 Welcome, everyone. It's wonderful to have you here. My name is Neha Narula, and I am the Director of the Digital Currency Initiative at MIT. Central Bank Digital Currency, or CBDC, is top of mind with over 100 central banks around the world engaging in research, pilots, and exploration. But in 2023, we're in a context marked by geopolitical fragility, financial instability, and market distrust in institutions. Since we are still at the beginning, it remains to be seen exactly what kinds of outcomes CBDCs once implemented will have. Will they help solve for financial inclusion or deepen the digital divide? Can CBDCs unify geopolitical and technical fragmentation in payment and economic systems, or might they exacerbate it? In our recent work at MIT, we've said that CBDC has the opportunity to play an important role as a public good, serving the public interest both as a public money and as a public money technology. But so much of this outcome depends on the design decisions that we make today. In this panel, we will explore the motivation and goals for CBDC, discuss recent research and experiments led by central banks, and cover private sector developments. We'll then move to broader questions about macro prudential issues that may arise if CBDC achieves scale in an economy, such as its implications for broader financial stability. And so now I would like to introduce this very illustrious panel. Thank you so much for being with us here today at the forum. I'd like to start with Governor Hanyaho from the South African Reserve Bank. Then we have Liva Mostri, the CEO of Euroclear, Governor Amir Yaron from the Central Bank of Israel, Javier Perez-Tasso, the Chief Executive Officer of SWIFT, and Governor Bilarde, who is the Governor of the Central Bank of Peru. So thank you all again so much for being with us here today. And I'd actually like to start with Governor Bilarde. So please allow me to share our hopes for a peaceful resolution of the protests that have arisen in Peru over the recent weeks. Now, despite the protests, Peru will remain one of the fastest growing economies in Latin America. You predicted 2.9 percent growth over the next year. And in the BIS's report last spring on CBDC and emerging market economies, authors from your central bank noted that growth in digital payments increased 270 percent in retail digital wallets, and nearly 350 percent in the newly authorized payment system, which supports 24-7 transfers. Now, I think that both of these developments underscore the importance of central banks for innovation and perhaps as well the changes in consumer preferences for digital versus physical transactions seen in many countries since the pandemic. So I'd like to ask you, Governor, what are the main motivations for exploring central bank digital currency in this environment? And what role does CBDC have to play in the continued development of the Peruvian financial system? Well, thank you very much for the question. I'll show you what we are trying to do is a more efficient payment system at the end. We started with an experience that failed that was recommended around the world 12 years ago. All the phone companies, all the banks, took part in the electronic wallet, but that business case for the banks was not there. And it was not so user-friendly. So in 2015-19, we started again to try for all that digital wallets of the banks to be connected. That was interrupted by COVID, but because of COVID in part, there was a strong development of the digital wallets. For example, they affiliated more than two million very small businesses for the payments. And now they have around, what will be around 70 percent of the population of the day, one wallet or other. Before too fascinating, we were pushing for these wallets to be interconnected. Banks were not so interested. Now we are forcing them to be interconnected. And starting March, they have to be interconnected all. And starting the end of June, all financial institutions might be able to transfer by accounts, we turn using the phone basically. We see the central bank digital currency as part of the solution for unbanked people. That is if we have a record of the transactions, it will be easier for them to get credit. We have seen a lot of things interested in having this information. Of course, it has to do with open banking at the same time. It will have to be there. We have learned the hard way that regulation has to come from the central bank. In 2018, we introduced a Cure standard. Actually, we discovered later that they follow the guidelines, but not so strictly. So sometimes they were not interoperable. Now every Cure has to be allowed by the central bank. So that's not to have this difficulty that works only for a particular bank. Now we believe that we need it to be a business case for the banks to promote it. P2P transfer will not be charged, but probably it will be a small charge for P2P for business. And that's the point. Central bank digital currency is going to come later. We don't know exactly the formula. We're working with IMF. It's still a very small pilot, but it's very hard to know what will happen. It might be something similar to just wireless, where these wireless of the unbanked people, they have to have research in the central bank or with paper of the central bank, et cetera. But that is something to be seen in the future. And we're looking closely to what is happening around the world in those terms. Thank you. Yes, this is such an important topic, interoperability, both in the domestic case, so bringing together your banks and your banking system, but also internationally as well. And so, Governor Geron, I want to turn to you to discuss interoperability briefly. There's a risk of further fragmenting our payment systems if central banks operate in