 Let me invite SRB Chair Elke Koenig to give us some closing words. Elke. Thank you very much, Susan. Good morning. I think it's still good morning. Yes. So it falls on me to close this event. And after such a rich discussion, I'm not sure where to start, where to end without partially repeating. But let me first of all thank all of our participants, those who spoke yesterday and today, those who asked very interesting questions, and those who simply listened, and of course also the media representative, and last but not least, the team that prepared this so flawless. This is not in my speech because the team did not think I should thank them, obviously. Banking Union, 10 years on. I think first of all I would start with the old statement. We have a Banking Union. We have a single supervisor. We have a single resolution authority for the Banking Union. And of course, yes, we are all disappointed. But let's not be overwhelmed by our disappointment from last week because I think what happened last week was clearly we would have liked to see more progress in the area of the third leg. This will clearly for now have to take a backseat as some other topics. But there was also good progress in some of the areas of crisis management and let's now put all our efforts into developing this. So just to use a simple phrase, we are where we are. No need to talk about the spoiled milk. Let's move forward and let's see that we really promote the crisis management. And I think I want to take this opportunity again to truly thank Pascal Donahoe and his team for all the effort they have put in pushing forward the Banking Union. And let's take the positive part out of last week's discussion. There is a clear momentum to move forward, not as fast as we would have liked, but let's see. And to go into this direction, I think just to state, improvement or improving the crisis management framework, I think it's fair to stay and the word came on today's very interesting panel a lot of times. There is something which we didn't have 10 years ago. There is a strong sense of communication, cooperation between authorities, cross border. There are the European authorities. And I think it's also fair to say that Banco Popular in 2017 and Spare Bank this year were cases that proved that the resolution framework in Europe is working. Now you can always say, but what if, but let's start from, we have a resolution framework. It's working. And of course, there's more that needs to happen. I think Andrea, you put very nice words yesterday out in your opening speech. I would say both cases, all the day-to-day work shows that the strong cooperation between supervisory and resolution authorities, don't forget there were not even any resolution authorities 10 years ago, is really helpful and also the very good cooperation to make it with the banking industry. We are in this together. It's not for us to make banks resolvable because we know it all. It is for us in dialogue with you so that you can focus on the topics. And I would a bit counter your comment. I'm a strong believer in benchmarking, but not in benchmarking to make everyone the same, but in benchmarking to try to find good practice, which can trigger further debate and therefore make things even better. So it's not about the one European bank. But I think what we have to see is clearly when we look into now, call it the next years, and I've strong made a plea always whenever you have a project, look for the next two years, don't look for the next 10 years because it's just an excuse not to start this year. So for the next two years, I would, for this cycle, I would indeed look to the, turn to the details of the Eurogroup outcome last week and the statement clearly spells out two things we would strongly support. Expanding the scope of resolution. So to focus really on the fact that a bank either gets resolved or it moves into insolvency. And there might be this famous middle class, which probably better gets resolved. It's a bit too big to go into insolvency, perhaps a bit too small to be really already caught by our system. But for this, this expansion has to be accompanied by an enhanced set of funding options for the resolution authority to ensure that we really have all the tools necessary for the resolution of small and medium sized banks. And for sure, in a fair setting. So it's not for the big ones, they are caught by the full armory of our tours and the small ones go into insolvency. And then there's a layer that goes for free in between. No, they are in a competitive environment. So there needs to be funding options that are consistent. I won't go into detail, otherwise we are here for a couple of hours. Therefore, but as a logical consequence, we also welcome the plans to strengthen at least the national DGSS. It's important to reinforce depositor guarantee systems across the banking union to provide reassurance to depositors. But it's also important to have them in a consistent system where, well, same rules apply, which goes to the question of alternative measures, which you need if you want to have a resolution, which also goes to the question, what's the least cost? It's not the total amount of deposits. It should not be zero either, but it might be zero because of super priority of DGSS. So a lot of work that has to go into all of this and to stay with this. I also hope that we will see some work because it's inherently connected on harmonizing insolvency procedures, at least for financial institutions because a lot of practical steps. I'm not a dreamer, so I'm not expecting that we come to an administrative insolvency procedure right away. But as it was also mentioned today, a European FDIC should still be on the horizon. Now, I could go on with a number of other topics here, but let me try to come somehow to a more, I would say, the challenges we are all facing. And I found it fascinating. Thank you for the organizers here to say we talked a lot. And I think we are leaking our wounds during the first panel about the banking union and where we stand. Then the second panel I got the feeling will be for my grandchildren to explain to me what I have to do when we talk about banking in 2040. I'm optimist. I will hopefully still be there, but I might watch it rather from another, we'll definitely watch it from another place. But also the discussion we had to do today here, I think we all need to see that banking union was developed in the beginning in record speed. I've never seen an EU project that went so fast into working while it takes us still to implement it. And it has to stand the test of time. But I think we also have to reiterate banking union, capital market union, despite big data, all those discussion, stay very relevant, stay important for a sound European economy and the funding of a sound European economy. So let's all keep pushing there. The pace of change, advance of digital technologies, FinTechs, all of this should not be overlooked. But I am probably at that point a bit older and get the feeling I'm always going back in all these debates. Also some of the topics of today to the Pittsburgh statement, same business, same risk, same rules. And I think we should not forget about it. Of course, you need consistent, stable market finance. But the back side of that is shadow banking. So same risk, same rules. I would just go back to this argument. And of course in the end it will be for people other than me to deal with all of this. But it is something we need to keep in mind. There is much hard work on the road ahead in order to get the balance right between allowing space for innovation, being creative, not to fight the last war, not to consider you've seen it all and you know how the world has to run. And at the same time ensuring that we have a proper up-to-date regulatory framework in order to ensure that we can deal with any hiccups and to take your point that we hopefully also get focused in a way that we are not repeating the same question in five versions within four weeks, but that we are trying also to use this good cooperation we have to ensure that if data is available at the ECB, well it's available for us too. If data is necessary here, let's try to find the smartest way how to get to this. I could go on for long with this, but I think you have addressed so many topics also during this last panel that I am very happy to see we will not run out of steam, we will not run out of work and I leave it just and want to conclude I think we are all aware of the context in which we meet today and so in a time of diversion, in a time of big uncertainty, I think it's essential that we come together in the spirit of cooperation in order to drive financial stability agenda forward. It is more needed than ever and when looking at the poll, the economic environment is probably far more uncertain than it has been for a long time and there was one risk which was not mentioned which I think is metric too. For most people in this room, it's probably the first time that we see rising inflation, that we see political tensions building up. We have lived, we are living, we have been living in a world where basically a number of risks had been rather declining so let's deal with the fact the world is an uncertain place and we have to make the best out of it. So this was the first such ECB joint conference and my last but I hope it's a good example for that cooperation and I'm pretty sure we are all taking a lot of ideas, a lot of thoughts with us and it will not be the last of these conferences so and therefore let me say goodbye now to all of those connected online. Thank you for connecting and to those who've made it here to Brussels. I thank you also for this effort. It's good, it feels good to talk to real people again in a room and when clapping hands it doesn't just sound like one lonely warrior in a room. So thank you for all of you and I wish you now a safe trip home.