 Hello. My name is Julian Richards. I'm Director of the UK's Archaeology Data Service, the National Repository for Digital Data Generated in the course of Archaeological Fieldwork and Research in the UK. I'd like to provide our perspective on the principles of the manifesto, manifesto, and especially the recommendation for regional archive hubs. We have a particular interest in principle 3.5, improving information management, although of course this links with all the other principles. Firstly, some brief background about the ADS. We were established in 1996. We're based at the University of York. They're a national organisation. We currently have around 20 staff. We are a core trust seal accredited digital repository, and we hold some 35 terabytes of data, and this comprises 1.4 million records for the archaeology of the UK, including over 2,500 rich digital data archives, and now over 75,000 unpublished fieldwork reports at the former Grey Literature. The key development for digital archiving in archaeology in recent years is the creation by CIFA with historical and support of the Dig Digital recommendations. These emphasise the importance of the fair principles that data should be findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable. The guidelines describe the steps to creating a fair digital archive and stress the importance of depositing data with a trusted digital repository, in other words one which holds the core trust seal. I'd suggest that with the implementation enforcement of the guidelines, UK archaeology is on the way to solving the digital archive crisis. Now regional archive hubs are clearly the appropriate response to the physical archive crisis, but the aim of my comment is to emphasise that they are not appropriate for digital archiving, where critical mass of expertise that can only be sustainable at their national level is essential, and joined up access to data can also only be done nationally. The manifesto rightly states that comparative research is facilitated by consistency of approach to managing the data generated from fieldwork and held in legacy records, from geospatial referencing of interventions to the ordering and curation of the archive. Its sustainability depends on technical resilience, how the data are held and managed, and the resilience of the organisation responsible. Now this is even more true of digital archives where data standards and common vocabularies are essential to synthetic research. Nothing highlights the problems of achieving this more than soodling. Currently, German is largest infrastructure project comprising some 720 kilometres of new energy cables running north south across multiple German states. A great archaeological opportunity, but unfortunately each state has its own archival standards, leading to a fragmented archive, difficulty of finding information from along the route, and great difficulty for synthetic research. In contrast, positive contrast, ADS is working with High Speed 2 to create a single integrated digital archive along the full route by High Speed 2, crossing multiple counties and regions, and adopting a consistent approach to data standards and data archiving. The objectives for the digital archive to preserve the data into the long term obviously so that it remains accessible for use, but also to ensure that appropriate selection criteria are used consistently along the route, making and ensuring that the data is findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable, to ensuring that all digital data accompanied by consistent and high quality metadata, and then to effectively link all relevant and appropriate historic environmental digital data to the appropriate physical archive repository. And overall we believe this will provide a valuable digital resource that enables onward innovation and creativity for research, learning and engagement. Just to give you a bit more detail, so each individual site and intervention along the route will have its own individual data collection, but these will be cross-searchable along the route by various criteria. By what we call curated collections, they can also be explored by period or by theme. They can also be grouped together according to various criteria, here an example with archives selected for teaching, either at Key Stage 1, 2, or indeed at higher education level. I would argue more generally that the digital provides the blue that can join the physical. It can provide the pointers from the digital index data, the metadata, linking the textual reports and the underpinning digital data and catalogs, and linking these to the physical archive, in turn making them more visible and accessible. This is already achievable more widely via the latest version of OASIS, and here we highlight the same reporting archaeological investigations and linking research outputs and archives. And indeed OASIS now has an archives module to allow field workers to document the physical archive, specify what it contains, and for museums to also access OASIS, adding accession numbers and tracking the process of deposition. The new OASIS dashboard allows organisations and heritage managers to track the quantity and nature of fieldwork, the activity types, the reason for the investigations, and to monitor the deposition of archives, both physical and digital. In short, in England, the digital infrastructure is ready to support the development of regional archive hubs, providing the digital glue to facilitate a joined up approach and making a positive future for English archaeology. Thank you very much.