Everybody's in there? Nobody left outside? Okay. Very good. Welcome, everybody. Thanks very much for your attendance this morning. Welcome to Whitehaven Coal Limited's 2022 Annual General Meeting. My name is Mark Vaile. I'm the Chairman of the Whitehaven Board of Directors, and I will chair today's meeting. But before we go any further, I'd like to begin by welcoming New South Wales Elder and Board Member of the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council, Aunty Ann Weldon, who will perform a Welcome to Country. Ann, please. Good morning, everyone. Thanks, Mark. Thanks, Board. We've got a nice reception out the front there. Fellows that want to sing to us, they're singing us in here. They've got drums and everything. That's a good sign. Anyway, they're allowed to have their opinion. That's good. Today I stand before you on the land of the mighty Eora Nation, and I need to make you aware first and foremost that I am a Wiradjuri Koori Balaang. Wiradjuri, of course, is a mighty, proud but large nation of Aboriginal people, and my ancestral blood country starts at the foot of the Blue Mountains, and it goes all the way up to Nyngan and around near Hay and here. So it's a large area. Wiradjuri means three rivers people. The three main rivers are the Murrumbidgee, the Kalare which has been renamed the Lachlan, and the Molong, which has been renamed the Macquarie. And I think the traditional name sounds better than Lachlan and Macquarie, but it is what it is. I was born in a segregated section of Cowra District Hospital, and I grew up in Erambie Aboriginal Reserve, which is just out of Cowra, two mile out of Cowra, under the control of a mission manager and the police. But my ancestral bloodline connects all along the lands and the waters of the Kalare and the Murrumbidgee River. And one of the most, I mean, major achievements in my life is I am a mother, a grandmother of 11 incredible grandchildren, and the great-grandmother of the handsomest little baby boy in the whole wide world. I'm a Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council member, and I've been a member of our land council for more than 38 years, going to meetings for more than 38 years. In this particular part of Eora Country, Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council is a cultural authority and custodian of culture, water, and heritage. This morning, I bring you a message of respect and caring. It is important to acknowledge this country's rich, first, and original story. I'd like to pay my respects to all elders, past, present, of all Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people here today, and express my gratitude for the sacrifices that have been made by our elders to create a better quality of life for all peoples in our country. For me, it is indeed a humble privilege to provide a Welcome to Country. For me, it's a profound honor and a luxury of time, a time given by you and time given by many warriors that started the traditions for everyone. And a welcome isn't just words. It's a reflection of where we are, not this modern-day structure, but the continuous link of life, lesson, purpose, and nurturing supplies. And the boundaries of traditional owners are not defined by the hand and a pen, but through the natural landscape of our incredible Mother Earth. The Eora Nation's country spans from the Hawkesbury River to the north, the Nepean to the west, and the Georges River to the south. So on behalf of Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council, and with the permission of our members, I welcome everyone to the land of the Gadigal people and the Eora Nation. I acknowledge the Gadigal people, whose spirits and ancestors will always remain within their land, our Mother Earth. Whenever you travel, no matter where you live, across this incredible country of ours, you are entering the land of a nation, a tribe, or a clan, which have existed and belong to these lands that stretch as far beyond 65,000 years. First Nations of this land, we are the most diverse, unique, and sustainable people on the planet. We are the oldest living culture of the world, and it is important to acknowledge this country's rich, first, and original history. Let me pay homage to the many warriors that created pathways for all of us, the ones recognized and the ones that we have never heard of. Our journey and milestones will only be realized if we can see, if we can feel, and if we can be a positive difference put into real action. We must commit to making our world, our society inclusive, breaking through barriers, not creating them. For all of us together can bring about positive changes to multiple generations, starting with the healing of past generations and by declaring what should not have taken place to our present-day generations, giving them hope. For our creators have shown a way to creating a better future for the next generations for everyone in our country. Sadly, the lessons have been learned at our expense and at our devastation should and must be acknowledged. To listen, to learn, and come together to heal and prevent heartaches from ever happening again. So as you connect land and share today and tomorrow and beyond, don't live regretting what should have been done, but create the legacy of what must be done. For our future is only as good as our history, and we need to reflect upon the footsteps that we are all leaving and to know where we are heading, shaping a world that we can be proud of. And the truth needs to be told, but it must be heard if we are to walk together. I certainly look to further my vision through the realization of endeavors to protect our diverse culture, to protect and respect our land, our language, our emotional, and our spiritual well-being, our ceremonial ways of prayer, and through my journey, educate and nurture children, my grandchildren, my great-grandchildren, my nieces and nephews, and all children. You can all draw upon my people's spirit as we continue on our journey. For we believe our ancestors' spirits walk beside us, guiding us and light our way. We ask that you walk beside us. Please do not walk ahead of us and allow my people, Aboriginal people, to reach our destiny. I would like to sincerely thank your organization, Whitehaven Coal, for inviting me to come and conduct the Welcome to Country. I also acknowledge the fact that your company is actually located on the lands of the mighty Kamilaroi people. Well, let me tell you, Wiradjuri and Kamilaroi were at war. We were at war. We won it, of course, because those men from Kamilaroi were coming down stealing all of the beautiful Wiradjuri women there. Yeah. So it's certainly interesting and where we've come. I just hope that within your company that you certainly continue to—I believe you've got young Bobby Sutherland. I've watched Bobby grow into the young man that he is, and he is both, mind you. Now, I just told you about them Kamilaroi fellas coming stealing Wiradjuri women. His mother's Wiradjuri, yeah? His father's Kamilaroi. Yeah. So thank you for allowing me to come here. I certainly wish you well. And can I just say that within your company, I don't know what you give back, but there are a lot of worthy Aboriginal organizations, but more importantly, programs and charities that you could certainly support. In particular, not just in Kamilaroi country, it would be really beneficial. I don't know if you have scholarship schemes and the like, but that's what's certainly so positive. Your company does what it does, and what I say is that what you take out, you certainly give back, and you protect, preserve what is there. So once again, welcome to the land of the Eora Nation and Gadigal people. Always was, always will be Aboriginal land. Thank you very, very much. Thanks very much. Thanks very much, Aunty Ann, for that very warm welcome and a quick journey through history. And it's something that we all need to acknowledge and learn as much as we can. I'm from up on the Mid North Coast in Biripi country, so I sort of know about our lot up there. And we know a lot about the Kamilaroi and the Gomeroi, and I'm sure that the many programs that we do help in supporting the local Aboriginal community in Gunnedah. Paul will allude to in his address today. But of course, Bobby Sutherland's one of our key employees, and we've got many, many others working for us as well. Thank you very much for your warm welcome. Thanks, Aunty Ann. Hey, ladies and gentlemen, there is a quorum present, and I formally declare the meeting open. The notice of meeting has been distributed and will be taken as read. If I can just go through some introductions. Sitting at the table with me from your left, first of all, Tim Burt, Company Secretary, Paul Flynn, Managing Director and CEO, John Conde, AO, Deputy Chairman of the Board and Chairman of the Remuneration Committee, Dr. Julie Beeby, Chairman of the Health, Safety, Environment and Community Committee, Fiona Robertson, Chairman of the Audit, Risk and Management Committee, Board member Lindsay Ward, Kevin Ball, CFO, right on the end there. Our other Board member, Raymond Zage, who is domiciled in Singapore, was unable to be here in person today, however, is online joining the meeting electronically. I think we've got Mitchell Fitzgerald, partner of Ernst & Young, Whitehaven's auditor, is also here today to answer any questions on the audit of the company's accounts. And before we commence the formal part of today's meeting, I'd like to remind everyone here to be respectful of all shareholders who've taken the time to attend today. We welcome questions and comments, but anyone who is offensive or disruptive will be requested to leave the meeting so that all shareholders can get what they need to get out of today's meeting. All attendees are asked to refrain from using photographic or recording equipment. Once the meeting is concluded, there will be an opportunity for members of the media to put any questions they have to either myself or the CEO. This year, we are again using an electronic voting system, and all resolutions will be determined by poll. If you are eligible to vote, you can scan the QR code on your attendance card with your mobile device at any time after I open voting. This will take you to an online voting page. To cast your vote, simply select one of the options. There is no need to hit submit or the enter button as the vote is automatically recorded, and you'll receive a vote confirmation notification on your screen. So I now declare voting on Resolutions 1-5 open. So please submit your votes at any time while the voting is open, and I'll give everybody a warning later on in the meeting when we're about to close the voting. Resolutions six and seven are both contingent resolutions and will be dealt with later if necessary. If you require assistance with voting, please raise your hand. And I am holding open proxies in my capacity as chairman, and it is my intention to vote all available proxies in favor of resolutions one to four and against resolutions five to seven. We've got the housekeeping out of the way. I'll now turn to my chairman's address, which was released to the ASX this morning. Just first of all, following on from Aunty Ann's very warm welcome earlier, I would like to add my acknowledgement of the traditional owners of the land on which we meet, the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, and pay my respects to their elders past and present. I also acknowledge, as Aunty Ann did, the Gomeroi people and the Barada Barna people and their ancient and enduring connection to the lands and waterways on which our operating and development assets are located in the Gunnedah region. We are proud of the strong and constructive relationships we have formed with the traditional owner groups, and I'd like to reaffirm our commitment as a business to continuing our engagement in a way that's consistent with the track record we have now established over many years working together. Ladies and gentlemen, Whitehaven reported record earnings for FY 2022 as demand for our products exceeded supply. Coal prices increased to new highs. The past year has highlighted that access to high-quality, high-CV coal for reliable energy supply remains essential. The products we sell into a global market cannot be easily substituted, which is reflected in the prices being achieved. Sanctions against Russian coal and gas as a result of the invasion of Ukraine have exacerbated global energy shortages. This predicament is also a function of the significant underinvestment in fossil fuels over many years. Decarbonization is necessary, but it must take place in a responsible and coordinated way. We continue to maintain that this is a journey that will take decades, not years. As the world reprioritizes energy security at Whitehaven Coal, we are committed to maintaining supply and reliability for our customers and trading partners while supporting them to meet their emissions reduction aspirations. We produce the highest quality thermal coal in the seaborne market. Our thermal coal fuels high efficiency, low emissions electricity generation that is helping our customers in Asia generate electricity with lower emissions than older coal-fired power plants do. Towards the end of the financial year, our CEO, Paul Flynn, and I met with our largest customers in Japan, where more than 3,000 megawatts of new HELE electricity generation is planned to replace older coal-fired power plants. Our customers demand the highest quality coal to supply this new capacity and help them meet Japan's decarbonization goals in line with the Paris Agreement. We are proud of the role we play in this. As the world transitions to more intermittent renewable energy sources, traditional energy sources like coal are critical to providing reliable baseload energy, and it's important that the most energy-efficient and highest quality coals are available to do this. This will be energy-intensive, and coal-powered electricity will be required to build the necessary technologies and infrastructure to deliver on the world's emissions reduction aspirations. While maligned by some, there is now a growing acceptance that carbon capture usage and storage technologies will help ensure emissions reductions targets can be met while economies and populations continue to expand. Global investment in research and development in these technologies is growing rapidly, and momentum is building around the coal industry-funded and government-supported work of Low Emission Technology Australia. Whitehaven plays an important role in supporting industry innovation, community development, and economic growth more broadly. Our taxes and royalties to governments, both state and federal, totaled a record AUD 1 billion in FY 2022, helping to underpin Australia's economic prosperity, making a significant down payment on the stimulus that helped insulate our economy from the worst of the COVID pandemic. Looking ahead, demand for high-quality, high-CV thermal coal is set to remain strong, with prices expected to be well-supported for longer. In terms of metallurgical coal, despite current volatility, the longer-term demand and price environment is positive. We have a number of growth options to meet the strong continued demand, which Paul, our Managing Director, will comment on in his address shortly. Overall, the outlook for Whitehaven is very positive. We are attracting and retaining good people to work with us. We have an engaged workforce, strong leadership, and a developing cohort of emerging leaders. As detailed in our remuneration report in FY 2022, we undertook a comprehensive review of our executive