METHANEX CORPORATION 2011-04-04 T-18:53

IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR SHAREHOLDERS

Notice of the Annual General Meeting of Shareholders

and

Information Circular

March 4, 2011

A Responsible Care” Company

www.methanex.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INVITATION TO SHAREHOLDERS eooononcnconononcnononsonononononcnsnrnroncncncnsananononononcncns asar on cr nncncncnc asar ar cr rn rn rnncaranan cenas i

NOTICE OF ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS.

INFORMATION CIRCULAR eoconononconononcncnoncncacaconcncncncncnsnsonononcncncnonsnnonon anar cn cacas nn aran on once cansas aran an ce cnoncncns ac ac arnn nn rn crasas arar or rn en cnsnsacanons 1
PART IVOTINGoooeonininonoss 2.0. 1

PART II BUSINESS OF THE MEETING
RECEIVE THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ..
ELECTION OF DIRECTORS
REAPPOINTMENT AND REMUNERATION OF AUDITORS
ADVISORY VOTE ON APPROACH TO EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION ..
INTEREST OF CERTAIN PERSONS IN MATTERS TO BE ACTED UPON …. ..
INTEREST OF INFORMED PERSONS IN MATERIAL TRANSACTIONS oococcncoincocnnnononcncacorocnnonanancncarorocananononcorocnns

PART HI CORPORATE GOVERNANCE occcononcncnonsnsossrororsnsass 14

PART IV COMPENSATION
COMPENSATION OF DIRECTORS….
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION DISC Al .
STATEMENT OF EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION oococcoicinicininnonos .. 44
INDEBTEDNESS OF DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS.
DIRECTORS” AND OFFICERS” LIABILITY INSURANCE

PART V OTHER INFORMATION
SECURITIES AUTHORIZED FOR ISSUANCE UNDER EQUITY COMPENSATION PLANS..
SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS ….
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
APPROVAL BY DIRECTORS

SCHEDULE A……
METHANEX CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES

Methanex 1800 Waterfront Centre Telephone: 604 661 2600

Corporation 200 Burrard Street Facsimile: 604 661 2602
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada V6C 3M1 www.methanex.com
A Responsible Care” Company
March 4, 2011

INVITATION TO SHAREHOLDERS

On behalf of the Board of Directors of Methanex Corporation, I would like to invite you to join us at our Annual General
Meeting of shareholders. The meeting will be held at the Vancouver Convention Centre – East Building in Vancouver,
British Columbia on Thursday, April 28, 2011 at 11:00 a.m.

At the meeting, we will be voting on a number of important matters including, for the first time, a shareholder advisory
“say on pay” vote concerning our approach to executive compensation. We hope you will take the time to consider the
information describing these matters in the accompanying Information Circular. We encourage you to exercise your vote,
either at the meeting or by completing and sending in your proxy. Use of the proxy form is explained in the Information
Circular. If you are a “non-registered” shareholder, follow the instructions that you should receive from or on behalf of
your intermediary to ensure that your shares get voted at the meeting according to your wishes.

In addition to the “say on pay” advisory vote, we have a web-based survey to enable shareholders to provide direct
feedback to us on our approach to executive compensation and we encourage all shareholders to provide us with
comments using this survey. Please see page 21 of the Information Circular for more information.

The meeting is a valuable forum for you to learn more about our 2010 performance and hear first-hand our strategy for the
future. It will also provide you with an excellent opportunity to meet the Company”s directors and senior management and
ask them any questions you may have.

We hope that you will attend the Annual General Meeting and we look forward to seeing you there. If you are unable to
attend, the meeting will also be webcast live at the Investor Relations section of our website: www.methanex.com.

Sincerely,
Détthc

Bruce Aitken
President and Chief Executive Officer

METHANEX CORPORATION

NOTICE OF ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

The Annual General Meeting (the “Meeting”) of the shareholders of Methanex Corporation (the “Company”) will be held at the
following time and place:

DATE: Thursday, April 28, 2011

TIME: 11:00am (Pacific Time)

PLACE: Meeting Rooms 1 to 3 (Parkview Terrace)
Vancouver Convention Centre – East Building
999 Canada Place

Vancouver, British Columbia
The Meeting is being held for the following purposes:

1. to receive the Consolidated Financial Statements for the financial year ended December 31, 2010 and the Auditors”
Report on such statements;

2. to elect directors;
3. to reappoint the auditors and authorize the Board of Directors to fix the remuneration of the auditors;
4. to consider and approve, on an advisory basis, a resolution to accept the Companys approach to executive

compensation disclosed in the accompanying Information Circular; and
S. to transact such other business as may properly come before the Meeting.

If you hold common shares of the Company and do not expect to attend the Meeting in person, please complete the
enclosed proxy form and either fax it to (416) 368 2502 or toll-free in North America 1 866 781 3111 or forward it to CIBC
Mellon Trust Company using the envelope provided with these materials. Proxies must be received no later than 24 hours
(excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays) before the time fixed for commencement of the Meeting or any adjournment

thereof.

DATED at the City of Vancouver, in the Province of British Columbia, this 4th day of March, 2011.

BY ORDER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

RANDY MILNER
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and
Corporate Secretary

ii

METHANEX CORPORATION

INFORMATION CIRCULAR
Information contained in this Information Circular is given as at March 4, 2011 unless otherwise stated.
PART I VOTING

Solicitation of proxies

This Information Circular is provided in connection with the solicitation of proxies by or on behalf of the management
and Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Methanex Corporation (the “Company”) for use at the Annual General Meeting (the
“Meeting”) of the shareholders of the Company to be held at the time and place (including any adjournment thereof) and for
the purposes described in the accompanying Notice of Annual General Meeting of Shareholders.

It is anticipated that this Information Circular and the accompanying proxy form will be mailed on or about March 25, 2011 to
holders of common shares of the Company (“Common Shares”).

What will be voted on at the Meeting?

Shareholders will be voting on those matters that are described in the accompanying Notice of Annual General Meeting of
Shareholders. The Notice includes all the matters to be presented at the Meeting that are presently known to management. A
simple majority (that is, greater than 50%) of the votes cast, in person or by proxy, will constitute approval of these matters, other than
the election of directors and the appointment of auditors.

Who is entitled to vote?

Only registered holders of Common Shares (“Registered Shareholders”) on March 11, 2011 (the “Record Date”) are entitled to
vote at the Meeting or at any adjournment thereof. Each Registered Shareholder has one vote for each Common Share held at the close
of business on the Record Date. As of March 4, 2011, there were 92,699,307 Common Shares outstanding. As of that date, to the
knowledge of the directors and senior officers of the Company, the only person who beneficially owned, directly or indirectly, or
exercised control or direction over Common Shares carrying more than 10% of the voting rights of the Company was Wellington
Management Company, LLP. Based on the information filed by them on March 10, 2011, Wellington Management Company, LLP
beneficially owned and exercised control or direction over 12,273,831 Common Shares, representing approximately 13.2% of the
voting rights attached to the Company”s voting securities.

Can I vote Common Shares that I acquired after the Record Date (March 11, 2011)?
No. Only Common Shares that are held by a shareholder on the Record Date are entitled to be voted at the Meeting.
How do 1 vote?

If you are a Registered Shareholder, there are two ways in which you can vote your shares. You can either vote by proxy or vote
in person at the Meeting.

Voting by proxy

If you do not plan to come to the Meeting, you can have your vote counted by appointing someone who will attend the Meeting as
your proxyholder. In the proxy, you can either direct your proxyholder as to how you want your shares to be voted or let your
proxyholder choose for you. You can always revoke your proxy if you decide to attend the Meeting and wish to vote your shares in
person (see “How do I revoke a proxy?” on page 3).

Voting in person
Registered Shareholders who will attend the Meeting and wish to vote their shares in person should not complete a proxy form.

Your vote will be taken and counted at the Meeting. Please register with the transfer agent, CIBC Mellon Trust Company, when you
arrive at the Meeting.

What if I am not a Registered Shareholder?

Many shareholders are “non-registered shareholders.” Non-registered shareholders are those whose shares are registered in the
name of an intermediary (such as a bank, trust company, securities broker, trustee or custodian). Unless you have previously informed
your intermediary that you do not wish to receive material relating to the Meeting, you should receive or have already received from
your intermediary either a request for voting instructions or a proxy form.

Intermediaries have their own mailing procedures and provide their own instructions. These procedures may allow you to provide
your voting instructions by telephone, on the Internet, by mail or by fax. You should carefully follow the directions and instructions
received from your intermediary to ensure that your Common Shares are voted at the Meeting.

If you wish to vote in person at the Meeting you should follow the procedure in the directions and instructions provided by or on
behalf of your intermediary. You will not need to complete any voting or proxy form as your vote will be taken at the Meeting. Please
register with the transfer agent, CIBC Mellon Trust Company, when you arrive at the Meeting.

What is a proxy?

A proxy is a document that authorizes someone else to attend the Meeting and cast your votes for you. Registered Shareholders
may use the enclosed proxy form, or any other valid proxy form, to appoint a proxyholder. The enclosed proxy form authorizes the
proxyholder to vote and otherwise act for you at the Meeting, including any continuation after adjournment of the Meeting.

If you are a Registered Shareholder and you complete the enclosed proxy, your shares will be voted as instructed. If you do not
mark any boxes, your proxyholder can vote your shares at his or her discretion. See “How will my shares be voted if 1 give my
proxy?” below.

How do 1 appoint a proxyholder?

Your proxyholder is the person you appoint and name on the proxy form to cast your votes for you. You can choose anyone you
want to be your proxyholder. It does not have to be another shareholder. Just fill in the person’s name in the blank space
provided on the enclosed proxy form or complete any other valid proxy form and deliver it to CIBC Mellon Trust Company
within the time specified below for receipt of proxies.

If you leave the space on the proxy form blank, either Thomas Hamilton or Bruce Aitken, both of whom are named in the form,
are appointed to act as your proxyholder. Mr. Hamilton is the Chairman of the Board and Mr. Aitken is President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company.

For the proxy to be valid, it must be completed, dated and signed by the holder of Common Shares (or the holder”s attorney as
authorized in writing) and then delivered to the Company”s transfer agent, CIBC Mellon Trust Company, in the envelope provided or
by fax to (416) 368 2502 or toll-free in North America 1 866 781 3111 and received no later than 24 hours (excluding Saturdays,
Sundays and holidays) prior to the Meeting or any adjournment thereof.

How will my shares be voted if I give my proxy?

If you have properly filled out, signed and delivered your proxy, then your proxyholder can vote your shares for you at the
Meeting. If you have specified on the proxy form how you want to vote on a particular issue (by marking FOR, AGAINST or
WITHHOLD), then your proxyholder must vote your shares accordingly.

If you have not specified how to vote on a particular issue, then your proxyholder will vote your shares as they see fit.
However, if you have not specified how to vote on a particular issue and Mr. Hamilton or Mr. Aitken has been appointed as
proxyholder, your shares will be voted in favour of all resolutions proposed by management. For more information on these
resolutions, see Part II! “BUSINESS OF THE MEETING.” The enclosed form of proxy confers discretionary authority upon
the proxyholder you name with respect to amendments or variations to the matters identified in the accompanying Notice of
Annual General Meeting of Shareholders and other matters that may properly come before the Meeting. If any such
amendments or variations are proposed to the matters described in the Notice, or if any other matters properly come before
the Meeting, your proxyholder may vote your shares as they consider best.

How do 1 revoke a proxy?

Only Registered Shareholders have the right to revoke a proxy. Non-registered shareholders who wish to change their voting
instructions must, in sufficient time in advance of the Meeting, arrange for their intermediaries to change their vote and if necessary
revoke their proxy.

If you are a Registered Shareholder and you wish to revoke your proxy after you have delivered it, you can do so at any time
before it is used. You or your authorized attorney may revoke a proxy by (1) clearly stating in writing that you want to revoke your
proxy and delivering this revocation by mail to Proxy Department, CIBC Mellon Trust Company, P.O. Box 721, Agincourt, ON
MIS 0A1, Canada or by fax to (416) 368 2502 or toll-free in North America 1 866 781 3111, or by mail to the registered office of the
Company, Suite 1800, 200 Burrard Street, Vancouver, BC V6C 3M1, Canada, Attention: Corporate Secretary, or by fax to the
Company to (604) 661 2602, at any time up to and including the last business day preceding the day of the Meeting or any
adjournment thereof or (ii) in any other manner permitted by law. Revocations may also be hand-delivered to the Chairman of the
Meeting on the day of the Meeting or any adjournment thereof. Such revocation will have effect only in respect of those matters upon
which a vote has not already been cast pursuant to the authority confirmed by the proxy. If you revoke your proxy and do not replace
it with another in the manner described in “How do 1 appoint a proxyholder” above, you will be able to vote your shares in person at
the Meeting.

Who pays for this solicitation of proxies?

The cost of this solicitation of proxies is paid by the Company. It is expected that the solicitation will be primarily by mail, but
proxies may also be solicited personally or by telephone or other means of communication by directors and regular employees of the
Company without special compensation. In addition, the Company may retain the services of agents to solicit proxies on behalf of its
management. In that event, the Company will compensate any such agents for such services, including reimbursement for reasonable
out-of-pocket expenses, and will indemnify them in respect of certain liabilities that may be incurred by them in performing their
services. The Company may also reimburse brokers or other persons holding Common Shares in their names, or in the names of
nominees, for their reasonable expenses in sending proxies and proxy material to beneficial owners and obtaining their proxies.

Who counts the votes?

The Company”s transfer agent, CIBC Mellon Trust Company, counts and tabulates the proxies. This is done independently of the
Company to preserve confidentiality in the voting process. Proxies are referred to the Company only in cases where a shareholder
clearly intends to communicate with management or when it is necessary to do so to meet legal requirements.

How do 1 contact the transfer agent?

If you have any inquiries, you can contact the Company”s principal registrar and transfer agent, CIBC Mellon Trust Company, as
follows:

Email: inquiries(Acibcmellon.com

Toll-free: 1 800 387 0825

Telephone: (416) 643 5500

Fax: (416) 643 5501

Mail: CIBC Mellon Trust Company
PO Box 7010

Adelaide Street Postal Station
Toronto, Ontario. M5C 2W9

The Company”s co-registrar and co-transfer agent in the United States is Registrar and Transfer Company; however, all
shareholder inquiries should be directed to CIBC Mellon Trust Company.

PART II BUSINESS OF THE MEETING
RECEIVE THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2010 will be received by shareholders of the Company at
the Meeting of the Company and are included in the Annual Report, which has been mailed to Registered Shareholders as required
under the Canada Business Corporations Act (“CBCA”) and to non-registered shareholders that have requested such financial
statements.

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The directors of the Company are elected each year at the annual general meeting of the Company and hold office until the close
of the next annual general meeting or until their successors are elected or appointed. The Company has a majority voting policy for
election of directors that is described on page 21. The articles of the Company provide that the Company have a minimum of 3 and a
maximum of 15 directors. The bylaws of the Company state that when the articles of the Company provide for a minimum and
maximum number of directors, the number of directors within the range may be determined from time to time by resolution of the
Board of Directors. The Board of Directors, on an annual basis, considers the size of the Board and on March 4, 2011, the directors
determined that the Board of Directors shall consist of 11 directors, such size being consistent with effective decision-making.

The Corporate Governance Committee recommends to the Board nominees for election as directors. The process by which the
Committee identifies new candidates for nomination to the Board of Directors is described on page 19, under the heading
“Nominating Committee and Nomination Process.” The persons listed below are being proposed for nomination for election at the
Meeting. The persons named as proxyholders in the accompanying proxy, if not expressly directed otherwise, will vote the Common
Shares for which they have been appointed proxyholder in favour of electing those persons listed below as nominees for directors.

The following table sets out the names, ages and places of residence of all the persons to be nominated for election as directors,
along with other relevant information, including the number and market value of Common Shares’”, Deferred Share Units (“DSUs”)%
and Restricted Share Units (“RSUs”)% held by each of them as at the date of this Information Circular. In the case of Mr. Aitken, the
Company”s President and Chief Executive Officer, the table sets out the number of Performance Share Units (“PSUs”)” and DSUs
that he holds. Information regarding Mr. Aitken’s stock options” and other holdings can be found in the “Outstanding Option-Based
Awards and Share-Based Awards” table on page 46. The table also sets out whether a nominee is independent or not independent. See
page 16 for information on how director independence is determined. Unless otherwise stated, all Canadian dollar amounts in the table
below have been converted to US dollars at a conversion rate 1.0299, being the Bank of Canada average noon rate for 2010.

BRUCE AITKEN

Age: 56

Vancouver, BC, Canada
Director since: July 2004
Not Independent

Mr. Aitken is President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. Prior to his
appointment in May 2004, Mr. Aitken was President and Chief Operating Officer
of the Company from September 2003 and prior to that he was Senior Vice
President, Asia Pacific of the Company (based in New Zealand). He has also held
the position of Vice President, Corporate Development (based in Vancouver). He
has been an employee of the Company and its predecessor methanol companies for
about 20 years. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Aitken was Executive Director
of Cape Horn Methanol (now Methanex Chile) in Santiago.

Mr. Aitken has a Bachelor of Commerce degree from the University of Auckland
and is a member of the New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants, ACA
(Associate Chartered Accountant).

2010 Total 2010 Attendance Other Current Board
Board / Committee Memberships% Attendance at Board and Committee Meetings Memberships
Chair, Advisory Board, Centre for
CEO Leadership, Sauder School of
Member of the Board 70f7 7017 100% Business, UBC (educational
institution) (since 2009)
Enerkem Inc. (since 2010)
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total of PSUs (50% Total Market Value of Minimum
of balance), Common Shares, Shareholding Meets Share
Common Total DSUs Common Shares DSUs and PSUs” Requirements Ownership
Shares and PSUs and DSUs US$ CDNS US$ CDN$ Requirements? *
130,048 447,674 443,718 $12,489,936 | $12,863,385 | $5,709,292 | 5,880,000 Yes

Age: 59

Beijing, China

Independent

HOWARD BALLOCH

Director since: December 2004

Mr. Balloch became Chairman of Canaccord Genuity Asia Limited in January
2011. Based in Beijing, Canaccord Genuity Asia Limited is an investment
banking firm specializing in China and international firms active in the Chinese
market. Prior to this Mr. Balloch was President of The Balloch Group from
2001 until January 2011 when it was acquired by Canaccord Financial Inc. The
Balloch Group (also based in Beijing) was a private investment advisory and
merchant banking firm specializing in China and other Asian markets. Prior to
this, from 1996 to 2001, Mr. Balloch was the Canadian Ambassador to the
People’s Republic of China.

Mr. Balloch holds a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Political Science and
Economics and a Master”s degree in International Relations, both from MecGill
University, Montreal.

2010 Total 2010 Attendance Other Current Board
Board / Committee Memberships Attendance at Board and Committee Meetings Memberships
BeiKai Capital (private) (since
2011)
Member of the Board 60f7 Canaccord Financial Inc.
Corporate Governance Committee 3 0f3 14 of 15 93% (since 2011)
Human Resources Committee 4o0f4 Ivanhoe Mines Ltd. (since
Public Policy Committee (Chair) lof1 2005)
Ivanhoe Energy Inc. (since
2002)
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Share
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and Common Shares, DSUs and RSUsS” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDNS US$ CDN$ di
4,000 25,812 29,812 839,159 864,250 194,194 200,000 Yes

Age: 68

Independent

Vancouver, BC, Canada

PIERRE CHOQUETTE

Director since: October 1994

Mr. Choquette is a corporate director. He was Chairman of the Board of the
Company from September 2003 until May 2010. Mr. Choquette was Chairman
of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company from September
2003 to May 2004 and President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company
from October 1994 to September 2003. He was a Company employee for nine
years.

Mr. Choquette holds a Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Science and a Master of
Science in Chemical Engineering from Laval University, Quebec City. He is
also a graduate of the Advanced Management Program at the Harvard Graduate
School of Business Administration.

Total 2010 Attendance
2010 at Board and Committee
Board / Committee Memberships Attendance Meetings Other Current Board Memberships
Member of the Board 70f7
Audit, Finance $ Risk Committee 3 0f4 12 of 14 86% Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
Human Resources Committee 1 of2 o (government agency) (since 2008)
Responsible Care Committee lof1
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Share
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and | Common Shares, DSUs and RSUs” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDN$ US$ CDNS o
28,201 60,887 89,088 2,507,681 2,582,661 194,194 200,000 Yes

PHILLIP COOK
Age: 64

Austin, Texas, USA
Director since: May 2006

Independent

Mr. Cook is a corporate director. He held the position of Senior Advisor of The
Dow Chemical Company from June 2006 until his retirement in January 2007.
Dow Chemical provides chemical, plastic and agricultural products and
services. Prior to his Senior Advisor position, Mr. Cook was Corporate Vice
President, Strategic Development and New Ventures of Dow Chemical from
2005. Mr. Cook previously held senior positions with Dow Chemical including
Senior Vice President, Performance Chemicals and Thermosets from 2003, and
from 2000 he held the position of Business Vice President, Epoxy Products and
Intermediates.

Mr. Cook holds a Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering from the University of
Texas at Austin.

Total 2010 Attendance
2010 at Board and Committee
Board / Committee Memberships Attendance Meetings Other Current Board Memberships
Cockrell School of Engineering Advisory
Member of the Board 60f7 Board (since 2004) and the Environmental
Audit, Finance $: Risk Committee 70f7 160f17 94% Sciences Institute Advisory Board (since
– – – ( nn .
Public Policy Committee Lof1 2010) of the University of Texas at Austin
Responsible Care Committee (Chair) 20f2 (educational institution)
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Share
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and Common Shares, DSUs and RSUS” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDNS US$ CDNS o
12,500 11,909 24,409 687,074 707,617 194,194 200,000 Yes
THOMAS HAMILTON Mr. Hamilton has been Chairman of the Board of the Company since May
2010. He has been co-owner of Medora Investments, a private investment firm
Age: 67 in Houston, Texas, since April 2003. Mr. Hamilton was Chairman, President
Houston, Texas, USA and Chief Executive Officer of EEX Corporation, an oil and natural gas
. . exploration and production company, from January 1997 until his retirement in
Director since: May 2007 November 2002. From 1992 to 1997, Mr. Hamilton served as Executive Vice
Independent President of Pennzoil Company and as President of Pennzoil Exploration and
Production Company, one of the largest US-based independent oil and gas
companies. Previously, Mr. Hamilton held senior positions at other oil and gas
companies including BP and Standard Oil Company.
Mr. Hamilton holds a Master of Science and a PhD in Geology from the
University of North Dakota. He also has a Bachelor of Science in Geology from
Capital University, Columbus, Ohio.
Total 2010 Attendance
2010 at Board and Committee
Board / Committee Memberships” Attendance Meetings Other Current Board Memberships
FMC Technologies, Inc. (since 2001)
Member of the Board 70f7 HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc. (since 2008)
Audit, Finance € Risk Committee 3 0f3 13 of 13 100% Hercules Offshore Inc. (since 2004)
Corporate Governance Committee 20f2 Mental Health and Mental Retardation
Responsible Care Committee lof1 Authority, Harris County, Texas (non-profit
quasi-government agency) (since 2000)
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Share
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and Common Shares, DSUs and RSUsS” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDN$ US$ CDNS o
24,000 15,445 39,445 1,110,313 1,143,511 728,226 750,000 Yes

Age: 59

Independent

ROBERT KOSTELNIK

Corpus Christi, Texas, USA

Director since: September 2008

Mr. Kostelnik has been the President and CEO of Cinatra Clean Technologies,
Inc. since 2008. Cinatra is the exclusive provider in the United States of the
automated BLABO tank cleaning system to the refining, pipeline and terminal
sectors of the oil and gas industry. He held the position of Vice President of
Refining for CITGO Petroleum Corporation from July 2006 until his retirement
in 2007. Mr. Kostelnik held a number of senior positions during his 16 years
with CITGO, a company that refines and markets petrochemical products.
Previously, Mr. Kostelnik held various management positions at Shell Oil
Company.

Mr. Kostelnik holds a Bachelor of Science (Mechanical Engineering) with
honors from the University of Missouri and is a Registered Professional
Engineer.

