Good afternoon to everyone here in Perth, and good morning to all of those joining us from London. Welcome also if you are tuning in virtually. As Chair of Rio Tinto, I have the privilege of welcoming you to our 2026 Annual General Meetings. This year, in keeping with our focus of embedding stronger, sharper, and simpler ways of working across the business, we are holding the Rio Tinto PLC and the Rio Tinto Limited AGMs contemporaneously. Our meetings are linked audiovisually so all shareholders can participate in a joint discussion as provided for under Rio Tinto PLC's article of association and Rio Tinto Limited's constitution. As you know, AGMs are an opportunity for open conversations and for deepening understanding. They allow us as a Board to hear from you and to respond to the topics you are interested in.
Next year, our Directors will be present in person at the PLC AGM in London with the Limited AGM held contemporaneously in Australia. We plan to continue this arrangement for future AGMs with our Directors alternating their physical attendance annually. This naturally builds on our regular engagement with investors throughout the year. In fact, over the last two months, I've met personally with shareholders representing more than 1/4 of Rio Tinto PLC's issued capital and 1/3 of Rio Tinto Limited's issued capital. With that in mind, I'm looking forward to facilitating our conversations today as Chair of both meetings in London and here in Perth. I would also like to welcome Geoffrey David, one of our General Counsels in London, who is supporting the Rio Tinto PLC meeting there.
Hopefully, you will see London on the screens, and they're obviously seeing us on the screen, so we have some sense of being together. I'd like to begin our meeting by acknowledging the Whadjuk people of the Noongar Nation on whose traditional lands I'm speaking from today, and I pay my respects to all traditional owners and indigenous people who host our operations around the world. I'm very pleased to introduce Robyn Collard to perform a welcome to country. Robyn is a Noongar woman from the Whadjuk and Ballardong groups, and she is joined by her nephew, Josh Kelly, a Noongar man who will perform for us on the didgeridoo.
[Non-English content]
Hello and welcome, men, women, brothers, sisters, and leaders who have come here today to meet on the land of the Whadjuk people. We are here in Boorloo, the traditional and first name for Perth. We then see the beautiful Madarrap, the river crossing where our ancestors would cross the river. We come around past Heirisson Island on the Derbarl Yerrigan, the Swan River, and we see a place called Kings Park. Kaardumbe, Kaardap jenang ngombu.
Noongars know it by many names, but it is our home at the top of the hill, the place at the top of the hill, and the place when you stand, you can see a long way. We then travel down to Walyalup, Fremantle, home of Waalitj the Eagle before we cross the ocean to Whadjuk, home of the quokka. We then travel down to the Derbal Nara , the Cockburn Sound, before we come inland to Walliabup, the Bibra Lake region. We then travel to Djarlgarro Beelier, the Canning River, the place of many jarrah trees. Then we see the beautiful Kaardumurrup, the Black Hills, the Darling Ranges. We come to Mandoon, a place of many trees around Midland and Guildford before we go up to Joondalup.
[Non-English content]
From the north to the south, the east to the west, this is the land of Whadjuk people.
[Non-English content]
Our ancestors have walked this land for many thousands of years. They've left their footprints in the waters and in the sands. Sitting around the campfire sharing food and water, and telling the many, many stories of this land. We stand on the shoulders of our ancestors. They've kept our language alive, our stories, our cultures.
[Non-English content]
Three things that are very important for Noongars: our connection to family, our connection to the land, and our connection to our language and knowledge, stories, and our artwork. This is who we are.
We think about the stories of Waugal, the rainbow serpent, that stands alongside the spirituality of the scriptures, but also the creation stories that belong to Noongar people.
[ Non-English content]
Make friends on your journey as you work together collaboratively. Have strong conversations. Remember to show kindness and respect, because we are one and we are many. From all the lands on Earth we've come to be here meeting today on Whadjuk Boodja. Boordaw-an. Yanka. Thank you.
Thank you, Robyn and Josh, for that welcome and for opening our AGM. Before we move in today's meeting, I would like to acknowledge a matter of great sorrow, the deaths of three colleagues over the last year. Mohamed Kamara , who lost his life at Simandou last August. A colleague at Simandou in February, whose family requested his name be kept private. Brian Cameli at Kennecott in March. Each leaves families and friends and teammates, and we hold all those affected by these tragedies in our thoughts. As a Board and as a business, we have a clear focus and an accountability. Fatalities must be eliminated and everyone must go home safe every day. We've asked Simon to assure and ensure that we apply the lessons learned and make the changes needed to our business, and he will talk shortly about the actions being taken.
First, I ask for a moment of silence as we remember our three colleagues. Thank you, everyone, for taking that moment. I will now introduce the members of our Board who are here with us today. Joc O'Rourke. Ngaire Woods. Sharon Thorne, Senior Independent Director, Rio Tinto PLC, and Chair of our Audit and Risk Committee. Peter Cunningham, our CFO. Simon Trott, our CEO. Dean Dalla Valle, Chair of our Sustainability Committee. Ben Wyatt, Senior Independent Director of Rio Tinto Limited, and Chair of our People and Remuneration Committee. Jennifer Nason, Susan Lloyd-Hurwitz, and Tim Paine, our Australian Company Secretary. We also have with us Graham Hogg from KPMG in the room. Might wanna wave at the, who's here in Perth, and who is Rio Tinto Limited's Lead Audit Partner.
I also wanna say a special welcome to Sam Walsh, one of our former CEOs at Rio, 'cause we also stand on the shoulders of many leaders before. To make today's proceedings as efficient as possible, I will now declare that voting on all resolutions is open. As usual, resolutions will be decided by poll. This Board brings together deep experience across mining, capital markets, global business, and governance. In August, our newest member, Simon Trott, succeeded Jakob Stausholm as CEO. Jakob rebuilt trust and laid the foundations for Rio Tinto's strategic and cultural growth, the Board is deeply grateful for his contributions. We are proud to have appointed an internal successor of Simon's caliber. He is a CEO who knows this business and mining inside out, who also challenges our orthodoxies.
He's working at pace to achieve our ambition of becoming the most valued metals and mining business, supported by an incredibly strong leadership team. He's doing so in a fast-changing external environment. You need only look at your phone, turn on your TV, or read the paper to see the complex and uncertain world that we're operating in. While change is constant, one truth is clear. As volatility and fragmentation increase, nations are focusing ever more intensely on minerals and metals, and they are moving with urgency to secure supply for next-generation industries, electrification, and the energy transition. Whether it's copper for AI data centers, lithium for batteries, aluminum for advanced manufacturing, or iron ore for fast-growing cities, demand is increasing, and it also remains to bring challenges on the supply side to meet that increasing demand.
Rio Tinto is made for this moment because whatever the future holds, the world is only going to need more of the materials that we provide, and our global diversified portfolio and world-class project execution capability position us strongly for these opportunities ahead. While this environment requires us to move at pace and with conviction, it also demands a long-term view and a consistent approach. This is exactly what our strategy is designed to deliver. It's based on a winning formula for growth and returns. It starts with our world-class assets in key future-facing commodities operated through three strong businesses, iron ore, copper, and aluminum and lithium. It's grounded in disciplined capital allocation and operational excellence, in best-in-class project execution, in strong partnerships with governments and other organizations, and in a deep commitment to social license.
Crucially, this formula is delivering performance as we return $6.5 billion To you, our shareholders, maintaining a 60% payout for the 10th consecutive year. As a Board, our focus is on maximizing Rio Tinto's potential. Under Simon's leadership, we are embedding stronger, sharper, and simpler ways of working across the business and concentrating our people and resources on the areas that drive the greatest value while unlocking our portfolio's full strength. It won't have escaped you or your notice, I hope, that our share price has moved significantly since our last meeting. This is, of course, just one indicator of the long-term value that we are creating. To me, this reflects not only favorable market conditions and rising demand for what we do, but also a growing belief in the way that we are delivering.
I've seen that delivery in action, during my 18 visits to our global sites and offices over the last year as we reached many of our major project milestones. I saw at Oyu Tolgoi in Mongolia how we are ramping up production from an ore body more than 1,300 meters underground. All the major infrastructure is now in place, and we are already achieving record copper results. In Guinea, Sharon, Dean, and I joined Simon to mark the start of operations at Simandou less than two years after major construction began. Simandou not only unlocks a new source of high-grade iron ore with more than 620 km of multi-use railway and world-class port facilities, it also shows what is possible through partnership, bringing together Rio Tinto with the government of Guinea, Chinalco, Baowu, and WCS to achieve the extraordinary.
In Argentina in December, the Board and I saw how we are scaling up production of high-quality battery-grade lithium carbonate, positioning our portfolio for the energy transition. These are just a few examples of the projects driving our growth, and they show mining at its best, delivering returns for our shareholders and lasting value for communities through genuine partnerships which create real, tangible local benefits. Take Simandou, which could grow Guinea's GDP by up to 55% by 2030. Oyu Tolgoi, which supports around 20,000 jobs both directly and through the supply chain. Argentina, where we are now the largest lithium mining employer in the country. Every time I visit one of our sites, I'm reminded of the journey of partnership that starts well before a single ton of ore is produced to ensure our projects deliver value beyond the mine gates.
Last June, when we opened the Western Range iron ore mine in the Pilbara with our partner Baowu, what stayed with me was not only the milestone itself, but how it was achieved. Working in partnership with the Yinhawangka people, we made changes to our mine design to protect and preserve significant cultural heritage values. While many of our relationships with indigenous and land-connected groups around the world are strong, we know in some cases we still have work to do. Our priority is to listen carefully, engage early, and continue to build trust through our actions with co-management playing a central role. I've had the privilege of spending time with various groups, including the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura people in the Pilbara.