isolation instead of contributing to a shared foundation of knowledge. And a major issue that requires cooperation is shared standards for interoperability. And as Governor Belarde indicated, this is an important role for the central bank to play in setting these shared standards. Now you've engaged in Project Icebreaker, which is a collaboration with Norway and Sweden. And this aims to test near-instant retail CBDC, so we can divide CBDC into retail, which is available to the general public, and wholesale, which is more for financial institutions, but across borders, so retail across borders. So can you share a little bit about what has been learned here and what are some of the challenges when you try to address interoperability between countries? All right. First of all, thank you, Nia, for having me here. Maybe before I say something about Icebreaker, I think we're all realizing we're in the midst of a technological revolution in the payment system. And if payments used to be sort of more plumbing, they're affecting the IO structure of financial services and monetary policy. And that's why central banks are there. We are seeing it faster payments, smart contracts, e-money, crypto assets, stable coins, and CBDC, as you mentioned, is sort of a public good that can be both complementary, but can also, to these things, but can also, in some circumstances, crowd out some of these things. Some of the advantages have been mentioned, advanced and safe alternatives to existing means of payments, ensure the adjustments of payment system to the needs of the digital economy. CBDC could be the gateway to stable coin, which is the gateway instead of stable coin to find, to the, between the new digital economy and the standard economy and cheap cross border, which is where your question comes back. So what we've done with the BIS innovation hubs in Nordic center and the central bank of Sweden and Norway, we launched this project and the project kind of went through the second part of 2022. It's got a lot of technological features to it. And I believe it's the first CBDC retail experiment that takes a retail payment, a household or a merchant in Israel, paying in shekels, local currency and transferring it back to somebody in Sweden or in Norway. So it's a cross border. It allows all the users to do that with the end users receiving the payment with CBDC in their own country. The key feature here in order to achieve this project, the team designed the hub, which facilitates communication and the exchange of data among the national CBDC system. By the way, I'm sort of proud to say that the hub was actually built by the technological team in the bank of Israel. Basically, the concept requires only minimal adjustment to the national CBDC systems in order to achieve the desired interoperability. So while one of the key things you want to have once we have a whole matrix, all the currencies against all the currencies, you want a system that is agile enough to do that. And it seems like this system is capable of doing it. The hub and the technology used in the project teams enables basically nearly atomic transaction. For example, funds would be paid from the CBDC wallet of a payer in Israel if and only if the payee finds and receive the payee's CBDC wallet in Sweden. Thus, the counterparty risk that exists today in corresponding banking system is eliminated. It's important to notice and emphasize that the transaction would be immediate as opposed to several days in which is what's happening in today's system. One of the key insight and I'm getting to was that it is possible to make a direct and immediate cross-border payment between CBDC coins of different countries. In fact, there are two important characteristics here that do not exist in the current system. The first one in today's world cross-border payments take on average a few days to complete. And in the system we built, there's basically no third party involved in the transaction. And so there's no risk that the same party will fail. This may save significant risk premiums down the road. Also, the design of the system we built allows us to separate the money transfer from the FX transfer. The hub is an intermediary for that to the local foreign currency. Today when you transfer money through a bank or another payment company, and I have here sort of relevant entities, the same entity converts your local currency into foreign currency and makes the payment. This situation in some sense reduces competitiveness and may make the high cost on conversion. And basically our feature is separated to operation, make the currency exchange market more competitive, thereby reducing the cost. I won't go into the detail. There's a whole technical issue of how it's done through time-locked, hash time-locked contracts, et cetera. It consists of a bunch of APIs. And we will put a report out that gives the detail. But the important thing is the interoperability is not just between two currencies. As I mentioned, it can be extended challenges, and I'll stop here. AML issue, we haven't really dealt with that. It wasn't one of the issues in the project, but that will be an important issue going down the road in extending it. The important question down the road, who will build this hub if we do it globally? Is it going to be a consolidation of central banks, international bodies like IMFBIS, private companies like SWIFT, or others? So I'll stop here for now. Thank you. So many important things raised in that. First of all, I love that you said the tech team came from the Bank of Israel. I think we think of central banks as being mainly economists. I'm a bit biased. I'm a computer scientist, but I think you're going to have to have more and more technical capacity as we build out this future. They're not easy to hire. I