 I think if we listen to the statements from US agribusiness and as well as from US diplomats for the negotiation, better access for agricultural products from the US to the European market is one of our core objectives in the negotiations. In Europe and the US we have a very different background, how we see food, how farming and farming policy developed over the last decades and centuries. And we say that the consumers have a right to know, they have a right to choose and how we assess food and how we assess products that can be used to produce food are based on a precautionary principle. In the US, the system is different. It's more about giving faster access to market to different products and then they have very strict liability rules. So at the moment there is no import markets for meat treated with hormones, for meat washed with some chemical substances to reduce the germs on it as well as a very limited market access for genetically modified products. So who would benefit from this trade agreement if the US interests and the interests of the agribusiness would be one outcome then it would be the meat sector, the livestock sector and also the farmers who are producing GM crops in the US. I think we hear very different messages from both sides of Atlantic. The US say they want to get better market access for products that at the moment cannot be marketed in the US. You have statements from national ministers, you have statements from the EU Commission of the Trade, they say the public should trust him. So far we haven't seen a single piece of text from the European Commission about the food safety standards. So for us it would be naive to assume that agriculture and food safety standards who have been a controversial topic in other trade agreements would be fully defended by the European Commission. And we are heavily concerned about a smaller rather technical decision by the European Commission to authorize first substances how meat can be treated to achieve a higher hygiene status a few months ago. We also see the willingness of the European Commission to avoid US partners and to think about allowing the import of meat from cloned animals, which is so far not possible. So we see a lot of movements from the Commission based on the priority to foster the trade of US agriculture products instead of defending the European politics and the European standards. So for us it would be naive based on a statement of the Commission on trust us for the most complex trade agreement for the human history to say we trust you. For us, the European consumers, the European citizens have all reasons to be concerned that they might end with products on their plates in the supermarket shelves where they don't know which substances were used to produce them, who produced them and which procedures were used to produce them. So for us, a trade agreement that includes food safety issues is unacceptable because you cannot bargain car industry interests versus public procurement versus services versus food safety standards. For us, food is embedded in European societies in regional traditions and this should be excluded from measures to promote transatlantic trade.