remuneration framework with retention of executive talent an important objective, as well as alignment with shareholder value. I thank all of our people, particularly Paul Flynn, and our stable and experienced team of executive leaders for the outstanding financial results in FY 2022 and improvements across all areas of the business, including safety. It is encouraging to see a further reduction in the Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate to 5.4 in FY 2022 and that Whitehaven's five-year average of 5.8 is well below the New South Wales five-year industry average of 12.9. We often talk about the inversely proportional relationship between safety and production. While we can never be complacent, it is pleasing to see this continuing to play out in our circumstance. I thank my fellow directors for their continued commitment and hard work and support. Sadly for all of us, perhaps less so for him, my Deputy Chairman, John Conde, retires at the end of today's meeting after 15 years on the Board. As deputy chairman, John has been an indispensable counsel to me, and I will miss working with him immensely. I thank you, John, very sincerely for your service, and I wish you all the very best in your retirement, although you're not really retiring, you're just leaving our Board. I also thank our shareholders for their continued support and commitment to the company. It is extremely satisfying to see you being rewarded for your patience, with an AUD 0.40 fully-franked final dividend being a step up on the AUD 0.08 unfranked interim dividend in FY 2022. An additional AUD 588 million has been returned to shareholders through our initial 10% share buyback scheme, which was completed just last week. We intend to continue to return capital to shareholders through franked dividends and buyback programs. We look forward to the year ahead and to being the number one choice for our customers and delivering continued strong returns for shareholders. That concludes my comments, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much for your attention. I'll now hand over to Paul Flynn, our Managing Director, for his presentation. Thanks, Paul. T hank you, Chairman, and welcome everybody to Whitehaven's Annual General Meeting for 2022. I also acknowledge the traditional owners of the land on which we meet today, the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, and the Gomeroi and Barada peoples who are partners in our growth as a business and also in our shared reconciliation journey. I pay my respects to their elders, past and present. I'm pleased to be able to recap on Whitehaven's financial year results and also offer some reflections on the strong position the company is in. In our presentation that's been released this morning, there is a disclosure slide that refers to the necessary disclaimers associated with forward-looking statements. FY 2022 has been a very good year for Whitehaven. We've experienced exceptionally strong demand. We've reported record financial results, and we've maintained a disciplined capital approach during the course of the year, delivering ASX-leading shareholder returns, and we continue to operate in a safe, efficient, and sustainable way. As a reminder to you, Whitehaven exports all its coal into Asia for electricity generation, steelmaking, smelting, and other industrial purposes. Our three important markets are Japan, Korea, and Taiwan, which represent about 77% of FY 2022's Sales. In Japan, we keep the lights on for an average of 33 minutes of every 24 hours. In South Korea, we effectively keep the country operating for 23 minutes in a day, and in Taiwan, it's about 27 minutes of every day that Whitehaven provides electricity for. On a weighted average basis, that's about 30 minutes of electricity of every day provided by Whitehaven to some 200 million people across these very important markets. As the chairman noted in his address, while sanctions against Russian coal and gas exacerbated global energy shortages, we were already seeing global shortages as a result of significant underinvestment in reliable forms of energy over the past decade or so. Thermal coal prices strengthened considerably in 2021, and following the unfortunate conflict in Ukraine, prices increased to new highs, particularly for high-quality thermal coal, and the global supply-demand imbalances are expected to continue with strong thermal coal prices. For metallurgical coal, prices have dropped below thermal coal prices due to different market dynamics. The global economic slowdown has reduced steel demand in the near term, and prices have softened. At Whitehaven, we've been able to switch some of our semi-soft coking coal to thermal markets to take advantage of the higher prices. Most semi-soft coals in the broader market that could have switched into the thermal market have already done so over the last couple of years. And as many will know, prime low-vol hard coking coal cannot be easily redeployed to supply thermal coal demand. In addition to the strong demand for all fuel types, including the very competitive dynamics in the high-CV thermal coal market that we play in, we've seen inflationary pressures impacting all input costs in FY 2022. In addition to inflationary cost impacts have been in labor constraints due to full employment, minimal immigration, and ongoing COVID-induced supply chain disruptions. These challenges will remain ongoing during FY 202 3. Finally, while severe weather events in December impacted Whitehaven, including cutting off Maules Creek's mine access for short periods, our operations were not impacted by the March floods as severely as the Hunter Valley producers, but logistics, that being rail and port, were adversely affected. The weather impacts in our operations and logistics and on the Australian coal industry more broadly have added to the tight market supply, which is further supporting the high-price environment. These market dynamics, together with strong operational performance, underpin Whitehaven's record financial results in FY 2022. Our managed ROM coal production for the year totaled 20 million tons, and our managed coal sales, including purchased coal, were 18.8 million tons. 82% of the sales were thermal coal and 18% metallurgical coal. These numbers were encouraging in a year where we lost two weeks of production at Maules Creek, as I mentioned earlier, in the first half of the year as a result of flooding-related road closures, limiting access, and ongoing COVID-related absenteeism and labor constraints more generally. In addition, we adopted a strategy of washing more coal to produce higher-quality blends to take advantage of the exceptionally high prices at the top end of the market. This meant costs were higher, but the superior margins achieved through our quality-focused strategy helped us secure an additional $1 billion in EBITDA for the year. We achieved coal prices of $325 per ton, translated into $4.9 billion in revenue, a record EBITDA number of $3.1 billion, and $2.6 billion in cash generated from operations, and a net profit after tax of $2 billion. Because of these stellar results, we fully paid down our senior debt, and we paid a final dividend of AUD 0.40 fully franked on the 16th of September. During the year, we returned AUD 442 million of capital to shareholders in terms of up until the 30th of June, and we also paid an AUD 0.08 dividend, as you know. And through the buyback program, the acquisition of 7% of the shares was part of the overall 10% program that we announced when we released the half-year results for the year. As the chairman has mentioned, we have completed our initial buyback program now last week. We are focused on maintaining a disciplined approach to capital allocation. Our path is clear. First, we'll use the capital, our cash, to maintain and optimize the existing operations. Second, we will retain cash in the business to maintain strength in the balance sheet and fund optionality and flexibility. Third, we'll return capital to shareholders in the form of franked dividends and buybacks, as you've seen us do in FY 2022. After those priorities with surplus cash, we can then consider investing for growth and what is the best use of the capital. Growth investments might include M&A, say, for instance, of minority stakes of our existing assets or acquisitions in the metallurgical coal sector and diversify operations out of the Gunnedah Basin as an example. Or it may include investing in Vickery or Winchester South as well as our development projects. But we'll only invest in these projects and opportunities if they deliver superior returns to shareholders. Our aim is to return at least 20% and up to 50% of impact to shareholders through dividends and buybacks. But if buying back additional shares continues to be more attractive than investing in growth, then our payout ratio may be higher if there is surplus cash. Share buybacks have been and are expected to remain an efficient and value-creating way to return capital to our shareholders, particularly if the share price is undervaluing the company, which we believe remains the case. While the share price has appreciated considerably over the past year, increasing from about $3 per share to about $10 in recent weeks, earnings have increased significantly. Looking at the history of Whitehaven's share price, there's been a strong correlation historically between the coal price, but that changed about two years ago. At that point, we started to see a disconnect between the price and also the coal price relationship, making Whitehaven's shares exceptional value. While we do not expect the current coal prices to be the new normal, we do believe that there has been a structural change that has occurred as a result of ongoing shortages and the changed market dynamics, which will deliver longer-term pricing higher than we've seen before. The coal market is not like any other. There has been little investment, reinvestment in the industry to respond to supply shortages, and very few companies in the position that Whitehaven is in, where we have new development opportunities that we can bring on in the future. For these reasons, we believe the stock, which is trading at a historically low EV to EBITDA multiple of less than two times, continues to represent excellent value at these prices. In FY 2022, we delivered total shareholder returns of 154% in that year, ranking Whitehaven as the number one ASX-listed stock from a total shareholder returns basis. In FY 2023, so far, we've retained that number one position, and if we look on a rolling basis for the past 12 months, the returns up until the 12 months ended 30 September show TSR at 199%. While the strong demand and pricing environment is underpinning Whitehaven's results, the results have been strengthened because of our focus operating in a safe, efficient, and sustainable way. Our safety performance improved in FY 2022. We reported a total recordable injury frequency rate of 5.4 for employees and contractors. This result is 8% better than the prior year and 22% better over the last five years. Our people are highly engaged in our journey and our business more broadly. Employee engagement is an important focus of us, particularly given the challenge we faced during COVID and that we continue to face attracting and retaining good people in the industry and in regional locations. In many respects, employee engagement goes hand in hand with local community engagement, given the majority of our 2,500 workforce live and work in regional New South Wales. We're proud of the progress that we're making when it comes to employee and community engagement, diversity, and participation. Importantly, 11.8% of our workforce identify as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, and 15.3% of employees are female, which is progressing well towards our target of 20% female representation by FY 2026. There is more of these details tabled in our 2022 sustainability report, which I commend to you. The report covers environmental performance, which continues to improve, and once again, we've reported climate-related risks and opportunities having regard to the voluntary framework recommended by the Financial Stability Board's Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures, known to many of you as TCFD. Our analysis continues to conclude that our operations will be resilient and return positive value to shareholders under the IEA's two enduring energy scenarios in its World Energy Outlook. Our Scope 1 and 2 emissions totaled around a million tons of CO2 in FY 2022, which is slightly higher than FY 2021, primarily related to fugitive emissions as a result of higher production volumes in Narrabri. We recognize that achieving net zero emissions by 2050, Australia needs appropriate legislation and regulatory mechanisms, and Whitehaven needs to contribute by reducing its own emissions as well. We are actively engaged and responsibly aligning our activities to meet our shared targeted national greenhouse gas emissions reductions, including the Safeguard Mechanism Scheme, which is currently being revised with further detail from the federal government expected in the coming weeks and months. In FY 2022, we are offsetting all of our Scope 2 mine emissions by purchasing 100% carbon-neutral electricity across all of our sites, a product that is certified by the federal government under the Climate Active Scheme. To further reduce the electricity consumed from the grid, we are undertaking a feasibility study for solar electricity generation at our Narrabri Mine, which is currently the largest user of electricity in our portfolio. We're also investing in R&D options for reducing Scope 1 emissions and including the difficult-to-abate fugitive emissions from our mining operations. An emerging technology in this space is a process owned by a company called Hydrobe Proprietary Limited, in which Whitehaven is a significant investor. Hydrobe has a world-patented process to run industrial emissions through microbial algae and bacteria to offer the potential to turn CO2 into salable products such as fertilizer, green hydrogen, and syngas. We are considering the application of this technology at our mines and end-users' products. We expect that carbon credits will need to be part of the solution to abate emissions, and we are developing an approach to ensure that we have access to reliable government-endorsed ACCUs and international credit units of high integrity. Options for carbon offsetting generation across our land holdings are being considered also, including carbon farming, and we're also invested in technologies to develop carbon capture and storage technologies through our involvement in Low Emission Technology Australia, or LETA. We have contributed in excess of AUD 4 million to that organization over the last five years. Of course, we are directly helping our customers as well reduce their emissions and achieve their decarbonization goals. Whitehaven's high-CV thermal coal delivers lower CO2 emissions intensity than any other coal in the seaborne market, and this is due to its lower ash and higher calorific value properties of our coal. When Whitehaven's coal is used in a HELE power station, a high-efficiency, low-emission power station, the levels of emissions significantly decrease. For example, the plants that we are fueling in Japan emit around 44% less CO2 emissions than Australia's subcritical coal-fired power plants in Victoria. Consistent with Japan's energy strategy plan to close subcritical power stations by 2030, replacement of ultra-supercritical plants are coming online, representing new