 Good morning everybody. Today is, as you know, is June the 29th. It's the reopening of our country and a new day and a new dawn. So I'd like to wish you all the very best on our journey. But today I'm really pleased to welcome you to the IIEA webinar. I know you'll be kind of getting your seats at the moment, but this webinar, as you know, is on France and the future of innovation in Europe. My name is Joyce O'Connor and I chair the Digital Futures Group here at the IIEA. I'm delighted today to be joined by Professor Hugh Babine, who's a digital entrepreneur and advisor at the Institute Motine. The Institute is an independent think tank and it's dedicated to public policy in France and in Europe. June, thank you so much for joining us today. We're really pleased that you could take time out of your busy schedule to be with us. We know you're particularly busy at this time. June will speak to us for around 20 minutes or so, and after that then I will come back to you for questions and answers. Today, he will offer us his perspective on the future of innovation in France and in Europe and discuss how to develop a dynamic innovation and digital ecosystem. I look forward to receiving your questions, the audience, and you may join the discussion by using the Q&A function on Zoom. Please feel free to send in your questions throughout the session and once you have completed this presentation, I will come back to you. I'd really appreciate if you give your name and affiliation at the end of your question. A reminder that today's presentation and Q&A is on the record and it will be available on our website later this afternoon. We'd also like you to be free to join the discussion on Twitter using the handle at the IIEA. But now it gives me great pleasure to welcome our distinguished guest, Gilles Babenet. Gilles, as I said, is a digital entrepreneur and advisor at Institute of Monetary. G, you may remember that you were with us here in a different time, in a different age, back in 2013 when you were the digital champion for France. So you're welcome back in a completely different situation. He is professor in public policy and digital affairs at Science School in France and is the French representative to the European Commission for Digital Affairs. He's of particular interest in the areas of education and inclusion linked to digital technology. Gilles is also vice-chair of the French National Digital Council and he has written and published extensively on technology and data. Gilles, you are most welcome. Gilles, welcome back to the IIEA and we look forward to your presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Gilles. Thank you for IIEA, for organizing this discussion. I mean, it's really the right time to do this because we need to be set this world in a different manner. So I'm very pleased to be able to join you actually and to, I would say, tighten the links that may exist in between the organization and obviously the institution in general. So my talk today is obviously about the innovation across Europe and, you know, it's interesting because Europe is generally said to be lagging behind regarding the digital evolution. It's very much tied to the fact that whatever the type of key services we would use, social media, search, online shopping, watching a movie, we generally go through one of these big platforms, Facebook, Amazon of this world. And, you know, if we dig further and look at the number of big startups called Unicorns, Europe is also by far lagging behind. Even though this company overall still waits not much, you know, compared to the overall economy, then nonetheless represent the future. New forms of organization based on data, new forms of innovation, new standard of enterprise overall. So which is why it's important to make sure that, you know, we are there and we also have some of these big companies basically to take a role in general. And it's interesting because the reason why Europe and especially the continental Europe putting apart the UK is so much lagging behind. It's kind of a mystery, you know, business-wise, Europe is doing well. It's comparable to the USA. It has a very strong economy, good infrastructures, good educational systems, but to some extent the gap is not really easy to explain. So if we try to understand why there are such a difference, we could check on several factors that would reference our potential. And I've tried to classify these factors per order of importance in general. To me, there are a few maybe five, not more. The first one is clearly the human capital. Even though I just mentioned that we both have compared to the US excellent education system, I believe that the difference in between the US and Europe is the fact that US has been very good at attracting talents, you know, educating people and keeping the good one, you know. So they are exceptionally good at it. They have created what we call the HP1 disaster. And actually it's interesting because it's been like shut down by President Trump like only four to five days ago. And that has led to a consolidation of human capital, especially in the Silicon Valley, that is probably unseen anywhere else in the world. So that's very key. And I think it's a very consistent federal strategy that's been on since like at least two to three decades in general. The second factor to me is the innovation model. In Europe, we have given a clear priority to corporate innovation, and I would say even more institutional innovation. In the US and in China, innovation is more commonly celebrated and welcomed from the civil society in general. It's a result of general belief that if you're big, if you become a corporation, bureaucracy is kind of inevitable. And therefore it would freeze your organization and limit your