 You have 75% of men who are legislators in the world. 75% of men make laws for all of us in the world. Come on. Thank you all for coming. As you know, the World Economic Forum has been very active on this issue. And so it's only fitting that we're doing this, a reports issue that is one of the members of the forums managing board who's here, who's going to come up at the end of this session and talk a little bit about what the forum is doing more specifically. But we have a fascinating set of panelists. And I want to get right to it. So let me first introduce the panelists. And then I thought I'd do a little bit of sequential interviewing and then a conversation. Sana Maren is, of course, the prime minister of Finland. And if you are wondering, yes, she is, in fact, as young as she looks, or maybe even younger. Maria Peniko is the minister of labor of France. You might be wondering why she's not negotiating with the transport workers right now. But I think she'll be going tomorrow to do that. Pumzile Malambo Ngoka is the undersecretary general and executive director of the UN's gender equality and empowerment program. And Jonas Preasing is the chairman and chief executive officer of Manpower Group. So let me start with you, Sana Maren. Prime Minister, when you became the head of government, you became the youngest head of government in the world, what was more important that you were the youngest head of government in the world, or that you were female and that you had such a young cabinet which was dominated by women? Well, thank you very much for having me here. It's a pleasure and a very interesting and very important topic that we are discussing today. Actually, I didn't focus on the media attention so much. I know it's something else for many countries in the world that we have so many young women in power. We have actually a five-party coalition government and each party have a women leader in charge. And four of us are under 35 years old and one of us is over 50-year-old. So we do have different generations in the government. And of course, it looks different that we are used to. But I hope that in the future it doesn't get as much attention because it should be also seen as normal that we have different generations, different genders in power to making decisions because if we look at the population, there are different genders. There are different generations. So we need people from all backgrounds. But you said it looks different. But is it different to have a majority of your cabinet as women, so many young? Is it, in fact, do you think there's something different about the nature of the conversations? You've probably been in rooms and committees which were dominated by men. Do you think there's a different quality to the kind of conversation you have now in your cabinet? Well, we started our work last summer when we formed the government and we changed the prime minister last December. So, of course, we do have the same program. We do have the same visions and we do have the same agenda that we used to have. And we are very committed to build the society, the future in a way that is socially, economically, but also environmentally sustainable. So, actually, the agenda hasn't changed. We have worked on these issues before and we are continuing to work to the agenda as a fourth. But, of course, it's a different environment that we are used to. But I'm not the first female prime minister in Finland. I'm the third. And we also had a female president when I was a young girl and growing up. So, maybe it's not that big a deal in Finland that we have five women in power and that we have five female prime minister. But, of course, it shows and means something that the media and the global community is talking about. So, maybe today it's something else, but hopefully in the future it's the new normal that we have people from all kinds of backgrounds making the decisions in power places. You have the five leaders of the coalition, all women. How do you meet? Where do you meet when? How does it work? Well, it works like in every government. We have meetings and we make decisions and we don't... Yeah. We don't meet in a female locker room and have a locker room talk. Well, it's funny you say that because I saw in another interview you gave, you said you sometimes meet in the sauna. So, but, of course, I suppose that's not so different in Finland. Everyone's meeting in saunas all the time. That's true, yeah. We don't have the meetings in sauna. That was a joke that I made in Time Magazine, but actually we've been to the sauna together with the five female leaders and talked about everything else, our family life and getting to know better each other because I think when you know people you're working with, you also can cooperate with them better. So, I think it's very important that we also have social life and we also communicate in a not that formal way. It helps also in the formal meetings to get things done. What I'm going to get at is there are many women who will say that a conversation that has more women is less, for example, conflictual, that women tend to be more willing to find a compromise or a solution that is more cooperative. Do you believe that's true or do you think that is in its own way a kind of gender stereotyping and that actually men and women are essentially, that these dynamics are the same no matter whether there are eight women and two men or eight