Total 2010 Attendance
2010 at Board and Committee
Board / Committee Memberships Attendance Meetings Other Current Board Memberships
Association of Chemical Industry of
Member of the Board . 7o0£7 Texas (industry association) (since 2004)
Corporate Governance Committee Lof1 11 of 11 100% Frontier Oil Corporation (since 2010)
Public Policy Committee Lof1 Port of Corpus Christi (Texas) Authority
Responsible Care Committee 20f2 (government agency) (since 2010)
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Share
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and Common Shares, DSUs and RSUsS” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDN$ US$ CDNS o
18,300 11,909 30,209 850,334 875,759 194,194 200,000 Yes
DOUGLAS MAHAFFY Mr. Mahaffy is a corporate director. He was Chairman of McLean Budden
. Limited from February 2008 until March 2010. Prior to that he held the position
Age: 65 of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of McLean Budden from October
Toronto, Ontario, Canada 1989 to February 2008. Mr. Mahaffy was also President of McLean Budden
. . from October 1989 until September 2006. McLean Budden is an investment
Director since: May 2006 management firm that manages over $35 billion in assets for pension,
Independent foundation and private clients in Canada, the United States, Europe and Asia.
Mr. Mahaffy holds a Bachelor of Arts and a Master of Business Administration
from York University, Toronto.
Total 2010 Attendance
2010 at Board and Committee
Board / Committee Memberships Attendance Meetings Other Current Board Memberships
Member of the Board 70f7 Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
Corporate Governance Committee 3 0f3 15 of 15 100% (government agency) (since 2009)
Human Resources Committee 4o0f4 o (10)
Public Policy Committee lof1
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Share
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and Common Shares, DSUs and RSUsS” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDNS$ US$ CDNS o
0 32,652 32,652 919,100 946,581 194,194 200,000 Yes

A. TERENCE (TERRY) POOLE

Age: 68
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Director since: February 1994!”

Independent

Mr. Poole is a corporate director. He held the position of Executive Vice
President, Corporate Strategy and Development of NOVA Chemicals
Corporation, a commodity chemical company, from May 2000 to June 2006.
Prior to this, Mr. Poole held the position of Executive Vice President, Finance
and Strategy of NOVA from 1998 to 2000 and the position of Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of NOVA Corporation from 1994 to
1998.

Mr. Poole is a Chartered Accountant and holds a Bachelor of Commerce from
Dalhousie University, Halifax. He is a Member of the Canadian, Quebec and
Ontario Institutes of Chartered Accountants and is also a Member of Financial
Executives International.

Total 2010 Attendance
2010 at Board and Committee
Board / Committee Memberships Attendance Meetings Other Current Board Memberships
Member of the Board 7 0f7
Audit, Finance $ Risk Committee 7 47
(Chain? 3 043 18 0f 18 100% Pengrowth Energy Corporation (since 2005)
Corporate Governance Committee Lof1
Public Policy Committee
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Share
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and Common Shares, DSUs and RSUsS” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDNS US$ CDNS o
35,000 35,348 70,348 1,980,182 2,039,389 194,194 200,000 Yes
JOHN REID Mr. Reid is a corporate director. Mr. Reid held the position of President and
Age: 63 Chief Executive Officer of Terasen Inc., an energy distribution and
ge:

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Director since: September 2003

Independent

transportation company, from November 1997 to November 2005. Prior to that
position he was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
Terasen for two years.

Mr. Reid has an economics degree from the University of Newcastle upon Tyne
in the United Kingdom and is a Fellow of the British Columbia, England and
Wales Institutes of Chartered Accountants.

Total 2010 Attendance
2010 at Board and Committee
Board / Committee Memberships Attendance Meetings Other Current Board Memberships
Member of the Board . 7047 Corix Infrastructure Inc. (private) (since 2006)
Audit, Finance € Risk Committee 70f7 . : :
. : 20 0f20 100% Corix Water Products Inc. (private) (since 2006)
Human Resources Committee (Chair) 4of4 Finning International Inc. (since 2006)
Responsible Care Committee 20f2 a
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Stock
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and Common Shares, DSUs and RSUsS” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDN$ US$ CDNS o
10,000 40,443 50,443 1,419,888 1,462,343 194,194 200,000 Yes

JANICE RENNIE
Age: 53

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Director since: May 2006
Independent

Ms. Rennie is a corporate director. From 2004 to 2005, Ms. Rennie was Senior
Vice President, Human Resources and Organizational Effectiveness for EPCOR
Utilities Inc. At that time, EPCOR built, owned and operated power plants,
electrical transmission and distribution networks, water and wastewater
treatment facilities and infrastructure in Canada and the United States. Prior to
2004, Ms. Rennie was Principal of Rennie £ Associates, which provided
investment and related advice to small and mid-sized companies.

Ms. Rennie holds a Bachelor of Commerce from the University of Alberta and
is a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Alberta.

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Independent

Director since: September 2003

Total 2010 Attendance
2010 at Board and Committee
Board / Committee Memberships Attendance Meetings Other Current Board Memberships
Capital Power Corporation (since 2009)
Member of the Board 7o0f7 Greystone Capital Management Inc. (private)
Audit, Finance de Risk Committee 7 0f7 , (since 2003) .
– 19 of 19 100% Major Drilling Group International Inc.
Human Resources Committee 4o0f4 (since 2010)
Responsible Care Committee 1of1 Teck Resources Limited (since 2007)
West Fraser Timber Co. Ltd. (since 2004)
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Share
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and | Common Shares, DSUs and RSUs” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDNS$ US$ CDNS o
2,000 18,661 20,661 581,573 598,962 194,194 200,000 Yes
MONICA SLOAN Ms. Sloan is a corporate director. She was Chief Executive Officer of Intervera
Ave: 56 Ltd. from January 2004 to December 2008. Intervera provided data quality
ge:

products and services to the energy industry. Prior to this position Ms. Sloan
was an Independent Consultant for ME Sloan Associates from October 1999.

Ms. Sloan holds a Master of Engineering from Stanford University and a
Master of Business Administration from the Harvard Graduate School of
Business Administration.

Total 2010 Attendance
2010 at Board and Committee
Board / Committee Memberships Attendance Meetings Other Current Board Memberships
Member of the Board . . Tof7 Industrial Alliance Pacific Insurance and
Corporate Governance Committee (Chair) 3 0f3 o . . – e
Human Resources Committee 4of4 16 of 16 100% pinancial Services Inc. (since A 10
o o o
Responsible Care Committee 2 0f2 iovantage Inc. (non-profit) (since )
Share and Share Equivalents Held as of March 4, 2011:
Total Market Value of Meets Share
Total of Common Shares, Minimum Shareholding Ownership
Common Total DSUs and Common Shares, DSUs and RSUs” Requirements Requirements?
Shares RSUs DSUs and RSUs US$ CDN$ US$ CDNS o
4,000 46,219 50,219 1,413,583 1,455,849 194,194 200,000 Yes

0)
Q)
6)
(4)
(5)

The number of Common Shares held includes Common Shares directly or indirectly beneficially owned or under the control or direction of such nominee.
For information on Deferred Share Units, see “Deferred Share Unit Plan (Director DSUs)” on page 26.

For information on Restricted Share Units, see “Long-Term Incentive Awards – Restricted Share Unit Plan for Directors” on page 25.

For information on Performance Share Units, see “Performance Share Unit Plan” on page 39. Non-management directors do not participate in this plan.

Non-management directors ceased being granted stock options in 2003 and no non-management director currently holds any stock options.

(6) Mr. Aitken is not a member of any Committee, but attends all Committee meetings in his capacity as President and Chief Executive Officer.

(7) This value is calculated using $28.99, being the weighted average Canadian dollar closing price of the Common Shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange (“TSX”)
for the 90-day period ending March 4, 2011.

(8) See page 30 for more information on director share ownership requirements. See page 43 for Mr. Aitken’s share ownership requirements.

(9) Mr. Hamilton became Chairman of the Board in May 2010 and ceased to be a member of any Committee. Since his appointment he attends all Committee
meetings on an ex-officio basis in his capacity as Chairman of the Board.

(10) Mr. Mahaffy was a director of Stelco Inc., a Canadian steel producer, from 1993 to March 2006. In January 2004, Stelco Inc. announced that it had obtained an
Order of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to initiate a court-supervised restructuring under the Companies” Creditors Arrangement Act (the “CCAA”). Stelco
Inc. emerged from the protection of the CCAA in April 2006 and was acquired in October 2007 by a wholly owned subsidiary of the United States Steel
Corporation.

(11) Mr. Poole resigned as a director of the Company in June 2003 and was reappointed in September 2003.

(12) Mr. Poole has been designated as the “audit committee financial expert.”

Summary of Board and Committee Meetings
For the 12-month period ending December 31, 2010

Board of Directors

Audit, Finance and Risk Committee

Corporate Governance Committee

Human Resources Committee

Public Policy Committee

ni=|ajo jojo

Responsible Care Committee

10

Summary of Attendance of Directors at Board and Committee Meetings
For the 12-month period ending December 31, 2010

Board % Board Committee Comte Total Board and Committee
Meetings Meetings Meetings Attended Meetings Meetings Attended
Director Attended Attended $ Committee Attended hd %

Bruce Aitken”? 707 100% = = 707 100%

Howard Balloch 60f7 86% 3 0f3 Corporate Governance 100% 14 of 15 93%
4o0f4 Human Resources 100%
l of 1 (Chair) Public Policy 100%

Pierre Choquette? 70f7 100% 3 0f4 Audit, Finance and Risk 75% 12 of 14 86%
lof2 Human Resources 50%
lof1 Responsible Care 100%

Phillip Cook 60f7 86% 707 Audit, Finance and Risk 100% 16 0f 17 94%
lof1 Public Policy 100%
2 0f 2 (Chair) Responsible Care 100%

Tom Hamilton”? 70f7 100% 30f3 Audit, Finance and Risk 100% 13 of 13 100%
20f2 Corporate Governance 100%
lof1 Responsible Care 100%

Robert Kostelnik? 70f7 100% lof 1 Corporate Governance 100% 11 of 11 100%
lof1 Public Policy 100%
20f2 Responsible Care 100%

Douglas Mahaffy 70f7 100% 3 0f3 Corporate Governance 100% 15 of 15 100%
4o0f4 Human Resources 100%
lof1 Public Policy 100%

A. Terence Poole 70f7 100% 7 0f£ 7 (Chair) Audit, Finance and Risk 100% 18 of 18 100%
3 0f3 Corporate Governance 100%
lof1 Public Policy 100%

John Reid 70f7 100% 707 Audit, Finance and Risk 100% 20 of 20 100%
4 of 4 (Chair) Human Resources 100%
20f2 Responsible Care 100%

Janice Rennie? 70f7 100% 7017 Audit, Finance and Risk 100% 19 of 19 100%
4o0f4 Human Resources 100%
lof1 Responsible Care 100%

Monica Sloan? 70f7 100% 3 0£ 3 (Chair) Corporate Governance 100% 16 of 16 100%
4o0f4 Human Resources 100%
20f2 Responsible Care 100%

Total 97% 98% 98%

(1) In 2010, Mr. Aitken attended all Committee meetings in his capacity as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company.

(2) Mr. Choquette ceased to be Chairman of the Board in May 2010 and became a member of the Audit, Finance £ Risk Committee, Human Resources Committee
and Responsible Care Committee. Prior to joining these Committees, he attended all Committee meetings on an ex-officio basis in his capacity as Chairman of the
Board.

(3) Mr. Hamilton was appointed Chairman of the Board on May 1, 2010 and ceased to be a member of any Committee. Since his appointment he attended all
Committee meetings on an ex-officio basis in his capacity as Chairman of the Board.

(4) Mr. Kostelnik joined the Corporate Governance Committee in April 2010 and attended all meetings of the Committee in 2010 after that time.
(5) Ms. Rennie joined the Responsible Care Committee in April 2010 and attended all meetings of the Committee in 2010 after that time.

(6) Ms. Sloan replaced Mr. Hamilton as Chair of the Corporate Governance Committee in April 2010.
REAPPOINTMENT AND REMUNERATION OF AUDITORS

The directors of the Company recommend the reappointment of KPMG LLP, Chartered Accountants, Vancouver, as the auditors
of the Company to hold office until the termination of the next annual meeting of the Company. KPMG LLP has served as the auditors
of the Company for more than five years. As in past years, it is also recommended that the remuneration to be paid to the auditors be
determined by the directors of the Company.

The persons named as proxyholders in the accompanying proxy, if not expressly directed to the contrary, will vote the Common

Shares for which they have been appointed proxyholder to reappoint KPMG LLP, Chartered Accountants, as the auditors of the
Company and to authorize the directors to determine the remuneration to be paid to the auditors.

11

Principal Accountant Fees and Services
Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures

The Company”s Audit, Finance and Risk Committee (the “Audit Committee”) annually reviews and approves the terms and scope
of the external auditors” engagement. The Audit Committee oversees the Audit and Non-Audit Pre-Approval Policy, which sets forth
the procedures and the conditions by which permissible services proposed to be performed by KPMG LLP are pre-approved. The
Audit Committee has delegated to the Chair of the Audit Committee pre-approval authority for any services not previously approved
by the Audit Committee. All such services approved by the Chair of the Audit Committee are subsequently reviewed by the Audit
Committee.

AlI non-audit service engagements, regardless of the cost estimate, must be coordinated and approved by the Chief Financial
Officer to further ensure that adherence to this policy is monitored.

Audit and Non-Audit Fees Billed by the Independent Auditors

KPMGS*s global fees relating to the years ended December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 are as follows:

US$000s 2010 2009
Audit Fees 1,600 1,429
Audit-Related Fees 138 166
Tax Fees 304 186
Total 2,042 1,781

Each fee category is described below.
Audit Fees

Audit fees for professional services rendered by the external auditors for the audit of the Company”s consolidated financial
statements; statutory audits of the financial statements of the Company”s subsidiaries; quarterly reviews of the Company”s financial
statements; consultations as to the accounting or disclosure treatment of transactions reflected in the financial statements; and services
associated with registration statements, prospectuses, periodic reports and other documents filed with securities regulators.

Audit fees for professional services rendered by the external auditors for the audit of the Company”s consolidated financial
statements were in respect of an “integrated audit” performed by KPMG globally. The integrated audit encompasses an opinion on the
fairness of presentation of the Company”s financial statements as well as an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company”s internal
controls over financial reporting. The increase in audit fees for 2010 compared with 2009 is primarily due to changes in foreign
exchange rates.

Audit-Related Fees

Audit-related fees for professional services rendered by the auditors for financial audits of employee benefit plans; procedures and
audit or attest services not required by statute or regulation; and consultations related to the Company”s transition to international
financial reporting standards (“IERS”) and the accounting or disclosure treatment of other transactions.

Tax Fees

Tax fees for professional services rendered for tax compliance and tax advice. These services consisted of: tax compliance,
including the review of tax returns; assistance in completing routine tax schedules and calculations; and advisory services relating to
domestic and international taxation.

ADVISORY VOTE ON APPROACH TO EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

A detailed discussion of our approach to executive compensation is provided in the Executive Compensation Discussion and
Analysis which begins on page 31 of this Information Circular. As stated there, the main objective of our executive compensation
program is to attract, retain and engage high-quality, high-performance executives with relevant experience who have the ability to
successfully execute our strategy and deliver long-term value to our shareholders.

Important elements of our executive compensation program are designed to be dependent upon measures that align with
increasing the share price. For the executive officers, a significant percentage of the short-term incentive award is dependent on
achieving certain levels of “modified return on capital employed” but also on a broad variety of measures that we believe drive our
share price. In the case of the Long-Term Incentive Plan, the value of PSUs is dependent upon the compounded shareholder return

12

calculated over a three-year period and stock options/Stock Appreciation Rights (“SARs”) (which vest over a three-year period) and
have no value if the underlying share price does not increase.

We also believe in the importance of executives owning Company shares to more fully align management with the interests of
shareholders and focus activities on developing and implementing strategies that create and deliver long-term value for shareholders.
Therefore, the Chief Executive Officer and all other executive officers have significant share ownership requirements.

In connection with last year’s Annual General Meeting, a shareholder proposal was received calling on the Company to
implement an annual advisory vote on executive compensation (commonly referred to as a “say on pay vote”). A majority of the
Company”s shareholders voted FOR this proposal and we are now implementing the say on pay vote. The Company is using the
model say on pay resolution formulated by the Canadian Coalition for Good Governance. It is the Board”s intention that the say on
pay vote will be only one part of the ongoing process of engagement between shareholders and the Board on compensation. The Board
has also put in place a web-based survey to enable shareholders to give feedback on our approach to executive compensation. See
page 21 for more information on the survey.

This is an advisory vote and the results will not be binding upon the Board. However, the Board will take the results of the vote
into account, together with any feedback received from shareholders on the web-based survey, when considering future compensation
policies, procedures and decisions. Shareholders will be asked at the Meeting to consider and, if deemed advisable, to adopt the
following resolution:

RESOLVED THAT:

On an advisory basis and not to diminish the role and responsibilities of the Board of Directors, the
shareholders accept the approach to executive compensation disclosed in the Company”s Information
Circular delivered in advance of the 2011 annual meeting of shareholders.

The Board of Directors unanimously recommends that shareholders vote FOR the resolution. Unless instructed otherwise,
the persons named in our form of proxy will vote FOR the resolution.

INTEREST OF CERTAIN PERSONS IN MATTERS TO BE ACTED UPON

None of the directors or officers of the Company, no proposed nominee for election as a director of the Company, none of the
persons who have been directors or officers of the Company at any time since the beginning of the Company”s last completed
financial year and no associate or affiliate of any of the foregoing has any material interest, direct or indirect, in any matter to be acted
upon at the Meeting, other than the election of directors.

INTEREST OF INFORMED PERSONS IN MATERIAL TRANSACTIONS

None of the directors or officers of the Company, no director or officer of a body corporate that is itself an insider or a subsidiary
of the Company, no person or company who beneficially owns, directly or indirectly, voting securities of the Company or who
exercised control or direction over voting securities of the Company or a combination of both carrying more than 10% of the voting
rights attached to any class of outstanding voting securities of the Company entitled to vote in connection with any matters being
proposed for consideration at the Meeting, no proposed director or nominee for election as a director of the Company and no associate
or affiliate of any of the foregoing has or had any material interest, direct or indirect, in any transaction or proposed transaction since
the beginning of the Company”s last financial year that has materially affected or would or could materially affect the Company or any
of its subsidiaries.

13

PART HI CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Statement of Corporate Governance Practices

Corporate governance is a key priority for the Company. We define corporate governance as having the appropriate processes and
structures in place to ensure that our business is managed in the best interests of our shareholders while keeping in mind the interests
of all stakeholders. We believe good corporate governance is critical to the Company”s effective, efficient and prudent operation.

The Company is a Canadian reporting issuer with its Common Shares listed on the TSX, the NASDAQ Global Market and the
Foreign Securities Market of the Santiago Stock Exchange of Chile. In Canada, we are subject to securities regulations that impose on
us a requirement to disclose certain corporate governance practices that we have adopted. Canadian regulations also provide guidance
on various corporate governance practices that companies like ours should adopt. The Company also closely monitors corporate
governance developments in Canada and adopts best practices where such practices are aligned with our values and our goal of
continuous improvement. A brief description of our corporate governance practices follows.

1. Board of Directors

The Board has adopted a set of Corporate Governance Principles to provide for a system of principled goal-setting, effective
decision-making and ethical actions. A copy of the Corporate Governance Principles can be found in Schedule A attached to this
Information Circular and on our website.

2011 Board Objectives

Every year the Board of Directors establishes an annual set of “Board Objectives.” In early 2011, the Board established several
key objectives for 2011 including:

* continue to focus on first quartile Responsible Care performance;

+ pay close attention to developments in each of the Company”s production regions, particularly with respect to gas exploration
and development as well as the operations of the Company”s new methanol production facility in Egypt;

* examine opportunities to grow the Company”s presence in the China methanol market; and

e provide oversight and guidance on development and succession planning.

The status of and future actions for each objective are discussed at each Board meeting.
Committees of the Board of Directors

The Board has established five standing Committees with written mandates defining their responsibilities and a requirement to
report regularly to the Board. All Committee members have been determined to be independent in accordance with NASDAQ rules
and Canadian securities regulations and no Committee member was during 2010, or is currently, an officer or employee of the

Company or any of its subsidiaries.

The following table lists each of our Board Committees, its members and a summary of its key responsibilities.

14

Janice Rennie
Monica Sloan

Meetings Overall
in 2010 Attendance
Committee Members (4) % Summary of Key Responsibilities
Audit, Finance and | A. Terence Poole (Chain? 7 97% e assisting the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibility
Risk Committee? | Phillip Cook relating to:
Pierre Choquette = the integrity of the Company”s financial statements
John Reid = the financial reporting process
Janice Rennie = systems of internal accounting and financial controls
= professional qualifications and independence of the
external auditors
= performance of the external auditors
= risk management processes
= financing plans and pension plans
= compliance by the Company with ethics policies and
legal and regulatory requirements
Corporate Monica Sloan (Chair) 3 100% e establishing the appropriate composition and governance of
Governance Howard Balloch the Board, including compensation of all non-management
Committee Robert Kostelnik directors
Douglas Mahaffy * recommending nominees for election or appointment as
A. Terence Poole directors
+ annually assessing and enhancing the performance of the
Board, Board Committees and Board members
e shaping the corporate governance of the Company and
developing corporate governance principles for the Company
* monitoring compliance by the Company with ethics policies
and legal and regulatory requirements
e providing oversight of the director education program
Human Resources John Reid (Chair) 4 95% + approving the goals and objectives of the CEO and
Committee Howard Balloch*? evaluating the CEO”s performance
Pierre Choquette e reviewing and recommending to the Board for approval the
Douglas Mahaffy remuneration of the Company”s executive officers
Janice Rennie + approving the remuneration of all other employees on an
Monica Sloan aggregate basis
* approving the executive compensation discussion and
analysis
e reporting on the Company”s organizational structure, officer
succession plans, total compensation practices, human
resource policies and executive development programs
e recommending grants and administrative matters in
connection with the Long-Term Incentive Plan
e reviewing the operations and administration of the
Company”s retirement plans
Public Policy Howard Balloch (Chair) 1 100% e reviewing public policy matters that have a significant impact
Committee Phillip Cook on the Company, including those relating to government
Douglas Mahaffy relations and public affairs
Robert Kostelnik + overseeing the Company”s Social Responsibility policies
A. Terence Poole
Responsible Care Phillip Cook (Chair) 2 100% e reviewing matters relating to the environment and
Committee Pierre Choquette occupational health and safety issues that impact
Robert Kostelnik significantly on the Company
John Reid + overseeing the Company”s Responsible CareW) Policy and

reviewing the policies and standards that are in place to
ensure that the Company is carrying out all of its operations
in accordance with the principles of Responsible Care)

(1) The mandate of the Audit, Finance and Risk Committee, together with the relevant education and experience of its members and other Committee information,
may be found in the “Audit Committee Information” section of the Company”s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2010.

(2) Mr. Poole is the “audit committee financial expert.”

(3) Mr. Balloch, in his role as Chairman of Canaccord Genuity Asia Limited, is the only committee member who serves as a chief executive officer of another

company.

15

Director Independence
Independence Status of Directors

Name Management Independent Not Independent
Bruce Aitken x
Howard Balloch
Pierre Choquette
Phillip Cook
Thomas Hamilton
Robert Kostelnik
Douglas Mahaffy
A. Terence Poole
John Reid

Janice Rennie
Monica Sloan

EEE EEES EEES

Ten of the 11 nominees who are standing for election to the Company”s Board, over 90%, have been determined by the Board to
be independent in accordance with NASDAQ rules and Canadian securities regulations. Mr. Aitken is the President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company and is therefore not independent.

In accordance with our Corporate Governance Principles, the Board must be composed of a substantial majority of independent
directors. The mandates of the Audit, Finance and Risk Committee and Corporate Governance Committee state that these committees
must be composed wholly of independent directors. The mandate of the Human Resources Committee states that no committee
member shall be an officer of the Company. In addition, the Corporate Governance Principles provide that if the Chairman of the
Board is not independent, the independent directors on the Board shall select from among themselves a Lead Independent Director.

All Committees of the Board are currently constituted exclusively of independent directors. Mr. Aitken, in his capacity as
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Mr. Hamilton, in his capacity as Chairman of the Board, attend
Committee meetings.

Other Directorships and Interlocking Relationships

Several of the nominees are directors of other reporting issuers. For details, please refer to the biographies for each nominee under
“Election of Directors.” Mr. Choquette and Mr. Mahaffy currently serve together on the board of the Canada Pension Plan Investment
Board (“CPP”), the Investment Committee of CPP and the Human Resources and Compensation Committee of CPP. Mr. Choquette
has been a member of the CPP board since February 2008 and Mr. Mahaffy since October 2009.

Other than Mr. Choquette and Mr. Mahaffy, there were no nominees who served together as directors on the boards of other
corporations or acted together as trustees for other entities during 2010.

