 I will start my presentation, which will start first by the rationale of the European Interoperability Framework and the rationale for the revision of the framework also. How can I pass the slides? Ah, okay. So I think the first thing that is important to remember is what are our stakeholders' view and what is that they want. And this, if we refer to the input from the businesses in the various documents that were published by the Commission, you see that they ask for cross-border services from public authorities. From surveys from citizens, we have also the same feedback. They want e-services that enable them to fulfill administrative procedures in other European countries. The same feedback comes from the political level, as we can see by the conclusions of the last Council in May 2016, where they acknowledge the potential of the seamless cross-border and digital public services and use of public e-services across borders. I think we should all have in mind that this is what we are working for. Now, what is the situation in fact today? And there I refer to the e-government benchmark, and we see that we have very good marks in user centricity, so digital public services are being put online. But when we go more in depth of what does it mean, we see that there are parameters that are still lagging behind and offer even quotes below 50%. And in these areas, we see, for example, service delivery. And service delivery means what? Means end-to-end services. It means that the cities and not the business must not transport the paper from one to another. The service is offered end-to-end. And we see that the mark that we have today is below 50% mean value across the unit. Of course, there are differences, but the mean value is 48%. We see also very, very poor marks in cross-border mobility. So cross-border mobility, in spite of the accent that our stakeholders put on it, it's not yet there. And we see also two other marks that have also to do with what's going on in the backyard, in the backstage, which is authentic sources or the data from base registers and the accessibility of these data to put in place end-to-end services. The mark is, again, below 50% and the same for eSafe. Next. Now, I think it is interesting to see also the scores of this benchmark, which is the Digital Public Service Dimension by Country from the DESI Index 2016 and compare this index with the index for interoperability. And these are some brackets, and I'll come back to what you said a while ago, Carol, and allow myself to... The European Interoperability Framework was transposed in the majority of the member states. I think we have 24 national interoperability frameworks that were transposed from the DIF, adapting it, of course, to the situation of each country. So I think that gives, let's say, a background, a common background of understanding of what is required in the member states to achieve interoperability. It's not yet the full agreement in the full specification and I don't think that it's necessarily what we are aiming for, but it provides a common base of understanding that will help us afterwards connect the services. Close my bracket. And this second graphic shows the implementation of interoperability, and by this we mean the implementation of the national interoperability frameworks because we have seen there is the publication of the national interoperability frameworks and then there is the implementation of the national interoperability framework, which is not necessarily the same. So here we put the implementation. And if we compare the values in the digital public services and the interoperability, we see a correlation. Those countries that are best in putting in place digital public services are also the same, that are best in implementing interoperability. So there is really an importance in putting in place interoperability to really get to the digital public service that we want to offer to our stakeholders. So we have to focus. The focus should be on those parameters that score lower, of course. So we have base registers and associated with base registers we have date management. EID, which has a higher score in the government benchmarking, but nevertheless we should have, every time we should have it on mind because without EID authentication we'll get to nowhere. So that's why we put it there. E documents, the service delivery, so end-to-end, and an aspect that's governance and organization that although, of course, it's not in the benchmark, it is a constant feedback that we receive. It's the difficulty that the member states administrations face when putting in place digital services are in governance and in organizational aspects are extremely important and often a major barrier. Behind all this we have interoperability. So these things are, I think very important to have in mind. Interoperability, it's a means to achieve a proper digital end-to-end service. Now, this has been recognized in the Digital Single Market Initiative that was published and adopted by the Commission in May 2015. And one of the actions of the ESM Initiative is precisely their vision of the EIA because they recognize that it is extremely important to build cross-border public services. So the objective of the revision of the EIA and of the EIA in itself is to avoid the creation of new electronic barriers or silos when modernizing public administrations. So this was already before the previous version, the main purpose, so that everyone has a common understanding of interoperability and does not implement in each country in a different way because I understand that the priority for member states is first their own digital services. But afterwards we must connect with the other member states and if each one builds his own digital service in a completely different way, we will never, never get to cross-border services and the Digital Single Market and the Single Market, we can forget it. So this is important. One major objective of the EIA. And then of course, facilitated the interconnection of public service for citizen business at national and new level, improving the quality of public service in transparency and the coherence of open data from various sectors and countries. So again, the coherence around the different aspects. So for those that don't know, the European Interoperability Framework is constituted by a layered model on the IOP, a conceptual model of public service, principles and recommendations. What's in it? In the revision, I mean. So the revision was focused on these major aspects that we have identified as priorities that need to be addressed. So we have the governance with much more emphasis in this version. The interoperability governance meaning the implementation of interoperability across all sectors and institutional levels of the different member states. We have the public service governance which is the governance of a specific public service because one public service is often depending on several administrative entities. So how will they govern the public service? How will they organize themselves? Information interoperability which was before called semantic interoperability but we think more appropriate to call it information interoperability. And we have put a lot of efforts with a set of new recommendations in this area. And then we change the conceptual model of the public service because in this new form we can identify the particular components that are essential for the implementation of an end-to-end digital public service. And we have put a special focus on the information sources and base registers precisely to address the point that I mentioned before. So these were the aspects that we most focused in this revision because these were the aspects that we saw that were left behind and we should put our efforts on improving them. So that's the major force behind. Yes, I will keep together. So this is more details about the points that are mentioned, governance, the information interoperability, you see new recommendations, the public service governance mentioned explicitly and the base registers with a set of recommendations. And we came to the end of the last slide. How have we done? How was the process for the revision? It is the same that was for the last version. So it is a consensus-building process. The current version was developed with the Member States administrations around the table in several working groups. It was coordinated all the work by Vasilius that is there in support. And with the other European institutions that were also consulted and the commission services and with experts from the academia. And there was also a call for standardization bodies and we had a meeting last year with them and we asked input from the standardization bodies via the MSP stakeholder platform that is managed by our colleagues from DigiGrow and Digiconnect. Now it is in public consultation. And so we invite everyone to give us the comments. We have already received lots of comments. Amazing from citizens. I wonder what normal citizen knows about the European Interoperability Framework but the fact is we have a lot of comments from citizens. So I invite everyone to give the comments to the new revised version of the framework and I thank very much OFA for giving us the opportunity to come here and discuss. Thank you. At the end of the day we are all citizens. Yes, of course. Thanks.