At the last annual meeting, several shareholders voted against reappointing the current audit firm. Although this is not a majority, it is a warning sign from a non-negligeable proportion of shareholders. This rate often exceeds that of routine votes and may reflect concerns about perceived independence, the length of the mandate, or the quality of the work performed. Strengthening confidence in financial rigor In a sector with tight margins such as food, the reliability and independence of the audit are essential for market confidence, particularly in a context where Metro is continuing to grow in several segments. A transparent and proactive policy would strengthen the credibility of the company's financial reports. Maintaining the balance between continuity and constructive questioning The purpose of auditor rotation is to reduce threats to their independence, which are largely caused by the familiarity that gradually develops over time. There is a legitimate concern that, in the long term, the auditor may become too close to the client. For example, the auditor's independence may be compromised when friendships develop: the auditor becomes too closely associated with the interests of the client company's management, the audit plan becomes repetitive, or the auditor is reluctant to make decisions that would suggest that his or her previous decisions were wrong. In short, the risks of familiarity with the client are likely to undermine the auditor's rigor, objectivity, and critical thinking. Does the percentage of abstentions regarding the appointment of the current auditor reflect this opinion? We believe that such a service should be subject to a renewal of vision more frequently in order to assure shareholders that their auditors are providing them with the best service at a competitive price, while ensuring a new approach to auditing by a different firm. This proposal received 11.85% of the votes at the last annual meeting.