Thanks, Jenny. Before I do move to the remaining items of business, are there any questions from the floor that shareholders would like to raise? Chair, introducing Roger Ugalde. Hi, Mr. Ugalde, and welcome. Hi. Your shirt has already drawn the attention of the audience here. That was intent. With good reason. Good. Anyway, my question to you: How does your company engage with the Aboriginal communities to ensure their rights, knowledge, concerns are respected in your water extraction practices, and the steps you do take to prevent negative impacts on their traditional lands and water sources? What is your definition of free, prior, and informed consent? Because we have not given it. Would you like to just elaborate a little and tell me where specifically you're talking about, or do you just want to- I'm talking about your Boddington- Boddington. Boddington Bauxite Mine. Thank you. That's helpful. Look, I said earlier in relation to the question that came online, relationships with our indigenous communities, relationships with any community, is absolutely central to the way we do our work. We can't succeed as a company unless we have strong and positive community relationships. So that's at the heart of the way in which our board expects, and the management of South32 expect to run their business, and that includes in relation to water or any other issue about which communities have concerns. But Graham, do you want to just talk specifically about the Boddington issue? Yeah, look, we can, Karen. There's probably two elements that are current at the moment. One is obviously we're going through the EPA approval process, and that's a process that's been running for about five years now. It had a long, extensive period of consultation with communities, including traditional owners. That's where people have had a requirement to submit to the EPA various submissions and opinions, which we looked at, and obviously, we look at trying to mitigate and address those issues where we can. We're going through an appeals process at the moment as part of that appeals, that piece. That piece itself, appeals, is not only available to ourselves, but also other people who might have a different opinion or a supportive opinion on the project, and we do recognize that not everyone in this space will always agree. We certainly in the southwest, but also of WA, but also other parts of our business, we do try and extensively and continue to engage with the representative groups of the traditional owners on a continuous basis. We recognize that also doesn't include every component of that group, and not every component of that group is also happy. Currently, we are doing some work on a water area around a potential bridge. That is an area which is not, if you like, what's the word I'm looking for? It's investigative work. It's certainly been approved by the government of the State to date, and it's not part of implementing the approval for a project which we don't yet actually have. But we certainly have engaged there with the Gnaala Karla Booja Aboriginal Corporation, and various other peoples down there around the Hotham River, and we continue to. We certainly have some of our people available here at the end of the meeting, and we're happy to talk about it in more detail if you'd like, and we have reached out to numerous people to continue to engage on this, but we do recognize not everyone is always going to have the exact same opinion. Thanks, Graham. Any other questions? Chair, introducing Jason Fowler. Hello, Mr. Fowler. Welcome. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I have a question for you. 38 years of strip mining Northern Jarrah Forest at the Boddington Bauxite Mine, and you've only just begun to rehabilitate about 42% of that deforested area. So in the Worsley proposed expansion proposal, the EPA has quite clearly stated that the Jarrah Forest rehab may not be possible to its former structure, and there's some new science around this as well, published by some people at Curtin University. And they also recommended condition B14-2 from the EPA, stated that the proponent must prepare and submit a rehabilitation performance report within 12 months of the issue of this statement, and submit that. So my question is, what material and reputational risk ramifications will rehabilitation failure have for South32's international commitments, like the international standards of the aluminium, Aluminium Stewardship Initiative? Thank you. I appreciate the question, and of course, we appreciate this is a matter of real concern for a number of community members. As Graham indicated earlier, the proposed conditions issued by the EPA are now subject to appeal, and we don't yet have an answer on that appeal process. But if I just go to the last aspect of your question, we need to be judged, and we are judged on our conduct and our actions around the world. We're judged on the way in which we recognize and address environmental issues, whether they be relating to biodiversity or water or any other element. We need and will be judged on our attitude to communities and how we're working with those communities. And that is as it should be, because you cannot operate in the resources sector without a mind to addressing those issues. Now, I know, and Graham also made reference to this, the EPA process had submissions from a whole lot of people. The appeals process is open to submissions from a whole lot of people with concerns, either on the environmental aspect or on what I might call the facilitation of the business aspect, and of course, everything we do, because of the nature of the sector, has to weigh those aspects up: environmental protection and facilitation of the economic opportunity that is so important to the communities where we operate, so I mean, I would say to you that when we're thinking about issues relating to the permitting at Worsley, we are looking at those issues and weighing them up constantly. Graham, do you want to add anything to that? Maybe just a couple of specifics on that, and again, we have some of our experts here we can talk to you about after the meeting. We, we'd welcome that, and we have offered that meeting before, which I don't think's been taken up. But correct me if I'm wrong there, but we're certainly happy to engage. The team we have in the southwest are actually quite proud of the