demand for Whitehaven. In fact, Japan has five new USC plants coming online between 2022 and 2024, and South Korea will commission two new units in 2023. Collectively, these lines will produce about 6,000 megawatts of electricity and capacity and will need to be fueled by high CV coal. In FY 2022, 89% of our thermal coal was above 5,600 in calorific value, and nearly 35% of the total volume was above 6,200 in calorific value. In the September quarter alone, 100% of our thermal coal was above 5,850 calorific value. It therefore makes sense, as the world decarbonizes, Whitehaven's energy content continues to be part of the energy mix, and particularly in Asia, where the newest, most technologically advanced coal-fired fleet, including the best technology, can extend the advantages of Whitehaven's high-quality coal. Turning to the future, Wood Mackenzie is forecasting global demand of thermal seaborne coal to largely remain static to 2030 and then to taper through to 2050. However, the market has bifurcated, with advanced economies facing demand decline to 2050, as developing economies, mostly in Asia, our markets, to which we are exposed, continue to grow their demand. By 2030, nearly 85% of the world's coal-fired generating capacity will be in emerging and developing economies, according to Wood Mackenzie, and as you look at these forecasts, the amount of supply coming from existing mines falls well short of demand. We acknowledge the role we play, we will need to play, and will need to play in the coming decades, including being one of the few coal producers in the world in a position to bring on new thermal coal production to meet this anticipated demand, such as our Vickery project. Looking to our portfolio of assets, our underground operation at Narrabri has been granted an extension approval to 2044. Our large open-cut Maules Creek mine has more than 30 years of mine life, and our Werris Creek mine will come to an end in 2024, and Tarawonga has about 10 years left in its operations. The Vickery project is now fully approved and can produce up to 10 million tons of ROM production per annum and a very high-quality thermal coal. In order to fully assess the current economics in the project and determine the timing, we are revising earlier capital budgets, refining mine plans, and finalizing operating licenses. We're also considering the opportunity to bring Vickery on in a staged approach, starting with a smaller capital approach, a smaller version, where we can mine Vickery coal and transport it to our Gunnedah CHPP plant for processing. A smaller-scale initial investment will allow us to bring new volumes to market sooner, and we expect to be able to firm up our view around this project, this exciting project, in the middle of this financial year. Looking at metallurgical coal, we are seeing short-term softness as a result of economic slowdowns. This coal remains an essential ingredient in the steelmaking process and is structurally short in the long term. It's an essential component for the economic recovery and to service the obvious needs in Southeast Asia in particular and the subcontinent. Wood Mackenzie is forecasting strong growth in the demand for seaborne metallurgical coal in Asia over the coming decades. Our Winchester South coal development in Queensland's Bowen Basin remains an attractive future option for Whitehaven. We expect it will take another year to achieve our state-based approval and then potentially another year further for the federal-level approval. Progressing these projects is an important part of getting our projects shovel ready. In FY 2023, we'll focus on further improving safety, our environmental performance, and sustainability, as well as maximizing the thermal coal volumes and managing costs and optimizing our margins. So far, we've delivered a September quarter, which reflects excellent operational performance in our Narrabri underground mine, which is tracking well ahead of plan. However, access from road flooding has impacted our operations in our open-cut mines and hampered production, and we are hopeful the overall volume targets can be met and will remain focused on meeting our guidance for ROM coal production of 20-22 million tons for the year and manage coal sales of a range of 17.5-18.5 million tons. We're looking forward to delivering for you another strong year in FY 2023, and I'd like to thank the team and our Board for their strong support during the course of this financial year. Thank you. Thanks, Paul, for that comprehensive presentation to shareholders of the year past and what we're looking forward to in FY 2023 as we move forward beyond today. Okay, ladies and gentlemen, we'll now move to the next stage of our meeting. As this is a shareholders' meeting, only shareholders, their attorneys, proxies, and authorized company representatives are entitled to ask questions. Shareholders will be provided with a reasonable opportunity to ask questions on each resolution as we go to those resolutions, as outlined earlier. To ask a question, just please raise your hand and a microphone attendant will come around. Please introduce yourself when asking a question. If you have a question on a specific resolution that we're going to be dealing with later on in the meeting, I ask that question be considered when we're dealing with that particular item. Any general questions should be asked when we consider the financial report shortly. We welcome questions from shareholders, but it is important to give everyone an opportunity to participate. Please limit the number of questions, and please avoid using the time as an opportunity to make a statement or a speech. There will be plenty of opportunities for further engagement with both the Board and management immediately following the AGM. The meeting's first item of business is to consider the company's financial report and the reports of the directors and auditor for the year ended 30th of June 2022. The Corporations Act requires that these reports be laid before the meeting. However, there is no requirement for the shareholders to vote on these reports. So we table the financial reports. They've been made available. And so at this point, the matter is now open for discussion. If anybody would like to raise any questions on the financial reports. I mean, it's coming to you, Joy. Good morning, everybody, and good to be seeing the Board in person. I like to read the body language as well as hear the speeches and read them. My name is Joy Llewellyn-Smith. I've been a small shareholder, sometimes a little larger shareholder, but I don't hold many now. And I like to raise questions on behalf of the universe because I was trained as a socioeconomic researcher, and they shouldn't have put us girls at Hornsby Girls High into classes where we were taught to think for ourselves. But having done that, I think it's a benefit because I've listened to Aunty Ann this morning with great interest. I have been trying to educate myself as a human geographer as to what really happened, and I have to face the fact that some of my ancestors were over the Blue Mountains more than four decades before me and may be implicated in names, not Maules Creek, but other ones. I started school in Cowra, and I was horrified in 2010 on the way to Grenfell Bird Observer Camp to find out that I had never had any knowledge of it. They're just some preliminaries, but I want to say that from listening to Aunty Ann, something jumped into my head that never occurred to me before: Whitehaven Coal. Coal's black. White and black have got to work together, and you've got to find a way to do it, and the white is not superior. I had to learn that the hard way in my philosophy class. I'm not superior because I'm English-speaking and white. Descartes, thank you for taking me back to that core that shocked me. Now, I'm going to go to a couple of questions specifically towards the end of Paul's presentation. I would very much like to hear some more details about the solar feasibility study underway. Since when? Timing-wise? And what is a long study, or when can we expect some preliminary results? And the other one, which I'll come to, my color coding is often the way I organize things. Wood Mackenzie are doing some studies, and you're a major shareholder in it, so I think there's some potential conflict of interest. But once again, because of the word, and I'm getting some questions between Board members, so have I misunderstood that Wood Mackenzie? Keep going with the question, Joy. Yeah. So Wood Mackenzie, that same little different thing jumps into my head. Wood, not coal. Mackenzie, Scottish. They don't mind coal anymore. So would the Board consider approving an independent assessment of the Wood Mackenzie report to put to us shareholders? Because there's a lot of information, and we need some guidance. Thank you. Thanks, Joy. There was a lengthy contribution, but you've been a long-term shareholder, and you always turn up at our AGMs, and so we did indulge. But I would remind shareholders to keep their questions short. I'm just going to make a quick comment on the first part of your question, which was with regard to the solar feasibility. We've actually conducted. There's two components to this. One is very advanced in development, and it's what we call a behind-the-meter solar farm, which will supply electricity straight into the Narrabri underground, and that's going to be built on-site. And Paul will comment in terms of the progress as far as that is concerned. The second element of the feasibility that was undertaken was a larger scale, a larger scale solar farm in terms of can it be built, is the topography right? And that came back as a positive, but there's no pipeline out there near Narrabri to get that electricity into the grid yet. And so there's a couple of elements to it. But the behind-the-meter solar farm, which will replace electricity we're buying from retailers at the moment, is certainly well advanced. But I'll get Paul to comment also on the Wood Mac issue because, to my knowledge, we're not a shareholder in Wood Mac. Yep. Thank you, Joy. A little bit more color on the solar, if I might, Chairman. Having looked at a range of options, and as the Chairman's mentioned, we looked at an industrial-scale facility, but there is not the transmission capacity in the network to be able to move electrons of an industrial-size solar farm into the system. And so that deficiency is well understood by the government. They have plans to improve that so that other developers, such as ourselves, can look at opportunities to bring renewable energy generation into our region. But it is very constrained in terms of that capacity to put the electrons into the system. So then we moved to look at something more bespoke to our own requirements, something smaller scale where we weren't dependent on the transmission capacity. And that's why the Chairman's mentioned the behind-the-meter. So on our land, servicing our own needs, displacing the consumption from the grid, that's about 35 megawatts is what we're looking at there. We have done the pre-feasibility study. So we're moving to the feasibility study, which includes the compatibility of solar power, which is a relatively diffuse energy source, and aligning the conditions of power, the quality of power, I should say, with the needs of our long-haul operation. It's our largest consumer of electricity, but you'd need to have certain frequency and conditions of power to be able to make that functional. So we are studying that. I expect we'll have an answer for this and through a feasibility study within the next 12 months. But we've identified the location. We're doing the necessary work to consider already an EIS associated with that. So it is looking quite interesting for us. So we're very encouraged by what we've seen to date. For the smaller size, we are captive to the government fixing the transmission network in our region in order to be able to do something a little larger. Hopefully, that's helpful. On Wood Mac, we're not a shareholder of Wood Mac, no. So we're completely independent of that. We do pay for the service, no doubt. And they're one of many services that we use, not just Wood Mac. There's others as well, sort of CRU, also well-respected and widely used worldwide. We're very familiar with them because of the IEA uses them as well. AME and others, Commodity Insights. So we try and take a view from all these sources because there's always some risk associated with depending on one forecaster's view. But we're happy to bring a synthesis of those collective views, if you like, to shareholders. If you'd like to see an amalgam of what their current view is, perhaps we can pull that together and make that available to shareholders. Thanks, Paul. Next question, gentleman in the blue jumper. Thanks. My name is Dr. Rod Anderson. I live on Gadigal land. There are two small parts to my question, which is really, I guess, about provision for certain financial liabilities. The first part is, does Whitehaven Coal have a plan to protect the future of your workforce and the economic viability of the communities in which you operate by creating transition plans for each of your mines? Is that the entirety of your question? I have the second part. Yep. Yep. Given the large surplus recently secured by Whitehaven Coal, what programs will you implement soon to support your own workforce through this transition and to support economic diversification in the New South Wales Northwest more broadly? Thanks. Rod, was it? Yeah, Rod. And I presume you're asking your question as a proxy holder today. Thank you. On behalf of Mr. Hamish Maxwell-Stewart, I was 237 votes. I'm going to get Paul to comment in a second, but initially, my general response is the best thing that we can do in the interests of the economic viability and the future of our employees is continuing to operate the assets while the demand remains for the product that we produce in the international markets. And that goes for all employees, whether they be here or whether they be in the Gunnedah Basin. It also goes for the local economy in the Gunnedah Basin and more broadly across towards Tamworth. Paul, do you want to make a comment? Thank you, Chairman. I'll just add that we're fortunate in having long-life mines, and those mines are very interesting to our customers because they have invested in long-life assets that consume the product we have. And the matching of those power station lives is the most important thing that our customers are considering in terms of where they procure the coal from. As I mentioned earlier, we only fuel HELE power stations, the highest, most efficient power station technology. But as I also mentioned there earlier, the youngest fleet of these coal-fired power stations is in Asia in our backyard. And given we are in an environment of heightened energy security concerns for physical supply, price is important, of course, but our customers are very, very concerned about physical security, not just for today because there's a shortage because of some turbulence in the world, which is very unfortunate, but longer term because they've built assets that are going to be around for 30, 40 years, and they want to know or they want the confidence that they have relationships with companies that have long-life mines that can continue to service that requirement. As I mentioned, 30 minutes across 200 million people every day is a responsibility that we take very, very seriously. Thanks, Paul. Sorry, there's other. I'll come back to you. I'll let others ask questions first. Is it right there in the front here? Down the front, Tracy. Hello. Tracy Carpenter. I'm holding a proxy from Winnie Foo. I wanted to refer to the Vickery Coal Mine and some confusion over the split between metallurgical and thermal coal. It was referred to in both the Managing Director's speech and your own, Mr. Chairman, and I note that it's referenced as a metallurgical coal asset, but the approval documents in 2014 list the coal split as 70% thermal and 30% metallurgical, but in more recent documentation, I've seen that the coal split is 40% thermal coal and 60% metallurgical. Can you please clarify what the split is expected to be and what has caused the shift in those figures, please? I'll come to Paul in a second in responding to that, but just remember that most of our assets in the Gunnedah Basin are able to produce both semi-soft coking coal, metallurgical coal, and thermal coal. It would be irresponsible of us as a company if we didn't pursue the highest and best value of the product on behalf of our shareholders and indeed the nation. I mean, just remember that we export everything we produce. In FY 2022, we paid AUD 1 billion in taxes and royalties that has helped bring that budget deficit down as we saw it last night. So it can swing either way. Now, it costs probably more because there's more washing involved to produce the metallurgical coal, but if the demand and the price is there for that, then it can swing that way. So those percentages can move. So I'll just Paul? The question was specifically about Vickery. I understand. Sorry, Tracy, was it? Could you remind me where you got the 70/30 from? From the 2014. 