have to make it worth it. But also, this notion of separating functionality. You're separating the money transfer from the FX, and this speaks, I think, more broadly to a trend we're seeing of unbundling functions that were previously under one role. Now, there's a lot you said there, and in time I'm going to turn to Javier to talk about cross-border settlement, and I'm also going to turn to Liva to talk about smart contracts. But before we do that, I want to talk to Governor Hanyago about the South African Reserve Bank and the incredible experiments that you've been doing. You've been an early innovator in this space. You began exploring faster payments and retail and wholesale CBDC as part of Project COCA. But the SARB has a unique perspective, I think, on cross-border transactions, given that your central bank operates the real-time gross settlement systems for 16 countries in the South African development community. You joined the BIS' Project Dunbar, which is testing international settlement of CBDC transactions. Now, what opportunities does a cross-border CBDC create that the current SADC RTGS system does not offer? How do you think about that? Thanks. I think my colleagues have said quite a mouthful, so I would be brief. A point of departure in thinking about the CBDC is, is this a solution looking for a problem? Or do we have some real problem that we are trying to solve? If we have some real problem that we are trying to solve, what exactly is that problem? Of the countries that we have mentioned, just over 120 that are looking to introduce CBDCs or to study them, the reasons are varied and could actually be posed into three broad categories. The first one has to do with the modernization of the central bank. The central bank have got to take into account that there is this digital economy that is developing and that they have got to redefine their role there. Secondly, a second broad area has to do with making national payment systems efficient. And I think that any central bank where it's solved at the moment is busy modernizing their RTGS, causing some serious bottlenecks, because there are only so many firms that can build these things. And the third broad category has to do with dealing with domestic market failure and stroke financial inclusion. And so, as you think about the CBDC, then you have got to be thinking about what is it that we are trying to solve? What is the use case for a CBDC? And some of the banks, there would be consensus in the digital category that national currencies could actually be dislocated if central banks do not come to the party and provide it. So there are the issues of the supply side of the central banks feeling that the environment is changing and therefore they themselves must change and get into that space. But then there is also the demand side because we might come with these things trying to build a use case. Do the public actually need that? And quite frankly, in the introduction of the CBDC, you're actually going to need national conversations about the role of cash and who has access to central bank money. And the technology, the technology, there are enough people to solve the technology problem. The big issues are about public choice. They are about regulation and more importantly about the governance arrangements that are going to be put. So we decided to split our CBDC work into two. We first looked at the wholesale CBDC and then later on we looked at the retail CBDC. And when we looked at the wholesale CBDC, what we call Project COCA, we experimented this at that time. It looked like cutting edge, no longer does. I think that there have been a lot of developments in other countries. But we were able to bring in the banks in South Africa that account for more than 90% of the daily payments and settlements in the South African space. Processed 70,000 transactions with settlement within two hours, which is something that we would have processed through the whole day. And we were able to process that within a period of two hours with full settlement in central bank money. And then came the cash, the cash that as you do these things and the end is who has access to central bank money and could these things if tokenized because this is what was done, be settled with central bank money. And we proved to ourselves that that could be done. And so on the wholesale side it became a big success. And the reason we started on the wholesale side is that for all intents and purposes there isn't physical cash involved in wholesale. You could say that it is digital in some form or the other. Are there efficiencies to be realized that very early tokenization sped up the process of settlement and that in itself was very useful. With respect to retail CBDC, we took consciously a decision that we are going to be very good students, meaning that we are going to learn with everybody. We are not going to be the first movers. We would rather be very first followers because of the complexities that I had mentioned. I mean, at the end of the day you do all these things. What happens when you go offline, whether it's a result of cyber or you go offline, there's been an electricity failure. What does that mean for the ordinary people who must transact if you have completely migrated there, which then brings the issue of the role of offline in that space. And once you bring in offline, there is a risk of having to synchronize transactions that took place offline. And when you come back online, how you get those and what does that mean? Does that mean for speed? You posed the question. Why did we need a cross-border CBDC if we are doing these things? And I think that in an earlier conversation, what we did in SADAC for all intents and purposes was to get the interoperability of the RDTGS of all the 16 countries