opportunity to do some disruptive innovation. It's interesting because if you look at, for instance, Tesla or SpaceX, both companies are competing with traditional players, the car makers on one hand, the NASA on the other. And you know, if you read the US medias in general, they really foresee and I would say it's a challenge, the potential of this traditional innovation versus these newcomers. In China, it's a little bit different. It's more the pure notion of entrepreneurship that is at stake. You know, everybody knows in China the history of Huawei, how it's been created with a funding of $5,000 in first place, and how it become what it is today. And it's a kind of the mythology of China to believe that everyone can do that as well. And in Europe, I think it's a little bit different. We have difficulties to unleash the potential of the youngster generation. It's still very much institutional. And we still very much believe that breakthrough innovation can come from institutional systems. And therefore, there are a lot of, I would say, monies that's been invested in several chapters, several initiatives directly from the, I would say, institution in general. And on top of that, we tend to create some regulation that could be quite, I would say, slowing the traditional business. GDPR, it's obviously a very good regulation, but it's also kind of a huge problem for SMEs and I would say mid-sized companies in general. So it's, I would say, a lot of a matter of culture in general that we see at stake. And I think that the fact that the US has for a very long time been willing to unleash the potential of disruptive innovators, especially in the Silicon Valley, has helped to create a very consistent ecosystem in general. The first factor, I believe, is European integration. It's not exaggerated to state that all startups are struggling to expand their business beyond the first country. You know, the two de facto leaders, USA and China, have respectively a digital runway of 330 and 1.5 billion potential users. You know, it helps a lot because you can test your algorithm, especially if you are in an AI business on a much larger number of people, and the reach helps a lot. You know, if you have only a teeny fraction of these people who could use the service, on some hands, you won't be able to break even because this fraction will be too small. And if you are in the US or in China, that would let you break through and develop your business. So that's a problem. And it's interesting to notice that most of the companies that have been able to become unicorns or deca-corns are in Europe. Very much the one we're facing, I would say, cross-border regulation, you know, banking and music, like Spotify, N26, Revolute, company like that, who benefited from, I would say, a level playing field that we're all across Europe in general. The fifth factor, I think, is something which is a little bit difficult to size. It's what I would call the cluster effect. The fact that you can create links in between corporations, academics, universities, startups in general, and make sure that you make a very good mixture of all these different parameters. I think that, you know, Stanford, the Technion in Israel, a few of this place in general have been instrumental in the success of these countries, this place in the digital era in general. In Europe, it's more difficult. Maybe we can mention Combridge in the UK, a few other places across Europe, but it's not as big as what we can see in the US or in China in general. And it should be a consistent strategy from the European Union or from the government, from the European government in general. I very much believe that one dead angle that we haven't explored yet is the notion of cluster in general. The thing I haven't touched upon yet is private equity. And, you know, I've been a very strong voice for having more private equity in Europe over the past decade. I think that's necessary, obviously, and we have done much better to that extent. But it's more of a consequence than, I would say, a point that you should put in first place. You know, it's something which comes when you have good startups, when you have good entrepreneurs in general. Private equity from all over the world can reach you at some place. And you can see some countries such as Sweden, for instance, where there are very few private equity players, and still their startups get financed very well, because just the startups are noticed and seen from the other side of the Atlantic, and people move there to finance these startups. So I think it's and plus I believe that in terms of taxation, in some countries, especially in France, it used to be a nightmare. And, you know, given that the government have understood that we need to use this new way of financing companies, taxation system is much better than what it used. So it's the main factors. I believe that there might be a few others at stake in here, in general. For instance, I believe that mastering in English is really key as well. If you look at the most advanced country across Europe, it's places like Holland or the Netherlands, where people are very familiar with this language. Probably, Ireland is a good example as well. You have plenty of technology and digital players in general. So that may play, maybe that may very strongly play as well. But you have a few of these factors. I'd like maybe to stress on what is going on in France, in general, that may be of interest of the audience. I believe that, you know, until recently, there were no interests into trying to develop the French technology ecosystem. Until 2013, it was completely unseen by the government. They didn't pay attention to it. And in 2013, we had the first move with the creation of BPI, which is Born Public