 The working group, as you mentioned, prepared the DFS competency guideline primarily for policymakers and regulators and also for organizations like national ministries that may be working on financial and digital financial literacy issues because we recognize that competencies for DFS are lower than what they need to be and DFS products are quite complicated, complex, which require the consumer to have a certain level of knowledge not only with their financial literacy skills but also with their digital skills and technology skills. So the competency guideline actually looks at 15 different competencies and we've divided this up into knowledge segments, skills segments that consumers need to have and also proactive behaviors. So it's not helpful, for example, if they know they should be doing something, but they are not then doing it, that's not helpful at all. So the competency areas are arranged around the three types or three phases of relationships with the DFS providers. So they look at the presale phase when consumers are shopping around and getting information on the financial service and really trying to understand whether that product is affordable and suitable for their needs. We look at the skills, the competencies and the behaviors that they need to have at that aspect, at the presale aspect. We look at the sale aspect, the transactional phase with the DFS providers, what are the skills and competencies that they need to have at that level. And then we also look at the after-sale component or the post-sale component which would be the continuing relationship that the consumer has with the provider and any complaints or any need for redress. And does the consumer know how to actually complain effectively and how to get redress. So we look at all these three phases of the relationship and the competencies the consumer should have to be high functioning. Obviously, this competency guideline is very comprehensive, it's very detailed, and we might not find a lot of consumers out there, maybe very just a small percent with all of these competencies, but it's intended to be a roadmap that allows for policy makers to pick and choose and say, okay, we're going to work a lot on data privacy because we don't feel consumers have a lot of knowledge on that topic or we don't feel that they're actually taking proactive measures to protect their data privacy. So it's really a tool that we think that policy makers can use to take bits and pieces and to create a long-term strategy on the subject. Well, it gives them an idea of the topical areas where consumers may be weaker. If generally we look at financial literacy levels globally, there's a mismatch. There's a lot lower financial literacy levels than there are access levels. So generally this means let's take, for example, a North European country like a Scandinavian country that might have 85% of their consumers that have access to financial services including DFS, but then you look at their financial literacy levels and maybe there are a good 20 percentage points below that access rate. So essentially what that means is you have consumers that have access to these DFS products which are quite complex and they might not be understanding the terms and conditions, they might not be understanding pricing, they might not be able to use all the tools at their disposition. And this creates, this disconnect also creates a problem for regulators because a consumer that is not competent tends to get into difficulties and they also tend to be more likely to be victimized by predatory financial services to fall victim to frauds like Ponzi schemes. One of the working group subject matters that we worked on in the past was digital Ponzi schemes and now during COVID the frauds have really shot up exponentially. So essentially the regulator has more work and an increased burden when its consumer segment is not competent. So that's really the disconnect that we're trying to underline and to provide a tool for the regulators and the policymakers to use to to work on this essentially in the coming years. And are gender issues taken into consideration in the DFS consumer competency framework? Well with the consumer competency framework is aspirational but it seeks to protect the most vulnerable of consumers. So in some cases that might be women but not always and not necessarily and I certainly am not a gender expert. But we look to to protect the most vulnerable consumers so that might be somebody in the rural areas. It might be youth. We're starting to see data coming out that points to the fact that DFS really targets youth and youth are really attractive to using shiny new fintech services. But they're the ones who are most likely to get into trouble with financial services because they are the least financially literate group out there one of the least or lowest. So you have a situation whereby fintech and digital financial services are targeting youth but they're the most likely to get into problems with the use of these products doing things like over drawing accounts, engaging in risky investment behavior. Some of the data coming out of East Africa for example by World Bank Seagap tends to indicate that the digital lenders are focusing on youth and they might have tendency to default or to pay their loans late. So that act of paying a loan late sets them up for difficulty in the future being on negative credit listings for example. But yes we do take into account all the vulnerable types of consumers. So that would also include elderly populations, migrant populations, people with physical impairments or cognitive impairments. Essentially if you can protect the most vulnerable consumer you can protect everybody. Well I think the first step is noticing that there is a large disconnect between access and usage in financial literacy levels of populations and unfortunately I'm in the field of financial consumer protection. So unfortunately you don't see a reaction from a lot of regulators until there's been a big problem. So we saw that for example after the 2007-2008 mortgage debacle in the United States that then the issue of financial consumer protection was brought to the forefront and the OECD developed the high level principles on financial consumer protection which also highlighted that financial education is equally important. You can't have a bunch of consumers running around who don't know about the products that they're using, who don't read the terms and conditions, who engage in risky behavior. That sets up systemic risk potential for systemic risk in the financial services area. So we hope that regulators will pick this up and start using it and we're available to help them should they choose to do that. We have also had participation in the working group and input from financial sector regulators so that was very helpful. But I don't see that it's an area right now where there's a lot of attention focused unfortunately.