The co-management agreement we signed last May with the PKKP Aboriginal Corporation formalizes how we work together to protect and manage cultural heritage while providing greater certainty for both the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura people and Rio Tinto. Sustainability and social license go hand in hand and are core to our priorities. Creating shared value also means protecting and respecting the natural environment and fragile ecosystems where we operate, treating them with the utmost care. Equally, we believe that reducing emissions is not only the right thing to do, it actually strengthens our business and improves returns. Last year, we delivered a 14% reduction in Scope 1 and 2 emissions, and we expect further progress as our renewable energy contracts and agreements for the Boyne Smelter in Queensland take effect. Finally, some words about our people.
They are at the heart of how we live our purpose of finding better ways to provide the materials the world needs, and our progress is built on their talent and their expertise and their commitment to operational excellence. As a Board, we are striving to create an environment where colleagues can contribute and perform at their best, where teams are empowered to solve problems, and where safety and productivity go hand in hand. What we hear from our people when we visit our sites and offices shapes our ongoing work to strengthen our culture and build a more engaged and diverse business, fostering these conditions for new ideas, better decisions, stronger performance, and higher returns. I hope today you have a sense of our direction as well as the strong momentum that is building across our business. I'm very optimistic about Rio Tinto's future.
We have great people, world-class assets in the right commodities, and a clear strategy. Importantly, we have a tremendous opportunity. That is our winning formula, and it gives me absolute confidence in our ability to deliver both growth and returns for our shareholders over the long term and to create lasting value for our stakeholders. Thank you very much for listening, and I'll now hand over to our CEO, Simon Trott.
Thank you very much, Dom, and a very warm welcome to all of you here in Perth and of course those of us joining us from London and also online. Robyn and Josh, thank you for the welcome earlier, and I would also like to acknowledge the traditional owners on the land of which we meet today and pay my respects to their elders past and present. On safety, Dom has spoken about the three fatalities at our sites since our last meeting. Our colleagues' deaths show we are not where we need to be on safety, which is the foundation of our business. As a leadership team, we are focused on understanding what has happened, learning the lessons, and being clear about what must change.
We are renewing our focus on the critical controls for safety risks in our business, they are clearly understood, consistently applied, and personally owned by all of us as leaders. This work is never done, we will continue to do everything in our power to ensure that we protect our people whose incredible capability and expertise drive this business forward. In the 26 years I've been here at Rio Tinto, I know that when we are at our best, we are extraordinary, my objective is to make sure the whole company delivers at that level every day in a world where demand for the materials we produce is growing.
That is why when I stepped into this role, I set Rio a mission to become the most valued metals and mining business for you, our shareholders, for the people we work and partner with, and for the communities around us. We are making strong progress towards achieving this, and as you've already heard, we have a winning formula for growth and returns. Let me unpack this. We have the right assets in the right commodities, and each of our businesses, iron ore, copper, and aluminum and lithium, delivers value in their own right. We operate the world's leading iron ore business, combining unparalleled scale in the Pilbara, an integrated system in Canada, and high-grade growth from Simandou. In copper, we are a leading low-cost producer at scale, and in aluminum, we are the largest integrated producer in the Western world.
While in lithium, we are building a leading position globally as a Tier 1 producer with a strong pipeline of opportunities. Our growth is underpinned by best-in-class project execution, reflected in some of the outstanding project achievements Dom highlighted earlier. When I visit our sites, I'm struck by the job our people do in some of the world's toughest environments to do mining in the right way while delivering on time and on budget. Within each of our businesses, we are lifting performance and driving operational excellence. We are doing that by making sure everyone can work in a way that is stronger, sharper, and simpler. That means clearer priorities, more disciplined execution, faster decision-making, and less complexity, all of which lifts returns. This work is already translating into results.
We have now fully implemented the first $650 million of annual productivity benefits as promised, with substantially more underway. At the same time, within each business, we're strengthening capital discipline. Every dollar must compete for value, must deliver value. Every project must compete for capital. As we're doing that, we are targeting the release of $5 billion-$10 billion of cash from our asset base to further drive returns. Across each of our three businesses, our scale gives us the firepower to reinvest in the next generation of projects. The relationships we're building with both communities and governments that host us lay the foundations for shared value, helping us grow together and shape what comes next.
Increasingly, as Simandou shows, our partnerships are unlocking outcomes once beyond our reach, combining our strengths and sharing risk to create value in ways none of us could have achieved alone. Our winning formula is delivering growth today, and the proof is in our performance. In 2025, we increased our copper equivalent production by 8%, driven by record output in both copper and bauxite. These robust figures flowed through into our results, with EBITDA up 9% to $25.4 billion and underlying earnings at $10.9 billion. As Dom mentioned, we have returned 60% of that to you, our shareholders. We are well-positioned for the future, with industry-leading 3% compound annual growth to the end of this decade. As we deliver Simandou, Oyu Tolgoi, and four major replacement mines in the Pilbara together with the lithium projects.
Beyond all this, we have a strong pipeline of opportunities to extend growth well into the 2030s, particularly in copper, including Resolution in Arizona and at Nuton Leaching Ventures and projects like Nuevo Cobre in Chile. Our winning formula is clear, an unmatched mix of the right assets in the right commodities. Three, world-class businesses that are each driving value through operational excellence, disciplined capital allocation, and outstanding project execution, with a focus on social license and productive partnerships that position us for the future. This is a formula that is taking us towards becoming the most valued metals and mining business. I am convinced it will deliver strong returns and many more years of growth. Now back to you, Dom.
Thank you, Simon. We will now move to the meeting's formal business. The notices of meeting containing the text of each resolution to be put to the meetings were published on our website and were made available on March 20th, I will take them as read. We will deal with resolutions 1 -1 7 on both notices under the joint electorate procedure, Rio Tinto Limited and Rio Tinto PLC shareholders will both cast their votes on these resolutions. Resolution 18 in the Rio Tinto Limited notice of meeting will be voted on by Rio Tinto Limited shareholders only. Resolutions 18 - 21 in the Rio Tinto PLC notice of meeting will be voted on by Rio Tinto PLC shareholders only.
Your Directors are unanimously of the opinion that all resolutions proposed in these notices are in the best interests of all shareholders and of Rio Tinto as a whole. Accordingly, we recommend that you vote in favor of all resolutions. In a moment, we will give our shareholders the opportunity to ask questions on matters relevant to the business of the meetings. I should remind you that only shareholders, their representatives, or proxy holders are entitled to ask a question. For those shareholders and proxy holders attending in person in Perth and London, please raise your hand if you'd like to ask a question, and you will be invited to the microphone. Before asking your question, please state your name and if you represent an organization, its name. All shareholders and proxy holders attending virtually can submit written questions or ask them via the audio facility on the Lumi platform.
We can answer as many questions as possible, please keep your comments short and to the point, and I will discourage follow-up questions. If we receive several questions on the same topic, we may group them together and provide one response to try and keep things moving smoothly and avoid repetition. I'd now like to take the first question from the audience in Perth, and then I'm gonna move to London, and then to the online platforms, and I'll try and circle through that process over the course of the next hour and a half. If we could see if there's any questions from Perth. I see number one.
Good afternoon, Chair. My name is Louis Kent. I am the Sector Strategies Lead at ACCR. We work alongside institutional investors focusing on long-term shareholder value and the decarbonization of high-emitting sectors, including mining and steel, which we consider to be in the interest of all shareholders. We appreciate our engagement with Rio Tinto. I have two questions, one on iron ore and one on operational decarbonization. Would you like them one at a time, or shall I read them both?
Why don't you read them both?
Sure thing. Firstly, Rio Tinto's recent disclosures emphasize continued investment in expanding and sustaining its iron ore system, particularly in the Pilbara, which remains the core of the company's earnings. Alongside significant investments in projects such as Simandou, progress on low emissions iron-making remains only at pilot scale. Could you comment on the strategy for Pilbara or in a future low-emission steel system? How is the Board overseeing risk to long-term value in the Pilbara? What concrete actions are being taken this decade to ensure these assets remain competitive as green steel demand grows? The second question. Over the past decade, Australia's gas production has doubled, and the gas industry claims that the continued pursuit of large gas projects will bring down prices for Australian manufacturing.
Rather than bringing down the cost to consumers, wholesale gas prices on Australia's east coast have roughly quadrupled. Right now, the gas industry continues to pursue some of the largest proposed gas projects in Australia's history, claiming it will bring down prices for Australian manufacturing and that they have the interests of manufacturers at heart. Rio Tinto's investment decisions and disclosures point to a structural decline in reliance on fossil fuels to ensure economic longevity. Is it Rio's view that long-term gas reliance is not in the interests of the business and that Rio Tinto is doing all it can to decarbonize operations and remove reliance on gas as soon as possible? Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much for your questions. I'm gonna try and answer at one level and then may call on Matt Holcz to jump in as well. I think on the iron ore side, as you said, we continue to invest heavily, and we will continue to invest heavily. We see a lot of demand for steel over the coming decades, and the Pilbara's gonna remain a very important part of that. We are also working with our customers, primarily in China, but also in joint venture with some of our competitors to look for ways to try and advance green steel manufacturing side of things. We also have some experiments going on in Canada with IOC on that front.
That is an important area that we're working with, and we wanna work particularly with our customers on that. On the gas situation that you talked about, we're doing a lot on the decarbonization. The targets that we've set overall as a company to reduce Scope 1 and 2 by 50% in 2030, and to be net zero by 2050 is pretty aggressive. We're doing that in all the key areas. aluminum is a big part of that, and on decarbonizing the looking for renewable power for our smelters.
Also, doing everything we can, in the Pilbara on, looking again for alternates, whether that be, solar power and other ways to be able to drive it. I might turn to Matt if you'd to get more specific.