Domestissement, which obviously has its name says a public bank system, was demanded to clearly invest into technology, mostly in venture capital type. And that was a type of electroshock. In the years that came afterwards, we had the creation of the largest incubator in the world, the station F, which now hosts like 3,000 startups in general. We also had the funding of the Ecole 42, which is a very high-end school for like full stack colors in general. And a bunch of other very good initiatives such as the launch of the French tech ecosystem, the Grand Ecole du Numérique. More recently, we had the very strong AI initiative. But, you know, if you look at it, it was very late. I mean, we launched this initiative like only seven years ago. If you compare it to, let's say, Israel or the UK, what strikes in first place is that most of what they did was initiated in the 90s. In the UK, maybe by the turning of the new century. But it's old. And to create the ecosystem, it takes time, basically. So I believe that we have the right policy. And we have plenty of new startups coming. We're still lagging behind in terms of unicorns. But I believe that there are few countries that have more, I would say, will to develop this digital ecosystem. Not only in terms of investments, of billion poured into this thing. Also, in the fact that we are transforming the government policies in general, we're trying to push schools to integrate some coding chapters or courses in general. So it's very coordinated in between the different aspect of the general policies of the countries. And, you know, it might work. It's likely that, you know, on the long run, it would work. The only concern I have that it was very late. It's been launched only a few years ago. We took time to realize that this would be the future in general. So I think that, you know, if there is a blocking factors, some blocking factors in general, the key one to me might mostly be the culture and one. The fact that the European continent in terms of average age of its citizens is like six years older than the US. And this counts because you're more likely to innovate if you're young. And that helps, you know, to have a younger generation, population in general. And also, I believe that in the US and probably in China as well, there is a very profound trust that technology can help to save the world, to make the world better, and so on. It might be exaggerated. Sometimes it's mentioned as a little bit naive, but still it's very key. The cultural aspects of this is really important. In terms of early education, I believe that systems such as Philippa classroom is key as well, you know, to make some bonding in between, you know, members, to let them share ideas. Theater lessons, for instance, is a very good exercise as well. To know how to pitch is key as well. You know, things that you're more likely to learn if you're attending a US calling system than a European one. It's so true that now the PISA ranking from the OECD is taking into account this aspect, you know, the bonding, the Philippa classroom stuff into their evaluation system in general. So these are things that we should more develop across Europe and probably especially in France where we are still very fascinated by the notion of vertical poor in general, which to me is completely against the world to come in general. But still it's going in the right direction. If I was to talk about the reason why we should stay optimistic, the first reason is the quality of the human capital across Europe. You know, if you were to make a very rough comparison in between LMD, Listos Master, Dr. Rex, with the US in China, we are far, far, far ahead of these two places. We have the human capital. And you know, it's something which is very resilient. It takes a lot of time to build and a lot of time to dismantle in general. So I believe that this is here to stay and we should definitely leverage that to create the Europe of the future. So that's one thing. Second thing which I've noticed, which is probably tied to this is the capital efficiency. There was an English British investor called Victor Bastar who met some research and he has proven that the ratio of investor capital into startup is far more efficient in Europe than in the US. In other words, you need to put much more money to create a unicorn in the US than in Europe. So that might be due to the fact that we have much left of it. So therefore, you have more quality from the few that you have, the concentration of quality. But also the fact that we may have better people in general. So that's something we should realize. And maybe we can just scale it up, putting more money at work into a very teeny startup, early stage business angel type thing. And mechanically, we would end up by having better, more larger startup in general. Another thing that may have the value in there is that to have more coordinated policies in Europe, for instance, regarding the military, given that we have new type of threats, we now want to build a European military body in general. This was in the US and in China and in Israel as well, completely instrumental in the making of their digital ecosystem in general. And I believe that we might see a replication of that for tackle the climate change in general. Europe is very good at it. We are much more, I would say, virtuous in general regarding our climate policy. And I think that on the long run, trying to merge environment and digital technology will probably create a new discipline. And we could lead there. We have lost the battle regarding, I would say, B2C services in general, retail services, consumer services. We could win the one regarding technology and climate change in general. That is now being discussed at the commission. And some commissioners