Ann: Appendix 3Y-Mary Harney, page-11

You are aware that we are in the biotech field and things take time a lot of time and things the Board/Mary are working on might not show for a while,
so just because you think she may be Sitting on her hands doesn't mean she is.
The truth is if she was buying on market and bought her opinion earlier you may not even of posted what you did although you say you don't really car.
I wouldn't harp on the fact she signed off on the DCB strategy it was already,
ready to go when she got the board seat all she done was look over and gave DCB the thumbs up.
Till we are successful meaning getting people in the clinic I would not criticise anybody.
I would say the DCB strategy although much more cost to us shareholders and timeline pushed out quite a bit witch is not favourable.
Gave us a more of higher chance of getting people in to the clinic as it was going to be done in the US if I'm not mistaken.
Now I have full faith in the new team at RAC that the experts they spoke to believe we will get patient in Australian.
Pros and cons in both strategies and till we get patient in you can not say DCB one was wrong.
(just different)
I believe definitely if we can pull off what the new strategy has set out to do we will be much much better off.
(financially less diluted and time wise )
So I'll hold off on the sacking of Mary I bet the work she is doing will pay off in due course.