men and two women? Well, I think if we have people from different backgrounds, different genders making the decisions, the decisions are better because different angles are being pointed out and being used. So, I think it's very important that you have different angles and different backgrounds in the discussion and also in the decision-making process. I think it's better for everybody. It's not only better for women that we have women in charge, it's also better for the men. And we have many issues that we have to work or also in Finland, even though we are a country that's been pioneering in gender equality, but we also have many things to do. And one thing is reforming the parental leave because we do have too few fathers that are spending more time with their children when the children are very young and we want equality also in the parental leave system. And actually, me and my husband, we did split our parental leave in half. So I spent six months with our small daughter and my husband spent six months with our daughter as well. And I think it's very good also for the men that they can build such trusting and good, how do you say, relationship with their children. So I think it's very important and I feel that we also have a lot of things to do in Finland when it comes to gender equality on equal pay, when it comes to parental leave and for example, gender-based violence. That is an issue that we need to work on in Finland. And it's very good that we have different people from different backgrounds and actually our gender equality minister is a man in our government. So I think it's very good that we have different perspectives. We need everybody on board. It's benefiting everybody, so we need everybody on board. Do you and your husband share the work at home equally or do you feel like many working women that actually you end up having to do more of the housework? I think we do have a good dynamic with my husband and also because we have a small child and I have a very ambitious work and spend a lot of time in work. We also have the grandparents helping in the everyday life. So it's very important that you have also the network that is backing you and saying that you can do things and we will help you. So nobody makes it alone. We need each other. We need our spouses and our grandparents and everybody who is involved in our lives. Muriel, let me ask you. You're coming to this from a perspective of having probably spent a lot of time in situations that were quite male dominated. Do you think has it changed enough? Is it on the right track? Or how would you give us a grade almost and reflect a little what it's been like to work in these environments? My view is that there is a momentum but clearly we need to accelerate. First, because you never know, it can go back. In some countries it can go back. And also because when there is a momentum, you have to take the baton and to push that. Happy to share the French experience. In two steps, first in 2011, there was a law for women on boards. And why the regulator wanted to act? Because there were no progress. There were 10% of women on listed company boards and it was not moving because so-called there was nobody. And so there were no talent pool. With the obligation in five years to comply, today we have 43% more than the obligation in listed company in France. And that changed the whole thing. But he has to have this push of the regulator. And last year we passed another law. And before I came to the parliament to present this law on equal pay, we have worked for four months with unions, employers, women association companies to design it not only as an obligation, as an assessment, but also as a tool for action. So what we have done last year is now in France it's one year, there is an obligation of result on equal pay, not only a principle, but a practical obligation, there are sanctions if you don't respect it. You have three years to comply. But we have created together an index of equal pay, which is on equal pay for equal job, of course, but also equal opportunity of career, equal opportunity to have a pay rising. And you get all the points you need to have four out of 10 women in the top composition. And what happened, and it's very interesting that most of the CEO discovered there were a lot of discrimination in the company. I mean, I don't know any CEO that in the morning say I would discriminate women. But there are a lot of micro decision from management, from HR, self, also self esteem sometimes that women don't apply or think it's not possible, or because they don't share the boundary, think it's impossible for family reasons. And so since that, there is a real trend and we'll see in March, because it will be the second photo, so we'll see if it's moving or not. We are very pragmatic, if it's not moving enough, we will move another way. But I'm quite confident because every day I meet companies that say it's just a shock to realize. But we wanted to do it as a tool for actions. It's only five critters, it could be 50, but 50 just for reporting. Five, it's a tool for action. And I think there is a momentum for that. And in March, we will expand to the 40,000 company above 50 employees, so we go very, very deep in the society. It's almost five million of women that will get either equal pay, either equal opportunities, both will improve. And why we do that? For obvious reasons of justice and equity and in our