 So I understand that Mrs. Redding was with you not long ago, and I think it is fitting that we have this conversation about the efforts that are going on on privacy on both sides of the Atlantic. We've engaged in a project of updating privacy protections to deal with the current technology, to deal with a digital age, an age when increasingly we are all of us generating more data about ourselves, whether it is posting a notice of a birthday party on Facebook or information that we generate about our location on our cell phones or increasingly data about all aspects of our lives, things that we may generate from sensors. You can now use a cell phone as a stethoscope. You can now use it as an athletic training device combined with a heart rate monitor and track your health from moment to moment. All of this generates data, data that may reside in the cloud and not on a device. This opens up enormous possibilities of new frontiers of human knowledge as that data can be used to explore new avenues of health research, location data can be used for public safety in an emergency. Obviously, it brings with it enormous implications about what we share with the public, what information becomes accessible to the government as well as to others. This is an important project that each side of the Atlantic is engaged on. It is also a project that is vitally important to mutual commitments to economic growth and to an economic partnership. Last year, at the U.S.-EU summit, President Obama and President von Rumpa affirmed that the United States and the European Union are committed to encouraging innovation, to encouraging entrepreneurship and to supporting jobs and growth. What we do in the data privacy area is important to that partnership. In March of last year, Mrs. Redding and Secretary of Commerce John Bryson issued a joint statement on privacy, which underscored the goals of the U.S.-EU summit and emphasized that the United States and the European Union share a commitment to promoting the rights of individuals, to have their data protected, and to facilitate the interoperability of our data privacy frameworks. The joint statement expressed that the United States and the European Union clearly share a commitment to promoting the rights of individuals, to have their personal data protected, and to facilitating the interoperability of our commercial data privacy regimes. The European Union and the United States are global leaders in protecting individual freedoms, including privacy, while at the same time fostering innovation and trade that are so critical to the world economy, notably in the present times. Stronger transatlantic cooperation in the field of data protection will enhance consumer trust and promote the continued growth of the global internet economy in the evolving digital transatlantic common market. This work will also encourage innovation and entrepreneurship, and support the jobs and growth agenda outlined by President Obama and Presidents Van Rompuy and Barroso at the November 28th U.S.-EU summit. So it's in this spirit of cooperation and on data privacy that the United States has invited the EU to participate in ongoing processes, multi-stakeholder processes in which we are developing enforceable codes of conduct in commercial sectors. And tomorrow I will be in Brussels to speak to an interparliamentary meeting along with other representatives of the United States government to talk about our perspective on the European legislative proposals and the ways that we can strengthen the interoperability of our data privacy systems. Both the United States and the European Union recognize that we need clear rules of the road to foster economic growth and to foster innovation. We both recognize that trust is in the internet economy is a vital commodity, a vital commodity for consumers who have to be able to trust that their data will be used in ways that are consistent with their expectations and will be protected from access by third parties to whom they haven't committed that data. It's equally on the other side important to companies because companies rely on that trust in order to engage in transactions. We also recognize the importance of innovation in this speech, in this space. We also recognize that as the draft legislation in the EU says that cross-border flows of data are necessary for the expansion of trade and for international cooperation. So we will continue, our conversation continue to express our views on the European process as we have invited the Europeans to be stakeholders in our process. The United States has a deep tradition of privacy protection. These are deeply held values in the United States. Our Fourth Amendment to our Constitution rests on a deep distrust of government intrusion on individual privacy. We have built up over the years a set of statutes and judicial protections under statutes and common law on that foundation. We also have strong protections in statutes across a range of sectors, the financial sector, health records, telecommunications records, all protected by statutes that have been on the books, some going back to the 1980s. The United States in the 1970s developed a set of fair information practice principles that are a foundation for privacy protection around the world. Those fair information practice principles informed the 1995 European Data Privacy Directive. They are the foundation of the OECD recommendations. In the 1970s, the United States adopted a federal government privacy act that regulates how our federal agencies can handle private information and is out of that framework that we now have privacy impact assessments. We also have in the United States strong enforcement by our Federal Trade Commission and by State Attorneys General. Enforcement that holds companies to the promises that they make in privacy policies and any other undertakings. It is that enforcement that led to enforcement actions against Google for its rollout of Google Buzz and more recently a $22.5 million fine that the FCC levied against Google under the consent decree that it entered. This is a complementary process of enforcement that goes side by side with the extraordinarily detailed and transparent audit that Billy Hawks Data Protection Commission just recently issued on Facebook. In some sense goes with the imposition of fines and with the 20-year requirement of audits of Facebook further than what the DPC has done here. These efforts are working together to protect a billion Facebook users globally. The FTC has taken similar enforcement actions against Facebook with MySpace among others. So this is a system of enforcement that reflects a strong set of privacy values and a system that has been effective in putting privacy into practice, has built up a culture of compliance among American companies. Some of you may be familiar with the International Association