are very strongly aligned in the view that we should put a lot of investment in there. And we should try to build some clusters and ecosystem across Europe that would be specialized into this hero. And personally, I believe it would be really right. It would make a lot of sense. And it's very long phases in general. If you look at the, what I just mentioned, the retail services to consumers that are the services brought by the big platforms in general, they are all in this business. It took like three years to create. And it might take another like 20 years to create those new commerce. But I think I don't see any reason why we couldn't do that. So that was what I wanted to tell you. I'm very open to any questions that could come from the audience regarding all these ecosystem, European issues. Thank you very much, Gilles, for that very interesting presentation. It was a great overview and analysis of quite a complex issue. But I thought it was good that you were optimistic about the future and saw that the challenges could be met. I just like if I could maybe start because you raised it there towards the end, ask you one question because it's just happened overnight. Do you think with the new elections of the Greens and the Green Wave in France is going to accelerate that merger between, if you like, what the Europeans are called, the Green Deal and the digital agenda? Would that make a difference or was it already happening? Yeah, it's a very good question. And actually, we just spoke about it this morning with the June Motel. We had a discussion on that. I think that the French Greens are still in the making. It's different from the German ones. They have views to me which are sometimes a little bit romantic. And it's not science-based enough. So what we think is that we should definitely try to help these forces to be more rational and as a thing trying to push some content to to compare what they propose and what could be alternatives in general based sometime on technology. Okay, thank you. It's the beginning. But it does give optimism for the future around those areas. Could I ask you, actually, the audience to look at your Q&A function on Zoom when you're asking the question? And again, if you could give your name and your designation of where you're working would be very helpful. I see there's a question in here. Francis called for international and technology regulation beyond digital tax on big tech as part of its soft soft power internationally. What might this look like in the data economy? And how might the US position be factored into this? And this is from Claude Foyne, but researcher here at the IIEA. Okay, thank you Claude. It's quite interesting. I mean, you know, we all see that there are some problems in general with the Fung, whether it's economic or, you know, like onto trust issues or, you know, content-wise with Facebook and hate speech and so on. So, and we see that they may bear risk on elections, for instance. You know, it's especially presidential elections. It's been trolled by players, which sometimes are countries, not to mention Russia, for instance. So it's concerned that it's legitimate to have. But, you know, I think the big thing is to make sure that we don't arm the, I would say, innovation in general. So I mentioned in my talk GDPR. GDPR in some, to some extent, it's a very good idea. It's clear now that it's a hassle. It's a big problem for small players in general. So I think that, you know, France is very much pushing for this. But it's interesting to have, I would say, controversial debate in general on how to make it without arming the potential of innovation that may come from entrepreneurs in general. So I believe whether it's towards big platforms or regarding all the type of digital players, we have to have some regulation, whether regarding taxation issues or whatever else. But we need to be careful. We need to be careful not to arm the business in general. And, you know, I have, like, on a daily basis some interaction with members of the government in France. And it's not easy for them to get that. But I think they are progressively understanding that it's critical. You know, it's essential to make sure that we don't only regulate for lowering the potentiality of this platform. Yeah. And do you think it's quite interesting at the moment that maybe business is actually being co-active in this way and taking away, you know, advertisements like Unilever or Veroncy, you know, that they're actually making a statement themselves. You think that we'll actually bring about a climate where this becomes a much more focused discussion. Oh yeah, it's fascinating to see that. You know, I think everybody's words that Unilever has boycotted Facebook and doesn't want to give them money regarding the policies in general into the way they moderate the debates, which favours the extremists in general. And I believe that, you know, it's interesting because first it's global. It's seen from everywhere in the world. And secondly, it pushes corporations to become activists, which usually they are very reluctant to be. So that's, to me, it's a sea change in general. So it's quite interesting. We are entering into new territories. And yeah, I think it's really interesting. And I think, you know, this new suggestion of a digital or a dividend or a data dividend that's been suggested where, in fact, consumers, the citizens are paid for their data is another way. It's a new, it's the beginning of a discussion. I don't think it's been very well thought out, but it does go to your point that there is a climate now for that discussion, and perhaps alternative options of the then taxation. And it's an old idea, the digital dividend. I think the first to brought it up was Jarron Lanie, probably 