rehab work that they do. We offer open tours on a regular basis to public, and we also have a connection on our website, which allows you to monitor some of that rehabilitation. You did quote some numbers about what's been rehabbed and what hasn't. There is a large piece of the refinery infrastructure around crushers, facilities, et cetera, that lasts the life of the total operation, so that doesn't get rehabbed to the actual end. But there are also very large pieces of rehab that have been done, and again, we open tours to the public on that to have a look at that. We also, Claire is sitting somewhere in the audience at the back there, who Claire, you can talk to at the end. We have a number of different PhD students come down and do independent reviews. Over the last five years, in particular, we've done extensive environmental assessment and consultation on the work we do down there. We also recognize that the world continues to shift from when mining was started many years ago, and as a consequence, as part of this submission, we've reduced the vegetation clearing by 46% compared to what historically would have been done. We've offered 12,000 hectares of offsets and neo-ecological restorations and committed to no clearing of old-growth forests. But again, we're happy to engage on a direct basis at the end of the meeting or in another meeting to work through some of that, and actually welcome the discussion and the scrutiny. Thanks, Graham. Chair, may I present John Campbell? Hello, John. Welcome. Nice to see you. Thank you, Chair. I'm representing 611 shareholders. I think it is 5,005.5 million shares. And I've got one question on Worsley and the bauxite situation, and another in relation to Clark. On Worsley, I think you know, obviously, the appeal is going to be very important to the future of the refinery and the segment altogether. But is there an opportunity to import bauxite from other Australian? I understand that the Gove and Weipa export bauxite direct to China for processing. Is it possible to intercept that and process it at? I noticed in your quarterly report that you said that the production was constrained by the current restrictions on mining. Thanks, John. I'm going to get Graham in a minute just to comment on whether we'd want to source bauxite from elsewhere. But I would just make a general comment about the whole aluminium value chain, because it is a part of South32's competitive advantage, I think. We start at one end with bauxite, get to alumina, and ultimately to aluminium. So the vertical integration of those components of the product, which we believe very strongly in, in terms of a low-carbon world, is tremendously important to us. In fact, the Boddington Bauxite Mine and the alumina refinery supply our Hillside smelter in South Africa and our Mozal smelter in Mozambique. That does, as I say, give us a very significant competitive advantage, not only because we can be sure of the supply, but also the quality of the product that's going into those smelters. Graham? Yeah, look, Karen, good question, John, and you are right. In parts of, you know, Queensland, they have imported bauxite. They have also, some companies, exported bauxite to China. In the southwest of WA, not us, but we know Alcoa has previously tried to export some bauxite. I think the challenge is on the number of bauxite you need to move and the grade. We do believe the resources we have in the southwest is well, if you like, configured to actually go through our processing facility, because not all bauxite's the same. There's different impurities, such as reactive silica, silica and grades. And we do believe, you know, that we can responsibly mining it in the southwest of WA. If we have to, we'd look potentially importing some bauxite, but I think the economics, the quality issues, would probably make it a challenge, but we continue to look at all options in that space. My second question- Sure, please. -is on Clark. The Clark deposit, from memory, is about 9% manganese, whereas your deposits at Groote Eylandt and in South Africa are around 40%. Yep. I just wonder about the economics of mining a 9% deposit as against the 40%, whether it's a different type of ore or what gives it the appeal that the American government seems to have in it? Yeah. Well, you're right about the appeal. We've had tremendous support from the government in the United States for a number of components of the Hermosa project, and Clark being one of those. But Graham? Yeah, look, thanks, John, and a good question. I mean, if you think about manganese into batteries today, it's an evolving market. We believe over time, it's gonna become bigger and bigger. You use what's called high-purity manganese, that sort of goes into the electric vehicle batteries. Today, the only producer of that is China. What the U.S. is looking to do is to actually diversify that, so they're not reliant on one person. The IRA Act in the U.S. is structured in a way that domestically bought batteries and EVs get some tax credits for the consumer. That's one aspect. The other aspect is the logistics of moving manganese from South Africa to GEMCO to North America, and processing would be really high. There will be some people to go down that pathway. Also, not all manganese deposits are the same. There are differences, again, in impurities, grades, et cetera, that make it more or easier to basically process. To put it in perspective, Clark sits above the top of Taylor, so a lot of the capital work that we're doing today around dewatering, roads, power stations, infrastructure at Taylor, probably about 20%-28% of the spend is actually shared infrastructure for Taylor and Peake, and Clark itself could have a life well in excess of 60 years, so it's a very large deposit. It's also very shallow, so it's not underground, and again, it can share some of that infrastructure. On top of the economies of scale, the location, to Karen's point, the Department of Defense and Department of Energy are very keen in the U.S. to develop that domestic supply chain. We're currently doing a bulk sample at Clark to get enough material to provide to customers to see if it's got the right characteristics. That's about a $60 million bill that we're currently spending, U.S. Of that, the Department of Defense has given us a $20 million grant towards that. As we look at the next processing