Great. Thanks for your question, I'll probably just touch on the lower emissions pathways first of all. In terms of our Pilbara business, I guess we're really focusing on partnerships. Here locally, as you referenced, we've got a partnership with Calix on Zesty technology, looking at a pathway to green steel. Also the NeoSmelt joint venture in partnership with Woodside, with BHP, with BlueScope and others. Again, we'll be building facilities here just south of Perth. We're also doing a lot of work in the Pilbara with our customers, looking at our product mix, and looking at different ways for them to be able to reduce their emissions downstream as well, including acclimatization.
In terms of IOC, as Dom touched on, I think a key part about that project is we do produce pellets, which are a very important feed into low-emissions pathways in terms of steel. You touched on Simandou as well. Probably the point that I would share there, particularly when we get lower down in the ore body, is our ability to access really high-grade material that will be suitable for direct reduction as well. That's a summary of our focus areas on low-emissions pathways. Thank you.
Thank you. Matt and I, what we might, if I don't do a good job of it, 'cause you'll hopefully get to see some of the executive team, but that's Matt Holcz, who leads iron ore, after taking over from Simon. I'm gonna go to London, then I'm gonna go online. I'm partly saying this out loud so the online's ready. It's a call coming in from Madagascar, sometimes the connection's not great. On Madagascar, please be ready after the London one. We'll go to you next. Geoff, if we could go to London for the next question.
Good morning from London. I hope you can hear me. My name is Stephen Power. I'm from the Jesuits in Britain, which is a Catholic Church religious order with provinces around the around the world. We've engaged with Rio for the last three, possibly four years, coming to AGMs. Particularly on the issues to Madagascar, I might leave some of that to the next caller. We are considering divesting from the company because of several issues that we found problematic.
Just in, to name one or two, the engagement on with Madagascar for these years have been over water and water supply. A company spokesman have been very polite in responding to our questions and invitations to meetings. Key information on water reports have regularly come late without detail required and not, or not at all. Concerns over the water contamination remain, and conflict around the mine has yet to be resolved. Simandou, which much quoted a very big investment, by your own assessment necessarily involves considerable ecological damage and displacement of people. This is in the context of fragile government. The arrangements with the government there are very fragile, and the outcome of that is unknown. We've talked about scope emissions.
Scope 3, let's talk, if we can, of Scope 3 emissions, which, however much is reported, seem very unlikely to be subject to realistic targets, mostly because of the iron ore processing in China. It's coming from a broad assessment of mining from a document we put together and launched earlier, a few months ago, Catholic Approaches to Mining, which will become, launched in Rome a few months ago, and this will become, more better known in the future. My question is really to comment on any of those issues because of our concern for our present investment.
Thank you very much for your question, and I think there are three parts to it. I think they were quite clear. One is Madagascar, second is Simandou, and I think then, I believe it was around Scope 3 and how we think about dealing with Scope 3. On Madagascar, this is a area where we've focused a lot of time. I visited Madagascar myself. We are very focused not only in terms of water quality, but also the flows of water, because with storms and so forth, as you know, there can be surges. We've just released a recent water quality report. We actually have external groups that assess that, and they've just been made available. The fourth, in fact, QMM water report was released in April.
Just to be specific about it, the results are remaining very consistent with previous years. I'm just reading from this. Water quality upstream and downstream of QMM's authorized release point is comparable with all of the regulated metals consistently below laboratory limits of detection, and we'll continue to do that. We've also invested a fair bit in trying to manage the significant flows that occur during storm surges and so forth. We recognize the issues but are very much focused on that. In terms of Simandou, ensuring that we build those projects in a very ESG-compliant way has been a core part of what we've done. In fact, the IFC has been a core investor with us.
I would point to one of the Article 6, I think it is, in terms of the setup, looking at Mark Davies on this one. We follow on that, and that includes everything from the environment, from water, there in Simandou, to the people that are involved, the communities, to the western chimpanzee and to elephants there. All of those stakeholders, if I may call it, are taken very much into the design and the process as we've gone through it. Again, we could go into that in more detail if you'd like. Mark Davies is here. On Scope 3, as you said, we do not have Scope 3 targets. I'll just be very blunt about that.
It's not something we believe we can control. We've had many discussions with our investors about it. That doesn't mean we don't care about it or we aren't involved. You heard Matt talking about some of the things we're trying to do with our customers, and actually even with some of our competitors on doing green steel, if you will. It's something that we believe we should, you know, you should measure the output of what we do, so they can sound like very good things, but you can never measure it. We are focused on Scope 1 and two primarily with very specific measures. We are also doing some things, for example, on the supply side, which is in Scope 3 with our shipping.
We do not have targets on Scope 3 because we don't believe we can actually deliver and measure the results from that. I hope that gives a bit of a overview, and maybe in subsequent ones we can get deeper. What I'd like to do is go online. I think it's Eddie Velumilla. Eddie, do you wanna give it a shot?
Good morning.
Good morning.
Ladies and gentlemen, Member of the Board of Director and Senior Management of Rio Tinto. My name is Eddie Velumilla, and I represent the Sandung Platform, the voice of the communities of Anosy. Let me be clear. After more than 15 years of QMM's presence, we're no longer at the stage of promises. We're at the stage of results or the lack thereof. The situation is clear. On the ground, local recruitment remains inefficient. Market access is blocked for local actors.
Concerns about water, health, and environment persist, and the QMM social responsibility program has not produced any visible structural transformation at the local level. This isn't an isolated perception. It's a lived reality. Let's ask the real question. Where are the correct positive impacts for local people after decades of Rio Tinto QMM in Anosy? The problem isn't technical. It's systemic. Commitment exists, but they are not enforced, they are not transparent, and they are not monitored.
In short, the system may be working for QMM, but not for our communities. The fundamental question, is Rio Tinto truly ready to share the value created here? Will it continue mining operation where profits are concentrated for Rio Tinto, but the negative impacts are borne by the communities? As it is, the current QMM model is not sustainable. It will no longer be accepted. We are not asking for further discussion or debate. We demand immediate changes. Our demands are clear. We want your public commitment and a clear timeline for Rio Tinto to deliver. One. Total transparency, publication of recruitment contracts and CSR budgets, and independent monitoring mechanism to measure results and impact. Two. Economic justice, genuine priority given to local recruitment, guaranteed access to markets for local businesses.
Three, to about water, health, and environment, published independent impact assessment and analysis, rigorous health monitoring, application of the polluter pays principle because the health of the population is not negotiable. We want this commitment not in five years, but now. Our position is firm. We are not against mining, we reject mining without justice, development without inclusion, wealth without redistribution. In conclusion, we are not against development, nor against resource exploitation, we demand that it be equitable, transparent, and beneficial to all. Development that excludes the population is not development. Wealth that does not benefit the community is injustice. We demand immediate change, concrete, measurable, and sustainable action as assured by a monitoring system comprised of a local technical commission and social commission. Management of the LEC fund by an independent organization created for this purpose. Thank you.
Thank you, Eddie. T hat was very clear. By the way, I won't try and repeat it, the first line was, if after 15 years, we're not at the stage of promises, and I think you were pushing on the notion of what's the local community benefit that you want to see, water and health, and a independent oversight in terms of where we're sort of the messages. First of all, thank you for putting those out so clearly. I'm gonna make a couple of comments. Bold Baatar, I might ask if you might also wanna jump in as well.
The first thing I would say is we are very much committed to wanting to be supporting the community. Obviously, that comes from direct employment and indirect employment. About 1,700 people are employed there. As you know, in Fort Dauphin, we provide the power for the city with the solar power and now the wind side of things. We've also committed to $100 million over the next number of years to support communities in there. I know there's been some tension as to who gets what where, but that's a commitment that we want to make. Bold, I don't know if you wanna add anything or edit or say I've got it something wrong?
No, we're good. No, thank you very much for the question. We do take our social license very seriously, and in particular, being a good neighbor. Since we got into QMM, we have invested over $1 billion in a very large program. Of course, was making sure that we built a port access that provides necessary emergency, but as well export routes for the products that are made in Madagascar. Secondly, of course, with the original power plant, as well as the now the new renewable energy plant, we do supply power into the city of Fort Dauphin, which is an inhabitants of about 80,000 people.
In addition, of course, in the original days, we have built a water treatment plant, and we are working with Jirama, which is the local electricity and water utility, to distribute the water to the communities. We're going through a $1.4 million water treatment infrastructure rehabilitation program with them. Chairman, you have alluded to the $100 million program that we have committed to after the renegotiation of the investment agreement in 2023. But of course, we want to improve and want to find ways to improve local content and local suppliers, so I'd be happy to engage further on this topic, what else we could do in terms of procurement of local services. Thank you.
Thanks, Bold. Thanks again, Eddie. I'm now gonna go back to Perth, and then we'll go to London and then to the Lumi System. Four.
Hi. Welcome to Perth. I'm Tracy. I'm a West Australian and a shareholder. How does the Board assure itself that Rio Tinto is maintaining sufficient senior geoscience capability and upfront geological knowledge development to manage geological risk and protect long-term shareholder value, particularly in the context of ongoing productivity and organizational changes across the group? What indicators or assurance mechanisms does the Board rely on to assure that geological uncertainty is not being deferred in a way that increases future operational capital or value risk? Thank you.
Thank you very much. Great question. Again, I may draw on Matt Holcz to come in. I think first of all, on the ensuring that the focus of resources is on there, I think that Simon's initiatives now in actually moving more of our resources to where the assets are, the capabilities, the risk management, as you mentioned, the geotech capabilities and so forth, not being in London and in the center, but actually in the field, is reinforcing that push. In fact, we had a safety share this morning from someone in that area, based here, very experienced person, Allison, on that side. I think that's very much, you know, on there.
I think the second in terms of the Board, this is in the when you think about critical risks and looking at Sharon and the Audit and Risk Committee, we do regular reviews of a whole range of risks. There are the geotechnical side of things is something that is looked at. Mark Davies comes in regularly to speak to the Board. We've arrayed the various different sites that we're operating in, which are quite a considerable number, on a spectrum in terms of where we think the risks are. The Board does have that oversight, as well as having expertise on the Board, mining expertise. That also helps. Matt, do you wanna?