government with a half and a half, women and men, women and men, make it very strong. But also for economic reasons, for social reasons it's obvious. For economic reasons, there are a lot of studies. McKinsey made an IMF standard approach. There are many studies that McKinsey said, evaluate that if there were equal pay in the world, it would be 12 trillion small GDP. And there is a recent studies in Europe that if we go for that in Europe, it will increase GDP by six percent. And for obvious reasons, because women would have equal pay, not only it's good for them, it's fair, give freedom, but also they reinvest in the society a lot, in education, health, common goods, that helps the whole society to progress. So it's good for men and women, what I mean. Homsile, I wonder, you must have a slightly more macro perspective, because you're looking at this in so many countries. If the goal is to accelerate, where are the blockages and what should be done about them? Well, firstly, representation of women in leadership is a governance issue. We need to look at it like that. We need to think about a democratic workplace where as many of the people who work there are represented, not just women and men, but everyone else who may not be there. Secondly, we have lots of progress as far as girls excelling in education, but that does not translate into girls in the marketplace, especially in senior leadership. And in order to help the acceleration and the fact that we have girls in the pipeline who are not being selected, you actually need to put measures. You need regulation, you need codes, you need targets, whatever, but some special measure to push the pipeline to get to the right place. And of course, you also need retention, because even when you have them, the workplace isn't always welcoming. So you need retention so that they can stay. Parental leave is one such. You need to deal with the unconscious bias in the culture, in the workplace. You need to deal with sexual harassment, which is one of the reasons why women sometimes do not want to stay in high places. So it's a combination of measures that you need to get to the right. Jonas, when you look at this from the private sector, what is it that you hear? Because one of the things, Marielle, and I think Sana both talked about is people say, well, there aren't enough, there isn't this talent out there. We'd love to have women, but there aren't the qualified candidates. So what is your perspective? Well, I would say those kinds of statement, at least from our own experience, I'd put in the category of utter nonsense. It's a matter of how badly you want it, I think. And in our own, so we come from this, of course, with a great view of what's happening in labor markets, the demographics. We think the moral case, of course, is clear. The business case, and you, Prime Minister, talked about this, in a world that's disrupting and transforming at a rapid pace, you really want to have as a diverse talent pool and thought process as possible to make the best decisions. But if there is a business case, let me press you, why is it not happening? In other words, if businesses would benefit, if there is, in fact, this addition to the economy, then are businesses shooting themselves in the foot? Absolutely, because in the end, this is exactly the question I asked myself six years ago. If the business case is clear, the moral case is clear, we all agree you should happen. Nobody wakes up in the morning saying let's discriminate against somebody. Why is the needle not moving? And I think you heard some of the reasons here. First of all, it's not put high enough on the strategy. So if it's a program or it's a metric that's one of a hundred metrics, it's not part of a strategy that is truly going to drive better business outcomes. So you have to put it at a level of priority, board senior leadership and management that is truly understanding that drives better business outcomes. But the most important part, I think, is culture. You have to make it socially unacceptable not to have equal representation at all levels. And of course, the first person that is going to affect both strategy change and implementation and cultural change is the leadership. So the first one responsible for not making it happen is the senior leader, and in this case, myself. So to realize that we did not have a culture where it's socially unacceptable, that it is my job to create a culture that has conscious inclusion is what's going to move the needle. And I have to say, I've been surprised at seeing how quickly, when you decide that that is the level of priority and the approach that you need to take, how quickly you're able to move the needle. 45% of our board is women directors, aiming for 50. 