In Camera Sessions

Following each in-person meeting of the Board an “in camera” session is held at which only independent directors are in
attendance as provided in the Corporate Governance Principles. In addition, in camera sessions were held following each Committee
meeting in 2010.
Meeting Attendance Records

The cumulative Board and Committee meeting attendance rate for all directors in 2010 was 98%. For information concerning the
number of Board and Committee meetings held in 2010, as well as the attendance record of each director for those meetings, see the
chart on page 11.
2. Board Mandate

Section 3 of the Companys Corporate Governance Principles contains the Board mandate that describes the Boards

responsibilities. A copy of the Corporate Governance Principles can be found in Schedule A attached to this Information Circular and
on our website.

16

3. Position Descriptions
Board Chairman and Committee Chairs

The Board has developed written position descriptions (which we call “Terms of Reference”) for the Chairman of the Board, each
Committee Chair and for Individual Directors. These Terms of Reference can be found on our website. Section 4 of the Corporate
Governance Principles also sets out the responsibilities of each director.

Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”)

The CEO has a written position description that sets out the position”s key responsibilities. In addition, the CEO has specific
annual corporate and personal performance objectives that he is responsible for meeting. These objectives are reviewed, approved and
tracked during the year by the Board through the Human Resources Committee. See “Short-Term Incentive Plan” commencing on
page 34 for more complete information on these objectives.

Retirement Policy

The Board of Directors has determined that there should not be a mandatory retirement age for directors and the Corporate
Governance Principles establish that there should not be cumulative term limits for directors and states as follows:

Cumulative term limits for directors should not be established as this could have the effect of forcing directors off the
Board who have gained a deep and detailed knowledge of the Company”s operations and business affairs. At the same
time, the value of some turnover in Board membership to provide an ongoing input of fresh ideas and new knowledge
is recognized. The Corporate Governance Committee shall review annually the membership of the Board to enable the
Board to manage its overall composition and maintain a balance of directors to ensure long-term continuity.

4. Orientation and Continuing Education

To familiarize directors with the role of the Board, its Committees, the directors and the nature and operation of the Company”s
business, all directors are provided with a director’s manual in the form of a CD that contains information covering a wide range of
topics including:

Duties of directors and directors” liabilities

Board and committee governance documents

The Company”s Code of Business Conduct and Vision and Core Values
Strategic plans, operational reports, marketing reports and budgets
Important corporate policies

Recent regulatory filings and analyst reports

Information on our corporate and organizational structure

CDs containing updated information are provided to all directors on an ongoing basis. In addition, the Company encourages
directors to meet with senior management and to visit our operations and plant locations.

The Board recognizes the importance of ongoing education for directors. The Companys Corporate Governance Principles state
that directors are encouraged to attend seminars, conferences and other continuing education programs to help ensure that they stay
current on relevant issues such as corporate governance, financial and accounting practices and corporate ethics. The Company and all
of our directors are members of the Institute of Corporate Directors (“ICD”) and the Company pays the cost of this membership. A
number of our directors have attended courses and programs offered by ICD. The Company also encourages directors to attend other
appropriate continuing education programs and the Company contributes to the cost of attending such programs. As well, written
materials likely to be of interest to directors that have been published in periodicals, newspapers or by legal or accounting firms are
routinely forwarded to directors or included in a “supplemental reading” section in Board and Committee meeting materials.

The Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for overseeing the director education program and, based on feedback from
all directors, the program focuses primarily on providing the directors with more in-depth information about key aspects of the
business, including the material risks and opportunities facing the Company. Directors provide input into the agenda for the education
program and management schedules presentations and seminars covering these areas, some of which are presented by management
and others by external consultants or experts.

17

The Board received a number of presentations in 2010 focused on deepening the Board”s knowledge of the business, the industry
and the key risks and opportunities facing the Company as well as regulatory changes materially impacting the Company, such as the
Company”’s transition to IFRS. The Board also conducts an annual one-day strategy session that provides detailed information on the
business environment and trends affecting the Company. In addition, Board meetings are periodically held at a location where the
Company has methanol production operations or significant commercial activities. In November 2010, the Board met in New Zealand
where the Company has production facilities. This site visit gave directors an opportunity to receive various presentations on the New
Zealand energy market, government policies, and the Company”s New Zealand operations. The visit also gave directors an extended
opportunity to interact with employees, natural gas suppliers, business associates and government officials, as well as tour the
methanol production facilities and related infrastructure.

5. Ethical Business Conduct
Code of Business Conduct

The Company has a written Code of Business Conduct (the “Code”) that applies to all employees, officers and directors. It
provides a set of standards meant to help them avoid wrongdoing and to promote honest and ethical behaviour while conducting the
Company”s business. The Code also establishes a confidential “whistle-blower” hotline for reporting suspected violations of the Code.
The Code is reviewed annually by the Board. A copy of the Code may be found on our website. A printed version is also available
upon request to the Corporate Secretary of the Company.

The Board monitors compliance with the Code primarily through the Audit, Finance and Risk Committee and the Corporate
Governance Committee. These committees receive regular updates on matters relating to the Code, including an annual report on the
activities undertaken by management to maintain and increase Code awareness throughout the organization and the results of surveys
designed to determine employee understanding and awareness of the Code.

The Code states that suspected Code violations, whether received through the whistle-blower hotline or otherwise, are to be
reported to the legal department and the General Counsel shall investigate the matter. The Corporate Governance Committee is made
aware of all such reports. Furthermore, the Chair of the Audit, Finance and Risk Committee is advised of all reports that concern
accounting or audit matters and the Chair of that Committee and the General Counsel together determine how such matters should be
investigated and by whom.

No material change report has been filed since the beginning of the Company”s most recently completed financial year that
pertains to any conduct of a director or executive officer that constitutes a departure from the Code.

Transactions Involving Directors or Officers

The Code contains a specific provision relating to the need for directors, officers and all employees to avoid conflicts of interest
with the Company. Furthermore, the Corporate Governance Committee is mandated to consider questions of independence and
possible conflicts of interest of directors and officers. To that end, each director and officer completes an annual questionnaire in
which they report on all transactions material to the Company in which they have a material interest. A report of all transactions
involving the Company and the directors and executive officers is provided to the Corporate Governance Committee.

CEO Trading Policy

The Company has a policy stating that if the President and Chief Executive Officer intends to sell securities of the Company or
exercise options, a press release will be issued no less than five business days in advance of the date of the intended transaction. The
press release shall contain information that includes the maximum amount of shares or options intended to be sold or exercised, the
expected date of the transaction, the approximate number of Common Shares the President and CEO will hold after the intended
transaction, the share ownership requirement applicable to the President and CEO and whether it is reasonably expected that the
President and CEO will meet the requirement immediately after the anticipated transaction.

Recoupment Policy
The Company has a Recoupment Policy that provides for the forfeiture of options, shares or share units or repayment of cash

compensation received by employees in certain circumstances where the employee is involved in wrongdoing. For more information
on this policy, please see page 41.

18

Other Measures

The Board takes other steps to encourage and promote a culture of ethical business conduct. First, under the Company”s
Corporate Governance Principles, the Board has an obligation to satisfy itself as to the integrity of the CEO and other executive
officers and that they are creating a culture of integrity throughout the organization. On an annual basis, the Corporate Governance
Committee considers and reports to the Board on this issue. In addition, Company employees are surveyed annually on issues
concerning the Code of Business Conduct including whether they are satisfied that the senior leadership at their sites consistently
conducts itself ethically and honestly.

In addition to the Code of Business Conduct, the Company also has several other policies governing ethical business conduct,
including the following:

. Competition Law Policy – provides employees with an understanding of the Company”s policy of compliance with all
competition laws and information concerning the activities that are permitted and prohibited when dealing with
competitors, customers and other parties.

. Confidential Information and Trading in Securities Policy – provides guidelines to employees with respect to the
treatment of confidential information and advises insiders of the Company when it is permissible to trade securities of
the Company. This policy also prohibits insiders from engaging in short selling of the Company”s securities, trading in
put or call options on the Company”s securities or entering into equity monetization arrangements related to the
Company”s securities.

*. Corporate Gifts and Entertainment Policy – provides guidelines to Company employees on the appropriateness of gifts,
gratuities or entertainment that may be offered to or accepted from third parties with whom the Company has
commercial relations.

e Corrupt Payments Prevention Policy – prohibits the payment or receipt of bribes and kickbacks by the Company”s
employees and agents.

e Political Donation Policy – prohibits all political donations by the Company unless they are specifically approved in
advance by the Company”s President and CEO.

The Company”s employees regularly receive either web-based or in-person compliance training that focuses on ethical business
conduct and the foregoing policies. In addition, in 2010 employees and directors who are considered “insiders” under Canadian
securities laws were provided with training concerning their obligations and responsibilities under Canadian securities laws.

6. Board Renewal
Nominating Committee and Nomination Process

The Board has established the Corporate Governance Committee as its nominating committee. The Committee is composed
entirely of independent directors. A summary of the key responsibilities of the Corporate Governance Committee can be found under
“Committees of the Board of Directors” beginning on page 14.

The Committee is responsible for identifying new candidates to stand as nominees for election or appointment as directors to our
Board of Directors. The Committee uses a Board skills matrix to assist in this process. On an annual basis, the Committee reviews a
matrix that sets out the various skills and experience considered to be desirable for the Board to possess in the context of the
Company’s strategic direction. The Committee then assesses the skills and experience of each current Board member against this
matrix. When completed, the matrix helps the Committee identify any skills or experience gaps and provides the basis for a search to
be conducted for new directors to fill any gaps. Below is a summary of the current Board skills matrix that sets out the various skills
and experience categories and the Committee?s determination as to how many directors on the Board should possess those skills and
experience. The Committee has reviewed all of the skills and experience of the current Board members against the matrix and has
determined that the target numbers have been met.

19

Target Number of
Non-Management
Skills € Experience Directors
Leadership 3-4
Commodity experience 3-4
Global chemical industry experience 3+
CFO or retired audit partner 2
Capital markets 2
Government affairs 1
Board experience T+
Environmental 2-3
International experience 5-6
Energy 1-2

In identifying potential director candidates, the Committee takes into account a broad variety of factors it considers appropriate,
including skills, independence, financial acumen, board dynamics and personal characteristics. In addition, diversity in perspective
arising from personal, professional or other attributes and experiences are considered when identifying potential director candidates.
Desirable individual characteristics include integrity, credibility, the ability to generate public confidence and maintain the goodwill
and confidence of our shareholders, sound and independent business judgment, general good health and the capability and willingness
to travel to, attend and contribute at Board functions on a regular basis. Background checks, as appropriate, are completed prior to
nomination.

Suitable director candidates have, over the past several years, been identified through the use of an executive search firm retained
under the authority of the Committee. The selection process is led by the Chair of the Committee but all Committee members and the
Chairman of the Board are routinely updated on the process and the individuals being considered. The Committee Chair, the Chairman
and the CEO meet in person with the candidate to discuss his or her interest and ability to devote the time and resources required to
meet the Company”s expectations for directors. The recommended candidate is then formally considered by the Committee and, if
approved, the candidate is recommended to the Board.

Over the last several years, the Board has focused on renewal and this is illustrated by the chart below. Over the past five years,
five directors have retired and five new directors have joined the Board.

Board Tenure

Number of Directors
wm

0-5 5-10 10+

Years on the Board

In keeping with our focus on Board renewal, Mr. Choquette resigned as Chairman effective May 1, 2010 and Mr. Hamilton
became the Chairman of the Board effective May 1, 2010. Mr. Choquette remained as a director of the Company.

20

Majority Voting for Directors

In 2006, the Board adopted a policy that states that any nominee for election as a director at an annual general meeting for whom
the number of votes withheld exceeds the number of votes cast in his or her favour will be deemed not to have received the support of
shareholders. A director elected in such circumstances will tender his or her resignation to the Chair of the Corporate Governance
Committee and that Committee will review the matter and make a recommendation to the Board. The Board will, within 90 days of
the annual general meeting, issue a public release either announcing the resignation of the director or justifying its decision not to
accept the resignation.

If the resignation is accepted, the Board may appoint a new director to fill the vacancy created by the resignation. This policy
applies only to uncontested director elections, meaning elections where the number of nominees for director is equal to the number of
directors to be elected.

7. Director and Officer Compensation

Director and officer compensation is determined by the Board. The process followed for determining director compensation is
described commencing on page 24 and the process followed for executive compensation is described commencing on page 31.

8. Shareholder Survey on Executive Compensation

The Board appreciates the importance that shareholders place on executive compensation and believes that it is important to
engage shareholders on this topic. With this in mind, the Company has a web-based survey to enable our shareholders to provide
feedback on our approach to executive compensation as disclosed in this Information Circular. The survey is accessible to
shareholders at the Investor Relations section of our website (www.methanex.com) from March 25, 2011 (the date this Information
Circular was filed with securities regulators) until June 30, 2011. In order to submit comments, you are asked to provide your name
and confirm that you are a current shareholder. Shareholders may comment generally or on specific aspects of our executive
compensation and may provide as much detail as they wish. Shareholders who choose to provide an e-mail address may be contacted
in order for the Board to better understand their particular concerns. All comments will be provided to the Chair of the Human
Resources Committee and discussed at the July 2011 Board meeting to determine what actions are to be taken to address concerns
raised. We will provide a report on this process in our annual disclosure documents next year. We intend to run this web-based survey
on an annual basis.

Report on the 2010 Shareholder Survey

2010 was the inaugural year for our web-based shareholder survey with results discussed at the July 2010 Human Resources
Committee and reported on at the July 2010 Board meeting. Feedback was received from three individuals with small shareholdings
and from two institutional investors. Two of the individual shareholders expressed concern over what they considered to be the
over-compensation of executives. The institutional investors focused on the issue of instituting a shareholder advisory “say on pay”
vote with one indicating support for such a vote while the other stating that the Human Resources Committee is best positioned to
determine executive compensation levels. The Committee determined that no changes to the Companys approach to executive
compensation were warranted as a result of the feedback. The Committee and the Board both stated that this survey is an important
process and should be continued.

9. Assessments
The Company”s Corporate Governance Principles state as follows:
Performance as a director is the main criterion for determining a director”s ongoing service on the Board. To assist in
determining performance, each director will take part in an annual performance evaluation process which shall include
a self-evaluation and a confidential discussion with the Chairman.
Our Board of Directors conducts an annual performance evaluation and the Corporate Governance Committee oversees the
process. The process is designed to evaluate the effectiveness and contribution of the Board, its Committees and individual directors.
Results of the process are reported to the Board. In 2010, the process included the following:

Evaluation of the Chairman of the Board

Directors were provided with an opportunity to evaluate the Chairman of the Board”s performance and to make suggestions for
improvement. Directors rated the Chairman of the Board and provided comments on issues that addressed the conduct of Board

21

meetings, leadership issues and the Chairman”s ability to facilitate positive contributions from other directors. Results were tabulated
by the Corporate Secretary and were provided to the Chair of the Corporate Governance Committee who then had a private
conversation with the Chairman of the Board. The content of that conversation was reported by the Chair of the Corporate Governance
Committee to the full Committee at its January 2011 meeting.

Evaluation of the Board as a Whole

Directors were asked to evaluate how the Board is operating and to make suggestions for improvement. Directors provided ratings
and comments on a number of criteria including:

e the mix of skills, experience and diversity among board members as well as utilization of such skills and experience;
the process for selecting new directors;
communication with management and sufficiency of information provided to directors to enable them to monitor results,
identify areas of risk and understand important industry issues and trends;

* understanding of the Company”s strategic objectives, the industry and the competitive environment as well as key risks faced

by the Company;

e the strategic planning process, budget planning process and the integrity of internal controls and management information
systems;

e the processes for determining the CEO”s performance measures and compensation as well as all management compensation;
and

* succession plaming.

Results were tabulated by the Corporate Secretary, provided to the Chairman of the Board and then presented to the Corporate
Governance Committee at its January 2011 meeting.

Evaluation of Committees

Directors were asked to evaluate the Board committees in general as well as the specific committees on which they sit. Directors
provided ratings and comments on a number of criteria including:

e process issues such as the appropriateness of the committee structure, committee size and efficiency and effectiveness of
meetings and the value of in camera sessions;

*e quality of materials provided to the committee and of communication with management; and

e the mix of skills, experience and diversity among board members as well as utilization of such skills and experience.

Results were tabulated by the Corporate Secretary, provided to the Chairman of the Board and then presented to the Corporate
Governance Committee at its January 2011 meeting. Each Committee also reviewed the results of their individual Committee
evaluation.

Evaluation of Individual Directors

Directors were provided with an opportunity to evaluate their own effectiveness, comment on their peers” effectiveness and have
a private conversation with the Chairman of the Board regarding their performance and the performance of their fellow directors.
Directors evaluated themselves and their peers based on a number of criteria relating to their effectiveness as Company directors,
including their understanding of the business, contribution on strategic issues, interaction with management and areas of personal
strength. The Corporate Secretary received all questionnaires and each director was provided with an individualized report that
included the comments received regarding that director?s performance from peers (on an anonymous basis). These reports were also
provided to the Chairman of the Board who then conducted a confidential discussion with each director. The Chairman of the Board
reported to the Corporate Governance Committee at its January 2011 meeting regarding this process.

10. Management Succession Planning

The Company has detailed succession plans for each executive officer and each of such officer”s direct reports. For more
information on the Company”s succession planning process, please see page 31.

11. Board”s Role in Risk Management Process
The Board”s mandate (which is set out in section 3 of the Corporate Governance Principles) provides that the Board is responsible

for identifying and overseeing the implementation of systems to manage the principal risks of the Company”s business. The Audit,

22

Finance and Risk Committee”s mandate also states that the Committee is responsible for reviewing with management, at least
annually, the Company”s processes to identify, monitor, evaluate and address important enterprise-wide strategic and business risks.

Management annually undertakes a formal risk review process that includes identifying the principal strategic risks of the
Company, assessing the Company”s strategy to mitigate each risk, and determining accountability. The results of this process are
documented and reviewed and discussed by the Audit, Finance and Risk Committee and the Board. In addition, the Board, through its
Committees, oversees the Company’s risk management strategies and programs, including insurance programs, related to the
Company”s key operational risks such as health and safety, shipping and financial risks.

23

PART IV COMPENSATION

COMPENSATION OF DIRECTORS
Objective and Design of the Director Compensation Program

We are the world’s largest supplier of methanol with sales and operations around the globe and revenues of approximately US $2
billion in 2010. As such, the main objective of the Company”s director compensation program is to attract and retain directors with
international experience, a broad range of relevant skills and knowledge, and the ability to successfully carry out the Board”s mandate.
The Board”s mandate can be found in section 3 of our Corporate Governance Principles which are attached to this Information
Circular as Schedule A and can also be found on our website at www.methanex.com.

Directors of the Company are required to devote significant time and energy to the performance of their duties. The Terms of
Reference for Individual Directors and the Corporate Governance Principles set forth an extensive list of responsibilities and
expectations for the Board as a whole and for each individual director. Directors are expected to prepare for and attend an average of
six Board meetings per year, participate on committees and ensure that they stay informed about the Company?s business and the
rapidly changing global business environment. Therefore, to attract and retain experienced, skilled and knowledgeable directors that
are willing and able to meet these expectations, the Board believes that the Company must offer a competitive compensation package.

Our director compensation program is designed primarily to:
+ compensate directors for applying their knowledge, skills and experience in the performance of their duties;
+ align the actions and economic interests of the directors with the interests of long-term shareholders; and

+ encourage directors to stay on the Board for a significant period of time.

Director compensation is paid only to non-management directors and is comprised primarily of cash fees (annual retainer,
meeting fees, Chair fees and travel fees) and a share-based, long-term incentive award. Non-management directors are not eligible to
receive stock options under the terms of the Company”s Stock Option Plan. The Directors? Total Compensation table on page 27 sets
out the total compensation earned by the directors in 2010.

As part of this compensation program, the directors also have share ownership requirements which require each non-management
director to own shares or share units having a value equal to at least five times his or her annual retainer. See “Directors” Share
Ownership Requirements” on page 30 for more details. The Board believes that share ownership requirements further promote the
objectives of director retention and alignment with long-term shareholders.

Process for Determining Director Compensation

The Corporate Governance Committee, composed entirely of independent directors, is responsible for annually recommending to
the Board for approval the target compensation for the independent directors, including the appropriate compensation elements and the
target compensation for each element.

The Committee reviews director compensation at least every two years. As part of this process, the Committee reviews publicly
filed information circulars as well as director compensation surveys and reports published in Canada by reputable compensation
consultants, to ensure that our director compensation is comparable to, and competitive with, the comparator group (discussed below).
In addition, the Committee may hire an external consultant to assist with the review process.

During the most recent director compensation review conducted in late 2009, the Committee reconfirmed that the target
compensation level for directors should be the 50th percentile of a group of North American-based chemical companies with
international operations. The comparator group of companies, which are listed below, were chosen in 2009 by the Committee because,
similar to the Company, they were all North American-based chemical companies with international operations:

Agrium Inc. Chemtura Corporation Koppers Inc. Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan, Inc.
Ashland Inc. Cytec Industries Inc. Westlake Chemical Corporation Spartech Corporation

Cabot Corporation FMC Corporation Olin Corporation Terra Industries Inc.

Celanese Corporation Hercules Inc. (now Ashland Inc.) PolyOne Corporation

24

Based on the Committee”s review, target compensation levels for directors were unchanged. The Committee also determined
during its most recent review that the key elements of the Company”s compensation program – annual retainer, meeting fees, Chair
fees, travel fees and share-based long-term incentive awards – were comparable to and competitive with the comparator group
surveyed by the Committee.

Elements of Director Compensation
Annual Retainer and Other Fees

During the year ended December 31, 2010, annual retainer and other fees were paid to non-management members of the Board on
the following basis:

US$ CDN$

Annual retainer for a non-management director 38,839 40,000 annual
Annual retainer for the Chairman of the Board 145,645 150,000 annual
Board meeting attendance fee 2,427 2,500 per meeting
Committee meeting attendance fee 2,427 2,500 per meeting
Committee Chair fee (in addition to the committee meeting attendance fee) 2,427 2,500 per meeting
Cross-country or intercontinental travel fee to attend Board or committee meetings 2,427 2,500 per trip
Travel fee for site visits undertaken separate and apart from attendance at Board or committee 2,427 2,500 per trip
meetings (and not for orientation purposes upon joining the Board)

All retainers and fees in the table above are paid in Canadian dollars and have been converted to US dollars at the conversion rate
of 1.0299, being the Bank of Canada average noon rate for 2010. The Chairman of the Board receives a flat fee annual retainer and
does not receive any additional “per meeting” fees or travel fees. In 2010, the Chairman of the Board retainer was pro-rated between
Mr. Choquette, who resigned as Chairman of the Board effective May 1, 2010 and Mr. Hamilton who became Chairman of the Board
effective May 1, 2010.

The Company pays the retainer and other fees to compensate directors for applying their knowledge, skills and experience in the
performance of their duties. These fees are targeted to be similar to fees paid to non-management directors in the 50th percentile of the
comparator group as discussed immediately above under “Process for Determining Director Compensation.”

Long-Term Incentive Awards – Restricted Share Unit Plan for Directors

Directors are awarded Restricted Share Units (“RSUs”) under the Company”s Restricted Share Unit Plan for Directors as part of
the annual long-term incentive component of their compensation. Directors may elect to receive their RSU award in the form of
Deferred Share Units (“DSUs”), which are more fully described in the following section. The table below summarizes the last two
long-term incentive awards granted to directors in 2011 and 2010:

2011 2010
Chairman of the Board 4,700 RSUs or DSUs 6,900 RSUs or DSUs
All other non-management directors 3,100 RSUs or DSUs 4,600 RSUs or DSUs

The 2010 long-term incentive award for the Chairman of the Board included in this table was pro-rated between Mr. Choquette,
who resigned as Chairman of the Board effective May 1, 2010 (but remained a director of the Company), and Mr. Hamilton, who
became Chairman of the Board effective May 1, 2010. On March 5, 2010, Mr. Choquette was granted 5,000 RSUs (which he elected
to receive in the form of DSUs). Mr. Hamilton was granted 4,600 RSUs on March 5, 2010 and was awarded an additional 1,900 RSUs
on May 1, 2010 when he became Chairman.

25

RSUs are notional shares credited to an “RSU Account.” When dividends are paid on Common Shares, an equivalent value of
additional RSUs is calculated and credited to each individuals RSU Account. RSUs granted in any year together with applicable
dividend equivalents, will vest on December 1, in the 24th month following the end of the year in which the award was made.
Following vesting, directors are entitled to receive a cash payment based on the price of the Company?s Common Shares at that time,
net of applicable withholding tax. RSUs do not entitle participants to any voting or other shareholder rights and are non-dilutive to
shareholders.