Maybe I'll take it 'cause it's exactly the right question. I do worry about the interest and focus of mining and the number of graduates that are coming through technical disciplines. There's work we can do around that. If I lift it up, though, I think we do need to do a better job around articulating the amazing job and career opportunities you have in mining. If you think about a business like the Pilbara, it's got all the aspects that people should wanna work in from, you know, some of the highest technology through to some of the technical disciplines and roles all the way through our business. I think we can really inspire people to come and join us.
Thank you. Good recruiting on that need people. Yeah. Can we shift to London?
Sure. We have a question.
Good morning from London. My name is Laura O'Shea, and I represent the Climate Action 100+ Investor Group, speaking on behalf of interested investors. Before I jump into the question, I'd just like to acknowledge that you have already touched on some of these areas in former questions, so apologies for any repetition. We'd like to thank the Board for its continued commitment to net zero by 2050 and for the progress made in decarbonizing Rio Tinto's operation and value chain to date, not to mention the expansion of the transition materials business. This time last year, 93% of shareholders supported the 2025 climate action plan. A number of developments over the past 12 months, when viewed together, have led some investors to question whether the focus on decarbonization is being reduced.
These include changes to climate governance, the remuneration weighting, delays to steel decarbonization technologies, and reduced capital guidance to 2030. While each of these changes may be reasonable in isolation, in aggregate, they raise a few questions about delivery. Please could the Board outline how it expects to deliver its 2030 targets and the key execution risks it's managing in this context? Thank you.
Thank you very much for your question. I would just say at the outset, as I was saying before, we're very committed to the targets that we set, again, we reduce our Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 15% in 2025. We hit 14%. 50% in 2030, and net zero in 2030, and in 2050. We're also doing things to be nature positive, which we could also talk about. We're very committed. One thing I feel very strongly about is there's a lot of talk out there about what people do, that Rio Tinto is actually doing things on that front. We feel very confident about being able to deliver on the 50% reduction.
We've, we've done significant investments. I'm looking at Jérôme on the aluminum side. If you think about what we're doing at Boyne, 2.8 GW renewable, it's the single largest conversion from coal power to renewable power. By the way, it's in the shareholders' interest to be driving that. That is a major initiative which will move us there. I'm gonna rattle off just for a few things because I feel quite fired up by this. I won't get carried away, but a few of them. I mentioned the Gladstone Repowering program, which is very significant on a global scale in terms of what we're doing. There's the Pilbara Renewables and Electrification program.
Matt talked a little bit about that, but that's on solar, wind, battery storage, transmission upgrades. Electric smelting program, the iron ore steel partnerships, looking for the development of electric smelting technology. This is actually getting into, as I mentioned, Scope 3, even though we don't have a target for it. ELYSIS' zero- carbon aluminum smelting, major investments that we're making on that front in the Saguenay in Quebec. The Évolys Biocarbon project to replace fossil carbon inputs in aluminum processing. Kennecott renewable diesel conversion, this is in Utah. A renewable electricity procurement program in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Madagascar, and the U.S. I could shut up ’cause I could go on. I just wanna say these are clear initiatives that are there.
In terms of, there was a STIP adjustment. We lowered the decarb from 15% to 10%, and we raised the safety number on it, just given where we are. Simon felt that, and we fully endorsed that. That actually is gonna be, it's in a sense tough luck for management because they're gonna deliver on the decarb. They're not gonna get that, so it's gonna be harder because we've got to focus on that. It's not about less emphasis, it's about the focus on safety, and we will deliver that side of it. I mentioned before the set of management initiatives that Simon's driving to put more of our resources to where the assets are, that actually, we believe, will accelerate and reinforce the decarbonization. It's not taking away from the overall effort.
It's focusing it. I think hopefully it gives you a bit of a sense of it. We're committed. We actually think it makes us perform better as a business, so it's in our interest to do it, and we will continue to drive that forward. Can we go for an online question? Is it Morgan Pickett or who?
Hello. Thank you, Chair. I hope you can hear me. I have a question. Look, over the past decade, Australia's gas production has doubled. Rather than bringing down the cost to consumers, wholesale gas prices on Australia's east coast have actually quadrupled. You know, clearly supply is not the solution to bring down cost. Right now, the gas industry continues to pursue some of the largest proposed gas projects in Australia's history, claiming it will bring down prices for Australian manufacturing and really saying that it has the interests of manufacturers at heart. However, Rio Tinto's investment decisions and disclosures, even quite recently, point to a structural decline in the reliance on fossil fuels and a shift towards more renewable uptake.
Is it Rio's view that long-term gas reliance is not in the interests of the business and that Rio Tinto is doing all it can to decarbonize its operations, remove its reliance on gas, and that this is coming from a place of, you know, economic rationality rather than just altruism?
Thank you, Matt. Let me try and answer it. I'm not gonna get too much into the gas side, but maybe talk about gas per se, but look at how we think about it. As you said, Rio Tinto right now is more reliant on natural gas in our operations, and we think we're gonna need that for the medium term. I think as you are implying, fossil fuels are becoming increasingly expensive, and the Iran war is just putting a magnifying glass around that. Electrification and fuel switching, underpinned by renewable and electricity is something that we want to drive towards. As you said, it's actually in the business interest to try and do it.
Just to give an example, we're commissioning a hydrogen calcination pilot at the Yarwun aluminum refinery to try and demonstrate the viability of replacing natural gas. We're also building new solar and partnering with Traditional Owner groups on that front to try and replace gas as much as we can. Obviously there are some limits to the technology. We're pushing it. We are trying to be as aggressive as we can on that front. I don't know, Simon, if you wanna add.
No, I think that sums it up. Dom, there are aggressive targets and we're making good progress, and we're decarbonizing our business, as it makes good commercial sense.
Okay. Thank you very much, Matt, on that. I think we'll go online, as I mentioned. I think we have Karen Adams, if you can hear us.
Yes. Thanks, Dom. My name's Karen Adams. I'm the Legal Director at the Human Rights Law Centre in Melbourne. We represent communities in Bougainville and Papua New Guinea living with major ongoing environmental and social devastation caused by Rio Tinto's former Panguna mine. For the benefit of those unfamiliar with the situation, Panguna was a copper and gold mine formerly owned by Rio Tinto, operated by its subsidiary BCL. Over the time of its operation, over 1 billion tons of mine waste tailings was directly disposed into the local rivers, causing massive environmental and social impacts for local indigenous communities. The environmental damage caused by the mine was so substantial it ultimately caused a social uprising that forced the mine's abandonment. Rio Tinto divested from the mine in 2016 without any cleanup or remediation of the site having been undertaken.
Four years ago, in response to a legal complaint brought by communities about the massive problems that they're still experiencing, Rio Tinto agreed to fund an independent environmental and human rights impact assessment of the Panguna mine. In December 2024, the results of the first phase of that impact assessment were released, finding major environmental, social, and human rights impacts in every domain that had been assessed, including some life-threatening risks to local people from collapsing levees and infrastructure, chemicals left by the mining operation, and in particular from mine-related flooding. Rio Tinto committed at that time to working with all stakeholders to establish a remedy fund to address these impacts and to advancing work as a first priority to address the most serious risks and impacts identified.
While some important steps have been undertaken since then, work on the ground has been very slow to progress, and the remedy fund is nowhere near yet set up. As you know, in mid-April, Bougainville was hit by Cyclone Maila, which has further heightened many of the risks and impacts that communities are facing. In particular, a section of the main levee, which had already been highlighted as a major risk in the impact assessment, is now predicted to collapse within the coming days, potentially causing serious injury or fatalities to people living or working nearby. My two questions to the company are, firstly, is Rio Tinto committed to mobilizing its full expertise and resources to accelerate action to prevent loss of life in the Panguna area?
Will the company now commit to some clear time frames for the establishment of a remedy fund to ensure that the site can be properly remediated and risks to public health and safety addressed? Thank you.
Thank you very much, Karen, and it was very good to catch up with you yesterday in Perth with Simon and Isabelle. I'm gonna get to your two questions. One thing I just do wanna clarify is the background. If you recall, Rio Tinto through BCL was operating in Panguna, but basically during the Civil War, essentially had to evacuate under extreme circumstances. Rio Tinto has not been there since on it. We are very much committed to trying to work to a remedy. As you mentioned, we've also been funding and supporting some basic cleanup work that has been underway in there.
As we work with the Autonomous Bougainville government, we also work with the BCL to try and figure out what the remedy is that will continue to do that. We also I think we should acknowledge the devastation that's occurred with the cyclone, which we feel very badly about. I think Theonila, I hope I'm pronouncing your name properly again. Theonila also joined as a community representative in the group just talking about what is happening there. We will continue to do everything we can to help. We have to work through other people because we're not on the ground.
As you know, we have some engineers who are trying to help with the levees, where I know there are people that are living in those places near unstable walls and so forth, and we'll continue to do everything we can. We're very committed on that front to helping. On your first point, we are committed, and I'll let Simon jump in too if he wants to on this. We're also committed, as we said to you yesterday again, as a leadership group in working with the roundtable to figure out what the remedy will be and how we can actually get things to happen on the ground.
We continue to work and are committed to the process that we aligned behind working with the Roundtable. It was good catching up yesterday, Karen, and hearing some of the impacts on the ground following the passage of the cyclone. Providing some support and certainly looking at what we can facilitate in terms of working with others to try and alleviate some of those immediate conditions.
Simon. I'm going to go to Perth, I'm not sure who to go to. Like, if you guys just yell or tell me. Maybe when we go to Perth, I'll go one, two, four. I'll just do one for now, then we'll go to London. Just remind me of that after.
