 Can I first ask the Commission, Valdez or Pierre, to give their headlines? Yes, thank you Jerem. Well, Commission has carefully reviewed the reform proposal sent yesterday to the president of Eurogroup. And this has been preceded by contractive exchanges over the weekend between the Greek authorities and European Commission and also other institutions. So, in the view of the Commission, this list is sufficiently comprehensive to be a valid starting point for a successful conclusion of the review as called for by the Eurogroup at its last meeting. Let me stress, however, that the list does not include sufficient detail to allow us to assess each specific measure and how that impacts on a budget or on the overall program targets. Further specification of the reforms in these and other key areas is expected to be provided and agreed before the end of April. This is also in line with the last week's Eurogroup statement. We consider the Eurogroup statement of the last Friday as a basis. Michael Ninen. It is therefore regrettable that the letter by the minister does not directly refer to the commitments in this statement, such as, for example, to deliver primary surpluses and financing proceeds required to guarantee debt sustainability in line with November 2012 Eurogroup statement. We also find it rather unusual that the letter is not formally signed and does not refer to any actual government decision in this context. So the legal status of the letter is therefore not fully clear. Importantly, this list does not substitute in any view the memorandum of understanding which constitutes the official legal basis for the program underpinning the Master Financial Assistance Facility Agreement. It is also important to recall that the big authorities have committed to refrain from any rollback of measures and unilateral changes to the policies and structural reforms that would negatively impact fiscal targets, economic recovery, or financial stability as assessed by the institutions. Any policy initiatives, therefore, should be discussed ex ante with the three institutions. And now I would ask Pierre to elaborate further on some critical details. Okay, colleagues. In general, I would say we are encouraged by a number of commitments in particular to combat the tax evasion and corruption in areas through efforts to modernize tax and customs administration, as well as to pursue reform to modernize public administration. However, we must be, I think, realistic and decide to be discussed about how far these reforms can deliver results. There are other areas where the Commission believes that more must be done, including the area of statistics, where we consider it of vital importance that the institutional and operational independence of health staff, and it's only a matter of at full time. The new government must take immediate visible steps to show determination for a change in this area. I believe a revision of the legal framework is needed in other areas. In other... Have entered the conference. Urgent intervention and immediate decisions ought to be taken as the uncertainty of the past weeks has been damaging and destructive. First, in the financial sector, we believe the government must reiterate as soon as possible in a very key manner the key pillars of reform as agreed under the MOU to settle the markets and depositors. Similarly, on taxation and installments, the government must take urgent action to clarify its intentions so that taxpayers begin to pay again taxes and social security contributions and decisions should be taken swiftly in full consultation with the three institutions. Second, on privatization, our feeling is that the government should instruct the agency to proceed with the ongoing tenders also swiftly. So the Commission looks forward to working with the new administration to elaborate what are still at the moment general commitments and transform these into clear policy actions. I would also like to underline our willingness to continue to provide technical assistance, key areas to assist in the design and implementation of policies. To sum up, I won't be longer in the view of the Commission. This list is sufficiently comprehensive to be a valid starting point for a successful conclusion of the review. It is not at all something that means that the review is concluded or underway to be concluded. And I think this was what we were asked by the EU group and our answer is clear at that point. Let me turn to the ECB. Mario? Yes, thanks, Erem. Thank you. As we discussed in such short time, it was certainly not possible for the authorities to come up with their own list of concrete proposals and commitments which would allow us, the institutions but especially ECB, to assess the impact on growth, public finances and financial stability. I note that the commitments outlined by the authorities differ from existing program commitments in a number of areas. Having said that, the list sent by the Greek authorities covers a wide range of reform areas and in this sense is sufficiently comprehensive to be a valid starting point for a successful conclusion of the review. Now let me make a few additional remarks. We understand consistently with the EU group decision last Friday that the list doesn't call into question the current arrangement and as existing commitments in the current MOU and MEFP are the basis for the review. In case where the list deviates from the MEFP and the MOU, we will assess during the review whether measures which are not accepted by the authorities are replaced with measures of equal or better quality in terms of achieving the objectives of the program. We would appreciate if the Greek authorities would make very clear in public that there will be no rolling back of existing reforms or commitments in any of the areas mentioned in their list. Any new measures or laws in these areas will only be implemented once agreed with the three institutions. Unfortunately, we still continue to hear conflicting messages between the communication to the Greek general public and the commitments to this group. Second point concerns the payment culture. The list we are discussing today was not used for this purpose. In the coming days, we would expect very clear statements from the highest levels that contrary to previous announcements, first there will be no initiatives by the government on broadening or relaxing installment schemes and that measures to strengthen tax enforcement and payment discipline will urgently be discussed with the three institutions. And even this morning, we are hearing conflicting message from Athens. Second, there will be no new moratorium on auctioning of residences nor any other restrictions, which makes it difficult