12 years ago. He wrote a fascinating book about that. So it's not, there's nothing new in this suggestion. No, what is new is that it went through, I would say, technocrats, which is a good news, you know, it's been, it's been, it's been processed by people who know how to make taxation. And that's probably quite new. Now, there's a question in here from Seamus Allen. And it's, it's to your point about the education system and perhaps the the mindset and so on. It's asking the EU is working on a new digital education action plan and updating the skills agenda. What should be done in these initiatives to close the gap in human capital with the US and China? You know, I worked on the previous one, the agenda 2020, which had a very strong chapter on education in general. And I, you know, the first thing we need to do, which is still necessary, is to educate the politician about the need to create this type of jobs, you know, especially in France, which I know well, I can tell you that it's not clear enough for these people that you train someone to become a full stock cutter. And this person will immediately have a very good job. You know, so that's, that's not some things they have understood yet. You know, so as a result, we are struggling to, to find this type of profiles. And it's the same story all across Europe. You know, so it's, it's so views that we should create some funding for universities to, to create this, this curriculum and to make sure that they have, I would say, a level of expertise, which is standardized. That's really key to, to, to, to, to make sure that potential employers find, I would say, have trust in those profiles. The system. And would that be a core part of every curriculum? Or just, you know? Yes, it has to, because, you know, whether if you do, let's say, anthropology, if you know how to use, let's say, air, for instance, which is a data crunching software, it will help you to do your stats and, and you're going to be more efficient. I don't know any type of expertise which wouldn't be lifted up with digital. Yeah, no, I agree. I think that's an important point. There's another question here from Mary Cleary, who's the, from the Irish Computer Society. And she's asking the question, the contracts, the human capital that you mentioned, and the shortage of high level IT experts, to what extent is the lack of regulation of the IT profession an issue in the development of the European digital ecosystem? I'm not sure. I get this question right. What type of regulation would you see necessary? I think, you know, we need to have something which is, as I just mentioned, standardized profiles, like, you know, competencies in general. It will help people to travel cross-border across Europe, like LMD did, you know, LMD is a very good example of what we should do in general. This is not really from the European, you know, actually, it's from, from the following processes in general. And I think what we should also have probably is, I would say, some vertical definition of skill sets. Like, let's say, a cybersecurity expert, it's not the same thing, let's say, in Ireland than in France, you know, and this is an issue as well. So you need, as an employer, I used to be an employer in the digital space, you need to access the people in front of you all the time and you spent a lot of energy to do that, you know, and you discover later on on the road that the person you've just hired, she's, it's very good at something, but not at something, you know, everything. What do you think is the best way to go about that? Is that within a framework? In Europe, and because each member state has a different system, in a sense, you create an overall framework as part of our development of that digital agenda. Yeah, you know, to that extent, I don't see any, any, any problem in having more integration, you know, whether it's that the free circulation of data across Europe, the circulation of human capital, of whatever else, I mean, digital is, it's, it's, it's, it's very ubiquitous in general. So it would really help, you know, that would be a unique opportunity to create some policies that are really focusing on the development of digital to make some integration. Now, if we had, for instance, APIs in between the government in Europe, it will tremendously help the integration in general. So that's something we should definitely do. That that goes another point, which is the skill sets of the politicians in general, which are very low. You have that digital pass that in France, you created that for as part of the development of that skin's agenda. Did you find it, did you think that was good or if I got the right one? Yeah, it's, it's an early initiative. It's what we did in France is what we call grand école numérique, which is probably it's it's the past is not that well known, you know, it's been created four years ago. But it's not mandatory in all the curriculum, all the what you could do at university in general. What is probably more efficient in general is a grand école numérique. It's not a grand école, so to say it's not a high school. It's it's basically a fund, a governmental fund that would help universities and any type of organization that would want to create a computer science course. Okay. And the question from Ethomath Dermott, who's a member of the IIEA, and she asked the question, how can you ensure that women have a core role in the world of digital affairs? How do you ensure their interests and needs are recognized, whatever the policy design? Yeah, that's that's really something we need to be extremely consistent. And we have to push for that, you know, the obviously one of the key problems of this industry, it's it's a male industry. And it creates problems everywhere in the culture and