Chairman, John Campbell, representing Australian Shareholders' Association. I've got proxies for about 420 odd shareholders and a half a million shares. First of all, question on the procedure in the meeting. Normally in Australian company meetings, the proxies are shown to shareholders before they vote their shares. I don't think that happened last year, and I'm just asking if it can be shown, if we can see the proxies this year, please.
Thank you, and thanks for your engagement earlier too on a number of different topics. Just on the proxies, it's not Rio Tinto's practice to disclose proxy voting positions at the AGM prior to the relevant poll being conducted. And this approach reflects our DLC structure where most AGM resolutions were joint decision matters that were voted by shareholders in London and in Australia. And we, I guess the third aspect to it is that we think that it's important, following the, on the U.K. side, that voting be conducted in a live process. The disclosing of proxy positions in advance of a poll is seen as influencing the decision, and that's why we do it that way. You may not like that's the why we follow that.
Yeah. I understand. I've got two questions and a statement on remuneration. Would you like me to do them all three?
I generally wanted to just have one at a time, but go for it on this occasion.
Okay. First of all, you report in the annual report an internal, a material internal control weakness in relation to an acquisition. I assume that's Arcadium. The weakness was reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission in the U.S. under the legislation there. I wonder if you could give us an idea of the nature of that, of that problem, whether it was a spreadsheeting issue or something similar or, and also whether you're expecting any repercussions from the SEC.
Do you want to ask your second question as well?
Certainly. We discussed, and thank you for the time you gave us. We discussed the potential merger with Glencore and the fact that you now have a period during which there's a moratorium on further negotiations. Our concerns related to the inappropriate nature of some of their assets that you'd be perhaps acquiring, also to the gearing. Since then, I've read an article by a journalist called Joe Aston, who has made allegations of bribery, corruption, tax evasion, et cetera. I just sort of seek your assurance that it's not gonna be top of the agenda at the very least in August.
Okay. Then your statement.
The statement is, well, it's in two parts. Firstly, Directors' shareholdings. I'm concerned that the level of Directors' shareholdings, the minimum level that the company has set is somewhat below the minimum level of Directors' fees. We'd like to see it set at the actual level of Directors' fees, including committee fees. In particular, we note that the recently appointed Chair of the People and Remuneration Committee, Ben Wyatt, his shareholding is less than way less than the minimum. I think that's setting a bit of a poor example for that situation. We'd like to see that rectified. On the remuneration generally, we're voting against all three of the resolutions on remuneration.
The one on termination benefits being because we always do. The ASA has a policy of voting against that. We think that if you're going to remunerate a leaving executive at more than the statutory maximum, then shareholders should be given the opportunity to review that decision and look at the remuneration elements that are being offered. The other two resolutions relating to the remuneration report, we have three objections to that. First of all, we'd like to see the short-term incentive measured against actual reported profits and net profit after tax rather than underlying measures because we think executives should take responsibility for impairments and other write-offs that would otherwise be reflected in or removed from underlying profits.
We'd like to see the LTI appraisal, the long-term incentive appraisal period extended from three years to at least four, in view of the long-term nature of the decisions that are going behind that incentive. The mining decisions are often much longer than four years. We'd like to see 4 years as a minimum. The other aspect of it is that we don't like to see such a multiple applied to the long-term incentive. You're using a 5 x multiple for base pay as the maximum for LTI. That seems to us excessive. Mr. Trott's remuneration comes out at about $50 million on that basis and for 2026. Over five years that would be well over AUD 100 million.
We just think that it's excessive by all measures. I'm not wanting to deny him the money, because I'm sure that shareholders would very much benefit from the resulting, improvement in the share price. We just think it's excessive and unnecessary.
Okay. Thank you. Let me try and answer some of those. I think there are three buckets. I'll deal with the deficiency issue. I might shift on Glencore to you, Simon. I'll make a couple of comments on the shareholdings of Board members. On the terms of the LTIP, maybe Ben, go to you if that's okay. First, on the deficiency, I'm saying this with our auditor Graham Hogg in the room. That was a controlled deficiency relating to a highly technical accounting process. It was a process to get an input to an input of a process. We assessed the carrying value, it was around Arcadium, of the lithium business and are very satisfied that it's not impaired on that.
There's no issue whatsoever with that. And again, that was audited by KPMG. I might also just point out if you're worried about that, we got some criticism when we bought Arcadium. I think the lithium carbonate price was $11. I'll note that today it's around $23. And again, I don't want to predict how prices move, but we should just reflect on that element. No issue whatsoever with the on any impairment or on the valuation. We are very happy with that acquisition. On Glencore.
Sure. Thank you for the question, John. We laid out at Capital Markets Day in December last year our plan for taking the business forward, and you heard some of the outturnings for that today. We're making good progress against that plan, and there's a significant value uplift as we continue to deliver it. We should always be asking ourselves, "Can we add further value," to that, to that base case, if you like. Hence, the discussions that we had with Glencore. We really wanted to test a number of different pieces and see whether there was value we could add through that combination.
Ultimately, as we announced, we formed the view that we could not see value in that combination from those discussions for Rio Tinto shareholders. Hence the announcement to withdraw from those discussions. Our focus remains very much on delivery of the plan that we laid out at Capital Markets and that we've talked about today.
Just on the shareholdings. I think all the Board members except Ben have met the criteria, which is at the base level. I would argue that Ben is well on the way to doing it. There's been restrictions, in the last while, actually because of discussions like Glencore and others. Since the annual report's come in, I know Ben has done that and is well on the way to it. I just wanna say something about Ben. We are very lucky to have Ben Wyatt as a Board Member, and I think shareholders should be very happy with that. I just wanna say that. Thank you, Ben.
The other thing I just want to mention on the We'll get a bit into the LTIP and so forth, 'cause there was quite some detail you laid out there. As you know, there's a policy vote coming up, so we'll have conversations on that side. I do think it's important as a global company that we need to benchmark on other global companies when we think about our remuneration. We are sitting right now at or very close to record high share prices. The management team's not benefiting from that like I think they should on it, to your point there. We want to look at that. We're going to do it properly, and we're not going to go crazy on it.
We have to look at the benchmarks that are out there, 'cause we have a terrific leadership team leading a global business in very volatile and complex times. Ben, over to you.
Mr. Campbell, thank you. I consider myself duly reprimanded. If I can just emphasize the points made by Dominic. I will, within the five years required, assure that I have the appropriate shareholding. That's my attempt at a plucky defense. Next year if I'm not there, you can bring this up with me again. In respect to your three questions more broadly around the STI and the LTI, I'll answer them all in one go if you like. In 2024, the shareholders approved an increase from 4 x to 5 x the base salary. That was after about a decade of no increases to the long-term performance. That's always done on a very strong benchmarking, both in respect of executives in Australia.
in the U.K. and more broadly with peer groups. We do need to be mindful with our executives, how we pay them and how we benchmark them. We don't try to be the highest payer in the world. We certainly don't try and compare ourselves to some who pay particularly high. We want to be competitive so that we can both attract and incentivize our executive team. The comment you made around three to four years, noted. We had a good conversation on that the other night. Most companies on the ASX and the LSE still have a three-year performance test period. At Rio Tinto, we have that plus a two-year lock. Executives don't get access to those shares for five years.
We've got a vote in 2027, and we'll consider that point around that three to four-year performance period as we move through 2026. One final point I want to make on the long-term incentive. I assure you that Simon Trott didn't get $15 million in 2026, and there's twoo reasons for that, despite actually strong absolute total shareholder return. That's because we compare ourselves for that vesting with a range of companies on two different benchmarks. One, the S&P, about 2/3 weighting on the S&P, which has 150 companies, and 1/3 on the MSCI, which has about 1,600 companies.
That's particularly difficult because to get a threshold payment, that is, just to achieve threshold, you do need to be in the top half of that. You need to beat about 800 companies on one and about 75 on the other. To get to maximum, you have to be in the top quarter. That simply wasn't the case. In the 2024 and the 2025 performance period, the LTI vested at 12% and this year vested at zero. The LTI, despite strong absolute TSR returns, because of who we compare ourselves with, we're just not paying at all. At zero, and the committee did not make a decision to exercise its discretion to amend that.
As we move into 2027, we do need to be mindful, and I've foreshadowed this in my letter in the annual report, we do need to make sure that we have an appropriate LTI scheme that benchmarks well. We don't need, we're not looking to lead the sector, but certainly to be competitive, but also an appropriate peer group, an appropriate measure that incentivizes our executive team.
Thank you, Ben. Now we flick to London and then we'll go on the screen. London.
Thanks Tom. Hello, I'm Roger Featherstone, President of the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition from Tucson, Arizona in the United States. I'm here to ask a question about your proposed Resolution Copper project that would destroy Oak Flat, a Native American sacred site that is a recreational and ecological haven. At last year's AGM, I asked you if you would stand by international human rights, transparency, and biodiversity protocols, or would you take the low road and cozy up to our government's weakened standards? Your actions have spoken volumes in the last year. Your decision to merge your company's AGMs has the effect of curtailing the ability of shareholders to sit face to face and ask you questions. I've attended your London AGMs for 12 years. I've met with every one of your CEOs since Tom Albanese, yet this year your new CEO has refused to meet.
This says a lot about your accountability. It gets much worse. On Friday, March 13th, less than 60 days ago, the U.S. government in a shady, unprecedented, and illegal maneuver gave you the deed to Oak Flat. At least for now, you own a Native American sacred site. To be clear, you now own the land upon which a people go to worship. Your plan is to destroy Oak Flat. The U.S. government has determined that Oak Flat and the surrounding area is sacred. The U.S. Forest Service and the Ninth Circuit Court has determined that you will destroy Oak Flat. You have done this without the basic fiduciary due diligence of conducting a feasibility study you need to even make a decision whether the project is feasible.