in SADAC. And we were able to push significant significant volume in SADAC. But then there was a challenge. The challenge here was that these are multi-currencies. And the question is, do you find one currency with which you settled with? Which one is that? The default was that could we be using the dollar? And then the question was who's going to supply dollar liquidity in this RDGS? The third is not there. So who's going to get the dollar? And the default was that, well, we have got to be settling in our own currencies. But then there are countries that are dollarized, which then faced a different problem. And so the big issue is going to be the issue of interoperability. But then there are further issues which are legal. So you have got all these countries in SADAC. The legal systems are based on English law, depending on who your previous colonizer was, French law, depending on again who your colonizer was, or Portuguese law for that matter. And you've got to go and try and find each other, set the governance arrangement. And it turns out the governance arrangements in dealing with cross-border CBDC issues are actually more challenging than the technology solution. And the technology solutions could actually be found. So let me pause there. There are other issues that we might want to deal with, which include the role of the private sector vis-à-vis that of the central bank. And what collaboration mechanisms do you have there? How do you deal with the incumbents who are thinking that the small guys who are coming in wanted to eat their lunch and dealing with the issues of efficiency and competition to make sure that you actually bring the prices down. The costs in this cross-border system, whether you look at the correspondent banking systems, are massive. And in Africa, moving $100, you move $100 in Africa, by the time it reaches the recipient, it is $60. And so there are significant inefficiencies, there are significant rents that are end by the incumbents that we would have to break into. And that is going to need the involvement of central banks. There's so many interesting things there. And yes, your point, I think it was the CEO of the Gates Foundation in a panel yesterday, made the point that the poor pay the highest fees. They pay much higher fees than the rich. And making small payments across borders is incredibly challenging. I'm really glad you brought up offline. And at the very end of this panel, we will spend a few minutes talking about the public and private sectors and how we might work together, absolutely. But before we get an offline is so important, hopefully we'll have time to do a little bit on design choices. But before we get to that, I think you set up a transition to the private sector very well. So Javier, let's start off with what may be for some a slightly controversial statement from the BIS. According to a recent report, they said that the payment system underpinning cross-border financial flows has not kept pace with rapid growth in global economic integration. And they cite several things the governor just mentioned, high costs, low speed and transparency, operational complexity of the current international payment systems. And they cite these as reasons why central banks should be exploring interoperable central bank digital currency. However, there are so many challenges there, which I think the governor very nicely articulated. And they also note the contraction in the correspondent banking system that leaves some low and middle income countries with less access to global payments. So Javier, could you sort of expound upon that and say why in a world with CBDCs might we still need international payment systems like SWIFT? I think that we probably still do. And I think you would agree with that. How do these different paradigms work together? And perhaps in your answer, you could reference some of the experiments that I know that you're doing. Okay. Well, I have to say thank you as well for inviting me to the panel. I have to say this this hero villain construct is something that, you know, I understand that it's appealing and it's something that we've heard in the past as well with index. I think in real life it's a little bit more nuanced. And yeah, let me a little bit elaborate on where we stand in general, the industry as a whole and SWIFT, of course, in the international cross-border space. Because at the end of the day, if we really want, and I've heard it throughout the conference this week as well, if we really want to build a robust, resilient and interoperable that is inclusive global financial industry, we do need to collaborate private and public sector, but as well existing infrastructure with new technologies that come into the fore, it is paramount. And particularly in cross-border payments when you think about it, they are inherently complex because we're talking about bridging regulatory jurisdictions, bridging technologies, bridging currencies, different forms of value we see now from digital fear to CBDCs. And that at the end of the day requires a public agenda that is very well driven by the way, by the work done by the G20 and the BIS, you mentioned that, in the agenda, the roadmap towards improving international payments to make them to reduce friction and to make them fully transparent, inclusive and obviously increase the speed to the market there. And in that sense, we've been actually collaborating very closely over the past few years with the BIS there to indeed focus on this roadmap by 2027. They have very clear targets when it comes to speed. 