2014. Oh, okay. No, thank you. Oh, that was the small version. That was the 4.5 million ton approval. That's correct. So the smaller version that was approved in September of 2014 was not as extensive in footprint-wise as the subsequent approval which we've received for the larger version of the mine. We incorporated area, what was known as Vickery South, which the government had tended out, which is adjacent. And by incorporating that into the overall footprint of the mine, the split between metallurgical and thermal changed, 60/40 is the split of the aggregated project. Okay. Thanks, Paul. Thank you. Gregory Walker. I'm a shareholder. I recently added Whitehaven shares to my portfolio, which has been a good timing. My question is that I understand our revolving credit facility matures next year. Have we been able to secure refinance for that loan? And just a comment on that. Given many banks' decarbonization strategies, do we have an alternative capital management plan in place should we not be able to access bank debt for our company's upcoming projects? You are correct that the revolving facility, the current arrangement expires later on next year. We have been engaged in preliminary discussions with the current club, if you like, of financial institutions that provide that revolving facility. And of course, some circumstances over the last since we established that have changed. I think that we still have, and I'll come to Paul or Kevin, two of the Australian banks are still a part of our funding syndicate, plus Japanese banks, and I think maybe a Chinese bank. But the company is doing a lot of work in terms of reviewing what we need in that structure. We had made public announcements at some point we may enter into a US dollar bond to have that as part of the debt structure as well as the revolving structure that we have in place. But certainly, underlying all of that and given the results in FY 2022 where we've deleveraged the balance sheet completely to the tune of about $900 million, the focus going forward is to run a little bit of a more conservative balance sheet as Paul outlined in his presentation. But we're just about to embark upon the renewal, if you like, of the facilities, the banking facilities that you're referring to. I'll just get Paul. I'll make a comment or just a brief interjection. Kevin, after you. Gregory, we're in good form in terms of those discussions with the syndicate. We don't need the whole billion dollars that we have today. I think that's pretty clear. As we mentioned earlier and you've noted, we will run a more conservative balance sheet going forward. So we think it will be refinanced in orderly fashion, but we just don't need the whole AUD 1 billion anymore. So we will reduce that, but we will be keeping more cash on the balance sheet as a result. And as the chairman's mentioned, we are looking for opportunities, of course, always to diversify sources of capital. And the bond markets themselves haven't been particularly stable. I think as most bond market watchers would observe, given the gyrations in property market, in particular in China, have caused a lot of disturbance in that market. We don't need to do anything anytime soon, I might add, because we're in good financial shape. So we'll take our time and do it at a time of our choosing. But the refinancing, I have little concern for that. That, I assume, means that some of your lenders too, you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, are in discussion for bond banks supporting bond issues if you need it. The bond would be in the U.S. market, not in the Australian market. It will be heavily Asian-subscribed in terms of sources of funds because the Asian market is very important to us, and they understand the role that our business plays in the economies in Asia. So we would expect a large piece of that to come out of Asian financial markets, but it will be U.S.-based. Thank you. Thanks, Greg. I'll just go to one more over here, then we'll come back over to the gentleman in the coat next. I'm Thea Ormerod. I'm a proxy shareholder for Marcus Foth and Karen Large. In their submission to the Independent Planning Commission's assessment of Narrabri Stage 3, five University of New South Wales climate scientists looked at the remaining carbon budget for both 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming and concluded the following: There is no carbon budget left that can be spent by an extension of coal mining at Narrabri. If New South Wales wishes to achieve its goal of net zero emissions by 2050 or by 2030, as the science now requires, coal still in the ground must be left in the ground. Likewise, when former Chief Scientist of Australia, Professor Penny Sackett, reviewed your project, she concluded it represents a catastrophic risk and advised that New South Wales Independent Planning Commission not approve it. Can you explain why Whitehaven is going ahead as though they are incorrect? There is a number of assertions in there that I'm going to firstly leave Paul to respond to because it's a detailed and lengthy question. Thank you very much there. Paul? Thank you, Chair. Look, Narrabri Stage 3, obviously approval, just for everybody's context, is a life extension of an existing mine. And obviously, during the rigorous processes that the state government go through, including obviously the IPC's ultimate approval of the project, they go through extensive analysis of all submissions. And there are submissions from every quarter interested in these types of developments, which you would imagine. I think the conclusions overall speak for themselves in terms of the scrutiny for climate change-related considerations, both at the state government level and also the IPC, determined that the project should go ahead after considering all those important perspectives that are provided by submissions. So ours is not to second guess those. As I mentioned earlier, our customers are obviously in a heightened state of concern about the continuity of supply of our high-quality coal. As I mentioned earlier, it is the lowest carbon intensity of any coal available in the seaborne trade. And we have a role to continue to provide that while our transition to a lower carbon future continues to occur. Thanks, Paul. Gentleman in the coat there. Good morning. Thank you for your time. Mr. Chairman, last year, the Board said it would look at our company's resilience under the net zero by 2050 scenario. I note that it's not available in this year's financial report or sustainability report yet again. Given that a large cohort of our investors now request this disclosure, why is it still not being provided? Does the Board ever intend to assess and disclose the risks and results of a net zero by 2050 scenario poses to investors' capital and the viability of our upcoming projects, no matter how unlikely the Board may consider this scenario? Taken on Board your comment. So, what was your name? Hugh Hornbrook. Hugh, we were the first coal company in Australia to report under the TCFD. We've continued to do so, and we've continued to put that information out to shareholders, testing against the TCFD measures as well as through our sustainability report. We have two new circumstances that you refer to in Australia with the election of a new government. One is the commitment to net zero by 2050. That, I just might remind shareholders, is a commitment to a net zero, not an absolute zero, net zero emissions. The other is to achieve a 43% reduction by 2030. We've been engaged with the government as they're starting to put together and implement that policy that they went to the election with in terms of how we work in with the government. Obviously, it's a government commitment, both the target of net zero by 2050 and the target of 43% reduction by 2030. They are commitments of our elected government in Australia. We will comply. And so to the extent that Paul has actually had input into the process, had meetings with senior government ministers since the election, as far as what we are going to need to do and the things that we're asking from government with regard to not disadvantaging our business as against other international business with whom we compete. These are very, very important measures. But I'll just get Paul, if you want to a dd to that. Paul actually met with Chris Bowen to discuss these matters. Not a lot further to add, Chairman, on that. I think you've covered off the detail of this. I think it's an evolving set of circumstances. Obviously, our obligation, as the chairman says, is to comply with the laws of the land. And with the 43% reduction by 2030, we'll play our part. And the responsible thing for us to do for shareholders is to make sure that we're active participants in the consultation process as the Safeguard Mechanism revisions are bedded down. And so we are active in that arena. We have made submissions already on this. Mr. Bowen was kind enough to visit our Newcastle office and meet many of our executives and share morning tea with our staff. And so we're quite encouraged by the cooperative stance that this new government has taken. Thanks. Just over here in the white coat. As long as shareholders. Mr. Chairman, we're hearing a lot about energy security. What are we hearing from our customers? It's a very important point. And it's one that also goes a little bit to the broader context of the discussion here and some of the facts that Thea raised earlier. And as Paul outlined in his presentation, the strength of demand in our major markets in North Asia continues. It was strengthening just on the supply-demand equation before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And of course, following that, that demand strengthened even further where those sovereign countries elevated energy security in a policy sense within those countries. And so during the course of this year, we've had the occasion to meet with a lot of our customers at least twice, if not more. And what we're finding is that, firstly, a much higher level of commitment to energy security. And if you just look at the Japanese market, they have a published stated policy of how they're going to achieve their target of 46% reduction by 2030. And it actually—and that's a public statement by the ministry in Japan with the mix of their energy sources to achieve that goal by 2030. And that includes in the fossil fuel sector, 20% is gas, 19%-20% is coal, 36%-38% is renewables, 20%-22% is nuclear. And so what we're finding in our space, what our customers are saying, they're looking for longer-term commitments. I mean, historically, our contracts might be six months, twelve months, three years max. A lot of our customers are looking for a longer-term commitment than that, even at these prices, because of their focus on energy security. If we can just go back to a couple of these sort of, I suppose, assertions in some of the questions. If you closed Australia down, if you closed our operations down and the product that we produce, that Paul highlighted very, very clearly in his slide deck as far as the quality of the product that we sell to our customers, if you remove that from the market, those customers are then going to have to source far inferior quality product from places like Indonesia or even China. And they will just burn that, the emissions will be much, much worse. There was a slide in Paul's slide deck that showed you that the ultra-supercritical power stations that many of our customers are still building and switching on initially have a 40% reduction in emissions compared to the power stations we have in Australia. You need to get out of your mind the fact that what's going on in Japan and Korea and Taiwan and Southeast Asia is what's happening in the Hunter Valley here or the Latrobe Valley in Victoria. It's not. It's totally different. These power stations have 40% lower emissions than any of those power stations in Australia, and they haven't bolted on carbon capture, usage and storage yet, and when we were in Japan two weeks ago, there was a lot of conversation about what's going to happen when that happens, so we need to understand that. Our product is not burned in Australia. Our product is burned in markets where they have a long-term strategy that balances their commitments under the climate change goals in Paris and in Glasgow and the subsequent meetings with their energy requirements into the future. It is a very, very well-structured plan. Our company is part of that because we have the high-quality product that they need. There was a question up the back there. Yes, Angus Robinson, shareholder. Look, I commend you on your recent comments, Chairman. I truly believe, actually, this company has a noble purpose. It is because you have the cleanest seaborne coal in the world. As you just said, 40% cleaner coal than that from China, South Africa, and Indonesia, which are the sort of places where it would be sourced from otherwise. The irony of this whole discussion is that climate emissions are a global problem, and we should actually be opening more mines like Whitehaven has here in Australia and closing them down in places like China. China, as some of the people in the room will be aware, has just announced it's going to produce 300 million more tons of its dirty coal. So I'd like to commend you on the purpose of the company and what it achieves on a global scale for actually reducing carbon emissions. And thank you very much. I'd also like to commend you for your annual report. And I thought it read very well and provided a lot of information to people. And thank you very much for that too. My question really is, and I think the discussion here today has shown there's a degree of ignorance and distortion of facts. Is Whitehaven able to contribute? My question is there's been quite a distortion and lack of knowledge in the Australian populace about what really goes on. And I just wonder if there's an opportunity for Whitehaven Coal and other coal producers to get together to really start to try and educate the Australian