Because Arizona is in the worst drought we faced in 1,200 years, we don't have enough water for both your mine project and our communities and the environment. Because the project is not technically and economically viable, if you write a feasibility study that is truly impartial, comprehensive, and accurate, the only conclusion will be that you should not proceed with that project. The question I've asked you until I'm blue in the face is when will you abandon the Resolution Copper project and leave Oak Flat? For the first time, when will you give Oak Flat back to its rightful owners? I'm sure I'll have a follow-up.
Thank you, Roger, for your comments and questions. As you know, and I think that Simon feels exactly the same way, we're very keen to meet. We're in London beyond AGM meetings and we also travel to the U.S. and other parts, we can definitely follow up on that side. I think as you well know, we have been around Resolution for about 22 years. That was 2004. We have been following the U.S. court processes all the way through, we defer to the court systems. I know that there have been various groups that have not wanted us to do various things. We've just gone through the legal process in pretty well every single court that is available in the United States on that.
You and others have pushed us to be there. We've been there. We've gone through it. We had approval on that front. The last three administrations now have approved that we do it. We did that land exchange. Again, I might go to Katie Jackson for some more specifics on that. I see a little bit of a different story than how you are portraying it. As you know, there are a number of tribes that are across the different lands that are there, and we've been having a lot of engagement with them over time.
We've actually co-developed a cultural heritage management plan, and that includes co-management of the Resolution private lands in a complete physical avoidance of key ancestral lands, specifically Apache Leap, which contains some of the most extensive ancestral sites, as you've mentioned. The Oak Flat, I'm just gonna be specific on this, the Oak Flat campground, recreational roads, and climbing areas on the private land in the area will remain open for the foreseeable future in terms exactly in line with the land exchange. To ensure continued access and on-the-ground stewardship, the campground will be managed by Four Winds Contracting, a company owned by a San Carlos Apache tribal member, which will oversee campground maintenance facilities and road access. We're very much committed to doing things properly.
We could go on on the waterfront, where we also believe, and as does the Department of Forestry, how we are looking at water usage, also with the town of Superior. This is something that's very important for us, and we believe that we can run one of the lowest water use in copper mines, certainly in the Arizona area, but one of the lowest in the world. There's a range of initiatives that we're taking. We are following the legal processes. It's been a long process. We, as you've said, people have pushed us because of the size and scale of the copper that's there that could provide 25% of the U.S. copper's needs.
We've just said we are going to follow the process. We're not going to do anything unless we have the permission which we then received. That would be my initial comment. You mentioned you wanted to have a follow-up, please just one more I'll give you. Since you've flown all the way to London, and we're not there to see you in person, one more question, and then I may get Katie to follow up on it.
Let me do that when Katie has her response.
Ask your question now, please.
It was a follow-up. The question would be, let me just say this. Slavery was legal in the United States for a long time. Slave owners followed the legal process. Just because you can do something legally while you put your fingers on the scale, while you lobby for land exchanges, while you tip the courts in your favor, doesn't make it right.
Katie, do you wanna make any commentary?
The only things I've, I'd add is just Roger, to thank you for coming and asking questions and being present in London. I'm sorry that we couldn't meet with you there this week, but we have extended the opportunity to meet with our Head of Growth and Development, Adam Burley, who was down there. Also, I think our team at site, who do engage with you are also very keen to have you there to take your questions. I would just echo some of Dom's comments. I think in particular, this project has gone through one of the most rigorous consultation processes of any project at this stage of development.
We have made changes to the mine plan and changes to the land exchange on the basis of the feedback that we've heard from the communities and the tribes. In fact, we've reduced the acreage of the land exchange by 830 acres. We have been engaged in a very long and extensive consultation with all of our communities. The only other points to make are around the water supply. We recognize that water is scarce, as our environmental impact statement has demonstrated, the Forestry Service have emphasized that there is adequate supply for all the uses foreseen for 100 years.
We are very committed to making this one of the lowest, if not the lowest, copper mining consumers from a water perspective. We are committed. Thank you for your questions.
Thank you, again, Roger. We'll follow up specifically again just on getting a meeting to get together and so forth, with Simon and myself if you'd like. I'd like to go online to the Lumi system. There's a pre-submitted question which I'm just gonna read. Is that all right, Tim? Just to give you a heads-up, it's coming your way, Graham, on the KPMG side. It's from Mr. Steven David Mayne. Question for the auditor on Resolution 15, it may be worth mentioning what Resolution 15 is, Graham, when you respond. KPMG replaced PwC as our auditor at the beginning of 2020. When is the next competitive tender for the audit due to be held?
Could our new audit signing partner, Perth-based Graham Hogg, outline how he has found the handover from Adrian King, the outgoing KPMG partner who signed the full-year accounts in February this year? How involved has Graham been in past audits, and what was the process through which he was selected to be the new signing partner? The Chairman said he visited 18 Rio sites around the world over the past 12 months. How many sites is Graham Hogg likely to visit as audit signing partner over the next 12 months, and how many has he visited in the past? Yeah. Sharon?
If I could start the response, I will just ask Graham to comment on the site visits he's had. The audit did change hands to KPMG in 2020, the next competitive tender will be for the year ending 2030. We have to review and select auditors every 10 years. Every 20 we definitely have to change. At the 10-year point we can just review, we could determine that we would stay with KPMG, that is something that the Audit & Risk Committee will be going through in due course, likely to be in 2028, early 2029, to get that decision made. Just to clarify, Adrian King, who is also here, has been doing the sustainability assurance work. He was not the audit partner.
Trevor, who is here, was Graham's predecessor, and Graham actually did the work for 2025, so he has already been the audit partner for this year on Limited. We also have an audit partner in London who is responsible for the PLC side, so it's a dual signing process. Hoggy, would you like to comment on the sort of your experience, the site visits? 'Cause I know that you go around the business and ensure that you understand it.
Thank you, Sharon. Thank you for clarifying a few of those points. Thank you, Mr. Main, for the question to the auditors. I appreciate that you've taken an interest in the audit. Just to clarify also, as lead partners, we are required to rotate after five years, hence the rotation from Trevor to myself over the last year. In terms of the process that we undertake, there's a detailed process we go through internally at KPMG to make sure that we are selecting and putting forward the right candidate through to management and ultimately Audit Committee to make sure that they are comfortable with who we're putting forward.
As part of that process, I did get to meet with several management and several of the Board in an interview-like process in terms of the handover. What happened through 2024 with Trevor is I shadowed him towards the end of his last year just to make sure that I was getting that understanding of the company and making sure I understood the key positions which were being signed off in 2024. I had no involvement at all in the 2024 audit and took that up from 1st of January 2025, and as you said, Sharon, audited it in 2025.
As part of our risk assessment over financial reporting, I do get out to the sites, and I was fortunate enough to date to be at over eight of your sites, including some of your significant ones, Simandou, Oyu Tolgoi, the Pilbara region, and some of your aluminum assets. Also spending time at some of your functions in Singapore, Montreal, and also in London as ultimately are responsible for the audit with my joint lead partner. What have I missed there, Mr. Chair? I think that's it. Thank you.
I think you've done it.
Thank you.
Not usual we have you get called on like that, but thank you for being willing to do that. I now want to go to London, and I think it's two, and then we'll go n to Perth, number two, and then we'll go to London. Two here in Perth.
I thought we were going to London. n Today I stand here authorized by my Roebourne-Gurrima Elders to talk about water and what has been happening on our country. My name is Jason Masters. I am a proud Roebourne-Gurrima man, and I speak on behalf of my Roebourne-Gurrima people. Two years ago at your Brisbane AGM, we stood before this Board and pleaded with you to stop the unsustainable water abstraction of Bungaroo Creek, abstraction that is killing our country. Since then, Rio Tinto has acknowledged these impacts are now not sustainable and has progressed with a desalination plant now nearly completion. We're here to make it clear it is not enough. It will not stop our country from dying if Rio Tinto continues its groundwater abstraction.
In the two years since we first addressed this Board, groundwater levels across our country have continued to fall. Permanent waterholes have died. They're gone. One of them is Yarala. This is a place where my grandmother was born. A sacred permanent water pool that held water through every drought our old people can remember, now dry for the first time in living memory. Even after heavy rainfall from Cyclone Narelle, it remains dry today. Along the Bungaroo Creek and Jimmawurrada Creek, great stands of river gums have died. These trees that stood when our grandparents were born are gone. They cannot be bought back. Rio Tinto will say that a desalination plant solves this. It does not.
You will continue to extract groundwater from the Bungaroo aquifer after it is operational. This is only a partial solution to one borefield while another borefield continues to drain the same aquifer system. Your Southern Cutback license for Mesa J allows abstraction of up to 30 gigaliters per year with no public commitment to reduce it. This is only the beginning. Rio Tinto also plans to mine our sacred Bungaroo and Jimmawurrada Creek. We sat with our old people when they told Rio Tinto very clearly that they did not consent to mining at these sacred places. Before they passed, they've told us we must protect country. We have told Rio Tinto repeatedly since Juukan Gorge, "No means never." Our position has not changed. It cannot change and will not change.
Today I have three questions. Question one, restoration. A sacred waterhole has died. River gums are dead. Groundwater levels continue to fall. What is your specific plan with clear dates to stop all abstraction from the Bungaroo coastal water supply and allow our country to recover? Question two, irreversible impact. Ministerial Statement 1141 prohibits water abstraction that causes irreversible impacts to the Robe River and the Jimmawurrada Creek ecosystems. What does the Board define as irreversible impact? Explain this. Why are the deaths of long-lived river gums and the dying of Yarala not enough for you to stop abstraction? The last question is around consent. After Juukan Gorge, this Board committed to a values-driven approach and to free, prior, informed consent. The Robe River Guruma people oppose mining the Bungaroo and Jimmawurrada. Always have, always will.
Will this Board commit today that Rio Tinto will not mine these areas without our free, prior, and informed consent? This is a moment of truth. A yes today shows you have learnt from Juukan Gorge. A no or silence tells our people, your shareholders, and the world that nothing has changed. Thank you.