36% of our senior management is women up from 26 or seven years ago, heading to 50. Our interim step is 40. So to your point, you have to have very clear metrics. Our board is committed and is holding me accountable for making these changes, just as they are holding me accountable for executing on a business strategy to develop the Chinese market. And I think when you do it in this way, you can see much, much more rapid progress than we've seen in many instances, including in our own organization in the past. And that's why I think this idea that it's difficult to find people and that that will be the reason why it can't happen. In my experience, it's not true. If you really want it badly enough, you're going to make it happen, just as you're going to make the other things happen that you have to make happen in the company for it to be successful in the long term. Prime Minister. Can I comment on this? Thank you very much. I do agree and we have to realize that business doesn't always work in a logical way because there are people behind businesses who are actually very conservative sometimes. And we do have many case studies that say that people think that people who remind that of themselves are more qualified. So we do have older men in power. They seek similar-minded and similar-looking people and think that they are more qualified. And they are not always making the decisions consciously, but unconsciously as well. So we do need to work on this issue. We need to make it transparent and we do need the actions that are conscious and we need also the political structures and changes in society. So we cannot just leave it for the businesses themselves or for the organizations themselves. We do need a government of structures. We need laws. We need similar-mindedness of culture and we do need to work on this because it's a conservative world in many points. Yes, let me ask you the one part about this that I've noticed and when you look at the data is that at the top it's still very male dominated that even companies where you have... So your experience at manpower is actually quite unusual. Why do you think that happens that at the top, the board of directors, the senior management, even places that have 45% women, the low-lifes will have 10% women at that? And how do you change that? If I share the experience of France, we have solved the question of board of directors but with the law. Because I agree it's full nonsense or bullshit to say there is no talent. But they were hidden, just number two, doing the job but not visible, invisible women. But now we have at the executive committee level, we are still at one out of three. So still a lot to do. But for that, I think the question of culture is important inside company, but also the society. What does the law say that one third has to be? One woman out of three member of the executive committee. But in some companies it's zero or one. So I believe in the cultural change within company but also society change. It's why, for instance, the index will have made it transparent. So it means all the companies have to publish it. And guess what? What happened the first day? Because now we have already 7,000 companies. Only on 7,000 company, only 3%, 167, I know all women, are to fully compliant. What they have done? The first days they say, come for the reputation of a prayer. Come with us, we are the only one, the most advantageous are all world. So they get better talent. And so in the less good, everybody said young people, even a man and woman say, we cannot go, you have to create this reputation. You cannot go and join a company was 19th century because there is no equality. So I think the cultural change within the society and the cultural change with the company have to go together to accelerate. Otherwise it's too long. And we cannot wait one, two, three generations more. When we launched this index of equal pay, we did it why? We measure that to be at the rhythm, at the pace of the progress, where we needed still five generation to equal pay. So we don't have five generation to it. So it's why we have to play with also reputation, transparency, laws, at the same time, leadership. Yes. Pumzila, is there a developing country, developed country, dichotomy here? Are developed countries better at this? I mean, I know there are some places, Rwanda where the laws, and so you have very strong female representation. But what's the overall picture? It is actually quite mixed. You have countries like Rwanda, at some point Afghanistan had more women in parliament than the U.S. You have South Africa, you have Seychelles, you have Mexico now. So it's actually fairly mixed. And with many things sometimes that seem to be wrong in Africa, this is one area where there is actually progress. The representation in decision making is in the public sector though, not in private sector. Prime Minister, I want some advice from you. I think the U.S. in terms of percentage of women in its legislature, I think it ranks 75th in the world. How do we get it up? Well, I think you need to make many decisions. We have had for a long time in our law that, for example, in municipalities, in cities, you have to have at least 40% of either men or women in the body. So you need laws, and I'm not sure about U.S. legislation if you have something like this, but you need laws and you need structures that leads the way to gender equality. It just doesn't happen by itself. It just doesn't happen by itself. You need to work on it constantly. And also, I think it's very important to realize that it doesn't always go forward. We also are taking a step backward. So we all have to fight each and every day for equality, for better life, because also, there are things happening in the world that's going backward. So it's very important for everyone to step in. It's not somebody else's job. This is why I got into politics, because I realized that things just don't happen by itself. I have to work. I have to do it myself. All my friends and people around me have to do it by themselves, and we need everybody involved in taking the steps forward