populace on some of these facts because the argument has just got so strong with these distorted claims of the science is in and so on, and it's accepted by much of the populace as fact. And therefore, you get the sort of questions you've had at the meeting today. Is there an opportunity for the coal producers to get together to fund some real information on these issues and show how important the Australian coal industry is to reducing carbon emissions on a global scale, to show how important the coal industry is to the economy here in terms of funding the health and education that we all take and welfare that we all take for granted? And in terms of the regional towns like the gentleman's mentioning here, I mean, having consulted for a regional town which had its mine closed and said, "Look, we're desperately concerned because we're going, this is back in the 1990s, we're going from an average wage of the miners of AUD 90,000 to an average wage of the tourists and the tourism people in tourism retail and hospitality of AUD 20,000. And we're worried that people won't be able to pay their rates. And we won't be able to supply the water that we do because we won't be able to charge the rates that we currently charge." So in somewhere like Gunnedah, though, I know this is terribly important. Of course, I can't give you the current figures, I suspect, and I'd be delighted if you could tell me. I suspect that an average retail job is around 30 or 40 thousand, hospitality and yet for mining, it'll be well over 100,000. So I come back to the question about education and some of those comments I made. Perhaps you might like to respond to. Thank you. Sure. Look, thanks, Angus. And it's a very valid point because there needs to be a balance of information out there available for people to assess. And I mean, as an individual company, I mean, we and particularly the management team do our best. Our CEO is involved and engaged in many industry organizations that are trying to just disseminate factual information as best we can. But we continue to do that because it is the reality. And we need to understand not just what's going on in this space in Australia because we get a daily feed of that, but what's going on across the world. And as far as we're concerned, it is all, it's very, very important work that we do as a company on behalf of our shareholders to engage and understand in those markets what is going on. I mean, whenever Paul and I go to Japan to visit, we don't just talk to customers. We go and talk to the government because the government in Japan sets the policy. The Prime Minister of Japan was here last weekend and signed with our Prime Minister. I don't know what they call them, whether they weren't treaty-level documents, but they were probably MOUs. One was on security. The other one was on energy security because it is absolutely critical to a net energy importer like Japan to know or be comfortable in the knowledge that they have got those products coming to maintain and to operate their country. They are just about stocked out as far as renewables are concerned. It's also very important for us, representing the interests of our shareholders, that we understand that what they are doing to mitigate the Scope 3 emissions. We're responsible for Scope 1 and Scope 2 here in Australia, where we sell our product to. We need to understand how they're doing it. I mean, I remember years ago, I once made the statement that we are assisting our customers achieve their Paris commitments, and it still remains a fact. Is there anything you wanted to add, Paul? Other than to just say, Angus, the point that you make abou t the education and the dissemination of better quality information, I take that very much on Board. As a company, we do a lot. And we're always encouraging through those associations with other producers to do more. Each company has its own appetite for that type of work, I must say. But we think it's very important to represent our shareholders well in this discussion. And we're active participants in all those forums to encourage other players in the sector also to play a similar role. So there's more work to be done. I agree 100% with the sentiment you're raising there with your point very well made, and we'll continue to push hard for this. Thanks, Paul. Look, are you just here in front? Been trying for a while. Thank you. Hello, Mr. Chairman. My name is Ava, and I'm 19 years old. I'm speaking as a proxy. I was one of the litigants who took the former Environment Minister, Sussan Ley, to court arguing that she had a duty of care not to approve your Vickery expansion project. My question is to the Board. Do you believe that you have a duty of care to the young people of Australia and the future generations to stay within 1.5 degrees of warming by stopping coal expansion and starting a just transition for your workers? Is there more to the question, or that's the question? That's the question. That's the question. Yes, we have a duty of care to not just our shareholders, but all people in Australia in terms of the balance of responsibility as being a responsible publicly listed company that's undertaking operations and activities that are legally endorsed and approved by governments across Australia in the interest of the economy of Australia, in the interest of the local economy, in the interest of young people in the Gunnedah Basin and the workforce. And more specifically, to your point, as I reiterate again, the alternatives to what we're doing are much worse for the people that you represent than what we are doing. I don't know whether Paul wants to add to that. Next question, please. Gentlemen down here. Down the front. Sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Peter Sainsbury, my wife and I hold shares. So Mr. Vaile, Mr. Flynn, congratulations. A huge year for the company. Can I just ask for a bit more information about something you said, Mr. Flynn, that appeared in one of your slides? Last year, the Board advised that the large financial and human capital requirements for upcoming projects were such that the company could only handle one developing project at a time. But given we've seen these record profits, is the Board reconsidering this strategy? And just to ask you to expand on what you were saying earlier, so what's your thinking, and what do we need to do to be able to pursue multiple projects at one time? Thank you. Thank you for the question, Peter. It's a constant juggling exercise, I have to say, that one. Our view is still that one project at a time is the right way to go. Now, which one goes first of those development projects is an open discussion for the Board considering the approval status of it and obviously the return profile that each of those two different projects represent. The challenge for us, and I'm sure this is no new statement to everyone in this room, our biggest challenge is labor, and being able to resource up the very important human capital to be able to build two projects at once, say, for instance, is obviously not something that we can undertake alone. All the service providers that we speak to are suffering the same dynamics that we have in terms of scarcity of those valuable skills, and it's everything from tradespeople through to engineers and so on, and that's before we even talk about the raw materials required in order to be able to conduct an exercise of that scale. We're a little cautious. We see the market's in good form. We see financially we're in good shape. We are very conscious of making sure we return capital to shareholders who've been long-standing and very supportive. So there's a balance there of all this. The outlook looks very good. So we do feel that we're in a unique position to bring on capacity. And harking back to the chairman's comments about our recent trips to see customers, I mean, they are very, very concerned about where the extra capacity is going to come from. So they're very encouraging of us considering what to do with our important projects. Winchester South is obviously not approved yet. So that's obviously further down the pipeline. Winchester South. Yeah. Sorry. Our Queensland Coking Coal Deposit in the Bowen Basin. Whereas Vickery is now fully approved. As I mentioned in my presentation, we are considering a capital-light version to bring that on so that we can accelerate the development of it. Again, this is all driven by customers' anxiety about physical supply. We are looking at that very closely. One of the most important pieces of that puzzle that's difficult at the moment is actually assembling a workforce, not just to operate it, but of course, to build the project in the first instance. We're pushing hard on that. I think if we had some other answers on labor scarcity, I'd love to hear them. I know the government's working on this. They're very mindful of it. We're recruiting offshore as well and providing new incentives to bring people to our region, such as housing. You may have seen also. We've soaked up the housing capacity in our region, given that we've quadrupled our size in the last 10 years. So we need to stimulate other activities there that enable more people to come to our region to assist us in our journey. Thanks, Paul. There's a gentleman up the back. Yeah. Jonathon Lewis, shareholder. I'm sure this goes to a point you made, Mark, about paying approximately AUD 1 billion in royalties and taxes of FY 2022. So I'm sure, as you guys all know, the Queensland government recently changed their royalty scheme and basically increased the royalties they charge on the coal that's exported out. Do you see New South Wales going down the same path? And if so, how will it affect the company? One of the things we actually put in the middle of the year when the Queensland government announced that increase in the royalty regime in Queensland, Paul and I were actually in Japan, and sort of as everybody saw here, it hit the headlines here to the extent that the Japanese ambassador went into the national media making a comment about it. That's the view they took of it, so we have sought as much comfort as we can get from the New South Wales government that it's not going to follow suit, but that only lasts until March next year because there's a state election in March next year, and they may get re-elected. There may be a new government, so as far as we can, yes, we've sought undertakings that the royalty regime is not going to change in New South Wales. Obviously, as Paul just alluded to in the previous answer, we do own an asset that is subject to approval processes in Queensland. And so we've been involved with the Resources Council in Queensland, who are lobbying the Queensland government to remove the extra levy they put on once they brought their budget back into balance. I mean, it was announced as a budget rectification measure, if you like. But we know that once these things get baked into the base, it's hard to take them out. But they're the couple of things that we've been doing. But certainly, as far as New South Wales is concerned, the indications from the current state government that they're not going to make any changes here, but that's something that the industry will need to pursue with both political parties leading up to the election in March of next year. Yeah. The gentleman right next to you, if you want to hand him the microphone. Thank you. I know there's people that have already asked questions. You've got their hands up. I'm going to go through people that haven't asked any questions first. Good day, thanks, Mr. Chairman. My name's Nic. I'm appearing today as a proxy for a shareholder. So my question is about the Narrabri Stage 3 project. As the Board would be aware, the Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action are currently challenging the approval of that project in the Land and Environment Court on the grounds that the approval was unreasonable, irrational, and illogical, and not in the public interest. Of course, those grounds include the impact of Stage 3 on global heating and, in fact, heating here in New South Wales. The project is seeking to mine thermal coal to 2044. Your document submitted to the IPC indicated that Scope 1 emissions would continue out to 2064. Annual Scope 1 emissions compared to current operations are projected to roughly triple, mostly as a result of methane venting. Your documents identified that it's very difficult to abate those emissions. I think Whitehaven Coal, the Department of Planning, and the Independent Planning Commission all agreed that abatement of less than 1% is the current plan for those substantial Scope 1 emissions. Really, my question oh, sorry. Finally, if you look at the Scope 1 emissions data reported to the Clean Energy Regulator in Canberra, what you notice is that when Stage 3 becomes operational, if it is built, it will become the highest-emitting thermal coal mine in the entire country of Australia in terms of Scope 1 emissions. There is no coal mine currently operating in Australia, thermal coal mine, with higher emissions than the 1.36 million tons that your project is projected to emit. I guess coming to the question, the Australian government has just signed the Global Methane Pledge. Chris Bowen is cracking down on Scope 1 emissions, as you've referred to a few times with the Safeguard Mechanism conversations. So really, my question is, given that situation, is the Board reconsidering whether this is a good project and whether it's responsible for it to go ahead? And I guess the second part of it is, does the Board consider that if you're an Australian government looking to bring down Scope 1 emissions and there's a merit order of thermal coal mines in Australia? And as you've said, we're responsible for the Scope 1 and 2 emissions. So if you're looking to manage your Scope 1 emissions problem and you've got a mine that's the highest emitter in Australia, is there a risk that that mine will be closed first simply because that makes good policy sense in a global, national, and state quest to get to net zero? Thanks, Nic. There was a lot of commentary in that as well as the question. I think the answer to the first part of your question is no, and I'm going to let Paul answer the second part. Yeah. Thanks, Nic. There was a lot in that one, so let me try and work my way through that. But sorry, the one thing before I go into that, I should have added to the answer to Peter's question there was that, Peter, those projects need to compete against the buyback in terms of the best use of the incremental dollar we have surplus to our needs. That dynamic we've explained pretty extensively in February. So given the stock is pretty cheap on an EV multiple basis or an EV multiple basis, we're continuing to push the buyback given the sensible nature of that dynamic. Projects need to compete with that. I just thought I should add that to that. Sorry for that indulgence. Nic, look, illogical and all those other references you made, I'll take that as a comment rather than something I need to respond to. The project, just to be clear for everybody again, given that it wasn't clear in your statement, is that Narrabri Stage 3 is a life extension of an existing mine. So it's just a continuation of it for a longer period of time. The important aspect of that, I think, given that we are in the business of complying with the laws of the land from an emissions reduction perspective, is that we must deliver our share of emissions reductions over time. We should do that. And we will. What you're referencing in terms of potential emissions from Narrabri is Narrabri operating at its highest