Ann: Appendices 3Y x4, page-3

Yeah In4apenny ripped a fart out of the company, when asking GJ if Mark R. had his board seat by being apart of the boys club lol I near fell off my chair when Peter asked that question. Bloody outstanding IMO. No messing around, cut straight to the bone. Nice one Peter.

Whereas Cynthia T, I don’t see why see holds a board seat, if only the use of her political capital in “Canada”..
Sure when Sudbury Canada was short listed as being the spot for our P1 was still on the cards it made sense to me having a “local” on the team (BOD), but since choosing AD as our location CT has been collecting BODs fees and incentive options under false pretences.
IMO CT and MR should go if they aren’t interested in developing the company through CR’s. As Peter put it there is no alignment in advancing the company if they don’t have a stake in the company they are representing via their board seat. There is no incentive for them to further the project faster into cash producing, it really is in their best interests to perpetuate the status quo.
I am of the opinion CT should stand aside for a
US based Director or better yet a AD Director sitting on the board to facilitate In country stoppages or bottlenecks. Surely this will occur once AD secures the funding for the chemical plant ??

LT-B1