The Board believes that the long-term incentive awards granted to directors both compensates the directors for the performance of
their duties and also promotes director retention and alignment with the interests of long-term shareholders. The target dollar value of
such award (“Target LTI Dollar Value”) is determined by the Corporate Governance Committee during its review of director
compensation and is targeted to be similar to the awards granted to non-management directors in the 50th percentile of the comparator
group as discussed above under “Process for Determining Director Compensation.” For 2011 and 2010, each director received the
number of RSUs (or DSUs) determined by dividing the Target LTI Dollar Value by the weighted average closing price of the
Common Shares on the TSX for the 90-day period ending on December 31 of the fiscal year immediately prior to the year in which
the grant was made and then rounded.

Deferred Share Unit Plan (Director DSUs)

Under the Company?s Deferred Share Unit Plan (the “DSU Plan”), each non-management director elects annually to receive
100%, 50% or 0% of his or her retainer and meeting fees as Deferred Share Units (“DSUs”). The actual number of DSUs granted to a
director is calculated at the end of each quarter by dividing the dollar amount elected to the DSU Plan by the five-day average closing
price of the Common Shares on the TSX during the last five trading days of that quarter. Additional DSUs are credited corresponding
to dividends declared on the Common Shares. Under the terms of the DSU Plan, directors must elect to become a member of the Plan
by December 31 in any year in order to be eligible to receive DSUs in the following calendar year. Directors may also elect to receive
their long-term incentive awards in the form of DSUs. See the section “Long-Term Incentive Awards – Restricted Share Unit Plan for
Directors” above.

DSUs held by directors are redeemable only after the director retires as a director of the Company or upon death (“Termination
Date”), and a lump sum cash payment, net of any withholdings, is made after the director chooses a valuation date. For DSUs granted
on or after March 2, 2007, directors may choose a valuation date falling between the Termination Date and December 1 of the first
calendar year beginning after the Termination Date, but the director cannot choose a date retroactively. For DSUs granted prior to
March 2, 2007, the valuation date chosen may fall on any date within a period beginning one year before the Termination Date and
ending on December 1 of the first calendar year beginning after the Termination Date. The lump sum amount is calculated by
multiplying the number of DSUs held in the account by the closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on the valuation date.

The Board believes that providing directors with the alternative of receiving their cash fees and long-term incentive awards in the
form of DSUs, which may not be redeemed until retirement or death, further promotes director retention and alignment with the
interests of long-term shareholders.

Perquisites

Certain minor out-of-pocket expenses incurred by directors are paid for by the Company. All such expenses are included in the
“All Other Compensation” column found in the Directors” Total Compensation table on page 27.

26

Directors” Total Compensation

The following table sets out what each director earned by way of annual retainer, meeting fees and long-term incentive awards for

2010. The Company reports its financial statements in US dollars and therefore is required to report all compensation amounts in US
dollars. However, since all amounts have been paid to directors in Canadian dollars, the amounts reported in all tables in this section
have been reported in both Canadian dollars and US dollars and, except as otherwise stated, have been converted to US dollars at a
conversion rate of 1.0299, being the Bank of Canada average noon rate for 2010.

Board Committee All Other
Annual Attendance |Attendance [Committee Total ¡Share-Based | Comp-
Director Retainer Fees Fees Chair Fees_ [Travel Fees? [Fees Earned” | Award |ensation” Total
Bruce Aitken*

Howard Balloch US$ 38,839 14,565 19,419 2,427 12,137 87,387 116,128 12,550 216,065
CDN$ 40,000 15,000 20,000 2,500 12,500 90,000 119,600 12,925 222,525
Pierre Choquette? US$ 74,441 9,710 12,137 – 7,282 103,570 126,226 39,767 269,563
CDN$ 76,667 10,000 12,500 – 7,500 106,667 130,000 40,956 277,623
Phillip Cook US$ 38,839 14,565 24,274 4,855 19,419 101,952 116,128 6,879 224,959
CDN$ 40,000 15,000 25,000 5,000 20,000 105,000 119,600 7,085 231,685
“Thomas Hamilton” US$ 110,043 7,282 14,565 4,855 9,710 146,455 159,721 7,167 313,943
omas Hamilton CDN$ | 113,333 7,500 15,000 5,000 10,000 150,833 164,497 7,999 323,329
Robert Kostelnik US$ 38,839 16,992 9,710 – 14,565 80,106 116,128 5,350 201,584
: CDN$ 40,000 17,500 10,000 – 15,000 82,500 119,600 5,510 207,610
US$ 38,839 16,992 19,419 – 14,565 89,815 116,128 17,296 223,239

Douglas Mahafí , . , . , xx , ,
ouglas Mahafly CDN$ | 40,000 17,500 20,000 – 15,000 92,500 119,600 17.813 229,913
A. Terence Poole US$ 38,839 16,992 26,702 16,992 12,137 111,662 116,128 19,580 247,370
: CDN$ 40,000 17,500 27,500 17,500 12,500 115,000 119,600 20,165 254,765
John Reid US$ 38,839 16,992 31,556 9,710 2,427 99,524 116,128 22,675 238,327
CDNS$ 40,000 17,500 32,500 10,000 2,500 102,500 119,600 23,353 245,453
Janice Renmi US$ 38,839 16,992 29,129 – 2,427 87,387 116,128 9,448 212,963
anice Rennie CDNS 40,000 17,500 30,000 – 2,500 90,000 119,600 9,731 219,331
Monica Sloan US$ 38,839 16,992 21,847 2,427 2,427 82,532 116,128 26,204 224,864
CDN$ 40,000 17,500 22,500 2,500 2,500 85,000 119,600 26,988 231,588
US$ | 495,196 148,074 208,758 41,266 97,096 990,390 | 1,214,971 167,516 || 2,372,877
Total CDN$ | 510,000 152,500 215,000 42,500 100,000 1,020,000 | 1,251,297 172,525 || 2,443,822
(1) Travel fees are paid per trip for cross-country or intercontinental travel to attend Board or committee meetings or for site visits undertaken separate and apart from

Q)

6)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(0)

attendance at Board meetings or committee meetings (and not for orientation purposes upon joining the Board).

This column includes all retainers, meeting, Chair and travel fees earned during 2010, including those paid in DSUs. Under the Directors? DSU Plan, directors
may elect to receive 100%, 50% or 0% of their retainer and meeting fees as DSUs. The DSU Plan is more fully described under “Deferred Share Unit Plan
(Director DSUs)” on page 26. In 2010, Mr. Balloch elected to receive 100% of his retainer as DSUs (3,590 DSUs) and Mr. Mahaffy elected to receive 50% of his
retainer and meeting fees as DSUs (1,828 DSUs). The number and value of the DSUs received by Mr. Balloch and Mr. Mahaffy in lieu of fees are reflected in the
“Directors” Share-Based Awards – Value Vested During the Year” table on page 29.

This column reflects the grant date fair value of RSUs and DSUs received by directors in 2010 as long-term incentive awards. The value shown is calculated by
multiplying the number of RSUs or DSUs so awarded in 2010 by the Canadian dollar closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on March 4, 2010, the day
before such share units were granted, being $26.00. In the case of Mr. Hamilton, he received an additional 1,900 RSUs on May 1, 2010 upon his appointment as
Chairman of the Board. The value of these RSUs is calculated by multiplying 1,900 RSUs by the Canadian dollar closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX
on April 30, 2010, the day before the share units were granted, being $23.63. The grant date fair value shown in this column is the same as the accounting fair
value. Directors can elect to receive their long-term incentive awards as RSUs or DSUs. Please see “Long-Term Incentive Awards – Restricted Share Unit Plan for
Directors” on page 25 for more information.

This column includes the value of director perquisites in 2010 as well as the value of additional share units earned by directors in 2010 (RSUs and/or DSUs as
applicable) corresponding to dividends being declared on Common Shares during 2010. Please see “Long-Term Incentive Awards – Restricted Share Unit Plan for
Directors” on page 25 and “Deferred Share Unit Plan (Director DSUs)” on page 26 for more information on dividend equivalents. With respect to dividend
equivalent DSUs, the value of dividend equivalent additional DSUs is calculated by multiplying the number of such units by the Canadian dollar closing price of
the Common Shares of the TSX on the day that such units were credited. With respect to dividend equivalent RSUs, the value of dividend equivalent additional
RSUs is calculated by multiplying the number of such units by the weighted average Canadian dollar closing price of the Common Shares of the TSX for the
fifteen trading days prior to the day that such units were credited.

Mr. Aitken is the President and Chief Executive Officer and therefore does not receive any compensation as a director. See “Statement of Executive
Compensation” beginning on page 44 for information on Mr. Aitken”s compensation.

Mr. Choquette was Chairman of the Board until May 1, 2010 and did not receive any “per meeting” attendance fees or travel fees while he was Chairman. He
received a pro rata portion of the Chairman’s annual retainer.

Mr. Hamilton was appointed Chairman of the Board on May 1, 2010 and did not receive any “per meeting” attendance fees or travel fees following his
appointment. He received a pro rata portion of the Chairman”s annual retainer.

27

Directors? Outstanding Share-Based Awards

The following table shows the number of share-based awards held by each director as at December 31, 2010 that have not vested.
Directors do not receive stock options. All Canadian dollar amounts have been converted to US dollars at a conversion rate of 1.0299,
being the Bank of Canada average noon rate for 2010.

Outstanding Share-Based Awards at December 31, 2010”
Number of Shares or Units Market or Payout Value of Share-Based
of Shares that Have Not Awards that Have Not Vested?

Director VestedO US$ CDN$
Bruce Aitken*

Howard Balloch – – –
Pierre Choquette – – –
Phillip Cook 8,809 258,736 266,472
Thomas Hamilton 10,745 315,600 325,036
Robert Kostelnik 8,809 258,736 266,472
Douglas Mahaffy – – –
A. Terence Poole – – –
John Reid 8,809 258,736 266,472
Janice Rennie 4,716 138,517 142,659
Monica Sloan 4,716 138,517 142,659

(1) This table does not include DSUs outstanding because DSUs vest immediately upon grant. The table below shows the total number and value of DSUs held by
each non-management director as at December 31, 2010 and includes dividend equivalent DSUs credited since the date of the original DSU grants. The value is
calculated by multiplying the number of DSUs outstanding by the Canadian dollar closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on December 31, 2010 being
$30.25. All Canadian dollar amounts have been converted to US dollars at a conversion rate of 1.0299, being the Bank of Canada average noon rate for 2010. The
actual amount paid to a director on settlement of DSUs depends on the valuation date chosen by the director, and the valuation date may be retroactive in the case
of DSUs granted prior to March 2, 2007. See “Deferred Share Unit Plan (Director DSUs)” on page 26 for more detailed information regarding the Deferred Share
Unit Plan and the valuation date that directors may choose.

Number of Outstanding Value of Outstanding DSUs
DSUs as at Dec. 31, 2010 as at Dec. 31, 2010
Granted Granted on Total
prior to or after DSUs
Director Mar. 2,2007 | Mar. 2,2007 Held US$ CDN$
Howard Balloch – 22,712 22,712 667,092 687,038
Pierre Choquette 11,756 46,031 57,787 1,697,308 1,748,057
Phillip Cook – – – – –
Thomas Hamilton – – – – –
Robert Kostelnik – – – – –
Douglas Mahaffy – 29,552 29,552 867,995 893,948
A. Terence Poole 16,684 15,564 32,248 947,181 975,502
John Reid 17,305 11,229 28,534 838,095 863,154
Janice Rennie – 10,845 10,845 318,537 328,061
Monica Sloan 19,594 18,809 38,403 1,127,965 1,161,691

(2) These columns reflect the number and value of outstanding unvested RSUs as at December 31, 2010 and includes dividend equivalent RSUs credited since the
date of the original RSU grants. The value of the RSUs outstanding is calculated by multiplying the number of RSUs outstanding by the Canadian dollar closing
price of the Common Shares on the TSX on December 31, 2010 being $30.25.

(3) Mr. Aitken is the President and Chief Executive Officer and therefore does not receive any compensation as a director. See “Statement of Executive
Compensation” beginning on page 44 for information on Mr. Aitken”s compensation.

28

Directors” Share-Based Awards – Value Vested during the Year

The following table shows the aggregate dollar value realized by each director upon vesting of share-based awards during 2010.

Directors do not receive stock options and do not receive any non-equity incentive plan compensation. All Canadian dollar amounts
have been converted to US dollars at a conversion rate of 1.0299, being the Bank of Canada average noon rate for 2010.

Share-Based Awards – Value Vested during the Year

Number Vested during 2010 Value Vested during 2010
(++) ($)
RSUS”” DSUS” RSUS” DSUS?
Long-Term Long-Term Long-Term Long-Term
Incentive Granted in Incentive Dividend Incentive Granted in Incentive Dividend
Director Awards |Lieuof Fees] Awardsó |FEquivalents”| Total Awards Lieu of Fees” | Awards? |Equivalents| Total
Bruce Aitken”

US$ – 87,387 116,128 12,549 | 216,064
Howard Balloch – 3,590 4,600 519 8,709 CDN$ Ñ 90.000 119.600 12.925 | 222.525
: US$ – – 126,226 35,087 | 161,313
Pierre Choquette – – 5,000 1,458 6,458 CDNS Ñ Ñ 130,000 36.136 166.136
A US$ 95,781 – – – 95,781
Phillip Cook 3,319 – – – 3,319 CDN$ 98.645 – Ñ Ñ 98,645
: US$ 95,781 – – – 95,781
Thomas Hamilton 3,319 – – – 3,319 CDNS 98,645 Ñ Ñ Ñ 98,645
. US$ – – – a a
Robert Kostelnik – – 7 7 – || CDNS – – – – –
US$ – 89,815 116,128 17,296 | 223,239
Douglas Mahaffy – 1,828 4,600 717 7,145 CDNS Ñ 92.500 119.600 17.813 229,913
US$ – – 116,128 19,580 | 135,708
A. Terence Poole – – 4,600 813 5,413 CDNS _ Ñ 119.600 20,165 139,765
7 US$ – – – 17,326 17,326
John Reid – – – 720 720 CDNS Ñ Ñ Ñ 17844 17844
: : US$ – – – 6,584 6,584
Janice Rennie – – – 273 273 CDNS _ Ñ _ 6.781 6.781
Monica Sloan – – – 969 96 us – – > [ B318 | 23818
CDNS – – – 24,015 24,015

(1) This column represents RSUs that were awarded in 2008 and that vested on December 1, 2010, together with dividend equivalent RSUs credited in respect thereof.

Q)

6)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(0)

Please see “Long-Term Incentive Awards – Restricted Share Unit Plan for Directors” on page 25 for more information.

DSUs vest immediately upon grant, however, they may not be redeemed by a director until retirement or upon death. Directors may elect to receive 100%, 50% or
0% of their annual retainer and meeting fees as DSUs. Directors may also elect to receive their long-term incentive awards in the form of DSUs. Additional DSUs
are credited each quarter corresponding to dividends declared on Common Shares. Please see “Deferred Share Unit Plan (Director DSUs)” on page 26 for more
information.

The value of the RSUs shown in this column reflects the amount actually paid to directors for RSUs that vested on December 1, 2010, calculated in accordance
with the terms of the Company”s RSU Plan by multiplying the number of vested units (including fractional units) by the weighted average Canadian dollar closing
price of the Common Shares on the TSX during the 15 trading days prior to the vesting date, being $29.72. The Canadian dollar closing price of the Common
Shares on the TSX on December 1, 2010, the vesting date, was $30.58.

These columns reflect the number and value of DSUs received in lieu of fees earned as elected by directors in 2010. The value is equal to the Total Fees Earned
column in the Directors” Total Compensation table on page 27. DSUs are granted in lieu of fees on a quarterly basis and the number of DSUs granted at the end of
each quarter is calculated by dividing one-quarter of the annual fees elected to be received as DSUs by the average Canadian dollar closing price of the Common
Shares on the TSX on the last five trading days of the preceding fiscal quarter.

These columns reflect the number and value of DSUs granted to directors in 2010 as long-term incentive awards. The value shown is the grant date fair value
(which is the same as accounting fair value) and is calculated by multiplying the number of DSUs awarded in 2010 by the Canadian dollar closing price of the
Common Shares on the TSX on March 4, 2010, the day before such share units were granted, being Cdn $26.00. Directors can elect to receive their long-term
incentive award as RSUs or DSUs. Please see “Long-Term Incentive Awards – Restricted Share Unit Plan for Directors” on page 25 for more information.

These columns reflect dividend equivalent additional DSUs credited on outstanding DSUs in 2010 and the value is calculated by multiplying the number of such
additional DSUs by the Canadian dollar closing price of the Common Shares of the TSX on the day that such DSUs were credited.

Mr. Aitken is the President and Chief Executive Officer and therefore does not receive any compensation as a director. See “Statement of Executive
Compensation” beginning on page 44 for information on Mr. Aitken”s compensation.

29

Directors? Share Ownership Requirements

Since 1998, the Company has had share ownership guidelines for directors to promote shareholder alignment and in early 2011

these became a requirement. The current requirement states that each non-management director is to own shares having a value equal
to at least five times their annual retainer. In the event a share price change results in a director falling below the minimum
shareholding requirement, that director has one year in which to meet the requirement. RSUs and DSUs held by a director are
considered when determining whether the individual is meeting the share ownership requirements. All new directors have a reasonable
period of time within which to meet their share ownership requirement.

The following table shows, among other things, the number of Common Shares, RSUs and DSUs held by each director as at

March 4, 2011 compared to the number of Common Shares, RSUs and DSUs held as at March 5, 2010 and the percentage of the
requirement achieved for each director based on their holdings as at March 4, 2011.

Number Total Value of Common Shares Amount
of Common Total at Risk Value and Share at Risk as
Common | Number of Share Shares of Common Shares Units Required % of a Multiple
Director Shares Units Held and Share | and Share Units? to Meet Requirement’” |Requirement | of Annual Meets
Director Since Year Held RSUs DSUs |Units Held US$ CDNS US$ CDN$ Achieved Retainer | Requirement
Bruce Aitken’”
Howard Balloch Dec-04 | 2011 4,000 – 25,812 29,812 839,159 864,250 194,194 200,000 432 21.6 Yes
2010 4,000 – | 18,603 22,603 469,279 535,917
Change a -| +7,209 +7,209 | +369,880 | +328,333
Pierre Choquette Oct-94 | 2011 28,201 – 60,887 89,088 | 2,507,681 | 2,582,661 194,194 200,000 1,291 64.6 Yes
2010 27,508 -| 56,329 83,837 | 1,740,609 | 1,987,775
Change +693 – | +4,558 +5,251 | +767,072 | +594,886
Phillip Cook May-06 | 2011 12,500 11,909 – 24,409 687,074 707,617 194,194 200,000 354 177 Yes
2010 12,500 | 11,846 a 24,346 | 505,467 577,244
Change – +63 – +63 | +181,607 | +130,373
Thomas Hamilton”? | May-07 | 2011 24,000 15,445 – 39,445 | 1,110,313 | 1,143,511 728,226 750,000 152 7.6 Yes
2010 12,000 11,846 – 23,846 495,086 565,389
Change +12,000 | +3,599 – +15,599 | +615,227 | +578,122
Robert Kostelnik Sep-08 | 2011 18,300 11,909 – 30,209 850,334 875,759 194,194 200,000 438 21.9 Yes
2010 18,300 8,593 a 26,893 558,348 637,633
Change – | +3,316 – +3,316 | +291,986 | +238,126
Douglas Mahaffy May-06 | 2011 – – 32,652 32,652 919,100 946,581 194,194 200,000 473 23.7 Yes
2010 – – 27,007 27,007 560,715 640,336
Change – – | +5,645 +5,645 | +358,385 | +306,245
A. Terence Poole”? | Feb-94 | 2011 35.000 -| 35,348 70,348 | 1,980,182 | 2,039,389 194,194 200,000 1,020 51.0 Yes
2010 35.000 -| 31,435 66,435 | 1,379,312 | 1,575,174
Change – – | +3,913 +3,913 | +600,870 | +464,215
John Reid Sep-03 | 2011 10,000 8,809 31,634 50,443 | 1,419,888 | 1,462,343 194,194 200,000 731 36.6 Yes
2010 10,000 8,593 | 27,815 46,408 963,515 | 1,100,334
Change – +216 | +3,819 +4,035 | +456,373 | +362,009
Janice Rennie May-06 | 2011 2,000 7,816 10,845 20,661 581,573 598,962 194,194 200,000 299 15.0 Yes
2010 2,000 4,600 | 10,572 17,172 356,522 407,148
Change – | +3,216 +273 +3,489 | +225,051 | +191,814
Monica Sloan Sep-03 | 2011 4,000 7,816 38,403 50,219 | 1,413,583 | 1,455,849 194,194 200,000 728 36.4 Yes
2010 3,000 4,600 | 37,434 45,034 934,988 | 1,067,756
Change +1,000 | +3,216 +969 +5,185 | +478,595 | +388,093

0)
Q)

6)
(4)

(5)

(6)

This column includes all Common Shares directly or indirectly beneficially owned or over which control or direction is exercised.

For 2011, this value is calculated using $28.99 per share, being the weighted average Canadian dollar closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX for the
90-day period ending March 4, 2011. For 2010, this value is calculated using $23.71 per share, being the weighted average Canadian dollar closing price of the
Common Shares on the TSX for the 90-day period ending March 5, 2010. Canadian dollar amounts for 2011 holdings have been converted to US dollars at the
Bank of Canada average noon rate for 2010 of 1.0299. Canadian dollar amounts for 2010 holdings have been converted to US dollars at the Bank of Canada
average noon rate for 2009 of 1.142.

Our director share ownership requirements state that directors are to hold Common Shares and/or share units equal to at least five times their annual retainer.

Mr. Aitken is the President and Chief Executive Officer and therefore does not receive any compensation as a director. See “Share Ownership Requirements”
beginning on page 43 for information regarding Mr. Aitken”s holdings and ownership requirements.

Mr. Hamilton is Chairman of the Board and therefore in 2011 his percentage of share ownership requirement achieved and the amount at risk as a multiple of
annual retainer are calculated as five times his annual retainer of Cdn $150,000 (US $145,645).

Mr. Poole resigned as a director in June 2003 and was reappointed in September 2003.

30

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Objectives and Design of the Executive Compensation Program

We are committed to operational excellence as part of our business strategy and this commitment extends to our search for, and
retention of, executive talent. As such, the main objective of our executive compensation program is to attract, retain and engage
high-quality, high-performance executives with relevant experience who have the ability to successfully execute our strategy and
deliver long-term value to our shareholders.

The objectives of the Company?s executive compensation program are to:

+ compensate executives competitively for the leadership, specific skills, knowledge and experience required to perform their
duties and achieve annual financial targets and non-financial performance goals;

+ align the actions and economic interests of executives with the interests of long-term shareholders; and
* encourage retention of executives.

All of our employees, including each of our executive officers, set yearly personal performance goals that are aligned with the
Company”s overall strategic goals. The personal performance goals are designed to be challenging, yet attainable. The annual personal
performance goals of the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company (“CEO”) are set by the Board and the CEO sets the
annual personal performance goals for the other Named Executive Officers (“NEOs”) and all other executive officers.

The Human Resources Committee of the Board annually reviews and recommends to the Board the remuneration of executive
officers. During its most recent review, and since 1998, the Committee determined that our executive compensation program should
be designed to be competitive with the 50th percentile of a comparator group of North American-based chemical companies with
global operations and should be comprised of base salary, Short-Term Incentive Plan, Long-Term Incentive Plan, perquisites and
benefits. All of these elements are discussed in detail below.

The Company also believes in the importance of our executives owning Company shares to more fully align management with the
interests of shareholders and focus management’s activities on developing and implementing strategies that create and deliver
long-term value for shareholders. Therefore, as part of our executive compensation program, the CEO, each NEO and all other senior
officers have significant share ownership requirements. For more information see “Share Ownership Requirements” on page 43.

The Company’s overarching performance goal is to sustainably increase the share price. With this in mind, significant elements of
executive compensation are designed to be dependent upon measures that align with increasing the share price. For all executive
officers, 40% of the short-term incentive award is dependent on achieving certain levels of “modified return on capital employed” and
20% on a broad variety of measures that we believe drive our share price – including project completion, manufacturing excellence,
customer service and safety. The remaining 40% is based on personal objectives designed to incentivize executive officers to achieve
annual performance targets that are aligned with our corporate strategy. In the case of the Long-Term Incentive Plan, the value to
executives of awards of Performance Share Units (“PSUs”) is dependent upon the compounded shareholder return calculated over a
three-year period and stock options/SARs granted have no value if the underlying share price does not increase from the date that the
options are awarded.