Thank you, Jason, for your comments and also your three questions that you've given to us. I also want to thank you for the time that you and Kelly and Anthony spent with Matt and Caitlin and I on Monday where you were outlining this. As you know, we're in pretty serious discussions on all the different elements of how we can possibly work together as we go forward. There's a number of different components to that which we're keen to pursue. Again, I may draw on Matt on this as well. I would just say, first of all, I think we did listen from the Brisbane session in terms of the commitment on the desalinization.
We're doing everything we can to try and get water back in, into the system. That is well underway to do it. We totally recognize the challenges that are there, but as you heard us talking about on Monday, we're looking for all different ways where we can just reduce dramatically the use of water from that aquifer. In terms of the irreversible, you know, impact and damage, that's something too we're very keen to discuss with you what we can do to try and help deal with that as part of the overall agreement. Then, third, around the sacred lands.
I think we've made a lot of progress in that discussion and what that means, from, and especially from your April 29th letter to us, which is a very powerful note in setting out what is most important to you. Matt Holcz, do you want to add anything to that?
Thanks for your question, Jason, and also I acknowledge that you've come here today to represent your people as well. Thank you for that. I just want to start by building on the conversation that we had earlier this week to recognize those issues, and I very much understand, in terms of water, it's not just a resource, it's life, and it has a very deep, cultural and environmental impact. Certainly, we have done a lot of work to reduce our abstraction, and with the desalination plant coming online in the second half of the year, that will further reduce the abstraction as well. I also commit to making sure that we engage in very transparent conversations with the Roebourne-Gurrima people on how we are gonna go forward with a sustainable approach.
Acknowledge that government will need to be involved in those conversations as well, as that aquifer also supplies local communities as well. In terms of that ongoing dialogue, you certainly have our commitment that we want to work towards a solution there. I also just want to reference your point on the Bungaroo cultural precinct. The importance of your people, not just in terms of environment, but particularly in terms of culture. You've made your position there very clear, and we certainly acknowledge that position as well. Thank you again for your question.
Thanks again. Jason also for coming here. I am now gonna switch to London, and then we will go and look what is on the Lumi system. London.
Hello, my name is Richard Solley. I'm a shareholder, and I have questions about the company's lithium operations in Chile. Rio Tinto's planned lithium mining at the Salar de Maricunga in Chile's Atacama Desert poses severe threats to the Colla indigenous people. These questions are from the National Council of Colla Peoples. Given that Atacama is an area of extreme water stress, where life and the ecosystems of the salt flats depend on limited aquifers, what concrete, measurable, and independently verifiable assurances can Rio Tinto provide that its current or future operations will not extract fossil water or continue to deplete our territory? In international forums, Rio Tinto projects an image of leadership in sustainability. In the Atacama Desert, we can see how our biodiversity is under threat.
How does Rio Tinto justify this double standard, and what direct and transparent mechanism will the company put in place to enable the Colla people to demand genuine redress for the socio-environmental damage inflicted on our territory? Finally, with regard to Rio Tinto's investments in Chile, and specifically the consortium currently being formed by Codelco for lithium mining in the Maricunga salt flat, is Rio Tinto aware that the location of its project works is threatening one of the country's most important sites for the nesting of flamingos, which are classified as vulnerable by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature? What specific measures is Rio Tinto taking to ensure the protection of ecosystems housing protected species?
Thank you very much for your question and comments, Mr. Solley. I just wanna clarify for everyone or be more specific about where this area is in Chile. The Salar de Maricunga and Salares Altoandinos and Andes lithium projects are both early-stage developments. They're led by Codelco and ENAMI respectively. They are at a early stage, and there are ongoing studies to figure out what the development option should be. We are working there, as you mentioned, with our partners Codelco and ENAMI, and are very aware of the sensitive environments where these projects are proposed to be built, especially in terms of water use, the flamingos that you mentioned, the impacts on the Salar and also on the local communities.
Through the many conversations that our team has had with community members and the local stakeholders, we recognize that there's a lot of trust and expectations that are being put on Rio to develop these projects responsibly. I would just point out that we were selected for being involved in this based on our technological and operational know-how. The work that we are doing on DLE, and other ways of re-reducing water in the extraction of lithium, we are seen as leading edge on that, and we are very committed to building, again, a strong, respectful partnership there. I don't know, Jerome, if you wanna add anything to that? Jérôme Pécresse, who leads our aluminum and lithium business.
Thank you, Chairman. I don't have a lot to add, but I mean, to confirm what you say, we do not have lithium operations in Chile today, and the joint venture or partnerships that you mentioned have not even been technically formed. This is at a stage of studies. We clearly are well aware of the considerations you brought forward and are looking at if these projects happen, how we minimize the impact on the environment. As a data point to echo what the chairman said, when we do projects in lithium in Argentina today with our latest technology, we have reduced by a factor of two the amount of processed water that we use for lithium extraction.
We continue to work to improve from one project to the other our lithium extraction technology and work on the ability to reinject the brines as much as we can, which we know is a critical consideration for these Chile projects, which again, as of today, are purely at the stage of projects. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm now gonna go on the Lumi system. We have a question from Mr. Dan. It's a pre-submitted question. I'm just gonna read it. How is diversity in the workforce a strength? I think there's some skepticism I pick up in that question that he's laying out. I would say that we think that diversity of thinking is essential for good problem-solving. Good problem-solving is important for being able to generate results, which is in the shareholder interest. Having diverse thinking and being open to other people's ideas wherever they may come from is actually important to the fundamentals of the business. This is important for how we do our business. That's why it's very strongly emphasized in our culture.
I'm gonna now go back to Perth. I'm planning, unless people go crazy on me here, that we're gonna close up in 10 minutes from now. I'm just sensing whether the questions are, so I'm giving us, like, the 10-minute warning, if you will, as we go through it. We'll go to Perth, then if there's any questions in London, and then we'll go back online, and there's two that are online. I see Yvonne. I hear you on the phone, and I think it's Harry Ashman. Perth.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Dom. Glad to hear Rio Tinto are addressing the hydrogen for the future. With advent of green hydrogen being available from BP Refinery Kwinana site in W.A. here in 2027, according to Premier Cook, will Rio Tinto be providing platinum required to drive FCEV vehicles, which give zero pollution as distinct from EV that are not zero pollution? I've got 2 other questions. Next one is, has Rio Tinto given consideration to geothermal green base power? The largest in Australia is under construction in North Perth, intended for completion in June of 2026. The last one is, will the following possibly resolve Bungaroo issue, native people, originally designed and developed in Denmark? Osmotic power now is in operation in Japan, driven by variation in the density of seawater brine, generating green base power to drive a desalination plant. That's all that I have, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. We may need to try and recruit you into our technology group for the ideas. Thank you for those questions. I'm giving you a heads-up, Mark Davies. I'm going to go to you. I see three areas. He's green hydrogen and the opportunities in green hydrogen, geothermal base power, and there's something happening in North Perth on that front. I think it's osmotic power with, to do with sea brine. I honestly don't know what that is. I think that's what it is. Maybe if anyone does know, Mark will know that. Mark, would you?
Thank you. Great question, and that offer to come and advise us on new ideas is great. On the geothermal, look, when we look for renewable power options, we tend to look at all options. Actually, we do use a little bit of geothermal power in the mix in New Zealand today. But it is very much location dependent. It depends on having hot rocks at the right depth. It's just one of the options that we consider. In terms of the osmotic power, that's pretty early stage. Once again, I would say we tend to look at what is the best option.
When you look at the scale of our business, it's actually what we tend to try to buy, you know, what is readily available. Actually, the markets today, solar with batteries or wind with batteries actually works really well in a lot of our contexts. When we're looking at new options, that tends to fit with where our assets are located. We do try to keep an eye. We have a team that has been looking at all these new emerging options. We tend to buy in more when they're commercially available rather than very early stage. Thank you.
Thank you. Maybe we can follow up too in the foyer, after on some of the other dimensions there. Geoff, I am going to London. I am not sure if there are any more questions from London.
No, Dom, I think we don't have any further questions in London. Thanks.
Thank you. Perth, and then I'm gonna go to the two remaining online questions.
Thanks so much for taking my question. My name's Mia. I'm from the Mineral Policy Institute. I just wanted to take this opportunity with the full Board here in Perth to speak a little bit about the Ranger uranium mine, which has been one of the longest- standing issues for Rio in Australia. The Ranger Uranium Mine sits within the Kakadu World Heritage Listed National Park, and would like to thank and acknowledge Rio's response and commitment to finance the rehabilitation of that mine. It's one that is both an important commitment, it's one that is a legal requirement, and it's one that Rio will be long judged on the outcomes there. Just wanna acknowledge that commitment.
I also actually had a question from a group in Serbia, again, about a lithium mine where the community has had some long-held resistance to the proposed lithium mine there because of water, nature, and impacts to the agricultural community. I suppose the question really, and I think it stems from the response in the mines in Robe River, we heard about the Oak Flat proposal. We've heard about resistance in Chile, and hearing about resistance in Madagascar and in Serbia. I suppose the question to the Board really is mines in Bougainville and Ranger where there was no consent a long time ago when those mines were formed, a lot has changed. What is Rio's view and position on how to treat concepts internationally on free, prior, and informed consent?
How does the Board respond to long-held community resistance because of concerns around water, environment, and impacts to local economy and industry? Thank you.
Thank you. Let me just start with a couple of things on it. First, on Ranger, as you mentioned, or ERA, I just wanna reiterate again, and we've said that every single Board meeting that I've had the chance to be at, is that I'm gonna make this statement to make this very clear. You know, we acknowledge and respect the Mirarr people's longstanding and intergenerational opposition to the development of Jabiluka, and we wanna particularly call out the leadership of Yvonne Margarula, who I've had the chance to meet personally, a wonderful woman. I can understand the stress she's in. We are not and do not want to mine. We've made that very clear.