capacity throughout the life of the mine. That's the way those numbers were modelled. The capacity of that mine is approved to be 11 million tons per annum. We've given guidance this year up to 5.7 million tons. Those numbers that you're referring to are theoretical based on the production ceiling of the approved mine. I might just add that. The mine itself, actually, just for your information, is very, very low in methane. In fact, extremely low. In fact, the predominant gas that exists at Narrabri when we mine coal or when we're degassing the seam itself in advance of production is CO2. We actually have very, very little methane. But it does rise gently over the area of Stage 3 as we trend south into producing into that area. And it is such a low level that we actually can't even flare it. It's so low level, the methane concentrations there. So the condition that is imposed on Narrabri is a very sensible one. And that is the government wants us to continue to study the ways in which we might be able to deal with that methane over the life of the project. So that is a commitment in our approval. And that includes things like flaring. So how would we go about flaring concentrations of methane, which are at such a low level? We all acknowledge methane has a differential and multiple impact that CO2 does from a climate change perspective. But the condition is on us, and we must comply with that to study that and, if practical, implement those measures over the life of the mine. Thanks, Paul. Gentlemen here, I'm still going to people that haven't asked a question. Sorry, folks. Then I think the lady over here, and then there's a lady up the back. Okay. My name's Kevin Daly, Mr. Chairman. I just need two numbers from you. The first is what level of CapEx will be involved in Vickery Light? And the second one is how much per year do you spend on your carbon dioxide emissions abatement procedures? I don't know that we've actually got to the point of establishing the CapEx for Vickery Light. I don't know whether Paul can comment on that. I can make some general marks, if you like, Chairman. The capital light version of that, Kevin, is essentially the box cut, which would be required in any event for the bigger version, so that's obviously the initial cut that needs to be developed there, so that would be in the order of AUD 50 million-AUD 60 million to do that. It won't be as big as, obviously, the bigger version at the moment, but that's what we're talking about. The capital light version would entail using contractors rather than putting capital out the door ourselves. So we have an existing CHPP. The project is on the haul road directly to the CHPP already. So what we would do is assemble short-term contracts in place for people to bring haulage equipment in, crushing screening equipment in, loading equipment. The objective here would be to minimize the amount of capital required and speed up the arrival of first production. So getting equipment from others who have it, who obviously hire it out, would be quicker than ordering it ourselves in the short term, acknowledging that the smaller version is not the longer-term plan and that the smaller version would be done potentially in advance of any decision on the larger version in any event. So what we're trying to do is minimize, as I say, with contractors for equipment and gear and so on. The box cut's really the major component, if you like, of the capital that the company would need to put in that light version. Thanks, Paul. Lady down the front, lady in the middle, and there's a lady at the back. They haven't asked questions yet. Thank you. I'm representing here two shareholders. And they have questions to ask about the Vickery mine. They read recently in the Australian Financial Review that the Vickery project is currently uncontracted. The first question about that is, is the preference to find a joint venture partner for Vickery coal? And then there's a second question. Can the Board please advise the shareholders if they will be using Vickery as an opportunity to diversify our Southeast Asian markets, or will we be returning to our primary markets? Well, I think I'll get Paul to answer the second part of the question. Sorry, your name was? Judith Walker. Thanks, Judith. With regard to the capital structure of the development of Vickery, all options are still on the table as far as whether we invite a JV partner to invest in the asset or whether we do it ourselves or whether we structure some financing arrangements that accommodate long-term offtake agreements. It's still all under consideration. There's been no final decisions taken on that. And part of the rationale behind that goes back to an earlier question with regard to the sources of capital that are required to build these projects. And so all those options are still under serious consideration. And I'll go to Paul for the second part of the question. Yep. Thanks, Chair. We are attempting to diversify into more markets already because Japan, Korea, Taiwan, as I've mentioned, about 77% of our existing business, which is fantastic. They're fantastic markets. They pay a premium for the high quality that we have. More recently, though, we've been expanding quite nicely into Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam, all growing markets, all having different but greater needs than what they've had in the past for different reasons. Philippines and Vietnam growing very strongly in their own right. Malaysia's circumstances are a little bit different in that they have been a very large exporter or producer and exporter of gas, LNG. Their capacity to continue to export at the level they are is diminishing over time. They've recognized this, and they've built new ultra-supercritical power stations to replace some of that gas production. So we have recently, after many years of negotiation and discussion with the Malaysians, signed a contract there, which is fabulous for us. And that also coincidentally seems to be stimulating some interest from investors also out of the Malaysian market for us, which was certainly welcome as well. So that movement into those markets is continuing. We're not moving away from our great markets. We just want to diversify a little further into these other new and growing markets, which is exciting for us. Thanks, Paul. The lady in the middle has been waiting for quite some time. Thank you. I'd say good morning, but I think it's good afternoon at this point. Not sure. Not quite. A few more minutes. Okay. My question is about Gorman North. Last month, a Whitehaven subsidiary in Narrabri Coal Pty Ltd was granted two new coal exploration licenses adjacent to the Narrabri underground mine. At a time when the global community is calling for no new coal mines or coal mine expansions, Whitehaven is doing both. This coal exploration area at Gorman North has a number of very significant groundwater resources and forms part of the recharge area of the Great Artesian Basin. Local farmers rely on this groundwater for irrigation as well as for significant stock and for domestic use. At the recent New South Wales Farmers Annual Conference in Sydney, delegates unanimously supported calls brought by the Narrabri branch to block new coal mining that could damage the Great Artesian Basin. Given opposition from the New South Wales Farmers and its risks that it poses to groundwater, would the Board consider abandoning further coal exploration and yet another mine expansion at Gorman North? Thank you. I take on Board the comments you made and the assertions that are laid out in that at face value. As Paul has indicated, Narrabri is an existing coal mine. We've applied and been granted approval for an expansion. Part of that process of getting development consent takes into consideration in great detail, aided and abetted by external consultants, the impacts that it has on the area, including water resources. And so we believe that we've undertaken a fulsome study on that to be able to safely go ahead with that. But I don't know whether Paul wants to add anything to that. Thanks, Chair. I mean, there's lots of work, obviously, to go on in Gorman North. The government's clearly interested in seeing whether somebody wanted to review that opportunity. And it is, as you say, adjacent to our existing mine. So given that we've got existing infrastructure there, we are the logical party to study that. Lots of work to be done. Very, very early days. Narrabri's performance, I think, just in terms of managing underground mining and its intersection with valuable resources such as water, I think, is well documented. And we think we're a responsible user of water in our area and cohabit with our adjacent farmers and neighbors very, very well. It's a very good relationship that we share with all the surrounding people. In fact, Narrabri Mine generally is seen as a very positive contributor to the community up there. It is very high-quality coal. The government obviously has an interest in exploiting the resources that it's responsible for. Hence, its reason for tendering that ground. We have no commitment to developing it as yet because there's a lot of work to do to have a look at the nature of it. But it does look like a good and interesting life extension for an otherwise very good, productive business that creates jobs for more than 700 people in the area. So we'll continue to study that now that we have access to it. Thank you. The lady in the blue jacket at the back. Thanks. Look, I've just been reading Goldman Sachs. Jeff Currie has said that 3.8 trillion of investment in renewables over the last 10 years has moved fossil fuels from 82% to 81% of overall energy consumption, and it's now going back to 82%, so all these trillions haven't done anything really, and with close to eight billion people in the world who don't want to be mired in poverty, don't we need more fossil fuels, and all this trying to stop fossil fuel, new mines and so forth, all it's done is put up the cost of existing coal, gas, oil, which is hurting poor people around the world, or Bangladesh can no longer afford to import gas, for example, and my question is, what would happen if we abolished all fossil fuels? I mean, how many people would die? The other question is, do you think we should have one of these HELE coal-fired power stations built over our existing coal-fired power stations with all the infrastructure in place rather than spending billions rolling out transmission lines all over the place and being dependent on China for short-lived energy infrastru cture? We as a company have always been an advocate of HELE or ultra-supercritical power stations for the benefit that they can bring compared to the existing infrastructure that we have. Now, that's up to others, the people that own those power stations, to governments that regulate them. We've seen what's been happening in Australia. I'll just give you a little anecdote. I'm sorry to keep referring to Japan, but Japan is way ahead of us here in Australia in setting policy on these issues. Way ahead. The former chairman of J-Power, one of our major customers, said to me once when the whole climate change debate was getting rolling, he said, "We haven't got a coal problem. We have a carbon problem. We need to deal with the carbon, not the coal." And the Japanese policy does that. It initially is addressing the decarbonization of their economy in line with their global commitments, which we all know what they are. And they're proving to the world that they can do that. They have the flexibility of bringing back online, and they need to in the next or by 2030, a network of nuclear power stations that we do not have in Australia. But as part of that equation, it's going to be a balanced mix. It's risk mitigating, the policy that they've introduced. And so I think, and I'm sorry, I didn't catch your name at the start. Janet, because our core customers operate HELE power stations, we are an advocate of HELE power stations. Right. Hang on. We've got people that haven't asked a question yet. Gen tlemen over here. Yep. My name's Peter Youll. I'm a shareholder. Quick question. I've seen recently, a couple of weeks ago, that Whitehaven is working on setting up an insurance mutual company. Where is that up to? And is it all because you're having trouble getting insurance through normal means? And are you expecting government aid in order to set this up? Well, I don't know that others are. So I don't think we can expect any government aid. But certainly, the global insurance market, not just in our industry, but across a number of industries and on another Board that is confronted with similar challenges as far as insurance is concerned, is getting tougher, tighter, and more expensive. And so many companies are having a look at what are the opportunities available to them for self-insurance type structures. But Paul, do you want to just sort of elaborate a bit? Yep. Thank you, Chairman. Yep. It's definitely been a trend directionally. There's been less support in insurance markets for coal. Having said that, in more recent times, and I suspect it is somewhat related to the difficult times being experienced in Europe, that the trend seems to have moderated. In fact, we've only just recently run the process of building our insurance book for the year, and we've received significant improvements there in that regard. I think as large businesses grow, and ours—and we're not large business, but we seek to grow further—self-insurance does become a piece of the puzzle, and we should look at that. I think, as the Chairman's mentioned, government support for these types of initiatives is probably unlikely. But there is a sensible approach, I think, balances insurance coverage with certain risks managed from a self-insurance perspective. The one which I think is quite interesting is this country has become known globally as the class action center of the universe in some ways. And that area of insurance coverage has gone up incredibly. So I think there's certainly reform required in that area in order to make that more affordable for companies, not just ourselves, but companies more generally right across all industries here in this country. So lots of work to be done there. Thanks, Paul. There's one right at the back corner that hasn't asked a question. Yep. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Jim Cook, shareholder. Quick question, bearing in mind the success of Whitehaven at the moment, the strength of the team, is there a timeframe on Vickery Light or Vickery full? And/or has the Board given any thought to looking at purchasing any other coal assets as they come on the market in the next year or two, bearing in mind, again, that there are a lot of big players looking to divest existing coal mines, particularly in Queensland? Thanks, Jim. I'll let Paul answer the first part of the question with regard to Vickery timeframes. Just more generally on the second part of your question, we always maintain an open mind as far as M&A opportunities are concerned, bearing in mind that the company policy still is going forward that if we are to increase the size of our asset pipeline, if you like, the focus is clearly on increasing the contribution that metallurgical coal makes to our revenue. So it doesn't eliminate thermal coal possibilities, but certainly prioritises any acquisitions of metallurgical brownfield sites that might come up. And you'll recall in the last couple of years, there's been a few divestment processes run in Queensland that we have actually participated in. So we keep an open mind on that. Obviously, with the economic circumstances we've enjoyed in the last 12 months and those that we expect to enjoy in the next 12 months, we'll be in a much stronger position in terms of our balance sheet to participate in any opportunities like that. But I just wanted to highlight that that's company policy in terms of our strategy. We sort of certainly look for any opportunities, particularly in the metallurgical space. Paul, do you want to comment on Vickery? Yep. Thanks, Chairman. Jim, our timeline for saying more about the Vickery Light alternative is we've said the half-year results would be the appropriate time for us to say more about that. Now, there's quite a bit of study that goes on as these things do, of course. We've outlined some of them already. One of the most pressing ones is how to assemble the workforce for not just the construction of the open cut itself, but then also assembling the workforce through contractors in that capital light version to be able to start to extract some coal as soon as possible, but I think the release of the half-year results would be about the right time given the amount of work required, and also just a couple of comments on the bigger version of Vickery. As you would imagine, in this environment, inflationary impact as it is, we are reassessing the capital cost of the Vickery project just given that everything seems to be going up at the moment. In order to make sure that we have the best estimates that we can put to our Board on what the construction cost might look like for the larger Vickery version, I think that will take the balance of this financial year to do that. Gentlemen up the back hasn't had a question. Thank you. Raymond Weatherall. I'm here via proxy. I mean, December of this financial reporting year, one of them called to plead guilty to 19 charges brought by the State Resources Regulator for abuses of mining laws that cause environmental damage that could last for decades. In this context, my question is, when you've been found guilty of so many environmental breaches placing waterways, environment, and our communities at risk and facing the long-term devastating effects of these deliberate breaches, continual actions demonstrating a failure of social license to operate, let alone the destruction of Gomeroi Country and our culture and heritage, it appears duplicitous to be here today overstating your performance without discussing your repeated irresponsible and unlawful actions. Thank you. Thanks for the question, Ray. There was a mixed outcome as far as some of those actions that you referred to. Do you want to make a comment, please, Paul? Sure. Thanks, Ray. Look, I think you mentioned the water, I presume, was the basis of those matters that you're referring to. Water? It was water. Yep. Look, I think from my perspective, that is an incident which occurred some years ago. But as an organization, and sorry, just for context, after the drought, we had drought-breaking rains. And given the volume of water that came down, the drainage lines that we had built on the high wall at Maules Creek weren't able to cope with that volume of water. So we did have some water spill into the pit. And we were found guilty for the inadequacy of those drainage lines. What were we charged firstly? Our approach to that was really just to plead guilty and no contest on that because I think you've got to own up for where you have been inadequate. And that was a lesson learned for us as an organization, I think, to demonstrate the integrity that we should be. If you've been deficient in some capacity, you need to own it. And we did. And we have to take our medicine for that. The judgment that subsequently came, as you rightly pointed out, we were found to be guilty, but there was no surprise there. We pled guilty in the first instance. But the judgment was very pleasing from my perspective because the court, in its public summary of its judgment, acknowledged that the company was of good standing. It had expressed remorse for what it had done. It had not sought to contest it in any way. In the two years that had ensued, we had done exactly what we said we would do in rectifying the drainage lines on the high wall at Maules Creek. And I think the success of that has been proven with the significant rains we've seen this year. We were seeing incredible rainfall and no migration of clean water into the pit at all at Maules Creek, which has been fantastic. Thanks, Paul. You two guys have had one. I'll come to you shortly. Hi, David Giffin, shareholder. Congratulations on FY 2022 and also the first quarter of FY 2023. Just a quick question on the budget last night for sort of Paul and Kevin, just the impact on off-market buybacks. And so does that mean that those funds, which should be thinking just in capital management, which may get off-market buybacks going forward, will be reallocated to on-market buybacks or dividends? Just any comments on that would be appreciated. Thanks, David. And obviously, after last night's announcement, some of this exercising your mind. But Paul? Given that Kevin's been underoccupied there at the other end of the table there, I might expose you to Kevin if you would like. Good. Need to press the button and hold it down, mate. I was having a grand time sitting at the end of the room. Yeah. No, you were as surprised as we were. It came out of nowhere last night. So we're revisiting that. The 240 million shares that are up that we're seeking resolutions for, we maintain the view that buying back shares is a better choice for the use of those capital. Interestingly enough, out of all of the work we've done over the last year or so, what we are seeing is really increased interest from offshore investors because of the strength of that buyback. That change in buyback legislation really looks like it's going to be to the detriment of Australian retirees. So it's going to be an interesting piece of legislation. So yeah, we'll have a look at it. We'll see where it goes. And we'll make the decisions that work best for shareholders. Yeah. I think the authorization that we're seeking today stands regardless of the form as to whether it's on or off. But if the off-market is reduced attractiveness to shareholders, then the on-market can take up the balance of that program. Okay. Rod, and then the gentleman behind you, these are your second questions, and we're getting towards the end of question time. Thank you. Sitting here, it's as if the galloping disasters of climate change weren't already happening across Australia and the world. And it's interesting to hear Whitehaven's coal being painted as a savior against climate change. I think that would be a controversial position outside of this room. Now, my original question was about transition, the transition of communities and for your workforce. I guess my question now is, given that the Board clearly doesn't think that the collapse of the thermal coal market or the continuing collapse of the thermal coal market will resume once the disaster in Ukraine settles down. So I guess I'm just asking again, don't you think that you have, because your answer to my first question was really that you don't have a transition plan other than making more coal? Now, don't you think that you have some responsibility to communities and to your workforce, to engage your workforce to be doing some transition plan? The last part of the question, the answer is we have a responsibility to the entire community. Your first comment, we don't paint ourselves as a savior. We paint ourselves as part of a transition to a decarbonized world. And that's based on we're talking about a net zero basis, not an absolute zero basis. Now, there was another question right behind you. And I think this is just about—you're going to wrap up question time, folks. We've had over an hour so far. Everybody's been very patient. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You describe it as a second question for me, but I fear that I may not have been clear enough in my first question because I asked a question about our company's resilience under the net zero by 2050 scenario. And perhaps I wasn't clear enough because you and Mr. Flynn seem to have answered in terms of your company's engagement in our Australian government's 2030 and 2050 targets. And that's absolutely nothing to do with it. So the question was about our company's resilience under the net zero by 2050 scenario. In other words, what is our resilience in the event that the world takes the necessary policy measures to meet net zero by 2050? But further to that, and before I go on, this was something that your Board said you would look at last year, but it's not appeared in the financial report or the sustainability report. But further to that, given that that hasn't appeared yet, and a net zero by 2050 scenario only goes so far, and we really need to achieve much more than that. So I want to refine the question and say, has the Board requested and reviewed an impact analysis of a Paris-aligned net zero by 2050 scenario? That's a different kettle of fish, as I'm sure you'll appreciate. A Paris-aligned net zero by 2050 scenario on Whitehaven's current assets and planned investments. I'll get Paul to answer that last part of the question because, I mean, forward-curve projections on coal prices go out so many years, and they've been found to be sometimes wanting when externalities intervene in the global seaborne market, as you will refer to now, is happening. But in terms of the strategy and the planning for the life of the assets that we have at the moment, we continue to believe that this company will obviously remain financially viable. Paul. Yeah. Thank you, Chair. Our TCFD reporting does provide feedback to our shareholders on the resilience of the business under Paris-aligned scenarios, being steps and SDS. The 2050 net zero emission commitment is obviously a national commitment and not just this government. In fact, the previous government also made a commitment to net zero emissions in 2050. But again, that doesn't mean no emissions. And so that's why we're investing in technologies that'll allow obviously emissions to occur, but they'll be offsetting technologies that'll allow also for the impacts of those emissions to be mitigated. And so the responsibility we have to our shareholders is to make sure that we ensure that we're exploring all the opportunities available for our shareholders and our employees and stakeholders to make sure that they have confidence that the business is going to be enduring over the next 20, 30, 40 years. I understand the sentiment that you're expressing in terms of anxiety around the future. Of course, these are freely traded markets. And if people are overly concerned in that regard, then there's always an opportunity to liberate oneself from that anxiety. Thanks, Paul. That's Joy. I'm just about to. This is absolutely the last question. We're sort of okay. Joy. I stand to honour the First Nations people around this globe. I was warned when I was a class member in 2004 through the telling of the Green Ant Dreaming that there was about 40 years for white minds to get their head around what's going on. And we. That's M-I-N-D-S. Minds. Yes. As a poet, I'll use that. Basically, what this meeting has done has had a free sounding Board from shareholders and people representing shareholders. And I hope you put it to good use because we are all responsible for sitting and watching the extinction of species at such a fast rate that we will soon be watching our own Homo sapiens extinction. Thank you. That was, I presume, a comment, not a question. Thank you, Joy. Okay. I'm proposing to close the general part of questions on the financial reports, and we want to move on to the business of the meeting, and we have a number of resolutions that we need to put to the meeting. The first resolution to be considered is the adoption of the financial year 2022 remuneration report. This is a non-binding advisory resolution. Before opening this item to questions and discussions, I wish to make some brief comments to assist shareholders in understanding the company's approach to remuneration. The Board is committed to applying a fair and reasonable executive remuneration framework, which operates to incentivize and reward senior executives and which is aligned with both company performance and shareholder interests. Over the past five years, the framework has delivered substantial value for shareholders. The company received a first strike against its remuneration report at the year 2021 AGM. The Board took that very seriously and, supported by independent consultants, subsequently completed a comprehensive review of the company's remuneration framework. Following the review, the Board made material improvements to its remuneration disclosures and has implemented changes to its remuneration structure from both a fixed and variable remuneration perspective. These changes lead to a better balance between improving the overall position of the company and rewarding senior executives accordingly. The Board consults widely with shareholders and shareholder representatives seeking their feedback on the company's remuneration structure. The response has been extremely positive and provides a high degree of comfort that the new remuneration structure is strongly aligned with shareholder interests. And obviously, the Board recommends that shareholders vote in favor of Resolution 1. I think the screen should be now showing the details of the proxies received already. Yep. So as you can see, they're the proxy votes that were in by the designated closing time for proxies. As I indicated at the beginning of the meeting, I hold a number of proxies. For this meeting, as chairman, I propose to vote those in favor of Resolution 1 as well. Just before moving on, because the voting is open on Resolutions 1-5 or one to four, one to five. Are there any questions on this resolution before we move on? Yeah. Something on the microphone? Mr. Chairman, perhaps you could explain to me why it matters to you whether this resolution is carried or not. You've already got the spill motion as a backstop in case it isn't carried. And there doesn't seem to be any real punishment for you other than having that spill resolution. The spill resolution will go through. The existing Board will all be re-elected. And why worry about it? Well, the proxy votes that have already been lodged, obviously, the resolution's carried, so we won't be going to the spill resolution. But the law requires that we have it on the notice of meeting so that if the remuneration report resolution is voted down for a second strike, then under the law, we must go to the spill resolution. But because it's been voted up according to the proxy votes, we won't be having that other resolution. But under the Corporations la w, we've got to do it. Why worry anyway? Well, we've got to do it. But I mean, the reality is, and as I said, we got the first strike last year. Many investors gave us the benefit of their views as far as why they voted against the remuneration report. And so we've undertaken a written branch review of what we're doing, going back to shareholders with that. And that's the result. Thank you. No other questions. Okay. We'll move on to Resolution 2. And Resolution 2 is my re-election as a Board member. And to conduct this, I'll hand over to the Deputy Chair, John Co nde, to conduct Resolution 2. Thank you, Chairman. Resolution 2 is the re-election of the Honourable Mark Vaile, AO. Mark was appointed as an independent director of Whitehaven and Chairman of the Board in May 2012 as part of the merger with Aston Resources. He's also