the designs. So we need to rebalance that strongly. And it starts with early school. It's very similar to math. I mean, it's mostly men with new math. And although women are generally better at schooling math, we end up by having, you know, in term of university graduation, it's almost like two thirds, if not more of men versus women were graduated. So it's you know, it has to go through policies that come from the top of the government. Because otherwise, it's too technical, it has to be at the political agenda of the people you work for. Because it touches upon so many different aspects, you know, let's say, for instance, as the the Minister of Culture in France, they do finance film, movie, you know, they do that a lot, a lot of money in there. We should pay attention on the role of the people in those movies, you know, because it's the way you very softly bring ideas to people. And therefore, make sure that if you have, let's say, a hero who's a cutter, it's not always a man, you know, for instance, one of the same. So it's, I would say, very ubiquitous policies that could deal with this, starting with the early school up to the end of the education process in general, and touching on many other aspects in general. I do believe in strong gender policies, making sure that as, let's say, an organization, you have to put some commitment to make sure that you have 6% of women, a certain sentence, and you progressively increase that as well. So yeah, I know that it has to be really, again, focused intervention. And I agree with you at an early stage at primary level. What do you think about the role of parents or guardians in this? Because their expectations are also kind of stereotyped, I think, aren't they, in many ways? Yeah, I mean, you know, it's the pink dress. Yes. It's symptom in general. Lufa boys and pink for girls. And you know, I spoke to one of my best friends, he's very much willing to make sure that he doesn't create stereotype to his kids. And he said, you know, even though it's something American shows, you, you fall into it a lot of times in general. So I think that sure, parents have a role in there. But I strongly believe that the educational system is probably something we should should probably master and change much more easily than changing the mindset of parents in general. I have a question here from Chloe Sullivan, public affairs consultant. Do you think individual countries or national governments have a responsibility to drive and embrace digital disruption? For example, as you know, Ireland has just appointed a new government should we be encouraging new ministers to embrace digital disruption? We do. We should. We should. It's one of the key things I'm struggling with, friends, is that the very limited competence of the politician in here, you know, need to explain all the time what is good and what isn't good and how technology works in general. And you know, something which strikes me is in Israel or in China, like 50% of the politicians have an engineering or a scientific background. I think that there is a correlation with the success of these countries in the in the digital space in general. So and to tell you the truth, one of the things I did over the past 18 last months is I created the MOOC on public administration and digital. I did that because I was so frustrated with the very weak competencies that I wanted to, you know, to bring my share. And what was the take up of that view? It doesn't be launched. It's supposed to be launched on this Friday. Oh, good. We follow that. It's in French, is it? I'm sure. Yeah. That's a good idea. We might love to have. Absolutely. Tony may follow up on that. That would be very interesting. And like a question now from Madeline Clark, executive director of the GMEO partnering with philanthropy in Europe, supported by DG or TD Horizon to find and support evidence based social innovation to develop plans. So that's that's quite an undertaking. And she wants to ask the question, can you comment on how he sees the potential for digital innovation that can contribute to overcoming the social challenges we face across Europe to be encouraged? Oh, thank you. That's a very good question. I, you know, it's what we call, there is what we call digital divide, the fact that instead of reducing the gap in between, let's say, poor and rich, it increases this gap in general. And the COVID crisis has shown that actually, you know, if you had, I would say, parents who were pushing you to do your work, your schoolwork and so on, you were most likely to be coming from high end societies and any other. So it's something we are looking at the French level and the digital champion program that I belong to has this goal as well. And, you know, I think that some countries have shown the way, actually, if you look at, let's say, Sweden, for instance, you know, they are very serious about how to use this technology for impaired people, for disabled people in general, for the elderly, for all these people, and they are creating some tools and platforms that are especially made for these people in general. So it's the reason why I believe it can work is that basically the technology allows you to leverage a system, you know, so if you do a platform, it's a big investment, but it works for a non-tier category of people in general. So it's it's mostly, I would say, a matter of political will as well, you know, like gender. And I, the thing we need to do at the European level is to identify the best practices and I would say to let all the countries to see that because, for instance, I know initiatives in Romania that are really stunning that the best I could imagine enough for helping people to to learn how to read and to count and so on. It's been launched by another