that we will eventually have gender equality. We have lots of things to do also in Finland. But I'm not sure why is it so that the United States' representation is so low when it comes to women. I just don't know, because it's a developed country. So you have to ask the US citizens why they are picking men, not women. Jonas, do you have any thoughts? I think it's pretty clear that we talk a lot about how can we include more women in the workforce, and especially at all levels, and a lot of governments, and especially worried about demographics and the declining birth rates everywhere, including in the US. And so we think about that a lot when the answers are pretty clear and the evidence is also very clear. The data shows if you provide child care and elder care at scale so that women can fully participate in professional life and growth, they will participate to a greater degree in all facets of life. And as much as governments talk about doing different things, the reason they are not really adopting this as the one and only truth is that it's expensive, and it will require to be paid for, and that's why governments are reluctant, and the US, the benefits for working mothers, maternal leave, and others, are extremely low when it's compared to, for instance, to Finland or France or other countries all over the world. So I think that is the key driver behind the difficulty for women to fully participate during the course of their careers. Some do, and we are lucky in our own company to have women that have risen and are rising to the top, but they do so at great personal expense and sacrifice, frankly, in terms of what they have to do to make this whole equation work between professional and family work. I think, you know, when I look at it, when you look at a historical perspective, this is perhaps the most profound social change that has taken place in the world over the last 30 or 40 years, because if you think about how many thousands of years men have been dominant, particularly dominant in the workplace, and this transformation is, you know, if you think about one ethnic group being on top versus at the bottom, those things happen all the time, but this has been a structural reality in the world for so long. You go back, you know, and now in just the last 20 or 30 years, it's been addressed and it has produced backlashes of various kinds. So I think it's one of these things we should not be surprised it's hard. We should not be surprised that there are backlashes, but that's all the more reason to just keep at it day after day, just as the Prime Minister said. But I think it's important that we don't say it has been addressed because that is an illusion of change. You have 75% of men who are legislators in the world. 75% of men make laws for all of us in the world. Come on. I mean, it's too much. The number of women who are in leadership also in private sector, it's not adequate. So when we see just a critical mass appearing, not equal critical mass appearing, it's almost like they're taken care of. So we have to fight parity is parity. If it's not parity, it's not the real thing. Muriel, you have the last word. Yes, in the world, 60% of workers in the informal work. Among them, more than 80 are women. 80%. 80%. So it means that no social security, no retirement, no real pay. So I think that's question of parity has to go with the question of real access to the economy. If we don't empower women, help women to empower, they will be never equal. One of the things that we haven't talked enough about is, you know, there's been a debate in the United States. How much of this is that women need to demand these kinds of positions and how much of it are the kind of structural changes you were talking about? Family leave, parental leave. It was occasioned by the book by Cheryl Sandberg, Lean In. And there were some people who said, this is of course important, but women leaning in is not gonna be enough. You need a change in laws. You need husbands who are gonna do housework. You need all those kinds of things. That it isn't just a question of women demanding this. Would you tend to agree with that? Yes, of course, fully agree that the regulator has to create targets and rules, but also echoing on what Jonas said, it has to be a comprehensive review. The question of daycare, for instance, is very important. In France, we have the highest day rate with Ireland in Europe. And many countries ask us, how you do? We just have, not perfect, but better daycare. If you ask women, last in Japan and Germany, they are fixing now to choose between carrier and family. One third will not have no children, not at all. So, I mean, it can look counterintuitive, but the most you can have daycare, the most you work. Okay. Zilla, you said, parody is parody. And I want to ask a controversial question because I think it's, I think people wonder about this. Is it possible to imagine a world of equality of opportunity where there will be some areas, some industries, some professions, whether there be many more women than men, but others in which there will be many more men than women? In other words, should we be tolerant of the idea that not everything will always be 50-50? But if we are told, how do we know, how can we be sure that it's not because of discrimination? You see my point, is there, could there be some potentially, I don't want to say natural, but just some areas where you notice these