facility, they're looking. They've already given us approval for a $166 million grant, which is about 30% of the capital of doing a process plant. So we think this has got a bit of time to play out. It's a long-term option, but it's a very large option if you think about the lack of EVs that exist today in the U.S., and if they go where the market is, they'll need a domestic supply. Thank you. You can see where the U.S. government has been prepared to really back some self-sufficiency in these areas, and fortunately, we've been the beneficiary of it. I have to say, just while we're talking about that extraordinary work from Graham's team, based in the United States, and people working on that project in Arizona, to secure this support. And we will actually, as a board, have an opportunity to see progress on that because our next visit to that project is in December. Any other questions? Chair, introducing Jenita Enevoldsen. Hello, Ms. Enevoldsen. Welcome. Hi. Ms. Enevoldsen, actually. Oh, Enevoldsen. I'm sorry. No worries. My question actually is a follow-up. Yes. In response to what we've heard around the rehabilitation efforts- Yeah -and the reduction in deforestation, and also the commitment to not deforest or to end deforestation of old growth forests. I'm quite aware. I'm not sure if the board is aware, but there was a report recently done called the Uncovered: A Benchmark Deforestation, Deforestation Benchmark. I'm not sure if you're aware of this. But South32 actually got a 13 out of a 100 score for your deforestation commitments. So that's 1.3 out of 10. That's a really low score for in terms of considering your biodiversity risk in your whole portfolio. I read in detail your sustainability report, and it was interesting to hear that you're looking at the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures and looking to lean into that and understand how you can commit to better by addressing your biodiversity risk through your rehabilitation or otherwise. But I'm very curious, around the old growth definition, how do you define old growth forest? And when will you end deforestation in your supply chain? Okay, thank you for the question. And we do recognize it's a matter of great concern and great passion for a number of the community members in that part of Western Australia. So we appreciate you being here and raising the issue. I am not aware of the report. Graham might be, and I'll ask him to comment on that in a moment. But again, if I just go back to my comment earlier, as a board, we are focused on those two things, and you rightly talk about our commitment to TCFD, which, of course, we've been committed to from the outset. And I know Graham and his team spend a very significant amount of time making sure that we are reporting and transparently dealing with the issues that we confront in our sector. But Graham, can you add anything to the question about the report? Look, the report itself, I'm not aware of that, to be honest. Was it a global report of all South32 or specific to the Southwest? Southwest WA. Yeah. Okay. I was looking at that. So again, we can absolutely have a discussion with this after. We've got some of the experts in the room, we can look at that with you. There's various reports that are always published by different people. We're probably. I'm not across every single one, but I can guarantee our team will be, and we'd love the opportunity to talk after the meeting, if you like. Yeah, lovely. I'd just really be interested in your definition of old-growth forests, because your plans to expand the Worsley Mine are actually gonna be deforesting or bulldozing critically endangered species' habitat. So in terms of biodiversity risk, it's actually quite a high biodiversity risk, and you haven't addressed this in your reports, in the annual report or in your sustainability report, which is almost a hundred pages. That's really absent. So I'm just really curious about that definition. And then also, yeah, do you have any comment on the definition of old-growth forest for South32? Look, again, I can't go into the detail as much as some of our experts can, but if you give us a chance after the meeting, we'll sit down and have a chat with you and go through that. What we can commit to is, when we've had a look at our submission to the EPA, obviously, there's always a difference of opinion, so we recognize that, but we have welcomed a challenge on that from different people on a scientific basis. We do recognize we will have some impact on vegetation, fauna and flora, and as part of that, we commit to offsets, bigger areas to try and avoid, to make sure that there's pathways for, you know, other things to sort of continue to progress. But give us a chance at the end of the meeting, we can have a detailed discussion about that. We've got some of our experts in the room here. Wonderful. It might... I was just going to add to that. It might be helpful also, in addition to talking to Claire, to chat to Holly. Yeah. Because I know that the team have completed biodiversity risk and opportunity screening at all of the operations, so Holly might also be able to be a bit more informative about what we've done there. Wonderful. Yeah, look, looking forward to ending deforestation in your supply chain. Just to follow up on Roger Ugalde's question, you didn't answer his question. What's your definition of free, prior, and informed consent? 'Cause you've got a non-compliance for this in your Aluminium Stewardship Initiative standard? Yeah. Yep, so we, part of the ICMM, we certainly commit to the principles in there, which is a principle that we seek to obtain, that free and prior consent. We recognize it's not always our decision, 'cause in the end, the government makes a final decision on some of those consents. We also recognize that we will not please everyone in some of those issues, but we absolutely look to engage with people as much as we can. Yeah, consent actually lies with the traditional owners, when you're applying FPIC. Uh- That's the international definition under the UN Declaration of Indigenous Peoples. Yep. So that's the definition. The consent comes from the traditional custodians, and I'd really encourage you to lean into free, which means giving enough time for the traditional owners to understand what you're proposing, prior, and informed consent. What information they want