Succession Planning and Leadership Development

We are committed to investing in the development of our employees. Our goal is to be our own primary source of global
leadership talent. To achieve this we need to have a strong bench of high potential candidates for every key leadership position. Our
succession management program is designed to build and preserve organizational capability and to minimize succession risk by
proactively assessing, identifying and developing leadership talent at all leadership levels, including the executive level, within the
organization. Only individuals with assessed upward potential and sustained high performance are considered as high potential talent.
Talent is a standing agenda item at all executive team meetings and the team devotes two half-day sessions per year conducting an
in-depth talent review for members of the global management team plus assessed high potentials from all levels in the organization.

We offer a suite of leadership development programs for high potential talent. The objectives of these various programs include

developing leadership skills, expanding leadership capacity and cultural fluency, enhancing commitment to action plans and
developing a network of global peers within the organization to share knowledge and experiences.

31

Over the last decade, our executive leadership team has been engaged on a regular basis in developing both the individual
leadership abilities and the team performance of the senior executive group.

Each fall, the Human Resources Committee reviews the progress made in developing current and future leaders through the
succession management program and leadership development programs, with particular focus on the executive officers. The Human
Resources Committee and the Board of Directors are satisfied that well-qualified internal candidates exist for all executive positions,
including the President and CEO position.

Process for Determining Executive Compensation

The Human Resources Committee is responsible for compensation matters with respect to executive officers. The Committee, as
of the date of this Information Circular, consists of six members, all of whom are independent directors. None of the members of the
Committee is, or was during the most recently completed financial year, an officer or employee of the Company or any of its
subsidiaries; was formerly an officer of the Company or any of its subsidiaries (with the exception of Mr. Choquette who ceased to be
an officer of the Company in 2004); has any indebtedness to the Company or any of its subsidiaries; or has any material interest, or
any associates or affiliates that have a material interest, direct or indirect, in any actual or proposed transaction since the beginning of
the Company”s most recently completed financial year that has materially affected or would materially affect the Company or any of
its subsidiaries.

As part of its mandate, the Human Resources Committee annually reviews and recommends to the Board for approval the
remuneration of the Company”s executive officers, including the NEOSs identified in the table below under the heading “The
Company”s Named Executive Officers.” The Committee periodically reviews the levels of compensation for executive officers and
obtains advice from independent consultants in that regard. The last full-scale competitive assessment was conducted by Towers
Watson in November 2010. Towers Watson provided benchmark market data and analysis based on compensation data published by
comparator group companies in information circulars. Based on the results of this assessment, total compensation for executive
officers was deemed to be competitive. The Committee also obtains the advice and recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer
with respect to compensation matters pertaining to the Company”s other executive officers. Towers Watson, from time to time, is
retained to advise on specific executive compensation matters raised by the Committee. However, the Committee is ultimately
responsible for its decisions and may employ factors and considerations other than the information and advice provided by Towers
Watson. Both the Committee and the Board have the ability to exercise discretion in awarding compensation. As an example, owing to
the sharp but short-lived decline in the Company”s share price in late 2008 and early 2009 as a result of the global financial crisis, the
Board exercised this discretion in 2009 with respect to the annual stock option and PSU grants. The Board determined that the 2009
stock option and PSU grant sizes be based on the average stock price over the entire 2008 year rather than over the last 90 days of the
year as is the usual practice. This resulted in smaller stock option and PSU grants than otherwise would have been determined as the
Board did not want the 2009 grants to be perceived as excessive if the stock price returned to pre-financial crisis levels in the short
term. The Board did not exercise this discretion in 2010.

Total compensation for executive officers includes base salary, short-term incentives, long-term incentives, perquisites and
benefits. Total compensation is established to be competitive with the 50th percentile of the aggregate total compensation for
organizations in a comparator group of companies. In late 2007, the Human Resources Committee reviewed the comparator group that
is used to establish total compensation for executive officers. The Committee selected a comparator group of 16 companies comprised
of North American-based companies in the chemical industry with annual revenues between US $1 billion and $10 billion that have
global operations and, where possible, operate in a commodity-based or cyclical business. Since that time, through subsequent
mergers and acquisitions, the comparator group is now comprised of 13 companies as follows:

Agrium Inc. Chemtura Corporation Koppers Inc. Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan, Inc.
Ashland Inc. Cytec Industries Inc. Olin Corporation Spartech Corporation
Cabot Corporation FMC Corporation PolyOne Corporation Westlake Chemical Corporation

Celanese Corporation

32

Compensation Consultants

The Committee retains independent consultants from time to time to obtain advice and recommendations regarding executive
compensation matters. The Chair of the Committee approves the scope of all executive compensation work by independent
consultants and approves the invoices related to this work. The Committee first retained Towers Watson (then Towers Perrin) in 2007.
Towers Watson’s approximate fees to the Company over the past three years are listed in the table below.

Consulting and
Executive Consulting and Third-Party
Compensation Third-Party Administration
and Long-Term Administration Services for Executive Non-Executive
Compensation Services for Employee Supplemental Compensation
Advice Pension Plans Retirement Plans Advice Total Fees
2010 $49,000 $163,000 $27,000 $28,000 $267,000
2009 $82,000 $174,000 $30,000 $0 $286,000
2008 $89,000 $175,000 $36,000 $0 $300,000

The Company*s Named Executive Officers

The NEOSs of the Company are listed in the table below:

Principal Occupations and
Positions during Last Five Years
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company since May
2004.

Office Held
President £ Chief Executive Officer

Named Executive Officer
Bruce Aitken

lan Cameron Senior Vice President, Corporate

Development and Chief Financial Officer

Senior Vice President, Corporate Development and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company since November 2010; prior
thereto Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
of the Company since January 2003.

John Gordon Senior Vice President, Corporate Senior Vice President, Corporate Resources of the Company since
Resources September 1999.

John Floren Senior Vice President, Global Marketing | Senior Vice President, Global Marketing and Logistics of the
and Logistics Company since June 2005.

Michael Macdonald Senior Vice President, Global Operations | Senior Vice President, Global Operations of the Company since

November 2010; prior thereto Senior Vice President, Corporate
Development of the Company since June 2005.

33

Elements of Executive Compensation

The target executive compensation mix is illustrated in the table below.

% of Target Total Direct Compensation
Base Short-Term Total Cash Stock Options/ PSUs Total Equity Total Direct
Salary Incentive Award Compensation SARs Compensation
CEO 23% 17% 40% 30% 30% 60% 100%
All Other Executive 37% 19% 56% 22% 22% 44% 100%
Officers

All of the elements of executive compensation are summarized in the following table and described in more detail below.

Total Direct Compensation Indirect Compensation
1. Base Salary 2. Short-Term 3. Long-Term + 4. Benefits 5. Retirement Plans
Incentive Award Incentives
Pay for role and Pay for Pay for future Investment in employee Investment in financial
capability achievement of performance and health and well-being as security after retirement
annual strategic retention well as perquisites
performance goals
“At Risk” Awards | “At Risk” Payouts

Base Salary

Base salaries are intended to compensate executives competitively for leadership, specific skills, knowledge and experience
required to perform their duties. Base salaries for executive officers are established within a salary range, the midpoint of which is
targeted to be at the 50th percentile of the comparator group of companies as discussed under “Process for Determining Executive
Compensation” on page 32. Initial placement into the salary range is based on qualifications and experience and salaries are reviewed
annually. The initial placement and annual base salary review for the CEO is conducted by the Human Resources Committee. The
Committee may retain an external consultant to assist with this process. The CEO recommends to the Committee for its approval the
initial placement and annual salary reviews for all other executives, including the other NEOs. Over time, base salary can approach
and may exceed the midpoint of the salary range.

Short-Term Incentive Plan

The Company”s Short-Term Incentive Plan is designed to recognize and reward the achievement of strategic performance goals
by executive officers with an annual cash award. The Board has determined that the short-term incentive award should be based on
two components – corporate performance and personal performance – and that each component should be quantified and weighted for
calculation purposes. The purpose of the corporate performance component is to align the interests of executive officers with an
overall corporate performance measure to focus their efforts on achieving annual strategic corporate targets. The purpose of the
personal performance component is to recognize each executive officer’s personal contribution to certain annual operational and
strategic business activities and initiatives.

The target award is 75% of annual base salary for the CEO and 50% of annual base salary for all other executive officers. The
target award percentage for all NEOSs is determined by the Board each year and has been unchanged since 2001. For 2010, the Board
decided that the corporate performance component should represent 60% of the potential overall award and the personal component
should represent 40%.

The Company operates within a cyclical industry and there are no peer companies that operate in the methanol industry only.

Therefore, the Board determined that short-term incentive awards for NEOs should not be affected by relative performance to a peer
group of companies.

34

Corporate Performance Component

For 2010, the Board decided that the corporate performance component should be based on two elements: (1) shareholder return;
and (2) the successful startup of the Egypt Project. The shareholder return component was weighted at two-thirds of the total corporate
component and was based on the Company”s return on capital employed, modified to eliminate the distortion of accounting
depreciation on new and depreciated assets (“Modified ROCE”). The successful startup of the Egypt Project component was weighted
at one-third of the total corporate component and was based on quantitative targets as well as the Board”s subjective assessment of
qualitative measures for this objective.

The Short-Term Incentive Plan provides for the following payout levels based on corporate performance results:

Corporate Performance Level Corporate Factor Payout Level
Minimum performance is not achieved 0%
Minimum performance is achieved or exceeded, Less than 100%

but target performance is not achieved

Target performance is achieved or exceeded, but | Equal to or greater than 100%, but less than 200%
maximum performance is not achieved

Maximum performance is achieved or exceeded 200%

The factor by which the incentive compensation award is calculated is pro-rated between the minimum, target and maximum
award depending on actual performance under each of the components.

Modified ROCE

The Board reviewed a number of measures of shareholder return in 2004 and determined that Modified ROCE was a good
measure to be used for evaluating corporate performance. Investing in large capital assets designed to run for long periods of time is a
core element of our long-term business strategy. As a measure of the quality of returns to shareholders, Modified ROCE has a level of
simplicity that allows for ease of understanding by employees. The Board reviews the use of Modified ROCE each year and in 2010
established 12% Modified ROCE as the performance target, with break-even net income as the performance minimum and 17% as the
performance maximum. Refer to the “Financial Highlights” section of our 2010 Annual Report for a more detailed definition of
Modified ROCE. The Company”s actual Modified ROCE in 2010 was 8% resulting in a payout level of 70%.

Successful Startup of the Egypt Project

The Board determined that the successful startup, operation and integration of this asset within the Methanex portfolio would add
significantly to the Company”s cash flows and earnings and identified five areas to be measured under this objective. The five areas
measured under this objective were: (1) methanol production volume target of 700,000MT; (2) project completed within +/- 5% of
budget; (3) safe and reliable commissioning and startup of the plant; (4) Responsible Care performance during the startup and through
to year-end; and (5) demonstrated nameplate production for a substantial period of time during 2010. Since the project was not
completed in 2010, the Board assessed the Company”s achievement as “not achieved”, resulting in a payout level of 0%. This, taken
together with the Modified ROCE performance, resulted in a corporate performance rating of 47%.

Over the five years prior to 2010, corporate performance fell below the target level in one year and exceeded the target level in
the other four years but never achieved the maximum performance level. The corporate performance component percentage over the
past five years, including 2010, has been between 47% and 167% with an average of 113% of the target award. Generally, the
Committee sets the minimum, target and maximum performance levels such that the relative difficulty of achieving the target level is
consistent from year to year, keeping in mind the historical cyclicality of the business.

Executive officers who are resident in Canada for tax purposes may elect annually to receive 100%, 50% or 0% of their
short-term incentive award as DSUs. In 2010, no NEO elected to receive his short-term incentive award as DSUs. DSUs are more
fully described on page 40 under the heading “Deferred Share Unit Plan.”

35

Personal Performance Component

The Committee assigns the CEO”s personal performance rating, which is subsequently reviewed and approved by the Board. With
respect to all other NEOs, the CEO assigns their personal performance ratings and such ratings are reviewed and approved by the
Board. The personal performance component of the short-term incentive award is based on a number of measures for each executive,
as summarized in the table below.

Summary of Key Personal Goals for Performance
2010 Results Assessment
Bruce Aitken Strategic Priorities
Reliable Supply
e Continued emphasis on e Good progress was made on long-term initiatives in | Partially
strengthening gas supply Chile as described in our 2010 MDáA. Chile achieved
fundamentals to improve both production for 2010 was less than planned.

short-term and long-term gas
supply to our plants in Chile.

+ Secure additional gas supply in + Gas supply secured for New Zealand and Medicine | Successful
New Zealand and Medicine Hat. Hat through 2012.

Identify and Execute Growth Strategies
+ Continue to demonstrate progress | + Methanol demand growth for energy-related uses

on developing has exceeded plan. The Company has played a Successful
methanol-to-energy initiatives. leading role in promoting methanol fuels in the
energy and auto industries, trade associations and
governments.
+ On-budget and on-schedule e Project has been delayed and there were two Less than target
delivery of the Egypt project. contractor fatalities early in 2010. While the Egypt performance

project remains substantially on-budget, production
was not achieved by the end of 2010.

Operational Priorities

Global Leadership
+ Demonstrate market leadership + Maintained leading market share. Continued Successful
and develop and implement progress on promoting sound science as the basis
robust strategies to defend and for studies being conducted by various
protect methanol and methanol governmental agencies on health and safety
derivatives. impacts of methanol and derivatives.

Operational Excellence

* Achieve all Responsible Care + Therecordable injury frequency rate for employees | Exceeded
objectives including a recordable was 0.00. In 2010 there were no employee expectations
injury frequency rate target for lost-time-injuries and no major environmental
employees of at least 0.38. permit exceedances.

Low Cost

*e Continue to focus on SG£A and + Total fixed cash costs were on-budget with cost Successful

fixed costs at all levels of the savings offsetting unbudgeted costs incurred in
organization, building on lessons 2010.

learned from the 2009 economic

crisis.

Tan Cameron + Maintain the financial flexibility e Ensured sufficient liquidity and financial flexibility | Exceeded
and strength of the Company by to support options and key long-term strategic expectations
managing the liquidity and risks initiatives.
of the Company and achieving the
appropriate balance between + Successfully completed debt funding for the Egypt
short-term and long-term project.
priorities.

36

Summary of Key Personal Goals for

Performance

2010 Results Assessment

Tan Cameron e Achieve operational excellence in Delivered high quality quarterly and annual Successful

cont’d financial reporting and control, financial reports and disclosure documents.
treasury, corporate finance and Simplified tax structures to reduce risk. Well
risk management. positioned for transition to IFRS. Maintained

rigorous, high quality internal controls.

+ Continue to develop highly High quality support to Egypt finance team, Successful
skilled and engaged global including implementation of key financial systems
finance team. and training of key personnel. The finance team

continued to demonstrate depth and maturity.

John Gordon + Maintain department operating Maintained department operating budget while Successful
budget. delivering on important priorities.

e Provide effective corporate Significant positive progress has been made in all Exceeded
leadership, direction and areas of responsibility, particularly in Responsible expectations
functional support to all regions Care performance and Human Resources support to
in the areas of Information Egypt, Medicine Hat and Kitimat.

Technology, Responsible Care,
Human Resources and
Government and Public Affairs.

+ Deliver highly effective A number of internal succession candidates were Successful
organizational development, promoted to senior roles during 2010. Succession
succession planning and process is robust.
organizational effectiveness
management practices.

+ Develop and implement robust Provided robust support to our strategies to defend Successful
strategies to defend and protect methanol and methanol derivatives.
methanol and methanol
derivatives.

John Floren + Provide market leadership in all Maintained 100% supply to all customers despite Exceeded
regions and achieve 100% supply ongoing production limitations. Maintained market | expectations
to all customers. leadership and preferred supplier position and

enhanced the Company”s reputation for reliability
and security of supply.

+ Continue to develop highly Collaborative development plans and detailed Successful
skilled and engaged global succession plans are in place for all positions in
marketing and logistics team. global marketing and logistics.

+ Effectively manage operating Costs were well managed in all areas where costs Successful
costs. were controllable. Successful management of

shipping costs during a period of overcapacity in
our fleet.
+. Strengthen the commercial Good progress was made on this initiative, Successful

viability of methanol into energy
and continue to promote the use
of methanol energy derivatives
while advocating the principles of
Responsible Care and Social
Responsibility.

including the development of excellent
relationships and improved understanding of
opportunities in this area.

Michael
Macdonald

+ Execute the Egypt project.

Project has been delayed and there were two
contractor fatalities early in 2010. The Responsible
Care results, following the fatalities, for the balance
of 2010 on the Egypt project were excellent.
Continued to build a strong and positive reputation
for the Company in Egypt.

Less than Target
Performance

37

Summary of Key Personal Goals for Performance

2010 Results Assessment
Michael + Pursue new supply opportunities. | + Supported a number of regional initiatives to add Successful
Macdonald new capacity.
cont’d
+ Continue to improve corporate e Delivered high quality corporate strategy plan and Exceeded
strategy process and Board strategy session and also contributed to other | expectations
communication. Provide superior successful regional development initiatives.

investment decision and
analytical support to the
Company.

Based on the corporate and personal performance achieved in 2010, the Board awarded each NEO a short-term incentive award. With
respect to the CEO, the Committee determined that his overall personal performance results should be rated as “successful” for 2010
and assigned him a personal performance rating of 110%, which was approved at the March 4, 2011 Board meeting. The personal
performance results of all of the other NEOs met expectations and the CEO assigned performance ratings for each of them in early
2011, which were subsequently reviewed by the Human Resources Committee and approved at the March 4, 2011 Board meeting. The
calculation of the short-term incentive award for the CEO is detailed in the table below. The same formula is used to calculate
incentives for the remaining NEOs with the exception that the target award is 50% of base salary for the remaining NEOs whereas it is
75% for the CEO.

Corporate Corporate Personal Personal Overall .
Named Performance | Performance | Performance | Performance | Performance Short-Term Incentive
Executive Assessment Weighting Assessment Weighting Result Award Calculation
Officer (a) (b) (c) (d) (axb) + (exd) US$ CDN$
. $1,176,000 x 75% x
0 o o o, o xx176,
Bruce Aitken 471% 60% 110% 40% 72% $616,565 72% = $635,000

(1) The short-term incentive award calculation is (salary at December 31, 2010) x (short-term incentive target percentage) X (overall performance result), rounded to
the nearest thousand dollars. This amount is shown in both Canadian and US dollars and has been converted to US dollars at the conversion rate of 1.0299, being
the Bank of Canada average noon rate for 2010.

Long-Term Incentive Plan

The Long-Term Incentive Plan is designed to retain talented executives, reward them for their anticipated contribution to the
long-term successful performance of the Company and align their interests with those of long-term shareholders. The Long-Term
Incentive Plan was significantly modified in 2006 to replace Restricted Share Units (RSUs) with Performance Share Units (“PSUs”),
and since 2006, all executive officers have received 50% of the value of their long-term incentive awards in stock options and 50% in
PSUs. The PSU Plan is described below. There are no RSUs outstanding.

The plan was modified again in 2010 to replace most stock options with either non-dilutive stand-alone Stock Appreciation
Rights (“SARs”) or stock options with tandem SARs. Shareholders approved this amendment to the stock option plan at the Annual
General Meeting on April 29, 2010. Due to a potential adverse personal tax impact for employees in some jurisdictions, employees in
Belgium and Trinidad continue to receive stock options and employees in Canada receive stock options with tandem SARs.
Employees in all other jurisdictions receive stand-alone SARs.

The Company operates within a cyclical industry and there are no peer companies that operate in the methanol industry only.
Therefore, the Board determined that stock options/SARs and PSUs for NEOSs should not be affected by relative performance to a peer
group of companies.

The annual grant of stock options/SARs and PSUs is always established at the February/March Board meeting and the grant date

is the date of that Board meeting. The number of options/SARs and PSUs granted to each eligible employee in any year is related to
responsibility level and may be adjusted to retain key talent and for employees with longer-term potential for upward mobility.

38

The 2010 Long-Term Incentive Plan has the following two components:
Stock Option/SARs Plans

Under the Stock Option/SARs Plans, executive officers are eligible for grants of Company stock options/SARs. Options/SARs are
granted by the Board on the recommendation of the Human Resources Committee. The grant price is set equal to the closing price of
the Common Shares on the TSX on the day before the date of the grant and converted to US dollars using the Bank of Canada daily
noon rate on the day that the closing price is established. All options granted prior to 2005 expire, in the ordinary course, ten years
after their date of grant. Stock options granted in 2005 and thereafter and all SARs expire seven years after their date of grant.

As mentioned above, all executive officers have received 50% of the value of their long-term incentive awards in stock options
(stock options/SARs since 2010) and 50% in PSUs since 2006. In 2010, Mr. Aitken received 231,000 stock options with tandem SARs
and all other executive officers individually received 42,000 stock options with tandem SARs or stand-alone SARs. Mr. Aitken”s 2010
stock option/SARs grant represented less than 20% of the total stock options/SARs granted in 2010.

All management personnel of the Company who are subject to the share ownership requirements or guidelines are eligible for
long-term incentive awards. The table below shows the number of stock options/SARs granted in 2010 and 2009 and their ratio to
outstanding shares as at December 31, 2010 and 2009 respectively:

Number of Stock
Options/SARs
Granted in 2010 Number of Stock Options
Number of Stock |as % of Outstanding | Number of Stock Granted in 2009 as % of
Options/SARs Common Shares at Options Outstanding Common

Employee Group Granted in 2010 Dec. 31, 2010 Granted in 2009 Shares at Dec. 31, 20099
CEO 231,000 0.249% 264,000 0.287%
Executive officers (8 individuals, excluding 336,000 0.363% 360,000 0.391%
CEO)
All other managers (approximately 641,820 0.693% 733,830 0.797%
130 individuals)
Total 1,208,820 1.305% 1,357,830 1.475%

(1) The Company had 92,632,022 Common Shares outstanding as at December 31, 2010.
(2) The Company had 92,108,242 Common Shares outstanding as at December 31, 2009.

On March 4, 2011, Mr. Aitken was granted 156,000 stock options with tandem SARs and all other NEOs were each granted
30,000 stock options with tandem SARs. Mr. Aitken”s 2011 stock option with tandem SARs grant represents less than 20% of the total
stock options/SARs granted in 2011.

Performance Share Unit Plan

In 2006, the Company introduced the Performance Share Unit Plan. PSUs are notional shares credited to a “PSU Account.”
Additional PSUs corresponding to dividends declared on the Common Shares are also credited to the PSU Account. PSUs granted in
any year will normally vest on December 31, in the 24th month following the end of the year in which the award was made. For
example, PSUs awarded in March 2010 will vest on December 31, 2012. All of the executive officers and other key management
personnel are eligible to participate in the PSU Plan. At the time of vesting, a minimum of 50% or a maximum of 120% of PSUs
granted will vest depending on the Company”s performance against predetermined criteria. For PSUs granted in 2010, the
performance criterion is the compound annual growth rate in total shareholder return (“TSR CAGR”) over the period January 1, 2010
to December 31, 2012 (the “Measurement Period”). TSR CAGR is calculated as the change (if any) in value of an initial hypothetical
investment of US $100 in shares expressed as a percentage and determined on an annual and compounded basis over the Measurement
Period, with dividends assumed to be reinvested. The following chart shows the TSR CAGR performance levels used to determine the
number of PSUs that will actually vest based on the degree to which the TSR CAGR was achieved during the applicable Measurement
Period.

Performance Measure Vesting Scale
Total Shareholder Return CAGR % of PSUs Vesting
Equal to or less than 6% 50%
8% 100%
Equal to or greater than 10% 120%

39

The factor by which the vested PSUs are calculated is pro-rated between the minimum, target and maximum TSR CAGR
depending on actual performance. The Company operates within a cyclical industry. PSUs are designed to both focus management
efforts on performance while retaining employees in down cycles. As such, a minimum of 50% or a maximum of 120% of PSUs
granted will vest at the end of the Measurement Period. The following chart shows the actual vesting levels of PSUs that have vested
since the PSU plan was implemented.

PSU Grant Date PSU Vesting Date Actual % of PSUs
(Feb/March) (December 31) Vested
2006 2008 50%
2007 2009 50%
2008 2010 50%

In 2010, Mr. Aitken received 72,000 PSUs and all other executive officers each received 14,000 PSUs as part of their 2010
long-term incentive awards. On March 4, 2011, Mr. Aitken received 51,000 PSUs and all other NEOs each received 9,000 PSUs as
part of their 2011 long-term incentive awards. In both 2010 and 2011, Mr. Aitken”s PSU grants represented less than 20% of the total
PSUs granted in each of those years.