differences, even though it does not appear to be the product of discrimination? I suppose if we have many areas where there's adequate representation, you can tolerate lapses in some areas, but when we have a general underrepresentation, then it's better to push and push very hard. We will aggregate once we have enough, right now we are still in the upward push, so it's the context that we're in right now. And I would say there is nothing from our understanding of human capital or labor markets that would justify an underrepresentation in any sector or in any skill set. You know, a lot of this is based on... I guess what I'm asking is, could you tolerate a massive overrepresentation in some areas? In other words, wouldn't that be... Is that okay? I mean, how should one think about this? It exists today for historical reasons in many professions, but if you're asking, is this the natural law that it always has to be... No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Overrepresentation of women. Right. No, no, I understand. It goes both ways, but I see no reason why that would have to be the case. I want everyone to get on this prime minister. Well, of course, equality isn't something that is only a women issue. It's also an issue for the men. For example, we do have a problem in Finland that we don't have enough men in the healthcare sector, in the social care sector, in, for example, daycare or education. So we do need more men in these sectors working together with women. And we do need more women in tech. We need more women in various places. So we do have a problem with women, but we also have a problem with men. And it's very important that we realize that it's not a women issue. It's a people issue. The reason why you have sectors always the same. Health, daycare, it's women. Taking care of people is women. Taking care of technology is men, basically. Do you think it's a coincidence? When you look at all kids, still today, in many countries, in most countries, the stereotypes are so deep in the society that, in fact, men and women don't have a choice. 80% of the young kids choose filière training and a job, which is a stereotype of the sex. Men and women. So we have to free men and women of the stereotypes that make them have choice on the market. Yeah. You also still find that even in those areas where women are overrepresented, say, for instance, education, in primary schools in some countries, and in most countries, teachers are women, but you'll find that school principal is a man. So it's... Everything is under control. Let me see if there's an interesting and clearly very enthusiastic audience. Is there somebody here who has a particular perspective or question or something you want to add? Sir, I don't know if there are mics. I think we have a small enough room that you can... I think we do have mics, all right. But just be brief, if you will. Most of the time, we talk about unconscious bias against women, but I think most of the time it's just plain and simple discrimination. We're just preparing a paper about discrimination in financial markets, especially getting loans. We hire actors and actresses with similar characteristics and we find taste discrimination. So help me with this. How to tackle this through regulation? Or I have to expect a nice behavior from the banks? Sir, Madam Panico, let me ask you. You've emphasized the importance of law. And part of a government that is trying to reform and to make sure that it's easier to do business, is there a danger that too much of this is done through regulation? Or how should one balance that concern? You know, it's interesting because I think we all agree that usually business doesn't like governments to make too many regulations. I think we can agree on that. And they're right in many sense. Since we have done index of equality every week, we have still been thanking us. It's rare. It's a new obligation. Why? Because it gives them a tool to compare, to compete positively and to act. But we have still a lot to do. You just mentioned the financial sector. When you look at the access to capital, the access to venture capital, women have less, yes, and lower amount. So it's everywhere. I mean, each sector has to do something. It can be in education on stereotypes. It can be in financing access to capital. It can be in equal pay that's business and government. It can be in having also proper daycare so you have a real choice. So it's a comprehensive view. In fact, it's a society topic. But at the end, all companies who have done it say they are better. They are evidence that they are stronger as in a government. Better decision diversity brings innovation, bring robustness and bring value. And that, in fact, you have explained on that, you see it. But we must not lose the momentum because I'm afraid, like the Prime Minister, that you never know if we'll continue on out. So better take it now and make it quick. All right, let me... Oh, ma'am, yes, in the second row. Yeah, right there, right there. Thank you very much. I just wanted to, very, very quickly, I think we underestimate the fear of, from young women who are in positions in the work environment to speak out. So I just urge people who are older, who are in a position of perhaps a little bit greater authority or don't have that much to lose in that job or wherever they might find themselves and speak up especially in social situations because we can