Ann: Notice of General Meeting/Proxy Form , page-2

I’ve got problems with Resolution 3 in the Notice of Meeting.

What justification is there to pay Mr Ward nearly $500,000 a year – that’s a quarter of MDX’s current cash reserves – AND award him 10 million options? The Directors state that issuing options serves to align his interests with those of the shareholders. Perhaps the Directors could encourage Mr Ward to BUY a swag of shares on market as demonstration of his commitment to MDX in the first instance. No better way to align your interests with shareholders than to ride the same rollercoaster. I look forward to seeing an Appendix 3Y issued before the EGM next Thursday.

The Directors also state that awarding options to Mr Ward is in line with his experience. Can the Directors explain how his qualification in chemistry (not even chemical engineering) and experience in marketing titanium pigment, mineral sands and rare earths is relevant to MDX developing iron, uranium, gold and copper assets? Furthermore which “current market practices” – similarly claimed by the Directors – justify gifting 4.8% of the company to a person without a successful track record, or any track record for that matter, in developing the type of projects in MDX’s portfolio?

I know I’m not alone in being concerned.