In general, following the vesting of the PSUs, an employee receives an amount of cash equal to one-half of the value of their
vested PSUs (less withholding tax) and a number of Common Shares equal to one-half the number of vested PSUs. These Common
Shares are purchased on behalf of employees on the open market. Half of the outstanding PSUs held by an employee are considered
when determining whether the individual is meeting share ownership requirements. PSUs do not entitle participants to any voting or
other shareholder rights. See the table titled “Incentive Plan Awards – Value Vested or Earned During the Year” on page 47.

Executive officers who are resident in Canada for tax purposes may also elect to receive an equivalent number of DSUs in place
of their vested PSUs at the time of settlement. Mr. Gordon elected to settle 100% of his 2008 PSUs that vested on December 31, 2010
as DSUs. Settlement will occur in March 2011. DSUs are more fully described below.

Deferred Share Unit Plan

Under the DSU Plan, each executive officer who is resident in Canada for tax purposes may elect annually to receive 100%, 50%
or 0% of his short-term incentive award as DSUs. Such election must be made by the officer in mid-December of the fiscal year that
the award relates to. The actual number of DSUs granted to an executive officer with respect to an executive officer”s short-term
incentive award is calculated in March of the following calendar year by dividing the dollar amount elected to the DSU Plan by the
average daily closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on the last 90 days of the prior calendar year. Under the Long-Term
Incentive Plan, executive officers who are resident in Canada for tax purposes may also elect to receive an equivalent number of DSUs
in place of their vested PSUs at the time of settlement.

A DSU account is credited with notional grants of DSUs received by each DSU Plan member. Additional DSUs are credited to
DSU Plan members corresponding to dividends declared on the Common Shares. DSUs do not entitle a DSU Plan member to any
voting or other shareholder rights. DSUs count towards the achievement of share ownership requirements.

DSUs held by executive officers are redeemable only after the executive officer”s employment with the Company ceases or upon
death (“Termination Date”) and a lump-sum cash payment, net of any withholdings, is made after the executive officer chooses a
valuation date. For DSUs granted after January 1, 2008, executive officers may choose a valuation date falling between the
Termination Date and December 1 of the first calendar year beginning after the Termination Date, but the executive officer cannot
choose a date retroactively. For DSUs granted prior to January 1, 2008, the valuation date chosen may fall on any date within a period
beginning one year before the Termination Date and ending on December 1 of the first calendar year beginning after the Termination
Date. The lump-sum amount is calculated by multiplying the number of DSUs held in the account by the closing price of the Common
Shares on the TSX on the valuation date.

Benefits and Perquisites

Benefits and perquisites for executive officers include participation in the retirement plans described more fully on page 48 as
well as benefits such as extended health and dental care, life insurance and disability benefits that are extended to all employees.
Executive officers may also participate in the Companys Employee Share Purchase Plan, in which all employees are eligible to
participate. The Employee Share Purchase Plan allows all employees to regularly contribute up to 15% of their base salary into an
account to purchase Common Shares. The Company contributes into the account an amount of cash equal to one-half of the
employee”s cash contribution to a maximum of 5% of base salary. The combined funds in the account are, on a semi-monthly basis,

40

used to purchase Common Shares on the open market. Since 2008, the Company has provided a single, fixed amount, taxable
perquisite allowance for Canadian-based executives for financial planning, auto, social club, health, fitness and household security in
lieu of individual allowances for each perquisite.

Total Compensation Expense

The total compensation expense to the NEOs was not a significant percentage (less than 1%) of the Company”s revenue in 2010.
Recoupment Policy

In November 2009 the Board approved a recoupment policy. Under this policy, if the Board determines that, as a result of any
gross negligence, fraud or other illegal behaviour: (1) the Company has had to re-state its financial results; or (2) it later becomes clear
that metrics used and which formed the basis of any employee incentive compensation were not in fact achieved, then the Board in its
sole discretion can take such action as it deems to be in the best interests of the Company and necessary to remedy the misconduct and
prevent its recurrence. Among other actions that it may take, the Board may, to the fullest extent permitted by law, seek to recover or
require reimbursement of incentive performance and equity awards under any plan providing for incentive compensation, equity
compensation or performance-based compensation. Recovery or reimbursement may include recoupment of money or shares,
immediate forfeiture of unvested awards, and cancellation of outstanding vested awards and may also apply to profits that may have
been realized from the sale of securities.

Total Shareholder Return Comparison
The following graph compares the total cumulative shareholder return for Cdn $100 invested in Common Shares on December 31,

2005 with the cumulative total return of the S£P/TSX Composite Index and SéP 500 Chemicals Index, for the five most recently
completed financial years.

Cumulative Value of $100 Investment (Dividends Reinvested)

$200 – – – Methanex – TSX – Total Return

– A – S8P/TSX Composite Index – Total Return
–4– S8P 500 Chemicals Index – Total Return

$150 .

$50 : r 7 7 1
Dec.31,2005 Dec.31,2008 Dec.31,2007 Dec.31,2008 Dec.31,2009 Dec.31,2010

Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec 31,
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Methanex Total Return”? $ 149 $ 132 $ 68 $ 106 S161
SéP/TSX Composite Index Total Return $117 $ 129 $86 $116 $ 137
SéP 500 Chemicals Index Total Return $117 $ 148 $89 $ 128 $157

(1) For Methanex Total Return calculations, dividends declared on Common Shares are assumed to be reinvested at the closing price on the dividend payment date.

41

Trend in Total Shareholder Return Compared to Trend in Executive Compensation

Aggregate NEO total compensation over the last five years (as disclosed in the Summary Compensation Table on page 44), is
shown in the table below. NEO total compensation in 2010 is approximately 5% less than it was in 2006. Aggregate NEO total
compensation declined by a total of 5% over the three year period from 2006 to 2008, declined by a further 37% from 2008 to 2009
and increased by 60% from 2009 to 2010. The total compensation decrease from 2008 to 2009 is comparable to the 48% decline in
total shareholder return between year-end 2007 and year-end 2008 as illustrated in the Total Shareholder Return Comparison graph
above. Similarly, the total compensation increase from 2009 to 2010 is comparable to the 56% increase in total shareholder return
between year-end 2008 and year-end 2009.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

NEO Total Compensation (Cdn $ millions) $12.9 $12.7 $12.2 $7.7 $12.3

However, a comparison of NEO total compensation, as disclosed in the Summary Compensation Table, to the total cumulative
shareholder return over a period of time does not accurately illustrate the linkages between NEO compensation and total shareholder
return. A more useful comparison is based on total compensation earned by the NEOs, including the impact of the change in value of
previously granted stock options/SARs and PSUs. The value of outstanding PSUs and stock options/SARs vary based on the share
price at the time of valuation.

The following graph illustrates the annual change in cumulative total shareholder return on a Cdn $100 investment in the
Company”s Common Shares compared with the Aggregate Annual Compensation (defined in the footnote below the graph) of NEOs
in each year of the five-year period ending on December 31, 2010 and demonstrates the close link between the two.

Aggregate Annual NEO Compensation’ and Annual Change in Cumulative TSR?
$30 $80
-=- Aggregate Annual NEO Compensation

$25 $60
—E— Annual Change in Cumulative TSR o) >
s 3
S s40 5
3 $20 o
5 3
E 3
ES $20 a
SE $15 5
25 2
zZE $0 $
Fe E
25 $10 3
¿8 -520 $
2 a
g 2
5 540 D
> 5
xx e

$0 -560

-85 -580

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

(1) Aggregate Annual NEO Compensation for each year is based on all NEOs and includes base salary and annual incentive earned in that year as reported in the
Summary Compensation Table in our Information Circular, the annual change in unrealized value for outstanding stock options/SARs and PSUs in that year, and
the realized value for exercised stock options/SARs and settled PSUs in that year. Annual Aggregate Compensation does not include changes in the value of
Common Shares held. All executive officers are subject to share ownership requirements. See “Share Ownership Requirements” on page 43 for more information.

(2) Annual Change in Cumulative Total Shareholder Return (“TSR”) reflects the annual change in total cumulative shareholder return for Cdn $100 invested in
Common Shares over the five-year period beginning on December 31, 2005 as set out in the table under the heading “Total Shareholder Return Comparison” on
page 41.

The annual change in unrealized value for outstanding stock options/SARs and PSUs in each year is calculated as the difference
between the value of all outstanding stock options/SARs and PSUs at December 31 of the current year and the value of all outstanding
stock options/SARs and PSUs at December 31 of the previous year.

The annual change in realized value for exercised stock options/SARs and settled PSUs is calculated as the difference between the
actual proceeds the NEO received from exercised stock options/SARs and/or settled PSUs in the current year and the value of those
stock options/SARs and PSUs at December 31 of the previous year.

42

For the purposes of this graph, the values for outstanding stock options/SARs and PSUs are calculated using the Canadian dollar
closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on December 31 for each of the years included in this graph. The value of all
outstanding stock options/SARs at December 31 is calculated using the difference between the closing price of the Common Shares on
the TSX on that date and the exercise price and number of outstanding stock options/SARs on that date for each grant. The value of all
outstanding PSUs at December 31 is calculated using the closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on that date and the number
of outstanding PSUs on that date.

Stress-Testing CEO Compensation

While annual compensation awards made to the CEO are based on current year corporate and individual performance, the ultimate
value from the Long-Term Incentive Plan Awards is linked to and dependent upon the Company”s ability to replicate and sustain
successful annual performance over the longer term. In March 2011, the Committee reviewed a seven-year look-back total take
analysis for the CEO that confirmed that there were appropriate performance linkages and found that there was a reasonable
relationship between the CEO”s total compensation relative to total shareholder return.

Share Ownership Requirements

Since 1998, the Company has had share ownership guidelines in place for executive officers to promote meaningful share
ownership, and in early 2011 these became a requirement. Each executive officer is required to own shares having a value equal to at
least, in the case of the CEO, five times annual base salary and, in the case of each of the other executive officers, three times annual
base salary. Half of the value of PSUs and the full value of DSUs held by an executive officer are considered when determining
whether executives are meeting their share ownership requirements. Executive officers are expected to use the cash proceeds (if any)
from the exercise of stock options/SARs or the vesting of PSUs to achieve their share ownership guideline. Executive officers are
expected to make steady progress toward meeting these requirements and the full requirements must be met within five years from the
date that each individual became an executive officer. All other management personnel of the Company are subject to share ownership
guidelines that are related to the level of their position. The following table summarizes the relationship between the share ownership
position of each of the NEOs and the share ownership requirement applicable to each of them.

As at December 31, 2010
Minimum
Minimum Ownership Common Shares | Performance Share Share
Ownership Requirement (as Beneficially Owned Units (50% of Ownership
Requirement (as | Number of Common or over which Balance) and Requirements
Multiple of Base | Shares, PSUs and | Control or Direction | Deferred Share Total Achieved”
Named Executive Officer Salary) DSUS/” is Exercised Units Held Holdings %
Bruce Aitken $ times 203,000 129,017 288,170 417,187 205
lan Cameron 3 times 49,000 21,356 59,652 81,008 167
John Gordon 3 times 49,000 16,257 59,652 75,909 156
John Floren 3 times 48,000 46,900 20,294 67,194 140
Michael Macdonald 3 times 47,000 31,493 59,652 91,145 192

(1) Based on $28.93 per share, being the weighted average Canadian dollar closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX for the 90-day period ending
December 31, 2010. For more information on the “Performance Share Unit Plan” and the “Deferred Share Unit Plan” please see pages 39 and 40 respectively.

(2) Based on $28.93 per share, being the weighted average Canadian dollar closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX for the 90-day period ending
December 31, 2010. The percentage demonstrates the extent to which the guideline has been achieved. The percentage is also based on 2010 base salary.

Shareholder Feedback on Executive Compensation

If you are a shareholder and you wish to provide feedback to the
Chair of our Human Resources Committee on the Company?s
approach to executive compensation as described in this Information
Circular, you may do so through a web-based survey that can be
found in the Investor Relations section of our website at
www.methanex.com. See “Shareholder Survey on Executive
Compensation” on page 21 for more information.

43

STATEMENT OF EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Summary Compensation

The following table sets forth a summary of compensation earned during the last three years by the Company?s CEO, Chief
Financial Officer and its three other executive officers who had the highest aggregate total compensation during 2010. (All such
officers are herein collectively referred to as the “Named Executive Officers” or “NEOs”.)

The Company uses US dollars in its financial statements and is required to report executive compensation amounts in US dollars.
All components of the Company”s executive compensation are designed and received in Canadian dollars. All Canadian dollar
amounts in the following table and elsewhere in this Statement of Executive Compensation have been converted to US dollars at the
Bank of Canada average noon rate for the applicable year (2010: 1.0299; 2009: 1.142; 2008: 1.066) except where otherwise noted.

Summary Compensation Table

Non-Equity Incentive
Share- Option- -Plan Compensation ($) All Other Total
Name and Based Based Annual Pension Compen- Compen-
Principal Salary Awards? Awards* Incentive Valueó sationO sation
Position” Year 8) 8) (63) Plans LTI Plans (5) (6) (63)
Bruce Aitken 2010 US$ 1,128,265 1,815,840 1,829,307 616,565 – 217,191 368,787 5,975,955
President and CEO CDN$ 1,162,000 1,872,000 1,885,884 635,000 – 223,685 379,814 6,158,383
2009 US$ 980,736 449,430 450,200 560,420 – 188,792 339,593 2,969,170
CDN$ 1,120,000 578,650 579,641 640,000 – 215,600 387,815 3,521,706
2008 US$ 1,028,846 1,705,800 1,616,612 938,086 – 198,991 316,398 5,804,733
CDN$ 1,096,750 1,657,800 1,571,122 1,000,000 – 212,124 337,280 5,875,076
lan Cameron 2010 US$ 440,415 353,080 332,601 171,861 a 72,668 120,588 1,491,214
Senior VP, CDN$ 453,583 364,000 342,888 177,000 – 74,841 124,194 1,536,506
Corporate 2009 US$ 385,289 82,290 76,739 160,245 – 63,573 130,237 898,372
Development $2 CDN$ 440,000 105,950 98,802 183,000 – 72,600 148,731 1,049,083
CFO 2008 US$ 406,426 312,730 304,579 256,098 – 67,998 98,752 1,446,582
CDN$ 433,250 303,930 296,008 273,000 – 72,486 105,269 1,483,944
John Gordon 2010 US$ 454,170 353,080 332,601 168,948 a 74,938 127,218 1,510,957
Senior VP, CDN$ 467,750 364,000 342,888 174,000 – 77,179 131,022 1,556,839
Corporate 2009 US$ 406,305 82,290 76,739 162,872 – 67,040 115,154 910,400
Resources CDN$ 464,000 105,950 98,802 186,000 – 76,560 131,506 1,062,818
2008 US$ 431,051 312,730 304,579 263,602 – 72,062 113,614 1,497,638
CDN$ 459,500 303,930 296,008 281,000 – 76,818 121,113 1,538,369
John Floren 2010 US$ 447,131 353,080 332,601 171,861 – 73,777 103,831 1,482,282
Senior VP, Global CDN$ 460,500 364,000 342,888 177,000 – 75,983 106,936 1,527,307
Marketing $2 2009 US$ 394,046 82,290 76,739 159,370 – 65,018 92,843 870,304
Logistics CDN$ 450,000 105,950 98,802 182,000 – 74,250 106,026 1,017,029
2008 US$ 413,462 312,730 304,579 263,602 – 69,159 205,705 1,569,237
CDN$ 440,750 303,930 296,008 281,000 – 73,724 219,281 1,614,694
Michael 2010 US$ 413,632 353,080 332,601 156,326 a 68,249 125,192 1,449,081
Macdonald CDN$ 426,000 364,000 342,888 161,000 – 70,290 128,935 1,493,113
Senior VP, 2009 US$ 350,263 82,290 76,739 143,608 – 57,793 154,464 865,156
Global CDN$ 400,000 105,950 98,802 164,000 – 66,000 176,398 1,011,150
Operations 2008 US$ 369,371 312,730 304,579 227,017 – 61,885 161,542 1,437,124
CDN$ 393,750 303,930 296,008 242,000 – 65,969 172,204 1,473,862

44

0)
Q)

6)

(4)

(5)

(6)

AlL NEOs receive their compensation in Canadian dollars.

This column reflects the grant date fair value of PSUs granted to NEOs as long-term incentive awards. At the time of vesting, a minimum of 50% or a maximum
of 120% of PSUs granted will vest depending on the Company”s performance against predetermined criteria. For PSUs granted in 2010, the performance criterion
is the compound annual growth rate in total shareholder return (“TSR CAGR”) over the period January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2012. The grant date fair value
shown in this column is calculated by multiplying the total number of PSUs awarded by the closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on the day before the
PSUs were granted, converted to US dollars based on the Bank of Canada noon rate of exchange on that day (2010: US $25.22; 2009: US $6.33; 2008: US
$28.43). This valuation methodology is different than accounting fair value. In calculating the accounting fair value, the Company used a binomial pricing model
to assign a probability weighted average total shareholder return factor that determines the number of PSUs that would be included in the valuation in accordance
with the PSU plan. The accounting fair value, as calculated by the binomial pricing model on the grant date, is: 2010: CEO US $834,120, other NEOs US
$162,190; 2009: CEO US $210,870, other NEOs US $38,610; 2008: CEO US $864,600, other NEOs US $158,510. The PSU Plan is more fully described on
page 39.

This column reflects the grant date fair value of stock options/SARs received by NEOSs as long-term incentive awards. The value shown is calculated by
multiplying the number of stock options/SARs granted by the US dollar exercise price at the time of the grant by the Black-Scholes valuation factor (2008: US
dollar exercise price = $28.43, Black-Scholes valuation factor = 27.47%. 2009: US dollar exercise price = $6.33, Black-Scholes valuation factor = 26.94%; 2010:
US dollar exercise price = $25.22, Black-Scholes valuation factor = 31.4%). The exercise price represents the closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on
the day before the stock options/SARs were granted, converted to US dollars based on the Bank of Canada noon rate of exchange on that day. This value is the
same as the accounting fair value of the full grant, but is not adjusted by the vesting schedule. The Company”s Stock Option Plan is more fully described on page
39.

These annual incentive payments are reported in the year in which they were earned, not in the year in which they were actually paid. They are paid in cash and/or
DSUs in the year following the year in which they are earned. All NEOs elected to be paid in cash in each of the past three years. The DSU Plan is more fully
described on page 40. For more information concerning these annual incentives, refer to “Short-Term Incentive Plan” on page 34.

The amounts include the Company”s pension contributions to both the regular Company Defined Contribution pension plan and to the Defined Contribution
Supplemental Retirement Plan.

The amounts shown represent:

. For Mr. Aitken: the Company”s contributions to the Company”s Employee Share Purchase Plan, the value of additional PSUs corresponding to dividends
declared on Common Shares (2010 – Cdn $135,739; US $131,798 (5,336 units); 2009 – Cdn $141,289; US $123,720 (9,942 units); 2008 – Cdn $136,231; US
$127,797 (6,649 units)), the value of additional DSUs corresponding to dividends declared on Common Shares (2010 – Cdn $112,349; US $109,088 (4,534
units); 2009 – Cdn $119,952; US $105,037 (8,382 units); 2008 – Cdn $78,909; US $74,024 (3,923 DSUs)), perquisite allowance (2010 – Cdn $66,000; US
$64,084; 2009 – Cdn $66,000; US $57,793; 2008 – Cdn $66,000; US $61,914) and other miscellaneous items.

. For Mr. Cameron: the Company”s contributions to the Company”s Employee Share Purchase Plan, the value of additional PSUs corresponding to dividends
declared on Common Shares (2010 – Cdn $25,387; US $24,650 (998 units); 2009 – Cdn $25,891; US $22,671 (1,822 units); 2008 – Cdn $24,389; US
$22,879 (1,190 units)), the value of additional DSUs corresponding to dividends declared on Common Shares (2010 – Cdn $24,612; US $23,897 (993 units);
2009 – Cdn $22,102; US $19,354 (1,530 units); 2008 – Cdn $14,857; US $13,937 (739 DSUs)), perquisite allowance (2010 – Cdn $57,000; US $55,345;
2009 – Cdn $57,000; US $49,912; 2008 – Cdn $57,000; US $53,471) and other miscellaneous items.

. For Mr. Gordon: the Company”s contributions to the Company’s Employee Share Purchase Plan, the value of additional PSUs corresponding to dividends
declared on Common Shares (2010 – Cdn $25,387; US $24,650 (998 units); 2009 – Cdn $25,891; US $22,671 (1,822 units); 2008 – Cdn $24,389; US
$22,879 (1,190 units)), the value of additional DSUs corresponding to dividends declared on Common Shares (2010 – Cdn $24,612; US $23,897 (993 units);
2009 – Cdn $22,102; US $19,354 (1,530 units); 2008 – Cdn $14,857; US $13,937 (739 DSUs)), perquisite allowance (2010 – Cdn $57,000; US $55,345;
2009 – Cdn $57,000; US $49,912; 2008 – Cdn $57,000; US $53,471) and other miscellaneous items.

. For Mr. Floren: the Company”s contributions to the Company’s Employee Share Purchase Plan, the value of additional PSUs corresponding to dividends
declared on Common Shares (2010 – Cdn $25,387; US $24,650 (998 units); 2009 – Cdn $25,891; US $22,671 (1,822 units); 2008 – Cdn $24,389; US
$22,879 (1,190 units)), perquisite allowance (2010 – Cdn $57,000; US $55,345; 2009 – Cdn $57,000; US $49,912; 2008 – Cdn $57,000; US $53,471),
housing allowance (2008 – Cdn $60,224; US $56,495) and other miscellaneous items.

. For Mr. Macdonald: the Company”s contributions to the Companys Employee Share Purchase Plan, the value of additional PSUs corresponding to
dividends declared on Common Shares (2010 – Cdn $25,387; US $24,650 (998 units); 2009 – Cdn $25,891; US $22,671 (1,822 units); 2008 – Cdn $24,389;
US $22,879 (1,190 units)), the value of additional DSUs corresponding to dividends declared on Common Shares (2010 – Cdn $24,612; US $23,897 (993
units); 2009 – Cdn $22,102; US $19,354 (1,530 units); 2008 – Cdn $14,857; US $13,937 (739 DSUs)), perquisite allowance (2010 – Cdn $57,000; US
$55,345; 2009 – Cdn $57,000; US $49,912; 2008 – Cdn $57,000; US $53,471), vacation payout (2009 – Cdn $50,769; US $44,456; 2008 – Cdn $46,154;
US $ 43,296) and other miscellaneous items.

Where no amount is stated in this footnote in respect of a particular perquisite, the amount does not exceed 25% of the total value of all perquisites for the NEO
disclosed in the table. In all years, no NEO spent 25% or more of the value of his perquisite allowance on any one perquisite. The amounts shown do not include
payments made on settlement of PSUs granted in a prior year. Payments made on settlement of PSUs are reported in the table entitled “Incentive Plan Awards –
Value Vested or Earned During the Year” found on page 47.

45

Incentive Plan Awards

The following table sets forth information concerning outstanding stock options and share-based awards (PSUs) held by the

NEO as at December 31, 2010.