digital champion. He has created like six thousand spots where you can do that using platforms. So it's it's big. Yeah. Yeah, no, I think that's really important. And just taking off that is, and I'm getting the idea of creating a kind of library or database of best practice and use cases. Do you think that could be done in each country or in a European level, you know, so that people can have access to them? I think that's been to be done by each country, because you have language barrier, you have code barriers as well. And but what should be done at the EU level is sharing the information, sharing the information. Very interesting, you know, in this pandemic time, you know, it's been a great help, our emphasis on mental health. But in fact, digital technology has transformed the whole delivery of mental health services. And I think the politicians have seen that. So that's another example. I don't know if that certainly has happened here in Ireland. I don't know. Has that happened in France? I'm not sure. Yeah, no, I would welcome that. Yeah. You mentioned, you know, how good in your presentation, how good the UK was, you know, in terms of making progress. And as you said, back with Cambridge in the 90s and so on, do you think post Brexit, will the UK be a significant digital competitor in the EU, along with China in the US? You know, how will how will it fare? You know, it's very difficult to say. And depending to who you listen to, to get some pretty different views. I don't know. I don't know. I'd say that, you know, on the traditional economy, what is about to come for the UK is not good in general. But I would be less certain about that regarding the digital economy in general. It's, they would need to have some agreements with the EU regarding regulation and to be part of the level playing field, which apparently they don't want to be. But I think that, you know, to some extent, they have reached such a level which they can develop some platforms on the same ground as the US is doing, you know, so they managed to expand the platform dealing with the regulation of national countries well, you know, so it's possible, but it's unsure. I think, you know, forces, the UK is a great country, but it's very fragile. And I, to me, the biggest risk that they are facing is human capital. It's to have, I would say, a very strong leak of people who used to be willing to work there and who will quit the country because they feel that it's not the place they have to be now post-Brexit. And that may be the biggest risk for them, but it's unsure. It's difficult to say. We thought that people would leave the country past the first step of the Brexit process and actually they haven't as much as we expected. No, and I think today they're having another meeting and things are not looking that good. So I think your observations are very well made. And I just want to question about maybe to finish, you know, a central theme on Van der Leyen's commission and, of course, President Macron is an emphasis on Europe's digital sovereignty. Now, you know, what are your thoughts on this? Is it necessary for Europe to be digitally competitive, to have digital sovereignty? Hmm. It goes, I think it goes beyond the notion of economy. It's also go against, I would say, disinformation in general, and it touches cyber security. And so, you know, I read a book from Alan Greenberg. I can't remember the titles of the book, but it touches about cyber security in general. And it's incredible to see how weak are these systems in general. I wouldn't be surprised if we were to discover that it's possible to stop the whole Europe as a continent, you know, all the systems, all the supply chains, all the trains, all the things. It's what it implies in general. So it's one of the reasons why we're very concerned with Huawei and I, yeah, to me, if we want to be part of the future, to make a long story short, I think we need to regain our sovereignty in general, which means that we need to probably be quite tough at Huawei, but not only these people. A lot of platforms coming from the U.S., all the cloud act in general, we need to have a say on that and to be tough, you know, we need to have a political vision. So that's, I couldn't be clear. Yeah. Well, that's a very positive note to end this webinar on, because it is about having a vision. It is about creating that climate for change and support within your citizens and institutions within Europe. And I think that's a very positive message. And I'd like to thank you very much for your very thoughtful presentation and also for your answers and your considerations. And there's a number of ideas I think you've raised there. And thanks to our participants for asking those questions. I really appreciate it very much. And I hope we welcome you back again to the IAEA, but perhaps physically again, as another time and hope things will be good to you and to your work. And I'd like to thank you again for your participation. Really appreciated you and also to thank our audience. And if I could take this opportunity, you've mentioned cybersecurity there, but one of the next states for your diary for our audience here is on July the 13th, Johann Lappazar, who is Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity will be making a presentation at one o'clock. And on Tuesday the 14th of July, Helen Dixon, our Data Protection Commissioner will be looking at the GVPRs. You mentioned that two years on. You know what two-year-olds are like, so it would be interesting what she has to say. And it's her reflections on how things have happened. So thank you again for your questions and for your participations and for your excellent presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Bye now. Yeah, bye bye. Thank you. Bye bye.