about the project, and respect consent, 'cause we all know what consent means now. And I'd- Thank you. Yep, so I have to say, I wouldn't disagree on that point, but I would say the traditional owner group is quite broad. We try and work through the representative groups, recognizing that doesn't always capture everyone's opinion. But again, we've been on this journey for five years. If we're missing pieces, we'd love the opportunity to talk about it. Sounds good. Thank you. Thank you. Chair, may I introduce Mohinder Nair? Good afternoon, Mr. Nair. You know, with all respect, when I go to AGMs, I'm very happy to see when we pay our respects to the natives, and then we clap. Right? But on the board, I never see a native sitting in any AGM. Can you please justify? We are a mining company, all resources come from natives' land, not from the larger cities we live. So there is a big disconnect that we should come forward, nominate or get new people on the board. Yeah. You had said to me one more question just now: talent. You know, when I see people re-electing and same faces, are we running short of the talent on this planet? Are we really being fair to the world? I think retention must be proven. Why? Not because people sitting there think, "Oh, he's very good." If they are very good, why the others don't take them? Yeah. I think I got- Please, let's be fair, right? Yes. Talent is enough on this planet, but networking dominates all this. Please, I'm being very honest. Yes, and I- Thank you. -I think I got most of your question, but please come back and help me if I didn't. So the composition of the board is obviously something that shareholders can and should be concerned about, and it's why we spend so much time talking about, in our publications, the skill and experience we think is required to execute the role of a director of South32. We produce a matrix which goes through the skills and experiences represented on the board, including the ethnic mix, geographical mix, so on and so forth. I think it's a really worthy challenge to say: "Why don't you have somebody on the board who is a traditional owner, or who has the connection with community of the kind that you're talking about?" We certainly haven't set about a course to say that's not important. In fact, you know, the way in which the board does its work is to hear from traditional owners in a whole range of different facets, including our visit to community. We have all spent time in communities, both in Australia and in other parts of the world. You know, I mentioned earlier, we're going to the United States in December to the Hermosa project. There is a very significant community and Mexican community down by our operation there that we're going to spend time with. So I wouldn't like you to think just because there's not a traditional owner sitting on this board, that we're not cognizant of those issues, and as we go through succession, we're thinking always about what we need to best do our job. I mean, this board is not the same as it was in 2015. We have had a number of changes as we've brought new directors on board, and you see some of them here, and you see the diversity of the board. So I certainly feel satisfied that the diversity gives the right level of challenge and conversation and discussion that we're trying to achieve in South32. Sorry, you got me wrong. I did not challenge you specifically, okay? Yeah. I said, whenever I go to any AGM, I don't see this. Okay? Yeah. I only told you, you are re-exploiting the resources. Be the leaders to think this. Somebody has to become one to prove our endeavor to search, right? There are people in the world, but we don't use them, we ignore them. And that is the thrust I thought I will give to you. Nothing to do with you, people you retain. That's your business. I've got nothing to say on that. But you called me in this question. I said, "Let me give you a positive suggestion." That's all. Nothing more. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Well, I really do appreciate the positive suggestion. You know, we recognize that we can't do our work without the support of communities. So thank you. Chair, introducing Margaret Bulbeck. Hello, Ms. Bulbeck. Thank you. Welcome. Thank you for that. And, it was very heartening to hear you talk about how South32 encourages an ambitious approach to reducing, fossil fuel emissions and a genuine reduction in emissions. And yet, you've appealed the WA EPA decision, and so I'd like to get an explanation of why you've appealed it, when leading into it and exceeding it. Yeah. Seems to be more in line with what you're suggesting about your commitment to reducing fossil fuel emissions. Thank you, and it's a very good question. We haven't appealed the EPA decision because we're not supportive of emissions reduction. That's not the reason. We are supportive of a single framework across Australia to handle emissions, and at the moment, that's the federal government's Safeguard Mechanism. So what we're saying is, let's not have anything that's inconsistent with the Safeguard Mechanism so that we've got certainty. What we have also said is that putting a condition on Scope 3 emissions, for example, for that operation, is just not realistic because we can't deliver it. You know, the one thing that we've been absolutely consistent about as we approach the South32 portfolio of emissions is we have to be ambitious because we believe we have a part to play in this, and we want to play that part, but we also have to be realistic. Which is why I made that comment about, let's just make sure as we think about emissions, we're thinking about this from a global perspective, because the world is not going to be saved by individual countries. It's going to be saved by us all working together. But Graham, you look like you would like to add. Maybe just a couple of specifics, particularly around the southwest. We have, for example, five coal-fired boilers in the southwest, if you roll back about three years ago. Each one of those would account for about 2% of our carbon emissions, broadly speaking. To convert one of those to gas is not that super expensive for us, but it makes a substantial difference, obviously, on the carbon footprint. We've done two of the five already. As an organization, we've committed to half our Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2035. The