Outstanding Option-Based Awards and Share-Based Awards

Option-Based Awards Share-Based Awards
Number of Number of
Securities Option/ Vested Shares or
Underlying SAR Option/SAR Options/ Value of Unexercised Units that | Market or Payout Value
Unexercised Exercise Expiration SARs at In-the-Money Have Not of Share-Based Awards
Year Options/ SARs| Price“? Date Year-End Options/SARs Vested that Have Not Vested”
Name Granted (5 US$ 163) US$ CDNS (+) US$ CDN$
Bruce 2010 231,000 25.22 Mar 4,2017 0 0 0 73,815 1,084,038 1,116,451
Aitken 2009 264,000 6.33 Mar 5, 2016 88,000 2,027,677 | 2,088,305 76,478 1,123,142 1,156,724
2008 207,000 28.43 Feb 28, 2015 138,000 129,966 133,852
2007 207,000 24.96 Mar 1, 2014 207,000 913,239 940,545
2006 249,200 20.76 Mar 2, 2013 249,200 2,146,056 | 2,210,223
2005 50,000 17.85 Mar 3, 2012 50,000 576,089 593,314
lan 2010 42,000 25.22 Mar 4,2017 0 0 0 14,353 210,785 217,088
Cameron 2009 45,000 6.33 Mar 5, 2016 15,000 345,627 355,961 14,003 205,646 211,794
2008 39,000 28.43 Feb 28, 2015 26,000 24,486 25,218
2007 39,000 24.96 Mar 1,2014 39,000 172,060 177,205
2006 60,000 20.76 Mar 2, 2013 60,000 516,707 532,157
2005 10,000 17.85 Mar 3, 2012 10,000 115,218 118,663
John 2010 42,000 25.22 Mar 4,2017 0 0 0 14,353 210,785 217,088
Gordon 2009 45,000 6.33 Mar 5, 2016 15,000 345,627 355,961 14,003 205,646 211,794
2008 39,000 28.43 Feb 28, 2015 26,000 24,486 25,218
2007 39,000 24.96 Mar 1,2014 39,000 172,060 177,205
2006 40,000 20.76 Mar 2, 2013 40,000 344,471 354,771
2005 10,000 17.85 Mar 3, 2012 10,000 115,218 118,663
John 2010 42,000 25.22 Mar 4,2017 0 0 0 14,353 210,785 217,088
Floren 2009 37,000 6.33 Mar 5, 2016 7,000 161,292 166,115 14,003 205,646 211,794
2008 39,000 28.43 Feb 28, 2015 26,000 24,486 25,218
2007 39,000 24.96 Mar 1, 2014 39,000 172,060 177,205
2006 40,000 20.76 Mar 2, 2013 40,000 344,471 354,771
2005 1,750 17.85 Mar 3, 2012 1,750 20,163 20,766
Michael 2010 42,000 25.22 Mar 4,2017 0 0 0 14,353 210,785 217,088
Macdonald 2009 45,000 6.33 Mar 5, 2016 15,000 345,627 355,961 14,003 205,646 211,794
2008 39,000 28.43 Feb 28, 2015 26,000 24,486 25,218
2007 39,000 24.96 Mar 1,2014 39,000 172,060 177,205
2006 60,000 20.76 Mar 2, 2013 60,000 516,707 532,157
2005 30,000 17.85 Mar 3, 2012 30,000 345,654 355,989
(1) For the purposes of this column, the US dollar exercise price represents the closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on the day prior to the date of the

Q)

grant converted to US dollars at the Bank of Canada noon rate of exchange on that day. One-third of the options/SARs are exercisable beginning on the first
anniversary of the date of the grant, one-third beginning on the second anniversary of the date of the grant and the final third are exercisable beginning on the third
anniversary of the date of the grant. If the options/SARs are unexercised, they will expire, in the ordinary course, seven years after the date of their grant.

This column reflects the value of outstanding unvested PSUs and includes dividend equivalent PSUs credited since the date of the original PSU grant. PSUs
provide for different payouts depending on achievement of a target compounded average growth rate of total shareholder return over a three-year period. The
minimum payout is 50% of the vested PSU balance. The value shown is based on this minimum payout and is calculated using the Canadian dollar closing price
of the Common Shares on the TSX on December 31, 2010, being $30.25, converted to US dollars at a conversion rate of 1.0299, being the Bank of Canada
average noon rate for 2010. See “Performance Share Unit Plan” on page 39 for more information. This table does not include DSUs outstanding as DSUs vest
immediately upon grant. During 2007, Messrs. Cameron, Gordon and Macdonald each elected to settle their vested 2005 RSUs in DSUs (22,333 each). In 2008,
Messrs. Aitken, Cameron, Gordon and Macdonald each elected to settle their vested 2006 PSUs in DSUs (43,640, 7,543, 7,543 and 7,543 respectively); the
settlement date for the vested 2006 PSUs was March 6, 2009. In 2009, Messrs. Cameron, Gordon and Macdonald each elected to settle their vested 2007 PSUs in
DSUs (6,096 each); the settlement date for the vested 2007 PSUs was March 25, 2010. In 2010, Mr. Gordon elected to settle his vested 2008 PSUs (6,116) in
DSUs.

46

The following table shows the total number of outstanding DSUs and their value (calculated by multiplying the number of DSUs by Cdn $30.25, the closing
market price of the Common Shares on the TSX on that date) for all NEOs as at December 31, 2010.

NEO” Number of DSUs Outstanding as Value of Outstanding DSUs as at Dec. 31, 2010
at Dec. 31, 2010
US$ CDN$
Bruce Aitken 179,666 5,277,104 5,434,889
lan Cameron 39,359 1,156,037 1,190,602
John Gordon 39,359 1,156,037 1,190,602
Michael Macdonald 39,359 1,156,037 1,190,602

(**) Mr. Floren does not participate in the DSU plan as he is not a resident of Canada for tax purposes.

The following table sets forth information concerning the value vested or earned upon the vesting of stock options/SARs,

share-based awards (PSUs and DSUs) and the short-term incentive award during 2010. The values shown were calculated as at the
vesting date. Also included is the actual value realized upon the exercise of stock options during 2010.

Incentive Plan Awards – Value Vested or Earned During the Year

Non-Equity Incentive

Option-Based Awards | Option-Based Awards | Share-Based Awards – | Plan Compensation –

– Value Vested During – Value Realized at Value Vested During Value Earned During

the Year? Exercise? the Year O the Year”
Name (S) (S) ($) (S)
Bruce Aitken US$ 1,725,274 0 1,101,834 616,565
CDNS 1,776,860 0 1,134,779 635,000
lan Cameron US$ 294,542 0 205,901 171,861
CDNS 303,349 0 212,057 177,000
John Gordon US$ 294,542 0 205,901 168,948
CDNS 303,349 0 212,057 174,000
John Floren US$ 294,542 119,431 182,004 171,861
CDNS 303,349 123,002 187,445 177,000
Michael Macdonald US$ 294,542 0 205,901 156,326
CDNS 303,349 0 212,057 161,000
(1) The value shown in this column is calculated by multiplying the number of stock options that vested in 2010 by the difference between the exercise price and the

0)

6)

(4)

closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on the vesting date, converted to US dollars at a conversion rate of 1.0299, being the Bank of Canada average
noon rate for 2010.

This amount represents, in respect of all Common Shares acquired during 2010 on exercise of stock options, the difference between the market value of such
shares at the time of exercise and the exercise price. If the exercise price of any option is denominated in US dollars, such exercise price has been converted to
Canadian dollars using the foreign exchange rate at the time of the exercise and provided to the stock option administrator, Solium Capital, by Solium’s
stockbroker at that time, HSBC InvestDirect. Mr. Floren was the only NEO to exercise stock options in 2010.

The value shown in this column includes: a) the settlement value of 2008 PSUs, including dividend equivalent PSUs in respect thereof, that vested on
December 31, 2010; and b) and the value of dividend equivalent DSUs received during the year. Under the PSU Plan, following vesting of PSUs, NEOs generally
receive an amount of cash equal to 50% of the value of such vested PSUs and a number of Common Shares equal to the remaining 50% of the vested PSUs. The
PSU Plan is described in more detail on page 39. NEOs may elect to receive an equivalent number of DSUs in place of their vested PSUs at the time of settlement.
The DSU plan is described in more detail on page 40. The settlement value of such vested PSUs is based on the weighted average closing price of the Common
Shares on the TSX during the 15 trading days ending December 30, 2010 (Cdn $30.65) for the cash portion of the settlement, the weighted average purchase price
for shares purchased on the TSX over the 15 trading days ending February 4, 2011 (Cdn $28.98) for the share portion of the settlement, and on the performance
factor results (50%). The closing price of the Common Shares on the TSX on December 31, 2010, the vesting date of the 2008 PSUs, was $30.25. Based on the
TSR CAGR achieved, the number of 2008 PSUs that vested was 50% of each individual”s 2008 PSU balance as at December 31, 2010. The number of PSUs and
settlement value for each NEO in respect of vested 2008 PSUs was as follows (excluding the value of dividend equivalent DSUs): Mr. Aitken: Cdn $1,022,430;
US $992,747 (33,358 PSUs); Mr. Cameron: Cdn $187,445; US $182,004 (6,116 PSUs); Mr. Gordon: Cdn $187,445; US $182,004 (6,116 PSUs); Mr. Floren: Cdn
$187,445; US $182,004 (6,116 PSUs); and Mr. Macdonald: Cdn $187,445; US $182,004 (6,116 PSUs). Mr. Gordon elected to settle his vested 2008 PSUs in
DSUs (6,116). Mr. Floren does not participate in the DSU plan as he is not a resident of Canada for tax purposes. The value of DSU dividend equivalents is based
on the market price on the day they were granted, which is also the vesting date. DSUs are vested immediately upon grant; however, they may not be redeemed by
the NEO until the NEO ceases to be an employee.

The value shown in this column is the annual incentive payment included in the Summary Compensation Table on page 44.

47

Retirement Plans

The Company has established a registered defined contribution retirement plan that provides an annual company contribution
equal to 7% of annual base salary. Contributions are made to a retirement account and invested according to a selection of investment
vehicles made by the NEO. Seventeen investment vehicles are currently available from five investment managers. At retirement, funds
in the account may be used to purchase an annuity or they can be transferred to a life income fund or a locked-in registered retirement
savings plan. No NEOSs are members of a defined benefit retirement plan. All NEOs participate in the defined contribution plan.

Canadian income tax legislation places limits on the amount of retirement benefits that may be paid from the registered retirement
plan. NEOSs resident in Canada participate in a defined contribution supplemental retirement plan that provides benefits in excess of
what is provided under the registered plan. Benefits are provided without regard to Canadian income tax limits on the maximum
benefit payable and are paid net of any benefit payable under the registered plan. Supplemental plan contributions are based on
earnings defined as base salary plus the target short-term incentive award and provide NEOs with an annual contribution equal to 11%
of earnings less any contributions made to the registered plan. The Canadian defined contribution supplemental retirement plan was
fully funded as of December 31, 2006 and remains fully funded on an accounting basis as of December 31, 2010. The supplemental
plan funds are invested in a single fund with Phillips, Hager £ North and represent an asset on the balance sheet. At retirement, funds
in the member”s account may be paid as a lump sum or paid as a 10-year monthly annuity. These payments would be made from the
supplemental plan investment account, not from general revenue. No NEOs are members of any defined benefit supplemental
retirement plan.

The following table shows the change in value of the defined contribution registered retirement plan and defined contribution
supplemental retirement plan benefits for the NEOs:

Defined Contribution Plan Table (Registered and Supplemental Plans)

Accumulated Value Non- Accumulated
at Start of Year Compensatory” Compensatory? Value at Year-End
Name (S) (S) (S) ($)
Bruce Aitken US$ 1,137,623 217,191 116,523 1,471,338
CDNS 1,171,638 223,685 120,007 1,515,331
lan Cameron US$ 784,868 72,668 93,378 950,915
CDNS 808,336 74,841 96,171 979,347
John Gordon US$ 1,036,952 74,938 66,574 1,178,465
CDNS 1,067,957 77,179 68,565 1,213,701
John Floren US$ 396,384 73,777 31,907 502,068
CDNS 408,236 75,983 32,861 517,079
Michael Macdonald US$ 516,804 68,249 59,046 644,099
CDNS 532,256 70,290 60,811 663,358

(1) The amounts include the Company”s pension contributions to both the Company”s regular Defined Contribution pension plan and to the Defined Contribution
Supplemental Retirement Plan. These amounts are also reported in the “Pension Value” column of the Summary Compensation Table on page 44.

(2) The amounts include regular investment earnings on pension contributions. Employee contributions are not permitted in the Canadian pension plans.
Termination of Employment and Employment Contracts

The Company has entered into employment agreements with the NEOs that provide them with certain rights in the event of
involuntary termination of employment or a “Change of Control” of the Company. “Change of Control” occurs when:

. more than 40% of voting shares of the Company are acquired by an outsider;
. a majority change in the Board of Directors of the Company occurs;

. all or substantially all of the assets of the Company are sold to an outsider; or
. a majority of directors determines that a change in control has occurred.

In January 2010, the Committee approved management’s recommendation to amend executive employment agreements to
provide for a “double trigger” for future grants of stock options and/or SARs. Early vesting of stock options and/or SARs issued after
January 2010 requires the occurrence of both (1) a Change of Control; and (2) either termination of the NEO”s employment or the
NEO suffers an adverse material change in his employment status within 24 months following a Change of Control.

48

Mr. Aitken has an employment agreement that provides for three months” notice and a termination payment, if his employment is
terminated without cause, of an amount equal to (a) 2.5 times his annual salary; (b) 2.5 times his target Short-Term Incentive Plan
payment; and (c) compensation for pension and various other company benefits he would have received over a 30-month period. The
amount of this payment is reflected in the “Termination without Cause” column in the “Change of Control and Termination Benefits
for NEOs” table below. In the event that (1) a Change of Control occurs and (2) Mr. Aitken is terminated or suffers a material change
in his employment status within 24 months following a Change of Control, he is entitled to an amount equal to (a) 2.5 times his most
recent compensation (highest annual salary during last three years plus the average of his last three years” short-term incentive award
and long-term incentive award plus any other cash compensation awards); and (b) compensation for pension and other company
benefits he would have received over a 30-month period, plus all legal and professional fees and expenses. The total amount of this
payment is reflected in the “Change of Control with Termination – Total” column in the “Change of Control and Termination Benefits
for NEOs” table below. In the event that his employment is terminated for cause, no notice or pay in lieu of notice will be provided. In
the event that Mr. Aitken retires or resigns, no payment will be provided and Mr. Aitken is required to give not less than three months”
written notice of retirement or resignation.

Messrs. Cameron, Gordon, Floren and Macdonald each have an employment agreement that provides for three months” notice
and a termination payment, if their employment is terminated without cause, of an amount equal to (a) 1.5 times their annual salary;
(b) 1.5 times their target Short-Term Incentive Plan payment; and (c) compensation for pension and various other company benefits
they would have received over an 18-month period. The amount of this payment is reflected in the “Termination without Cause”
column in the “Change of Control and Termination Benefits for NEOs” table below. In the event that (1) a Change of Control occurs
and (2) they are terminated or suffer a material change in their employment status within 24 months following a Change of Control,
each is entitled to an amount equal to (a) 2.0 times their most recent compensation (highest annual salary during last three years plus
the average of last three years” short-term incentive awards and long-term incentive awards plus any other cash compensation awards);
and (b) compensation for pension and other company benefits they would have received over a 24-month period, plus all legal and
professional fees and expenses. The total amount of this payment is reflected in the “Change of Control with Termination – Total”
column in the “Change of Control and Termination Benefits for NEOs” table below. In the event that their employment is terminated
for cause, no notice or pay in lieu of notice will be provided. In the event that Messrs. Cameron, Gordon, Floren or Macdonald retires
or resigns, no payment will be provided and they are each required to give not less than three months” written notice of retirement or
resignation.

Where there is either a termination or change of control event, each NEO must adhere to restrictions on his competitive activities,
solicitation of business and hiring away for a period of one year after the termination of his employment. All NEOSs have also signed a
confidentiality undertaking that restricts their use of confidential information acquired during their employment with the Company
both during their employment and subsequent to the termination of their employment. All NEOSs are subject to the Recoupment Policy,
which is more fully described on page 41.

Change of Control and Termination Benefits for NEOs

The following table shows the benefits that the NEOs would have been entitled to if a Change of Control with termination or
termination without cause event had occurred on December 31, 2010.

Change of Control with Termination
Value of Early Vested
Options and Termination

Name Cash Portion” Share-Based Awards? Total”? without Cause”
Bruce Aitken US$ 12,157,845 9,493,759 21,651,604 5,867,511

CDNS 12,521,364 9,777,623 22,298,987 6,042,950
lan Cameron US$ 2,609,369 1,710,733 4,320,103 1,257,406

CDNS 2,687,389 1,761,884 4,449,274 1,295,003
John Gordon US$ 2,614,548 1,710,733 4,325,281 1,257,406

CDNS 2,692,723 1,761,884 4,454,607 1,295,003
John Floren US$ 2,602,103 1,710,733 4,312,837 1,244,917

CDNS 2,679,906 1,761,884 4,441,790 1,282,140
Michael Macdonald US$ 2,540,693 1,710,733 4,251,426 1,229,930

CDNS 2,616,659 1,761,884 4,378,544 1,266,705

(1) This column reflects 2.5 times the most recent compensation for the CEO and 2 times the most recent compensation for each of the other NEOs. The most recent
compensation includes the highest annual salary during the last three years plus the average of the last three years” short-term incentive awards and long-term
incentive awards, any other cash compensation awards as well as compensation for pension and other company benefits that would have been received. This cash
payment will only be paid where: (i) a Change of Control occurs; and (ii) the NEO is terminated or suffers a material change in his employment status within
24 months following such Change of Control.

49

(2) All unvested PSUs vest at the time of a Change of Control. For more information on the PSU Plan please see page 39. All unvested stock options at the time of a
Change of Control will become exercisable by the NEOs immediately prior to such Change of Control. For more information on the Stock Option Plan please see
pages 39 and 51. Early vesting of stock options and/or SARs issued after January 2010 require that both (i) a Change of Control occurs; and (ii) either termination
of the NEO”s employment or the NEO suffers an adverse material change in his employment status. This column reflects the value of unvested PSUs, including
dividend equivalent PSUs granted, and unvested stock options/SARs. For greater clarity, the value of PSUs and stock options that vested on or before December
31, 2010, in accordance with the terms of the Plans, are not included in this column. Regardless of whether or not an NEO”s employment is terminated after a
Change of Control event, both the unvested PSUs and unvested stock options will vest as described in this footnote.

(3) This column is calculated as the sum of the previous two columns and reflects the amounts payable to each NEO in the event that (i) a Change of Control occurs
and (ii) the NEO is terminated or suffers a material change in their employment status within 24 months following a Change of Control.

(4) The column reflects the termination payment that would be made in the event an NEO”s employment was terminated without cause. For the CEO, the termination
payment includes 2.5 times his annual salary, 2.5 times his Short-Term Incentive Plan target payment and compensation for pension and benefits that would have
been received over a 30-month period. For each of the remaining NEOSs, the termination payment includes 1.5 times his annual salary, 1.5 times his Short-Term
Incentive Plan target payment and compensation for pension and benefits that would have been received over an 18-month period.

The amounts in this table do not include the value of outstanding DSUs to which the NEO is entitled regardless of the reason for
the termination of employment. The number of outstanding DSUs and their value is included in footnote (2) to the “Outstanding
Option-Based Awards and Share-Based Awards” table on page 46. No incremental payments will be made in the event the NEO
resigns, retires or his employment is terminated for cause.

INDEBTEDNESS OF DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

No director or officer of the Company, no proposed nominee for election as a director of the Company, and no associate of any
such director, officer or proposed nominee, at any time during the most recently completed financial year, has been indebted to the
Company or any of its subsidiaries or had indebtedness to another entity that is, or has been, the subject of a guarantee, support
agreement, letter of credit or similar arrangement or understanding provided by the Company or any of its subsidiaries, other than, in
each case, “routine indebtedness” (as defined in the CBCA and under applicable securities laws) or which was entirely repaid before
the date of this Information Circular.

DIRECTORS” AND OFFICERS” LIABILITY INSURANCE

The Company carries insurance that includes coverage for the benefit of the directors and officers of the Company and its
subsidiaries arising from any claim or claims made against them, jointly or severally, during the policy period, by reason of any
wrongful act, as defined in the policy, in their respective capacities as directors or officers. The policy also insures the Company and
its subsidiaries in respect of any amount the Company or any of its subsidiaries is permitted or required to pay to any of its directors or
officers as reimbursement for claims made against them in their capacity as a director or officer.

The insurance provides US $100,000,000 coverage, inclusive of costs, charges and expenses, subject in the case of loss by the
Company or its subsidiaries to a deductible of US $500,000 (US $1,000,000 for securities claims). There is no deductible in the case
of loss by a director or officer. However, the limits of coverage available in respect of any single claim may be less than US
$100,000,000, as the insurance is subject to an annual aggregate limit of US $100,000,000.

The cost of this insurance for the current policy year is US $848,489.

S0

PART V OTHER INFORMATION
SECURITIES AUTHORIZED FOR ISSUANCE UNDER EQUITY COMPENSATION PLANS
Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table provides information as at December 31, 2010 with respect to compensation plans under which equity
securities of the Company are authorized for issuance.

Securities Remaining Available
Securities to be Issued Weighted Average for Future Issuance under
upon Exercise of Exercise Price of Equity Compensation Plans
Outstanding Options, Outstanding Options, [(Excluding Securities Reflected
Warrants and Rights Warrants and Rights” in Column (a))
(a) (b) (e)
Plan Category (+) US$ CDN$ (e)
Equity compensation plans approved by securityholders 5,312,012 $19.81 $19.70 2,495,458
Equity compensation plans not approved by securityholders – – – –
Total 5,312,012 $19.81 $19.70 2,495,458

(1) For the purposes of this column, if the exercise price of any option is denominated in US dollars, such exercise price has been converted to Canadian dollars using
the Bank of Canada closing rate of $0.9946 on December 31, 2010.

There is no compensation plan under which equity securities of the Company are authorized for issuance that was adopted
without the approval of securityholders.

Stock Option Plan

The Company has a Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”) pursuant to which the Board of Directors may from time to time in its
discretion grant to officers and other employees of the Company and its subsidiaries options to purchase unissued Common Shares.
Under the terms of the Plan, the maximum number of Common Shares that may be issued from and after May 5, 2009 pursuant to
options granted is 8,400,000 (representing approximately 9.1% of the Companys 92,699,307 outstanding Common Shares on a
non-diluted basis as at the date of this Information Circular). Options may not be granted to non-management directors under the Plan.

The following table sets out the total number of Common Shares that may be issued from and after the date of this Information
Circular pursuant to options granted under the Plan, the number of Common Shares potentially issuable pursuant to options
outstanding and unexercised under the Plan, and the remaining number of Common Shares available to be issued pursuant to options
granted from and after the date of this Circular.

Common Shares Issuable Pursuant to Common Shares Available for Future
Common Shares Issuable under the Plan Outstanding Unexercised Options as at Issuance Pursuant to Options Granted from
from and after March 4, 2011 Mareh 4, 2011 and after March 4, 2011 *
+ % + % $ %
7,740,185 830 6,064,167 6.50 1,676,018 1.80

(1) Approximate percentage of the Company”s 92,699,307 outstanding Common Shares on a non-diluted basis as at the date of this Information Circular.
(2) Including the options to purchase 815,910 Common Shares approved by the Board of Directors on March 4, 2011.

(3) After giving effect to the options to purchase 815,910 Common Shares approved by the Board of Directors on March 4, 2011 and assuming that all outstanding
unexercised options (including the March 4, 2011 options) will ultimately be exercised in full.

The maximum number of Common Shares that may be reserved for issuance to, or covered by any option granted to, any single
person may not exceed the lower of 5% of the issued and outstanding Common Shares or the maximum number permitted by the
applicable securities laws and regulations of Canada or of the United States or any political subdivision of either, and the bylaws, rules
and regulations of any stock exchange or other trading facility upon which the Common Shares are listed or traded, as the case may be.
In addition, the maximum number of Common Shares issued to insiders of the Company pursuant to options under the Plan
within any one-year period, or issuable to insiders of the Company pursuant to options under the Plan at any time, must not,
when combined with all of the Company”s other security-based compensation arrangements, exceed 10% of the Company”s
total issued and outstanding securities. Apart from these restrictions, there is no maximum number or percentage of securities under
the Plan available to insiders of the Company or which any person is entitled to receive under the Plan.

51

The exercise price for each option granted under the Plan is the price fixed for such option by the Board, which may not be less
than the “fair market value” of the Common Shares on the date the option is granted. The “fair market value” for this purpose is
deemed to be the US dollar equivalent of the closing price of a Common Share on the TSX on the most recent day preceding the
particular date upon which Common Shares were traded on such Exchange. The US dollar equivalent is determined by using the US
dollar/Canadian dollar daily noon rate as published by the Bank of Canada on the day the closing price is established.

The Plan provides for the issuance of Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs) in tandem with options. Under the terms of the Plan,
a tandem SAR entitles the holder to surrender the related option granted under the Plan and to receive a cash amount equal to the
excess of the “fair market value” over the “grant price” of the related option, net of any applicable withholding taxes and other
required source deductions. The Plan defines “grant price” for this purpose as the US dollar equivalent of the closing price of a
Common Share on the TSX on the most recent day preceding the grant date upon which Common Shares were traded on the TSX. The
US dollar equivalent of the closing price shall be calculated using the US dollar/Canadian dollar daily noon rate as published by the
Bank of Canada on the same day that the closing price is established for the grant date. “Fair market value” means the closing price of
a Common Share on the NASDAQ on the most recent day preceding the exercise date upon which Common Shares were traded on the
NASDAQ. SARs may be granted under the Plan in an amount equal to the number of Common Shares covered by each option.
Each exercise of a SAR in respect of a Common Share covered by a related option terminates the option in respect of such
share. Unexercised SARs terminate when the related option is exercised or the option terminates. The Plan also provides that
Common Shares subject to any option surrendered on exercise of a related SAR will be credited to the Company”s share
reserve and will be available for future options granted under the Plan. Since it is anticipated that most option holders will
exercise their related SAR, it is likely that the need for further increases in the number of Common Shares reserved for
options will be reduced.