75 percent of all transactions should be reaching end beneficiary accounts within an hour in terms of cost as well. And they quantify also the cost for different segments where it is particularly in retail and remittances, but work in progress also on wholesale and as well targets when it comes to transparency and choice and access. So as far as we are concerned, we are at Swift. We've now been working on a series innovation of our platform and now we're reaching 4 billion accounts with our new platform that allows for speed delivery to our customers. At the end, I know there are some stats out there, but I think it needs to be known that half of all Swift payments today reach end beneficiary accounts within five minutes. And with the new development that together with the financial community, with central banks, infrastructures like the Euroclear here in the panel, but also with the banking community, we're getting to a journey towards truly instant and frictionless transactions in the next few years. And that is possible because of the work at the domestic level on domestic infrastructure, on real-time payments infrastructures, but also in the bridging between all of those jurisdictions. So we get to that state and definitely we get within the objectives that the G20 has set out. Maybe to add because I have to say I enjoy the conversation on the interoperability bit, which is crucial. I do agree. And by the way, it is crucial, including all the controls when it comes to cyber, when it comes to recent control, AML you mentioned. I mean, that is where we need to bridge what we've built together over the past decades in terms of all the controls, regulatory compliance at all levels, cyber, providing liquidity to the system with the new world of bridging of bringing new innovations at the domestic level. For example, CBDC that indeed has a great promise when it comes to financial inclusion, programmer money. And in that regard, we've been running, we've been working on that also on tokenization of assets. But in CBDCs in particular, we made a breakthrough experiment last year whereby we came up together with several central banks and commercial banks with the results that we can through the SWIF platform, with all the controls that have been embedded over the past decades, through SWIF platform, we can bridge any country having any kind of technology or any kind of formal value. And we did particularly obviously focus on CBDCs. So CBDC is a DLT-based network bridging them with other CBDC-based networks. But also, as importantly, CBDC blockchain-based networks with traditional existing payment systems, whether it is our RTGISs or real-time payment systems. And it was a very important innovation in the sense that if CBDCs or when CBDCs are rolled out in a particular jurisdiction, they can immediately scale and be interconnected to the rest of the world. But with all the controls. And that is what is paramount if we want to build that inclusive and robust financial ecosystem that supports global trade and economic prosperity. Yeah, I think you're making a very important point there, which is CBDCs don't just get rid of the rest of the financial system. And in particular, they need to be linked. There will be many payment systems. There will be many other parts of the financial system, not least of which is securities clearing. So Liva, I want to turn to you to talk a little bit about that. And in particular, I want to understand Euroclear has engaged in some experiments with the Bank de France to settle French government bonds on distributed ledger. So this type of prototyping has been very common. But what I really want to learn from you is what problem you were seeking to solve that the traditional clearing process does not yet address. And really, what does the potential for CBDC for having that fast leg of central bank settlement? What does that mean for securities clearing platform like Euroclear? Thank you, Niga. Thank you to have the opportunity to explain this to you. So as Euroclear, we are in the business of safekeeping and settlement of securities, be that bonds, be that equities, be that funds or ETFs. We hold currently 35 trillion euros worth of securities on our books. And on a yearly basis, we process more than a quadrillion euros worth of securities. That is one and 15 zeros. That is each month World GDP that we process on our books. Innovation and especially innovation in view of supporting safety and efficiency and connectivity of the markets is really at the heart of our purpose. And so it is in that context that we do many experiments, many experiments with blockchain. It is not only about the France one on which I will go into more detail, but it's also digital issuance for real issuance. It's also being part of the finality experiment in commercial digital currency. We are collaborating with Swift in their experiment as well. So a lot of experiments are part of our DNA in order to foster that innovation. Now, typically, if we look at what we have done in the Banque de France experiment, it was really, I would say, an ecosystem experiment and to end life cycle experiment. So we started with doing digital issuance together with the French treasury of real treasury bond for the French treasurer. And that issuance was really native on the chain. And it was both the securities token and the cash token that were native issued on the chain. We had in the ecosystem partners also local banks that were using the same blockchain, and we were working on the blockchain of the Banque de France, by the way, using that same blockchain to manage their client positions. We were then able to go after the primary phase, after the primary issuance into secondary transactions and do the settlements there. And we went even up to the corporate action sphere where we processed corporate actions in this new environment. And while we do that, I think we all at this stage do most of these things to learn because I fully agree that we have to have technical solutions that