only reason we don't go faster at the moment in Western Australia is we're trying to manage the West Australians' dependency on coal, government's dependency on coal as well, because we share the same coal supplier. We're also trying to manage the just transition of the 500 people in Collie who work in the coal industry, so we're working with the WA government there to basically slowly do each one of our coal boilers from coal to gas and then ultimately look for another source, but in conjunction with the government, so we don't actually lose the power grid in the southwestern parts of WA, but we have absolutely committed to half our emissions by 2035. What I'm hearing is, I mean, gas, there are some arguments that gas has actually not reduced emissions more than coal, and there are certainly, I would say, I mean, my argument would be the Safeguard Mechanism, given that in its remit, we're getting new coal and gas exploration areas opened up all the time. It's not an ambitious emission reduction framework, which is possibly a reason why it's supported by some businesses. But it seems to me you might have also answered my second question, which is: when will you disclose to shareholders your greenhouse gas emissions reduction pathway? Which I think you mentioned would be sometime next year, but that was only for Scope 1 and Scope 2, so you have no plans to reduce Scope 3 emissions. So maybe just taking a step back there. We published about a year and a half ago, doing our climate action plan. In that, we actually described detail, operation by operation, what some of our plans are, and we actually would have updated that in our sustainability report this year, and that'll talk by operation by operation. The second piece to your question around Scope 3, we absolutely have targets around Scope 3. The challenge we have as an organization, our side, a lot of our customers, we don't have a bigger influence as like potentially a BHP or a Rio does. So we're trying to work hand in hand with some initiatives about how, why, how we try and reduce those Scope 3, but we probably don't have such a strong hand as some of our peers in that space, to be honest. And again, we've got Holly in the front audience here, and we can take you through some of those plans and discussions in detail. We have as a Board, I'll just add one more comment to that. We have, as a Board, seen the framework that has been devised to work with customers on Scope 3. I mean, it's perilously difficult, as you would know, but I think the team has made some terrific progress in identifying those customers we can work with to try and address this. Because what is it, Graham? 95% of our Scope 3 is really how our customers are using our product. Correct. Yep. Any other questions from the floor? Okay, well, look, if there are no more questions at this time, I'll move to the next item of business. Resolution 2 is the re-election of Wayne Osborn as a Director of the company. The summary of proxy votes in relation to this item are on display now. Wayne was appointed and elected a director in 2015, and was re-elected at the Annual General Meetings in 2018 and 2021. His contribution as Chair of the Remuneration Committee and as a member of the Nomination and Governance and Sustainability Committees is highly regarded by his fellow d irectors. Wayne's extensive experience in the mining, smelting, and processing sectors, as well as his skills in business strategy, capital projects, and health and safety, are extremely valuable to the Board. While Wayne is seeking re-election at today's meeting, he has indicated that if he is elected, he does not intend to seek re-election at the expiration of his term. Following the review by the Board of Wayne's performance, your directors recommend that shareholders vote in favor of his re-election. So, Wayne, I might ask you to make some comments to the meeting, if I may. Thank you, Karen, and good afternoon, everyone. It's certainly been my honor to serve on the South32 board, and today I'm seeking your support for re-election so that I can continue to serve the interests of South32 shareholders. As Karen's mentioned, I'm also serving as the Chair of the Remuneration Committee, and I believe that with my knowledge of South32 and my experience in overseeing remuneration design, that I'm making an important contribution in this role. I've had quite a broad career as a non-executive director, in particular, serving with Wesfarmers and Alinta Energy previously. In my executive career, I was nearly 30 years with Alcoa in Australia and served the last seven of those as their managing director. It's really been a privilege to be a member of the Board of your company, South32, since it became a listed entity in 2015. But as Karen's mentioned, while I'm seeking re-election at today's meeting, I do not intend to seek re-election at the end of the three-year term. I'll hand back to the chair. Thank you, Karen. Thanks, Wayne. I think, Jenny, you might have a question. Yes, Chair. Mr. Stephen Mayne has submitted a question that relates to Resolution 2. He asks, "In 2019, ASX 50 company Treasury Wine Estates voluntarily moved to annual elections for directors in line with best practice that occurs in both the U.S. and the U.K. Dual-listed companies like News Corp and Rio Tinto do this due to the laws in the U.S. and U.K., and BHP has continued doing it even after its U.K. DLC ended in 2021. Given that our old parent company, BHP, is voluntarily doing annual elections of directors, could re-election candidate, Wayne Osborn, and yourself, Chair, as former BHP company secretary, please both comment on whether they're prepared to examine a switch to the impressive annual elections model adopted by the likes of BHP, Rio Tinto, and TWE, and do they agree that this model better respects shareholder authority when it comes to director selection? Thanks, Jenny. It is a question that's been floating around for a long time, and as Stephen says, I certainly had experience of annual elections in my executive career with BHP. I have actually personally no objection to annual elections. You know, I think there is merit in thinking about that as an option. We haven't, as a board, felt it's necessary to move to that. You know, we think we've done a pretty reasonable job in the nine and a half years since the formation of South32 to have rolling succession, and fortunately, directors have enjoyed a very strong support from shareholders through that process. So, you know, I wouldn't take it completely off the table. It may well be that this becomes a more standard way of operating, but we don't have any immediate plans to change our process. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you. Well, look, could I ask you to enter your vote, please, on Resolution number 2? Resolution 3 is for the election of Sharon Warburton as a director of the company, and again, the proxies are on display. Sharon was appointed to the board towards the end of last year in November and serves as a member of the Nomination and Governance Committee and the Risk and Audit Committee. She's a highly credentialed director. Her extensive experience in areas such as accounting and finance, corporate strategy, risk management, and governance are valuable to the board. We're delighted to have Sharon join us. Following a review of Sharon's performance, the board recommends that shareholders vote in favor of her election. And Sharon, may I ask you to address the meeting? Thank you, Karen, and good afternoon, everybody. Since joining the South32 board in November last year, I've had the privilege of getting to know my fellow directors. I've met many of our senior leaders, and I've visited a number of the company's operations. I've also completed a comprehensive induction to the board and to the company. I have met many members of management related to my roles on both the nomination and governance, as well as the risk and audit committees. In addition to South32, I'm currently a non-executive director on several other ASX-listed companies, being Northern Star Resources Limited, Worley Limited, and Wesfarmers Limited. I'm also a director of some unlisted entities, being Mirvac Funds Management Australia Limited, Thiess Group Holdings Limited, and the Karlka Nyiyaparli Aboriginal Corporation. My previous director appointments have included nine years on the Perth Children's Hospital Foundation, the Gold Road Resources board, the NEXTDC Limited board, Barminco, Western Power, the inaugural chair of the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, the Blackmores board, and Fortescue. During my executive career, I had roles with Brookfield Multiplex, Citigroup, and Rio Tinto, and I worked across Australia, across Asia, Europe, and also in the Middle East. I am delighted to have been appointed to the South32 board, and I hope to receive your support for my election today. Thank you. Thanks, Sharon. We are delighted to have you. Are there any questions? Jenny? Yes, Chair. Mr. Stephen Mayne has submitted a question in relation to Resolution 3. He asks, "Could you direct and Sharon Warburton and the Chair comment on the recruitment process that led to her appointment to the board? Was a headhunter involved? Did the full board interview Sharon, and did they interview any other candidates? And did Sharon know any of our directors before engaging with the recruitment process? Okay. Thanks, Jenny. I will ask Sharon to make a comment on that, but let me just take you through the process. So we have a continuous process of succession for directors, as you would expect us to, because what we're trying to do all the time is make sure that we have the right level of skill and experience across all of the parts of the world where we operate so that we can have succession planning without leaving a gap. I mentioned at the beginning of the meeting that after Keith retires today, we'll have three founding directors still serving on the board. Wayne is one, Frank Cooper, our Chair of the Risk and Audit Committee, is another, and Futhi Mtoba is the third. As we're thinking, just by way of example, as we're thinking about succession in relation to those roles, what we're looking for are the skills and experiences new directors can bring so that when our founding directors cycle off the board, as they will do, over time, we've got the right skill to replace them. To support us in doing that work, we do use a recruitment firm. It's important for us to do that because we're looking for not only the skill and experience I've spoken about, but we're looking around the world, and in particular, where we do our business. If you think about the countries where we operate, Southern Africa, South Africa, and of course, Mozambique. North America, in the state of Arizona, we've talked a little bit about that today. Chile and Colombia, Australia. So we do need support to make sure that we are tapping the market for the best people to join us. Now, I think, Sharon, you need to answer the question: did you know any members of the board before you joined? Yes, I did know some of the members of the board, but, for those of us that are from Perth, then that would probably be no surprise because the corporate world and director community in Perth is very well connected. And I think that's a good thing because I know, for example, Frank Cooper through networks where audit and risk or risk and audit chairs get together and share ideas, participate in understanding the direction of new regulatory requirements in the finance and governance area. So I had met Frank many times over the years in that regard. I also had the privilege of sharing the Wesfarmers board table for a period of time, a small period of time with Wayne. So we did meet prior to my appointment here. I think there were a couple of the other directors that have worked at Rio Tinto in the past, as I have, but I don't think our paths actually crossed. I think the times were somewhat different, so. Great. Thanks, Sharon. Any other questions? Thank you. Then, could I now ask you to enter your vote on Resolution 3? Item 4 refers to the adoption of the Remuneration report for the year ended 30 June 2024, and that can be found on pages 82 to 108 of the annual report. The summary of proxies are on the screen. Under the Corporations Act, listed companies are required to provide a Remuneration report. While the vote for the report is advisory, your board does value the input from shareholders and will take the outcome of this vote into account when determining our approach to Remuneration. The board is committed to a reward framework that supports the implementation and achievement of our strategy and our business objectives. I spoke about this a little