Subject to certain limitations contained in the Plan, options (and tandem SARs) may be granted upon and subject to such terms,
conditions and limitations as the Board may from time to time determine with respect to each option (and related tandem SAR),
including terms regarding vesting. The Common Shares subject to any option may be purchased at such time or times after the option
is granted as may be determined by the Board. Pursuant to the provisions of the Plan, each option (and related tandem SAR), must
expire on an expiry date no later than seven years from the day the option was granted except that, subject to the right of the Board in
its discretion to determine that a particular option (and related tandem SAR) may be exercisable during different periods, in respect of
a different amount or portion or in a different manner:

(a) in the case of death of an optionee prior to the expiry date, the option (and related tandem SAR) will vest immediately
and will be exercisable prior to the earlier of (i) the date that is one year from the date of death; and (ii) the expiry
date;

(b) in the case of disability of the optionee prior to the expiry date, the option (and related tandem SAR) shall vest

immediately and will be exercisable until the expiry date;

(c) in the case of termination of the optionee”s employment by reason of (i) retirement of the optionee where the optionee
is not less than 55 years of age; or (ii) circumstances that the Board of Directors, in its discretion, determines
constitute a “major divestiture or disposition of assets, facility closure or major downsizing” (which determination
shall be conclusive and binding on all parties concerned), the option (and related tandem SAR) will continue to vest in
accordance with its terms and will be exercisable until the expiry date; and

(d) if the optionee ceases, for any other reason, to be an officer or employee of the Company or of a subsidiary of the
Company prior to the expiry date, the option (and related tandem SAR) will be exercisable prior to the earlier of
(i) the date which is 90 days from the date the optionee ceases to be an officer or employee and (ii) the expiry date.

Where an option expires or ceases to be exercisable during a blackout period during which trading in Company securities is
restricted in accordance with the policies of the Company or its affiliates, or within the ten business days immediately after a blackout
period, the expiry date for the option (and related tandem SAR) shall become a date that is ten days after the last day of the blackout
period.

All options granted by the Company prior to 2005 have vested and each unexercised option granted prior to 2005 expires, in the
ordinary course, ten years after the date of grant. For options granted in 2005 and thereafter and (it is intended) in future years,
one-third of the options are exercisable on the first anniversary of the date of the grant, a further third on the second anniversary of the
date of the grant and the final third are exercisable on the third anniversary of the date of the grant. Options granted in 2005 and
thereafter expire, in the ordinary course, seven years after the date of their grant. As described above, unexercised SARs terminate
when the related option is exercised or the option expires.

With respect to executive officers who have employment agreements, in the event of a change of control, these agreements
provide that any option granted prior to January 2010 and prior to the change of control that is not then exercisable becomes

52

exercisable immediately prior to such change of control. In January 2010, the Human Resources Committee approved management’s
recommendation to amend executive employment agreements to provide a “double trigger” for future grants of stock options and/or
SARs. Therefore, early vesting of stock options (and related SARs) issued after January 2010 would require that the occurrence of
both: (1) a Change of Control; and (2) either termination of the executive”s employment or the executive suffers an adverse material
change to his employment. Furthermore, unexercised options (and related tandem SARs) may be exercised up to their stated expiry
date provided that nothing shall preclude the compulsory acquisition of such options (or related tandem SARs) at their fair market
value in the event of a going private transaction effected pursuant to the amalgamation, arrangement or compulsory acquisition
provisions of the CBCA or successor legislation thereto. No option (or related tandem SAR) may be transferable or assignable
otherwise than by will or the laws of succession and distribution.

Approval by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the votes cast by the shareholders voting (excluding, to the extent
required pursuant to any applicable stock exchange rules or regulations, votes of securities held by insiders benefiting from the
amendment) is required for the following amendments to the Plan or options granted under it:

1. an increase in the number of Common Shares that can be issued under the Plan, including an increase to the fixed maximum
number of securities issuable under the Plan, either as a fixed number or a fixed percentage of the Company”s outstanding
capital represented by such securities;

2. areduction in the exercise price or purchase price of outstanding options (including a cancellation of an outstanding option
for the purpose of exchange for reissuance at a lower exercise price to the same person);

3. anextension of the expiry date of an option or amending the Plan to permit the grant of an option with an expiry date of more
than seven years from the day the option is granted;

4. an expansion of the class of eligible recipients of options under the Plan that would permit the re-introduction of
non-management directors;

5. anexpansion of the transferability or assignability of options (including any tandem SARs connected therewith), other than to
a spouse or other family member; an entity controlled by the option holder or spouse or family member; an RRSP or RRIF of
the option holder, spouse or family member; a trustee, custodian or administrator acting on behalf of, or for the benefit of, the
option holder, spouse or family member; any person recognized as a permitted assign in such circumstances in securities or
stock exchange regulatory provisions; or for estate planning or estate settlement purposes;

6. any amendment of the Plan to increase any maximum limit of the number of securities:

(a) issued to insiders of the Company within any one year period, or

(b) issuable to insiders of the Company at any time;

which may be specified in the Plan, when combined with all of the Company”s other security-based compensation
arrangements, to be in excess of 10% of the Company”s total issued and outstanding securities, respectively;

7. if the Plan has a fixed maximum number of securities issuable, the addition of any provision that allows for the exercise of
options without cash consideration, whether the option holder receives the intrinsic value in the form of securities from
treasury or the intrinsic value in cash, which does not provide for a full deduction of the underlying Common Shares from the
maximum number issuable under the Plan or, if the Plan does not have a fixed maximum number of securities issuable, the
addition of any provision that allows for the exercise of options without cash consideration where a deduction may not be
made for the number of Common Shares underlying the options from the Plan reserve; and

8. achange to the amendment provisions of the Plan;

provided that shareholder approval will not be required for increases or decreases or adjustment to the number of Common Shares
subject to the Plan, deliverable upon the exercise of any option or subject to SARs, or adjustment in the exercise price for shares
covered by options and the making of appropriate provisions for the continuance of the options (and related tandem SARs)
outstanding under the Plan to prevent their dilution or enlargement in accordance with the section or sections of the Plan that provide
for such increase, decrease, adjustments or provisions in respect of certain events, including the subdivision or consolidation of the
Common Shares or reorganization, merger, consolidation or amalgamation of the Company, or for the amendment of such section or
sections.

53

The Board of Directors has authority (without shareholder approval required) to make other amendments to the Plan or any option
(and related tandem SAR) relating to:

1. clerical or administrative changes (including a change to correct or rectify an ambiguity, immaterial inconsistency, defective
provision, mistake, error or omission or clarify the Plan’s provisions or a change to the provisions relating to the
administration of the Plan);

2. changing provisions relating to the manner of exercise of options (or related tandem SAR), including changing or adding any
form of financial assistance provided by the Company to participants or, if the Plan has a fixed maximum number of
securities issuable, adding provisions relating to a cashless exercise that provides for a full deduction of the underlying
Common Shares from the maximum number issuable under the Plan;

3. changing the eligibility for and limitations on participation in the Plan (other than amendments of the Plan to increase any
maximum limit of the number of securities that may be issued or issuable to insiders that may be specified in the Plan or the
reintroduction of participation by non-management directors);

4. changing the terms, conditions and mechanics of grant, vesting, exercise and early expiry of options (or related tandem
SARs);

5. changing the provisions for termination of options so long as the change does not permit the Company to grant an option (and
related tandem SAR) with an expiry date of more than seven years or extend an outstanding option”s expiry date;

6. additions, deletions or alterations designed to respond to or comply with any applicable law or any tax, accounting, auditing
or regulatory or stock exchange rule, provision or requirement or to allow option holders to receive fair and equitable tax
treatment under any applicable tax legislation; and

7. certain changes to provisions on the transferability of options (and related tandem SARs) that do not require shareholder
approval as described above.

No amendment of the provisions of the Plan or any option may, without the consent of the optionee, adversely affect or impair
any options previously granted to an optionee under the Plan.

SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS

Shareholder proposals to be considered at the 2012 Annual General Meeting of shareholders of the Company must be received at
the principal executive offices of the Company no later than December 26, 2011 to be included in the Information Circular and form
of proxy for such annual meeting.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Additional information relating to the Company is on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and on the Companys website at
www.methanex.com. Financial information is provided in the Companys comparative financial statements and
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (*MDxxA”) for the most recently completed financial year.

The Company will provide to any person or company, without charge to any securityholder of the Company, upon request
to the Corporate Secretary of the Company, copies of the Company?s comparative consolidated financial statements and
MDKA for the year ended December 31, 2010, together with the accompanying auditor”s report and any interim consolidated
financial statements of the Company that have been filed for any period after the end of the Companys most recently
completed financial year.

If a registered holder or beneficial owner of the Company”s securities, other than debt instruments, requests the
Company”s annual or interim financial statements or MDxxA, the Company will send a copy of the requested financial
statements and MDéA (provided it was filed less than two years before the Company receives the request) to the person or
company that made the request, without charge.

Pursuant to National Instrument 51-102, the Company is required to send a request form to registered holders and
beneficial owners of the Company”s securities, other than debt securities, that such registered holders and beneficial owners
may use to request a copy of the Company”s annual financial statements and MD¿A, interim financial statements and MD¿A,
or both. Registered holders and beneficial owners should review the request form carefully. In particular, registered holders

54

and beneficial owners should note that, under applicable Canadian securities laws, the Company is only required to deliver
the financial statements and MDEA to a person or company that requests them. Failing to return a request form or otherwise
specifically requesting a copy of the financial statements or MD£A from the Company may result in a registered holder or
beneficial owner not being sent these documents. Copies of these documents can also be found at www.sedar.com and the
Company?”s website at www.methanex.com.

APPROVAL BY DIRECTORS

The contents and the sending of this Information Circular have been approved by the Board of Directors of the Company.

Y

RANDY MILNER
SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, GENERAL COUNSEL
AND CORPORATE SECRETARY

DATED at Vancouver, British Columbia this 4th day of March, 2011.

55

SCHEDULE A
METHANEX CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. OBJECT OF THESE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES

2. CODE OF ETHICS

3. BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES

4. DIRECTOR RESPONSIBILITIES

5. BOARD LEADERSHIP

6. BOARD MEMBERSHIP

7. BOARD COMPENSATION

8. SHARE OWNERSHIP

9. ASSESSING THE BOARD”S PERFORMANCE

10. BOARD”S INTERACTION WITH STAKEHOLDERS

11. MEETING PROCEDURES

12. COMMITTEE MATTERS

13. BOARD RELATIONSHIP TO SENIOR MANAGEMENT

14. ACCESS TO RESOURCES AND ENGAGEMENT OF ADVISORS

15. EVALUATION AND SUCCESSION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

16. REVIEW OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES

Exhibit A to the Methanex Corporate Governance Principles

A-1

1. OBJECT OF THESE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES

The Board of Directors of Methanex Corporation (the “Company”) has adopted these Corporate Governance Principles as it is
responsible for providing the foundation for a system of principled goal-setting, effective decision-making and ethical actions, with
the objective of establishing a vital corporate entity that provides value to the Company”s shareholders.

2. CODE OF ETHICS

All directors, officers and employees are expected to display the highest standard of ethics. The Company has a Code of Business
Conduct to establish guidelines for ethical and good business conduct by directors, officers and employees and the Code shall include
guidance regarding conflicts of interest, protection and proper use of corporate assets and opportunities, confidentiality, fair dealing
with third parties, compliance with laws and the reporting of illegal or unethical behaviour. The Board, through the Corporate
Governance Committee, shall monitor compliance with the Code and annually review the Code”s contents.

3. BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES

The business of the Company is conducted by its employees, managers and officers, under the direction of the President and Chief
Executive Officer (the “CEO”) and the stewardship and supervision of the Board of Directors.

The Board”s mandate is to oversee and provide policy guidance on the business and affairs of the Company, which includes;
* monitoring overall corporate performance;

* overseeing compensation and succession planning for, and performance of, executive officers, including the appointment and
performance of the CEO;

* adopting a strategic planning process and approving, at least annually, a strategic plan that takes into account, among other
things, the opportunities and risks of the business;

e evaluating the integrity of, and overseeing the implementation of, the Company”s management information systems and
internal controls and procedures;

+. identifying and overseeing the implementation of systems to manage the principal risks of the Company”s business;
+ overseeing the implementation of appropriate disclosure controls, including a communication policy for the Company;
+ developing the Company”s approach to corporate governance; and

e to the extent feasible, satisfying itself as to the integrity of the CEO and other executive officers and that the CEO and
executive officers create a culture of integrity throughout the organization.

4. DIRECTOR RESPONSIBILITIES

Act in best interests
The primary responsibility of each director is to:
a) act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interest of the Company; and,

b) exercise the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances.

A-2

Participation

Directors are expected to prepare for, attend, and participate in meetings of the Board and the committees of which they are members.
Directors will maintain the confidentiality of the deliberations and decisions of the Board and information received at meetings, except
as may be specified by the Chairman or if the information is publicly disclosed by the Company.

Performance
Performance as a director is the main criterion for determining a director”s ongoing service on the Board. To assist in determining

performance, each director will take part in an annual performance evaluation process that shall include a self-evaluation and a
confidential discussion with the Chairman.

Ongoing education

Directors are encouraged to attend seminars, conferences, and other continuing education programs to help ensure that they stay
current on relevant issues such as corporate governance, financial and accounting practices and corporate ethics. From time to time,
the Corporation will arrange for site visits and other special presentations intended to deepen the directors” familiarity with the

Company and its affairs.

5. BOARD LEADERSHIP

Selection of Chairman and CEO

The Board elects its Chairman and appoints the Company?s CEO. As a general principle, the Board believes that the Chairman and the
CEO should not be the same person.

Lead Independent Director

In order to ensure independent Board leadership, the Board is committed to having either an independent Chairman or a Lead
Independent Director. If the Chairman is not independent, the independent directors on the Board (please refer to Exhibit A for
definition of independent director) shall select from among themselves a Lead Independent Director.

Either the Chairman or the Lead Independent Director, as applicable, shall chair regular meetings of the independent directors and
assume other responsibilities described in the Terms of Reference for the Chairman or the Lead Independent Director (as applicable)

or which the Corporate Governance Committee may designate.

6. BOARD MEMBERSHIP

Criteria for Board membership

The Corporate Governance Committee will review each year the credentials of candidates to be considered for nomination to the
Board. The objective of this review will be to maintain a composition of the Board that provides a satisfactory mix of skills and
experience. This review will include taking into account the desirability of maintaining a reasonable diversity of personal
characteristics but maintaining common characteristics such as personal integrity, achievement in individual fields of expertise and a
willingness to devote necessary time to Board matters. The Corporate Governance Committee will recommend to the Board the action
to be taken to effect changes in incumbent directors if, in the opinion of the Committee after discussion with the Chairman and the
CEO, such changes are deemed appropriate.

New directors
The Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for identifying new candidates to be recommended for election to the Board and

is also responsible for establishing criteria for the selection of new directors and conducting all necessary inquiries into their
backgrounds and qualifications and making recommendations to the full Board.

A-3

Majority voting

The Company has implemented a majority voting policy which provides that any nominee for election as a director at an Annual
General Meeting for whom the number of votes withheld exceeds the number of votes cast in his or her favour, is deemed not to have
received the support of shareholders even though duly elected as a matter of law.

Orientation

The Company will provide new directors with an orientation to the Company, its management structure and operations, the industry in
which the Company operates, and key legal, financial and operational issues. An information package will be provided that will
include information about the duties of directors, the business of the Company, documents from recent Board meetings, information
regarding corporate governance and the structure and procedures of the Board and its committees. New directors will also be provided
with an opportunity to meet senior management and other directors and to tour the Company”s operations.

Board composition

The Company’s bylaws provide for the directors to establish the number of directors to sit on the Board within a broad
minimum/maximum range. The directors are to determine a size of Board large enough to provide a diversity of expertise and opinion,
yet small enough to allow for efficient operation and decision-making. The Corporate Governance Committee annually reviews the
size of the Board and recommends any changes it determines appropriate. The Board is to be composed of a substantial majority of
independent directors.

Directors who change their present occupation

Directors who retire or otherwise leave or change the position they held when they first were appointed to the Board should not
necessarily leave the Board. In this circumstance, the Corporate Governance Committee shall review the appropriateness of a
director?s continued service on the Board. When continued service does not appear appropriate, the director may be asked to stand
down.

Term limits

The Directors are elected by the shareholders at every Annual General Meeting. The term of office of each director shall expire at the
close of the Annual General Meeting of Shareholders following that at which he or she was elected.

Cumulative term limits for directors should not be established as this could have the effect of forcing directors off the Board who have
gained a deep and detailed knowledge of the Company”s operations and business affairs. At the same time, the value of some turnover
in Board membership to provide an ongoing input of fresh ideas and new knowledge is recognized. The Corporate Governance
Committee shall review annually the membership of the Board to enable the Board to manage its overall composition and maintain a
balance of directors to ensure long-term continuity.

Retirement age

The Board has determined that there should not be a mandatory retirement age for directors.

Other Board memberships

Whether service on other boards is likely to interfere with the performance of a director”s duties to the Company depends on the
individual and the nature of their other activities. The Board believes that the commitment required for effective membership on the
Company”s Board is such that directors are to consult with the Chairman and the Chair of the Corporate Governance Committee prior

to accepting an invitation to serve on another board.

7. BOARD COMPENSATION

Directors are required to devote significant time and energy to the performance of their duties. To attract and retain able and
experienced directors, they are to be compensated competitively. The Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing
the compensation and benefits of directors and making a recommendation to the Board. Directors who are employees of the Company
receive no additional compensation for service on the Board.

A-4

Director compensation consists of cash and share-based long-term incentives. The cash portion may be comprised of an annual
retainer, meeting fees and supplemental fees for committee Chairs. The long-term incentives will normally be structured so as to vest
over time because time-based vesting assists in retaining the continued services of directors and aligning their actions with long-term
shareholder interests.

8. SHARE OWNERSHIP

The Company shall establish Company share ownership requirements for directors and executive officers. Other managers of the
Company will have share ownership guidelines. These requirements and guidelines help to more closely align the economic interests
of these individuals with those of other stockholders.

9. ASSESSING THE BOARD”S PERFORMANCE

The Board and each Board committee will conduct an annual self-evaluation. The Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for
oversecing these evaluations and reporting their results to the Board. The purpose of these reviews is to contribute to a process of
continuous improvement in executing the responsibilities of the Board and its committees.

All directors are encouraged to make suggestions on improving the practices of the Board and its committees at any time and to direct
those suggestions to the Chairman or the appropriate committee Chair.

10. BOARD”S INTERACTION WITH STAKEHOLDERS

It is the function of management to speak for the Company in its communications with the investment community, the media,
customers, suppliers, employees, governments and the general public, and the Board shall ensure that the Company has systems in
place to receive feedback from stakeholders. If comments from the Board are appropriate, they should, in most circumstances, come
from the Chairman. If shareholders or other stakeholders communicate with the Chairman or other directors, management will be
informed and consulted in order to formulate the appropriate response.

11. MEETING PROCEDURES

Scheduling of Board meetings and selection of agenda items

The Board holds approximately six regular Board meetings each year. The Chairman and the CEO, in consultation with the Corporate
Secretary, develops the agenda for each Board meeting. Directors are encouraged to suggest items they would like to have considered
for the meeting agenda.

Board materials distributed in advance

Information supporting Board meeting agenda items is to be provided to directors approximately seven days before the meeting. Such
materials should focus attention on the critical issues to be considered by the Board.

Non-directors at Board meetings

The Chairman shall ensure those Company officers and other members of management who attend Board meetings (1) can provide
insight into the matters being discussed and/or (2) are individuals with high potential who the directors should have the opportunity to
meet and evaluate. Management should consult with the Chairman if it proposes that any outside advisors attend a Board meeting.

Sessions of independent directors

Every in-person Board meeting shall be accompanied by an independent directors” session at which no executive directors or other
members of management are present. The object of the session is to ensure free and open discussion and communication among the
non-executive, independent directors. The Chairman (or the Lead Independent Director if the Chairman is not independent) shall chair
such meetings. If the Lead Independent Director chairs such meetings, he or she shall regularly advise the Chairman of the business of
such meetings.

A-5

12. COMMITTEE MATTERS

Committee structure

The Board, through the Corporate Governance Committee, shall constitute such committees as it determines necessary and as may be
required by law. Each committee will have its own mandate that shall set forth the committee?s responsibilities, structure and
procedure.

The current committee structure and the performance of each committee are to be reviewed annually by the Corporate Governance
Committee.

Assignment of directors to committees

The Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for proposing to the Board the Chair and members of each committee on an
annual basis. In preparing its recommendations, the Committee will consult with the Chairman and the CEO and take into account the
preferences of the individual directors.

Committee assignments should be based on the director’s knowledge, interests and areas of expertise. The Board believes experience
and continuity are more important than rotation and that directors should only be rotated if doing so is likely to improve Committee
performance or facilitate the work of the Committee.

Frequency and length of committee meetings

Each committee Chair will develop that committee?s meeting agenda through consultation with members of the committee,
management and the Corporate Secretary. The Chair of each committee will determine the schedule of meetings of that committee

based upon an annual work plan designed to discharge the responsibilities of the committee as set out in its mandate.

13. BOARD RELATIONSHIP TO SENIOR MANAGEMENT

Directors have complete access to the Company?s senior management. Written communications from directors to members of
management will be copied to the Chairman and the CEO.

The Board also encourages directors to make themselves available for consultation with management outside Board meetings to
provide counsel on subjects where such directors have special knowledge and experience.

14. ACCESS TO RESOURCES AND ENGAGEMENT OF ADVISORS

The Board and each committee shall have the resources and authority appropriate to discharge their duties and responsibilities. This
shall include the power to hire outside advisors without consulting or obtaining the approval of management in advance. Any
individual director who wishes to engage an outside advisor should review the request with the Chairman.

15. EVALUATION AND SUCCESSION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Performance evaluation of the CEO

The Board, through the Human Resources Committee, will annually review the CEO”s performance as measured against mutually
agreed goals and objectives. This review will also be used in establishing the CEO”s annual compensation.

Performance evaluation and succession planning of executive officers
The Board, through the Human Resources Committee, will annually review the performance and compensation packages of the

officers of the Company who report directly to the CEO and any other officer whose compensation is required to be publicly disclosed
and will also annually review the succession plan for the CEO and the executive officers.

A-6

16.

REVIEW OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES

The Corporate Governance Committee shall review these Corporate Governance Principles periodically and report to the Board any
recommendations it may have for their amendment.

EXHIBIT A to the Methanex Corporate Governance Principles

“Independent Director” means a person other than an Executive Officer or employee of the Company or any other individual having a
relationship which, in the opinion of the Company’s board of directors, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in
carrying out the responsibilities of a director. For purposes of this rule, “Family Member” means a person’s spouse, parents, children
and siblings, whether by blood, marriage or adoption, or anyone residing in such person’s home. The following persons shall not be
considered independent:

(A)
(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

0)

a director who is, or at any time during the past three years was, employed by the Company;

a director who accepted or who has a Family Member who accepted any compensation from the Company in excess of $120,000
during any period of twelve consecutive months within the three years preceding the determination of independence, other than
the following:

(i) compensation for board or board committee service;
(ii) compensation paid to a Family Member who is an employee (other than an Executive Officer) of the Company; or
(111) benefits under a tax-qualified retirement plan, or non-discretionary compensation.

a director who is a Family Member of an individual who is, or at any time during the past three years was, employed by the
company as an Executive Officer;

a director who is, or has a Family Member who is, a partner in, or a controlling Shareholder or an Executive Officer of, any
organization to which the Company made, or from which the Company received, payments for property or services in the current
or any of the past three fiscal years that exceed 5% of the recipient’s consolidated gross revenues for that year, or $200,000,
whichever is more, other than the following:

(i) payments arising solely from investments in the Company’s securities; or
(ii) payments under non-discretionary charitable contribution matching programs.

a director of the Company who is, or has a Family Member who is, employed as an Executive Officer of another entity where at
any time during the past three years any of the Executive Officers of the Company serve on the compensation committee of such
other entity; or

a director who is, or has a Family Member who is, a current partner of the Company’s outside auditor, or was a partner or
employee of the Company’s outside auditor who worked on the Company’s audit at any time during any of the past three years.

A-7

A Responsible Care? Company

Link al archivo en CMFChile: https://www.cmfchile.cl/sitio/aplic/serdoc/ver_sgd.php?s567=a70a6b6a957a3d53185dec2e58d657b1VFdwQmVFMVVRVEJOUkVFeFRtcE5lazUzUFQwPQ==&secuencia=-1&t=1682366909