answer real life problems. We all know that. But you also have to learn what are the capabilities of the new technology in order to strengthen your thinking about how can I solve real life problems. So there's a bit of a chicken and an egg behind that. And so you really have to do these experiments, learn and then get more focused on where can you really add value for pain points in the industry. So what were our big learnings there? First of all, not surprisingly, we learned that we could be more efficient. I think across the different stakeholders, we could be more efficient avoiding reconciliation across the stakeholders in the system, which was a big gain. A second big gain that was clear is that you could increase end-to-end transparency, end-to-end transparency between, I would say, wholesale holding and the ultimate beneficial owner, facilitating life for the issuer, knowing who are their shareholders, who are their investors. So that end-to-end transparency was a big gain as well. But next to that, we also discovered that there were a number of weaknesses, new type of weaknesses that were discovered. We were able to get around the energy problem by putting in four validators model on the chain. So there was a form of central authorities. It was the two parties of the deal, the central bank and us as a central operator of the system. Secondly, a bigger risk. And I think we really have to have that in mind. And sometimes we overvalue the atomic nature of instant settlement. We overvalue that sometimes because what we saw is that there was an increase of fragmentation on the one hand and so a loss of liquidity to trade the issue in itself. And secondly, as you work instantaneously, you lose all the advantages of nothing for some of the parties which can lead to more fails, which can lead to more volumes and which can lead to more credit consumption in our space. But then I would say the biggest challenge that we see in the long run. So you can solve for a number of these problems. But the bigger challenge that we see is not to find a good solution, but it is how do you organize the migration from a current environment with a very strong network effect with parties across the world, across issuers and investors that are connected on an ecosystem. How on earth are you going to organize that migration without expecting a big bang? And is even the added value of what we can see in the positives big enough to justify the huge investment in such a huge migration? And that's where I link that to another point that has been made by several of the speakers. It's about interoperability. And the interoperability, I see it even more between what I say the new and the old world. Because if we don't get that right, I think migration simply becomes impossible. So the interoperability between the new world, but not losing the liquidity of the strength of the current network, that is for me the challenge that we have to overcome. And that is why I believe it is so important to continue experiments, but even more to continue this close collaboration between the initiatives of the central banks in CBDC, between all the initiatives around digital issuance with incumbent big parties, because we will be always material in that interoperability. So I would stop here for the moment. Thank you. Yeah, I love what you said about needing to do the experimentation to understand what's even possible. I call this the technology policy loop. You need to have some idea of what you can do and what the technology can actually achieve and input that into policy and decide what you want to do and then back into the technology. So I like that very much. We could continue this for hours. I think there is so much to discuss here, but unfortunately we are running a bit closer on time. So I'm going to ask each of you, we're going to go down the line starting with Governor Belarde, if that's okay. But before we get to that, I want to ask each of you to say to the governors, I want your thoughts on what it is that you want to see from the private sector to help develop and scale CBDC. Are their experiments helpful or would you honestly prefer that they just leave you to it and let you figure it out and get out of the way? And Javier and leave, I want to know what does the private sector need from central banks to navigate this new space? But before we go down the line and get to that, I'll give you a moment to think about your answer to that question. I just want to speak very briefly about design choices. We don't have enough time to get into it today, but there's so many important design choices in central bank digital currency design. How will privacy be enabled? There is this myth and misconception that a central bank digital currency automatically means surveillance, when in fact we have the technology, we know how to design it, so that in fact the operator does not need to see fine grain transaction data if we don't want them to. Similarly, there's a myth that it requires an internet connection or a mobile device, when as Governor pointed out, no, it's actually very important that we design this to work in an offline context and potentially even for the most vulnerable who might not have access to mobile devices. And I think another really important question is around custody and access. Who can hold the CBDC? A key difference between cash and any kind of digital money is that cash is held by a user directly whereas digital money requires a financial intermediary. And most CBDC developments now also involve financial intermediaries. And so I think we have to ask ourselves the question, why do we think that CBDC will achieve different results if we end up replicating our existing intermediary ecosystem? So I think we have to be very thoughtful and creative as we go down that