We're obviously, the legal process is moving through it, but it's absolutely clear our view on how we feel on that. As it relates to Jadar, you will have noticed that that's on care and maintenance. It's a terrific lithium asset, we're not focused on that. We're focused in Argentina, in particular, Quebec, and other parts of the world, that's on care and maintenance. I also just wanna clarify something back to the Bougainville. That was not as though there was not permission. Remember what happened? There was a civil war. We were running for the hills to get out. That's why there's no people that were there. It's not I think it's very important we have the facts on the table on this.
Just on the, in terms of getting consent, we are very much adhere to wanting to work with communities before we are able to do anything at all. That's why, as I go back to Resolution Copper, that's been 22 years in that process. We didn't front run, push, weigh the scales. We were in the hands of the local tribes, where we had many discussions of what was going on and the legal system, and that's something that we're committed to, and I hope you will see that with some of the examples I've just mentioned, where we don't do things. I hope that gives you a bit of a bit of a sense. I'm gonna shift then to the two remaining questions which are online.
Yvonne, I think you're on audio, and then we'll go to Harry Ashman on audio. Yvonne, over to you.
Thank you, Mr. Barton. Can you hear me okay?
Very well.
My name's Yvonne Orengo. I'm an individual shareholder working with civil society in Madagascar. Mr. Barton, you've told me in the past that there are different interpretations to water data at QMM Madagascar. I agree, and in fact, it is really hard to come to consensus on water analysis when Rio Tinto withholds important data. I'm speaking here of the independent water studies by WRG and WSP that you promised to your shareholders and civil society at your AGMs between 2022 and 2025 and in dialogue. These reports relate to fish deaths that followed two QMM tailings dam failures in 2022. You've not honored the promises, and instead of full transparency, the QMM 2025 water report that you mentioned earlier shares only selected summary findings, apparently from the first WSP water sampling.
We cannot and have no way to interpret these findings because neither the raw data nor the actual external provider's report that clearly you now have been made available. This is not transparency. It's another broken promise.
The executives who made the transparency commitments on these reports have left Rio Tinto. There's no successor appointed to address this accountability matter. Nevertheless, I'm speaking to the Board now who has a duty to communities and shareholders to ensure that transparency is fulfilled. The Board must be aware, should be concerned, as should Rio investors, that this transparency is lacking and that it seems QMM chooses what to share openly. By that, I'm talking about it chooses its own baseline data and from a contaminated period. It never uses pre-mining water data in its analysis.
The report that we mentioned, that you've mentioned, highlights positive results, and Rio Tinto and QMM emphasize, as you've done today, fiscal investments in Anosy while downplaying or distracting from worrisome issues, such as, in terms of the water, high conductivity that exceeds Malagasy regulatory limits, that QMM has no long-term solution to managing the toxic waste sludge from the new treatment plant, or will say exactly what's in it, that there's still 1 million cubic meters of untreated water being released by QMM with no data to tell us of that impact, that there is still nothing to explain the 2022 fish deaths, which was in fact the whole purpose of the WRG and WSP studies. This situation is not conducive to consensus. It is not transparency. However much other data you share, this is highly selective management, and selective is biased. It is not scientific.
The Malagasy people have been waiting for answers on this and many other things, as you heard earlier, for a long time. There are pages of unanswered technical questions, I can testify, about the water management at QMM. Today I'm asking the Board simply for yes, no. Will you commit today to release the WRG and WSP reports as you've promised to shareholders and within 30 days? It's a yes, no answer. If no, what is the reason for continued withholding and lack of transparency on these studies and reports? Who in Rio Tinto senior management is now accountable for decisions related to transparency reporting and community accountability at QMM? Because I can get an answer from nobody, including at the highest level. This is my second question.
When can we expect full written, not verbal, complete scientific explanations and answers to questions posed about the waste management at the new treatment plant, as have been previously and repeatedly requested, including the EIA, which no one has seen yet and is a prerequisite for changes to the QMM project? Thirdly, importantly, what is the status of the strategic review of QMM, including any potential sale of the operation? How will the Board reconcile a possible change of ownership of QMM with these and multiple other unmet transparency and reporting, as well as other social and environmental commitments to the Malagasy communities? Thank you.
Thank you, Yvonne, I may ask Bold to come in on this as well. The first is that on the water usage, we have released the reports. I'm not aware of us hiding anything. Not to be provocative to you, I sometimes get the sense, 'cause you've had many of these conversations, if the data doesn't come out the way you like, that concerns you. I'm just gonna say, let's look at the data together. I'll ask Bold about that. Bold Baatar, by the way, is the executive who's in charge. That has been made public because, as you said, this asset is something that we are wondering whether we're the best owner of. We still own it. We're serving customers.
We're focused on, you know, having good relationships in the community and with our employees and so forth. Nothing has happened in terms of a sale or move, but it's that as well as our Borates business we've mentioned that we just wanna look at as whether we're the best owners of that asset. There's full commitment. All the investments, we will continue to operate on. I might point out that the employee group in QMM happens to be one of the most actually engaged groups in the entire Rio Tinto system, just to give you a sense of the leadership commitment on that. Bold, do you wanna make any comments?
Thank you, Yvonne. I had the pleasure of meeting you in the past when I ran the Energy and Minerals Product group, looking forward to engaging with you again on this very important topic. I also want to thank you. Thanks for your challenges. We actually did a lot of work since 2022 and the last number of years in improving and monitoring water quality. As you know, according to the World Health Organization, the water downstream and upstream poses no radiation contamination as you have described. We actually engaged, based on your recommendation, JBS&G, which is an Australian water company, that send these samples to Australia for an independent review in 2023 and 2024. They have found no evidence of any water contamination based on the '19 through '22 period.
Of course, we also monitor on an ongoing basis with two other companies called Environ and WSP that are monitoring the water quality for other heavy metals, and out of the 12, we're in compliance. You're absolutely correct to point out that in one of them, in alumina, we had breaches, and we are looking to remediate. Over the last three years, we actually improved the water treatment up to 70% on the emergency release. Definitely a lot of progress has been made in the last four years. Also want to acknowledge you have pointed those challenges out, and we are working.
We're not perfect yet. We're also very keen to engage with you what other information you're seeking for. The teams are absolutely working with the communities to make sure the water is monitored as well with the members of the communities to make sure that we are not contaminating the flora and fauna. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Bold. The last question is from Harry Ashman. Harry, can you hear us okay?
I can hear you. Can you hear me?
Very well.
Excellent. Thank you for the chance to speak. I'm Harry Ashman. I represent Robeco. We're a global asset manager. We're actually asking this question on behalf of interested investors with about GBP 2.5 trillion in assets under management. Many of them are members of the Nature Action 100 Engagement Initiative. We pre-submitted this question. I thought it'd be better to ask it live for the benefit of everyone listening. We really appreciate the constructive and insightful engagement we've had with your environment team, and we support their efforts. Rio Tinto's water targets expired in 2023, and it's quite clear that a new approach to issues like this, hazardous waste, stakeholder engagement on nature is really sorely needed. The release of an updated nature strategy has been delayed several times.
It's clear, especially from questions today, that regulators and host communities see the environmental impacts of current and potential mine sites as a vital part of your license to operate. As the company seeks to grow transition minerals production in particular, demonstrating a robust approach to nature is key to enabling that growth. The question's fairly simple. When can investors and stakeholders expect an updated nature strategy to be released? Can the Board provide clarity on its level of scope and ambition, please? Thank you.
Thank you very much, Harry, for the questions and also the pushes and engagement with our environmental team. We've actually outlined the approach in our annual report for 2025. As I mentioned, we've moved from group or centralized targets to site-based asset targets, and we're gonna report against these annually, and they'll be on the website. You won't have to wait till the annual report to come out. You can see it. It's much like our water report, which is online on every one of our sites. It gives a update in terms of usage and so forth.
This move from one central target to the product groups is again part of this strategy and new management approach that Simon's been pushing and where we're putting resources more towards where the assets are versus having them in the center. We think it's gonna drive more durable long-term impact in these areas. We think it's actually gonna deliver more on the, on the nature side of things. I'd also say that the approach that we're taking is very much aligned with commitments that we outlined in the and we've agreed to in the ICMM Nature Position Statement. We remain very much committed. It's just how we're doing it is gonna be done, we think, a little bit differently and more focused on where the assets are.
If, if I haven't answered you exactly right, let's please again, as with others, follow up, and we're happy to talk some more on it. W ith that, I'm gonna say we're finished with the questions. I don't see any questions in Perth. They're not in London, and there are no more online. I just wanna thank everyone for doing this. I hope it's been okay in London and online. We can see you closely from here. I hope you can see us. I hope we've had a very good discussion. There's been a lot of input, many things we need to follow up on.
Again, if there are any questions that you have afterwards too, please send them in to us and we can try and respond to that. It's now time for us to take a poll on the resolutions. Many of you have already voted by proxy, and if so, you don't need to vote again. I'd like to ask shareholders and proxy holders attending the meeting in person in Perth and London who are eligible to vote to submit your votes using the handsets. If you have any difficulty, one of our attendants can assist. If you're attending online, you should complete your votes now through the Lumi platform. The polls will close approximately five minutes after the end of the meeting.
Christopher Dedrick from Computershare Investor Services has been appointed as the returning officer for the poll for Rio Tinto Limited, and Computershare UK will act as the scrutineer of the Rio Tinto PLC poll. The poll's results will be announced as soon as possible after the meetings and will be posted on the Rio Tinto website. That brings us to the end of the proceedings. On behalf of the Board, I'd like to thank you all for your participation and continued support. I hope those of you in Perth will join my fellow Directors and members of the executive team for some refreshments in the foyer. For those of you in London, please enjoy a light lunch. I now declare the meetings closed. Thank you very much.