have this kind of conversation and then tonight you go to a dinner and there's three women and 55 men and no one says anything. So I think it's up to us to be in that social situation to ease that. Secondly, I'm a huge, huge fan of mandated quotas of all kinds of regulation. I'm sorry, but I do believe more regulation, more government intervention. This is a, I hate to say it this way, but it's a constipated atmosphere and environment we're in really, really constipated. Sometimes you just need that laxative and then things happen. So that's the one. I don't think I've ever... Could I just say quickly... Can I suggest that in order to allow other people to talk, we've... But sectors where women are not seen or would you... I think you're answering my plea by going on and I'm trying to get you to stop. So if you'd give the microphone, that'd be lovely. Sir, right next to you over there. Yeah. Thank you. Just a quick comment. We have men, we have women, but there are also other genders and we need to think about that as well going forward. And second, I'm just curious, are women-led organizations more equal? Well, you know, when I was running Foreign Affairs, I published an article by Francis Fukuyama called, What if Women Run the World? And his basic point was it would be a better world because there's all this evidence that women are more cooperative and such. But a lot of women reacted by saying, no, some women will be better and some women will be worse. Let me take one more. Ma'am, right at the back there. I just want to add a little bit on this topic. We're talking about women being discriminated in the workforce and we're talking about the reason is maybe because of the culture, organizational culture. Why don't we change the perspective? We take the socioeconomic responsibility and the value of contribution both men and women to look at it. And women actually taking much more responsibility and contribution in terms of the children caring responsibility family and also the society consumption and then the productivity contribution. So from that point of view, it is a social structure problem. It's not a company problem, it's not a regulation. It is, we believe that everyone needs to be on the workforce. Then it's a status. That's wrong. So if we take the holistic value contribution, men should be standing sitting there saying that, hey, we've been discriminated by women because we can only go into the workforce and we have no say or little say in family. So I think we should change the perspective of looking at the holistic value contribution. Women should take much more leadership in the society. I think that's a very good point that one sometimes forgets in these situations to talk about the value that would be unlocked for men to embrace a role in which they are also participating more in the raising of children, participating more in looking after people, taking care of other people, doing whatever else it is. It would be a balance that would benefit everybody. And now we will go to the World Economic Forum's managing board member who is going to give us a sense of what the forum is doing about all of this. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you all for being here. I'm actually very encouraged to see this very full room on the Thursday midday in Davos. I think it goes to show the importance of this agenda, the continued importance of this agenda. How do we want Davos 2030 to look? I think we wanted to look 50-50 across different industries, across different leadership groups, and we want the rest of the world to look that way. And how are we at the World Economic Forum going to support that agenda? Well, first, debates such as this one and support for this concept that governments need to be driving a lot of that change, but also businesses need to show intentionality. One, through data, we continue to every year provide a yardstick to the world in the form of the global gender gap reports and just continue to do that because it is important that there is that metric. We're also trying to design new metrics, so we've been working with LinkedIn and others to try to understand what exactly is happening in job markets and in terms of skills, and there are some pretty worrying statistics about the skills gaps when it comes to some of the most valued skills of the future, some of the most in-demand skills of the future, especially on the STEM and IT side of things. Second, working with many countries to set up closing the gender gap accelerators, so public-private collaborations that say, how do we get to more gender equality in three years, so not 30 years, in three years in various countries, and delighted to be working with seven countries in Latin America, France, the first country in Europe, Egypt, the first country in the Middle East and Africa region, and looking to partner with many more, so please speak to us afterwards. And third, and you'll hear about this later today, hard-wiring gender parity into the future of work, and a major set of commitments from businesses that if we pick the highest growth professions of the future, let's really focus on that and ensure we get to parity within those. So that's three of the things that we will be taking forward and looking forward to more ideas from all of you. Thank you. That's fascinating and a nice substantive note for us to end on. Thank you all very much for a fascinating conversation. Thank you.