earlier, but our reward framework consists of fixed pay, a short-term incentive, and a long-term incentive. We routinely review the framework to assess its effectiveness in both attracting and retaining executives, while also rewarding those executives for performance that is aligned to shareholder interests. We are satisfied that our framework has enabled us to reflect overall business performance, our executives' contribution to that performance, and the shareholder experience in the Remuneration outcomes for executives in the last financial year. In September 2023, the board adjusted Graham's fixed Remuneration in line with increases for the broader Australian workforce. Our business scorecard, which is detailed in the Remuneration report, guides short-term incentives for executives. It's designed to focus and reward our executives for delivery of key priorities for South32 that are within their control. Last financial year, several safety performance measures were met. However, we did not meet targets for reducing our lost time injury frequency and our potential material health exposures, and of course, as Graham and I have spoken about earlier, we have, since the end of the financial year, lost one of our work colleagues in Colombia, which, of course, we must never forget. We achieved strategic milestones in the evolution of our business this year, including bringing the Taylor Deposit to a final investment decision and the sale of Illawarra Metallurgical Coal. Although we achieved record production at Hillside Aluminium and met our controllable cost target, our aggregated financial result outcomes were below target due to adjusted return on invested capital and production performance. Performance for the 2024 financial year was 91% out of a possible 150%. Shareholders will recall that the board has the discretion to apply a business modifier to reflect factors that are not specifically contemplated in the scorecard. For the 2024 financial year, the board elected not to modify outcomes. In reaching that conclusion, the board considered the challenges that I referred to earlier in the meeting: Tropical Cyclone Megan on Australia Manganese, the impairment expense for Worsley Alumina, and the impairment expense for Cerro Matoso. In reaching its conclusion, the board recognized that these items were outside the control of executives. For the financial year outcome, Graham received a short-term incentive outcome of 109% of target or 73% of the maximum available under the plan. The long-term incentive is the component of executive pay most closely associated with the shareholder experience. It rewards executives for delivering shareholder returns that exceed peer benchmarks. Our total shareholder return for the four-year performance period was 109%, which exceeded the World Index by 30.5%, but fell just 2% below the Global Mining Index. As a result, only 1/3 of the FY 2021 LTI award vested, and the remainder of those shares lapsed. In September 2024, the board resolved to increase Graham's fixed Remuneration by 4% in line with the broader Australian workforce. Other members of management received increases of between 4% and 6%, which also aligned to the increases for the broader workforce in the relevant countries where they live and work. So let me pause now for any questions on this Resolution. Nothing online. Thanks, Jenny. Anything from the room? Okay, thank you. Could I ask you then, please, to enter your vote on Resolution 4? There are voting restrictions, as Claire mentioned earlier, for this Resolution, and they are set out in the Notice of Meeting. Thank you. Let me move then to Resolution 5, the purpose of which is to seek shareholder approval for the proposed grant of rights to our Chief Executive Officer. The summary of proxies received are again on the screen. The rights relate to Graham's long-term incentive for the 2025 financial year and the deferred equity component of his short-term incentive for the 2024 financial year. The performance measures for the long-term incentive award remain unchanged. 80% will continue to be assessed using the relative total shareholder return over a four-year performance period. Two strategic measures, one on climate change and one on the portfolio, will account for 10% each of the award. Performance on the strategic measures will be assessed by the board at the end of the four-year performance period, which in this case will be June of 2028. Further information on the manner in which these performance for these metrics will be assessed is set out in the Notice of Meeting. Are there any questions? Jenny? Thank you, Chair. Mr. Stephen Mayne has submitted a question in relation to Resolution 5. He says, "Having been in the job for almost 10 years, can the CEO summarize his past LTI grants as to whether they have vested or lapsed? Also, has he ever sold any ordinary shares in the company or bought any on market without relying on an incentive scheme to build his equity position in the company?" And then he goes on to say, "Please don't say look it up in the annual report and ASX announcements. It's complex, and can the CEO summarize the situation? Thanks. Thanks, Steve. Thanks, Jenny. I'm sure the CEO would be very happy to do that. Graham, are you able to run through? Yeah, look, Karen, since FY 2016, obviously, there's been a number of grants. If we look at FY 2016, they fully vested, which was about three million shares. In 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020, there were zero grants. And this year, as you just pointed to, there's about a 1/3. Yeah It was granted, which is about 898,514 shares. So what have I sold? Predominantly for other requirements, such as tax or orders. Yeah. But and I have other shares that I own in my own right as well. Thanks, Graham. You know, I think it's worth just making the point that although 33% of the long-term incentive vested this year, Graham didn't receive anything for the four years prior because it didn't meet the hurdles. So thank you for the question. Anything else, Jenny? Okay, anything in the room? Thank you. Well, look, I'll get you, if you would, please, to enter your vote on Resolution 5. And again, there are voting restrictions set out in the Notice of Meeting. So I'll now move to Resolution 6. The Corporations Act restricts the leaving benefits that can be given to executives without