Chairman of the governance and nomination committee. His qualifications and experience are set out in the notice of meeting. And Mark is standing for re-election as an independent director. And I invite Mark to make a few comments if you would like to. If I can, Mr. Deputy Chairman. From here, I'll make some comments so that you can continue on. Thanks very much, John. And it's indeed been a great honour to serve as chairman of the Whitehaven Coal Board since 2012. And in that time, I have witnessed a period of significant change within the sector, culminating last year in our strongest ever financial performance, underpinned by solid operational performance. Most recently, I've been a member of the audit and risk management and remuneration committees and chair of the governance and nomination committee. As chairman, I'm proud to have contributed to the company's evolution into the largest truly independent listed coal company on the ASX and Australia's benchmark coal investment. I trust shareholders will agree my continued leadership at the Board level will continue to deliver benefits to the company and our many different stakeholders from shareholders, suppliers, joint venture partners, community members, traditional owners, and more. As a director of listed companies across a range of industries over a period of around 15 years, I've been fortunate to have been offered insights around continually evolving corporate governance requirements and expectations that I've brought to my various roles on the Whitehaven Board and its subcommittees. My skills and experience in international trade negotiations, and in particular, will continue to be relevant as Whitehaven strengthens relationships with existing customers, valued Australian trading partners, in addition to developing fresh partnerships in emerging markets in our near region. Additionally, my policy experience will be valuable as the company navigates ongoing changes in the domestic and international policy landscape, as we've been discussing at length here for the last hour. Should I be re-elected, I look forward to continuing to work with my fellow directors and management to help build an even bigger and stronger force in Australian mining. As I have the floor and with indulgence, Mr. Deputy Chairman, can I once again acknowledge the outstanding contribution that John Conde standing before you has made to this business in its various forms over the last 15 years that John has spent on our Board. Although John would be far too modest to admit it, he's undeniably one of the legends of Australia's NED constituency. We've been absolutely fortunate to be the beneficiaries of his wise counsel through what has been an incredibly dynamic period for this company, the coal sector and energy markets more broadly. In his capacity as deputy chair, John has been an enormous support to me in my role, and I'm certainly very grateful for that. I know his insights, integrity, and good humor will be missed by all of us who have had the privilege of working with him. And John, we wish you all the very best with your future. So shareholders, I present myself for re-election, and would just ask that you join with me in acknowledging the great contribution that John Conde's made to our compa ny over the last 15 years. Thank you. That was a slight diversion from what I thought I was doing. We are very fortunate to have Mark as Chairman. As former deputy prime minister of our nation, he's held in very high regard domestically and internationally, and with Mark abstaining, the Board recommends his re-election as a director. The screen shows the results of proxies received on this resolution, and it's now open for discussion if anybody would like to make a comment or ask a question. Sir. Thank you. Thank you. I've asked a couple of questions earlier in the meeting about net zero by 2050 scenario, and the answers fairly clearly indicated that Mr. Vaile and Mr. Flynn regard the market for coal as secure out to 2050 and beyond. The IEA says that's not the case, that we must get out of coal as quickly as possible. There's further studies come again in the last 24 hours saying that even oil and gas is not compatible with a 1.5-degree aligned scenario. So I heavily question the prospects for coal under the net zero by 2050 scenario that you seem to be the way that you interpret that. So my question is, how have you as Chair satisfied your duty of care and diligence with respect to the transition risk facing Whitehaven under realistic net zero by 2050 scenario, given that almost 80% of our revenue comes from markets committed to the goal of net zero emissions by 2050? Yeah, I'll just answer that very briefly because the gentleman I forget your name. Sorry, sir. Very diligently and on a daily basis. Thanks, John. Oh, good. Are there any other questions or discussion? I think some of this stuff is best dealt with offline. We'll be around after the meeting closes. I think we take a view on reducing emissions and also on making sure that the world continues to enjoy the civilization that it does these days. If there are no further questions, I will observe that we finalize discussion on this item, and while voting won't close until the end of the meeting, we can see that based on the proxies received, the resolution will be passed very comfortably, and congratulations, Mark, on your election. Now, I want to just intrude on the script as well because before handing back to you, I want to say a few words, if I may, in appreciation responding to your comments about me. I thank you very much for the remarks you made during your speech and just more recently. I borrow the words from the former U.S. Supreme Court Justice William Brennan, who in a similar situation said that he wished his parents could have been there to have heard what was said. He said, "My father would have loved it, and my mother would have believed it." For me, it's been an honor to have served on the Board of Whitehaven Coal since 2007, including as chairman prior to our merger with Aston Resources. I'm very grateful to have had the opportunity to work with Mark Vaile for more than 10 years and with other Board colleagues and, of course, with the entire Whitehaven management team led by Paul Flynn and in my earlier years on the Board by Tony Haggarty. I extend my gratitude to my fellow directors and management for your support always. At all of our mine operations at our Newcastle, Brisbane, Gunnedah, and Tokyo offices and our head office in Sydney, we have deeply committed people who have all played major parts in creating the value Whitehaven has delivered to shareholders over the years. On your behalf, I express appreciation and thanks to all those employees, past and present, for their contribution. Lastly, and I'll sit down, I thank you, our shareholders, for the support that I feel we have enjoyed, for the discussions that we've had, and for the confidence that you show. I look forward to those discussions continuing. Back to you, Chairman. Thanks very much. Thank you. Thanks very much, John. We'll now move on to resolutions three and four, which are the resolutions for approval of share buybacks. The next items of business are to consider approval of further share buybacks. The company commenced on-market buyback in March 2022 to acquire up to 10% of the company's shares over a 12-month period. That buyback completed last week with 103 million shares bought back for a total of AUD 588 million. The Board and management continue to believe that an efficient means of returning capital to shareholders can be achieved through share buybacks. Resolutions three and four are proposing to give the company the flexibility to buy back further shares on-market or through an off-market buyback tender. If the buyback resolutions are passed, the Board will be authorized to buy back up to 240 million shares in aggregate, approximately 25% of issued shares during the 12-month period to October 2023. The Board recommends shareholders vote in favor of resolutions three and four. The proxy numbers are there on the screen for you all to see. You'll see that proxies received are 95.9% and 95.83%. So I would ask those voting today to use your phones and the QR code on your voting card to lodge your votes. Whilst we're doing that, if there are any questions on this resolution or these resolutions, because we've got a button running both together. If there's no questions and everybody's had the time to vote, we'll move on to resolutions five and six. The so-called Market Forces resolutions, resolutions five and six have been requisitioned by a group of shareholders holding approximately 0.002% of the company's shares on issue and are not supported by the Board. Resolution is a proposal to amend the constitution to enable shareholders to put advisory resolutions to this meeting. These are resolutions that are not binding but instead express an opinion or request information. Consideration of Resolution 6, which concerns climate change reporting and strategy alignment with net zero by 2050, is contingent on Resolution 5 passing. The Board and management take matters relating to sustainability and climate change very seriously. In fact, we've spent almost an hour primarily focusing on these issues in our general Q&A session today. The company already provides a comprehensive suite of disclosures on these and other topics in its sustainability report, which I recommend to all shareholders. We actively assess risks and opportunities arising from emerging trends in the global energy market. Our approach is underpinned by reference to data from a range of authoritative independent sources, in addition to leading market indicators, as well as analysis on policy and other developments in relation to carbon, climate change, and related topics. We report annually in relation to the Financial Stability Board's Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, and we are taking appropriate steps to keep the market and shareholders informed of how the business is dealing with the impacts of climate change on product demand and energy transition. We have clearly and repeatedly articulated our position on the role of coal in a more carbon-constrained future and demonstrated the resilience of our operating asset portfolio against a range of decarbonizing scenarios, including a Paris-aligned scenario. Given what we've just outlined, the Board does not consider it would be in the best interest of shareholders to limit business strategy to a single scenario, which is subject to considerable uncertainty. The Board, therefore, is firmly of the view that these resolutions are unnecessary and not in the interest of the company for reasons set out. The Board recommends shareholders vote against this resolution. The screen shows the vote on this resolution, which is clearly against the resolution. The matter is now open for discussion. I understand representing Market Forces, Bichotte? Where are you, Bichotte? Bichotte is just going to make a short statement, so we'll just indulge. Thank you, Chairman, and the Board. Greetings to all fellow shareholders and proxy holders. This resolution was filed on behalf of over 100 shareholders who share concerns that our company's coal expansion plans pose a real threat to investor capital and, more importantly, threaten the security of the world that we inhabit. This resolution proposes to do something that our company seems already halfway willing to do, which is return capital to shareholders instead of wasting it on new projects that face a high risk of becoming stranded assets as the world moves towards the global goals outlined in the Paris Agreement. Yes, our company has seen windfall profits this financial year, a fact which the Board can take little credit for and comes at the human cost of everyday Ukrainians and Russians suffering through a terrible conflict that I think Mr. Flynn referred to as a little bit of turbulence. We cannot expect these market conditions to last forever as countries like Japan, Korea, and Taiwan, our largest three customers, commit to net zero emissions by 2050. In the last six years, the pipeline of new coal-fired power has collapsed, so new emerging markets are unlikely to replace these customers. Indeed, these same market conditions generating high returns now may further accelerate the transition to renewable energy, hastening the demise of our company and investment. While the coal price is high, we see this as an opportunity for shareholders to be rewarded, for employees and contractors to be supported and retrained for a net zero economy, and for well-managed and resourced rehabilitation plans to be put into place for our company's currently operational mines. With our current profits, Whitehaven could be a national and potentially international example of how to manage down a coal mining company responsibly. Instead, our company seems to be betting that the world will not meet the global goals of the Paris Agreement, risking significant value destruction and unmanaged social and environmental impacts. If Mr. Flynn and Mr. Vaile are correct and the world is not on track for net zero emissions by 2050. It is hard to imagine how useful our profits will be in a future where global markets and supply chains are in turmoil due to increasing weather events that are extreme in nature, not to mention the immense humanitarian crises that these events are already creating. For the sake of shareholder capital, workers and contractors who need a clear plan, the communities our company's operations are embedded in, and the everyday people already being impacted by extreme weather events around the world and in our own backyard, we call on investors to vote in favor of these resolutions, and Mr. Chairman, if I may make one more observation, I noted that there was constant discussion about how the product that we sell is superior because it creates lower than normal emissions. I think it just put me in mind of when cigarette companies say that, "Oh, our cigarettes are less harmful to your health compared to our competitor's cigarettes." At the end of the day, both are equally harmful to the world. So yeah, just wanted to make a note around that. Thank you. Thank you, Bichette. Any other questions before I put the Resolution No. 5? Okay, we'll put Resolution 5. So everybody has your voting devices or your handheld devices there, the proxies on the Board. So clearly, Resolution 5 has been defeated. So that means that Resolution 6 is not required. And because the Rem report was a carried resolution seven, we don't need to go to either. So, I'm just going to, before I call for a close to voting, I'll just wait and pause for another 20, 30 seconds so everybody can just conclude your voting. Remember, you've got to take a shot of that QR code on your voting card that you're given coming in and cast your vote. Okay, is there anybody who hasn't completed their voting? If you have completed your voting, I'm going to declare that the poll is now closed. And the results, as we've seen for Resolutions 1-5, will be displayed on the screen. Hopefully. Our Computershare guys, there you go. So the results for one to five. And as you can see, resolutions one to four have been passed with a greater than 75% majority. Resolution 5 has not. As a result, we will not be voting on the contingent resolutions six and seven today. Ladies and gentlemen, that completes the formal business of this meeting. Thank you very much for your attendance. I will now formally declare the meeting closed and invite you, if you want to stay, for a cup of tea or coffee outside in the foyer. Thank you, everybody.