of Privacy Professionals. It's a global organization and a couple of years ago I attended an event there and a commissioner, a Data Privacy Commissioner said to me, you know, many of my European colleagues say that America does not care about privacy. But how come when I come to these events, all the people attending? are Americans. That is, I think, a reflection of the culture of compliance that has been built up by our sectoral regimes by the enforcement that is in place from the Federal Trade Commission and other law enforcers. I think it is also a recognition of some of the market imperatives to build up trust, to have a trusted brand. But we believe today that self-regulation alone is not enough. That there is a role for legislation in the United States to strengthen privacy protections, to reinforce trust within the system, and to increase our international cooperation. So the Obama administration embarked going on three years ago in a policy process, very much parallel to what the European Commission has been through. I had the privilege of co-leading that process as co-chair of the Interagency Committee within our government that led that process. We spent two years in a process of engagement with stakeholders, listening, understand the technology issues, the privacy issues. And last January, the Obama administration put out a privacy blueprint that set forth a consumer privacy bill of rights. A statement of basic expectations that consumers should have as they deal with companies, as they deal with the transactions and interactions online and in other environments that involve some exchange of their data. These seven principles, individual control, transparency, access, and accuracy, what we call respect for context. An adaptation of both the data minimization principles and use limitation principles that adopts the understanding that how consumers expect their data to be used varies according to the context. And that similarly consent and other things need to vary according to the context. We also believe that data security is one of those basic rights. We have in 46 states in the United States data breach laws, but we believe there should be a single national standard. So we are advocating that. As so, there are really four major elements of the blueprint. The consumer privacy bill of rights. The endorsement of legislation to give those rights legal force, to make those rights enforceable by our Federal Trade Commission. The third element is to flush out the consumer privacy bill of rights through a multi-stakeholder policy development process. We believe that the – one of the great strengths of the internet in this global communications network that we have today is that it is not run by any one government. It is not run by government that it is being an entity that has been transnational, multi-stakeholder, and that the governance by institutions like the World Wide Web Forum and other multi-stakeholder, governmental, non-governmental, academic has been part of the success of the internet because it has transcended boundaries because it has made it adaptable and flexible and has enabled the enormous innovation and dynamic economic growth that we have seen coming out of the internet. So we want to preserve that. We want to incorporate that kind of policymaking into the way that we approach policymaking in the internet. So we have said that we are going to proceed with using the same multi-stakeholder model to develop privacy policies based on the consumer privacy bill of rights. So we have begun a process to deal with transparency in mobile applications. That began in July. We have convened several meetings of stakeholders to try to work out what – how on this small screen do you provide adequate transparency so that consumers can understand how they – their mobile data is being used. That process is – has been moving forward. Discussions continue. We have more scheduled. It's a challenging process. You know, anytime you bring people disparate views together, there will be some pulling and tugging. But we expect that just as we've seen in other internet multi-stakeholder processes that some consensus will be achievable at the end of the day. We are moving forward as well to – with the drafting of legislation to implement the Consumer Bill of Rights and, you know, give it the legal force that I spoke about. The final element of our privacy blueprint is international interoperability. This is something that is vital in, you know, to our economies. It's a goal, a principle that, you know, is especially important in these fragile economic times. The United States and Europe are united not just by common cultures and values and people, but our economies are inextricably linked. They together account for half of global GDP. Trade between the United States and the European Union accounts for nearly one-third of global trade flows with 15 million jobs at stake. We need to maintain these flows. We need to grow this market. We need to allow companies to develop on both sides of the Atlantic and to expand the global growth agenda. So as we each proceed forward with the development of privacy protections to enhance trust in that environment, it is important that we do no harm. So the questions before us, the questions, particularly in our discussions with the European Union are, you know, how do we ensure that these rules of the road do no harm? How do we set these rules in ways that will enable international interoperability? We have one important mechanism in place today. That is the U.S.-EU safe harbor framework that will continue under the proposed regulation. We need to keep that mechanism in place, but we need to build on. We need to allow binding corporate rules to be flexible enough and, you know, to be administratively simple enough that, you know, companies can adopt those to allow international flows. We need to expand mechanisms of accountability so that companies, you know, can proceed to share data across borders, you know, in a vast number of contexts in ways that will halt them accountable to standards in our country, to standards in the EU, you know, whether those are through audits, whether it's subsequent liability. We also don't want to hope that the provisions in the regulation to allow for the developments of standards of conduct will be an important tool to bring to policymaking, to bring to the development of the application of privacy policies in the European Union the same dynamic multi-stakeholder process that we seek to incorporate into our policymaking. So these are, I think, our key objectives in our dialogue to maintain the flow of information, the flow of data across borders so that we can continue the dynamic economic relationship that exists between the United States and the European Union and to build on that. So thank you. I look forward to your questions.