line. And so now I want to turn to everyone to talk about this question of how the private and public sectors could work together. So we're going to do this quickly starting with Governor Bellarde. What do you want to see from the private sector? I believe the role of the central bank is to regulate the standards, but slowly the sector is of innovation. They are going to be the ones that innovate, that create new products. I believe it's very important. What is important for us is to set these standards and to foster competition also. And in many cases, we are trying to work at that with user experience. So no bank seems to be more benefited because of the design of the screen in these cases. But I believe the role of the private sector is fundamental, but within a set of regulation that might order these innovations. And Javier? I would say, well, clearly I think we are facing a fantastic opportunity to achieve those targets over the next five years to improve international payments and bank the unbanked, two billion people that are unbanked in the world. Innovation is happening from the private sector will continue. And that can guarantee you that it is indicated. From our perspective, maybe I would add two points that are relevant, at least from our perspective for the public sector. And they are, you know, to consider fragmentation in this whole process, to consider, to make sure that we, whatever we come up with at the domestic level and with new forms of value, takes into account this famous theme that we've been discussing here and across the company about a conference about interoperability. So that is crucial that when we come up with the new innovations, these can scale and these can go against the potential forecast of having digital islands that could accelerate even more technological fragmentation that, as we know from the IMF, recent reports have said that could send countries into reverse gear and contract their GDP by 5%. So one is fragmentation, the other one, definitely cyber. It's when we come, well, you talked about AML and obviously regulatory compliance, but I think cyber is paramount when we come to innovation to, you know, embed cyber from the outset when we come up with new designs for domestic technology that can obviously scale over time. Obviously we have experience at Swift, but not only at Swift, it's not only about infrastructure security, it's not about actually a single party security where it is a financial institution or a central bank, it's about the ecosystem security, it's about having the right common standards and practices that can be embedded across the ecosystem. It's about the ecosystem security so that we can have endpoint security and have the robust foundations that can support that innovation. Thank you. Governor, your own. And briefly, if we're running out of time. Sure. Well, first of all, even if I envision a retail CBDC, I envision it as a two-tier system where the private sector is actually the one that is engaged with the end users. So they're going to be there almost by design. It need not be even banks, it could be payment providers, and because they don't have the financial liabilities that less regulation may need to be in there. So it's already back there. Science has not said the last word on developments, and the private sector is usually very good at that more so. So we will need them there. Just as an example, we use the company VMware in Israel to help us with limited privacy in one of those projects. So I believe it's always there. I'll just say the issue of is it a solution looking for a problem? I think there's a whole host of issue. It's the integral of all of these that will ultimately give rise. I don't think there's a single point that gives sort of the reason to do a lift off on that. And it's the scale, the economies of scale of central banks. It's the trust of central banks. We have to continue to develop these experiments to be in the frontier. And here I share my friend LaCetre point is as a small open economy, we have to be at the frontier. We have to be ready in case this is happening. But for interoperability to happen, we also need the major central banks to be involved. I'll stop here. Okay, Liva. So I think this is a journey on which nobody today is certain about the endpoint and even less about the way how to get there. So in order to facilitate the journey, because we are on that journey and the journey is going to happen, I think in order to facilitate that, I would see two requests that I would say to the central bank community. One would be to align amongst themselves. I would say within the Eurozone, I'm already aware of three different models of CBDC that are being taught about. So I think the more alignment between central banks on these design choices will be helpful for everybody. And then the second request I would have is to involve the private sector, the incumbents that will be so necessary for that migration in as much as possible experiments so that we learn together and that we design that journey together. That would be my two questions. Okay, Governor, last word briefly. Very clearly, it's not our intention to open bank accounts for all citizens in the central bank. Let's get that one clear. Partnership with the private sector is going to be important. That partnership is going to have to be reconfigured because we are in the business of monetary policy and financial stability. And this, our actions get transmitted through the actors in the market. So that issue of partnership is going to become important. Thank you. Well, this has been a fascinating conversation. Thank you again to all of our panelists for being here. And now I'd like to turn it over to Drew. Sorry, we are closing. So thank you so much everyone for joining us again. Yes.