shareholder approval. So the board is seeking to renew the approval of the existing obligations to our relevant executives, to which they are contractually entitled. Our relevant executives include the leadership team and directors of South32 subsidiaries. The summary of proxies received is on the screen. If shareholders approve this Resolution, it will give the board the flexibility to tailor the termination arrangements to relevant executives within certain parameters, having regard to the circumstances for the cessation of employment. It will also allow the company to operate our reward framework in a way that supports our strategy and to attract and retain talented executives from around the globe on competitive terms. Shareholders are not being asked to approve an increase or changes to existing Remuneration arrangements for those executives. If granted, the approval will be effective for a three-year period or until the 2027 AGM, at which time it will be put again. Are there any questions or comments on this Resolution? John? Chair, just to state the ASA's position on this, since it was drawn to attention. Our objection to it is one in principle. We think that the provisions in the Corporations Act are there to try to moderate the amount of leave payments, so the termination benefits paid to directors, executives. The reason for our opposition to approving a blank check to the Board is that if you were not to have that approval, then you would be forced to regard the Corporations Law requirements and ask shareholder approval for each time that the limits set in the Act were exceeded, and we prefer that. We think that would, A, moderate the payments that you were inclined to make, and B, give the shareholders an opportunity to express their appreciation or otherwise of the work of the director concerned. Thanks, John. I do appreciate you explaining that because as you'll remember, this was one of the questions raised by Mr. Mayne earlier in the meeting, and I mentioned that the Australian Shareholders Association had a policy position in relation to this Resolution. So John, thank you. That's helpful. We have a different view, a respectful different view, because we think that the right people to set leaving arrangements are, in fact, the members of the board, and we do feel that we've got to be able to offer long-term incentive arrangements that not only bring people into the company but keep them here, and so fundamentally, the key aspect of this for us is that if somebody leaves on good terms, for example, they retire, then we've got the opportunity to pro rate those long-term incentives. They remain subject to all of the performance conditions that attach, so there's no gift here, but we think that is a really important part of the attraction and retention package. But as I say, I do appreciate the explanation. And as I said earlier, we do talk often with our proxy advisors, and in particular, the Australian Shareholders Association, through John, and have a very fruitful set of discussions on these issues. Any other questions? Jenny? Yes, Chair. Mr. Stephen Mayne has submitted a question that relates to Resolution 6. He says: The annual report says that we have 247,003 shareholders, but less than 2% of them will have voted today. Politicians wouldn't tolerate a 90%, 98% no show in elections, so why do we? One way of tackling chronically low retail shareholder voting rates is to disclose how many shareholders actually voted for and against each item of business, like with a scheme of arrangement. Tabcorp did this yesterday. The ASX and Qantas embraced this practice last year. You have the data on how many of us voted, so why not disclose it to the market with the poll results, if only to provide some public ventilation of retail shareholder sentiment? It will also be interesting to see how the ASA decision to vote its hundreds of undirected proxies against this leaving entitlements item changes the overall numbers when compared with the other items of business. Helen, since you've said no to most of my governance and transparency requests today, can you please give me a small win on this one? Oh, I'm tempted. Look, thanks, Stephen, for the question again. You know, we have looked at this, and I have no objection to continuing to look at it. We just haven't felt that it's been market practice to date, but there's no reason why we can't continue, and you've mentioned some companies there. I mean, let's have a look at that and see what other people are doing. You know, ultimately, of course, we can't force anybody to vote. It's not like the system by which the politicians operate, where we do have compulsory voting in this country. I think there are a few other countries around the world that might like that at the moment. But we don't have that, and therefore, it's obviously a decision for each individual shareholder whether they exercise their right to vote and therefore participate in the governance of our company or not. But let us take that on notice, and you know, I'll give you an answer next year. How's that? Anything else on Resolution 6? Okay, thank you. May I ask you to enter your vote? So that brings us to the end of the items of business. Before I close off the meeting, though, were there any other questions that anybody wanted to raise? Jenny, anything else for you? No further questions, Chair. Okay, thank you. Then if you've not already done so, would you mind completing, please, your voting cards and place them in one of the ballot boxes being passed around, or indeed, enter your votes online if you've joined us online. We will leave the poll open for another 10 minutes, just to allow you to finish off. The results of the poll will be released, as we ordinarily do, to the stock exchange and published on the company's website as soon as possible. So that brings us to the end of the 2024 Annual General Meeting. All it remains for me to do is to thank you for your participation today, whether you're here in Perth in person or whether you've joined us online. And just to reiterate our thanks, Keith, as you leave us at the end of this meeting, for your service to South32. On behalf of all of the members of the board and indeed everybody at South32, thank you all for joining us. I wish you a good day. If you are here with us in Perth, I hope you might join us for some refreshments. Thank you.