for banks to effectively work out the MPLs. I think it should be in the interest of Greece first and foremost to have a viable credit system. If banks are not viable, they won't give any credit. I made this point several times. There will also be no initiative for any general or horizontal debt relief for private creditors. I mean, with your agreement, I would like to make a point on the difference between the Eurogroup statement and the statement here about the FSS box for bank recapitalization. Can I make it now? Well, either now or discuss it further in the Euroworking group on Thursday. You raised the issue with me when we spoke. It may be useful to return to the Euroworking group. As I said, we among each other were very clear on how the decisions on the use of the FSS bonds would take place. It would take place on the basis of the ECB SSM decision. They are the ones who trigger the use of these funds for recapitalization purposes. That's what we agreed on in the Eurogroup. Any further debate on that issue, I think, should take place in the Euroworking group. If that's all right. Thank you, Yeroum. So I understand that the draft amendment of the Master Financial Assistance Facility Agreement that I circulated yesterday will be in line with the statements agreed on Friday. Anyone has any further comments on that? I think it should take place in the Euroworking group. Okay. Thank you. Then for me, if I have this assurance, there is no need to raise this point. Thank you. Then I'm finished. Sorry, Yeroum, can I take this point? Yes, please. It must be totally clear, because I will create incredible problems in my parliament. We have in no way any amendment to the given agreement. We have stated on Friday to the HFF problems that will only be released on request by the ECB SSM. That means the last decision has to be taken by the institutions in the HFF. Otherwise, it would be a change of the treaty, of the memo U, and that is not what we can go to parliament. We are going for an extension, but not for any change in the budget. Therefore, my demand is only don't create a discussion or misunderstanding that there will be any amendment to the given agreement. Don't worry, Wolfgang, there will be no changes or amendments to the statement we reached on Friday. In that particular sentence, there are two aspects. One is, as you said, that the release of these funds will be on request by the SSM. But you can also read, they will be released on request by the SSM. In other words, formally, there may be a decision to be taken, but they will be released on request by the SSM. In other words, if the SSM finds it necessary, this recapitalization, the funds will be released. So there are both aspects in one sentence. We're not going to change the statement. That would cause a lot of problems, of course. If anyone wants further clarification, I think it should take place in your working group. It will be about procedures, but not about the political decision we took. I may continue. I would like to ask Christine for her assessment. Thank you very much, Jeroen, and good afternoon to all of you. I will not repeat the consent of the letter that we issued last night. I could literally endorse and adopt all the points made by Mario, except the last one, which is separate. Two points that I will come back to, to insist upon, is number one, that the discussions on completion of the review, which should start as soon as possible and for which we are ready, to be successful cannot be merely confined within the policy parameters outlined in the government's list. I think the reference to the MOU and the MESP by Mario was particularly relevant. The second concern that I have, which is also mentioned by Mario, is the constant and recurring noise that we hear from Athens and which echo around the world in a way that is inconsistent with what is indicated in the memorandum of the list issued by the Greek authorities. And there is real constant reference to backtracking. That includes expectation of impending changes to the pension scheme, that backtrack on policy commitments, as well as changes to the generous tax debt installment schemes that already have weakened the revenue collection by the Greek authorities. So Yannis, if you're with us on the call, I would urge you to reduce that noise and to make very clear that there is one single list and not a week list separate from new lists. Finally, I think it would be extremely helpful, certainly from our perspective, if Yannis could explain to all of us the government's guarantee equity positions as well as how it is proposed to move forward. With that, as I said, we stand ready and we are eager to begin the real work which will not be about picking words on paper which we were not associated to over the weekend, but that's fine, but clearly the actual review work now needs to begin. Thank you. Thank you, Kristi. I would now like to turn to Yannis to pick up on a couple of points raised. I think we all fully understand that the detailed work has yet to begin. We must also fully understand that all the legal documents and the basis for the programme of support is unchanged until further works out, detailed, discussed and agreed with the institutions. So that's the basis on which we work. Yannis, can I ask you to react on a couple of issues raised by Mario and the Commission, Christine? Yes, sure. Thank you so much, Jeroen. Let me, however, begin by thanking you as the President of the Eurogroup for your role in helping establish the necessary common ground to reach where we are at present. I also want to thank the institutions for the constructive relationship we had over the last 48 hours and for so swiftly reading our list and coming to the verdict or the recommendation that you have come. I do believe, and the government believes here in Athens, that we now have a firm basis on which to build the solid agreement and for the next four months at least, and work towards the review. Let me now do as you said, Jeroen, and address some specific issues that were mentioned. There are some minor issues which we can deal with very, very swiftly. The letter wasn't signed, it was sent at midnight, so there were technical issues involved there that we can deal with that. This is a response to one of the Commission's points. The question of no unilateral moves and the need to collaborate with institutions in everything we do has been mentioned by all three institutions. I shall convey this view to my government. It is our intention not to make any such moves as we have stated in our letter to the Eurogroup. We have every intention to collaborate with institutions and to make sure that whatever we introduce in parliament or whatever measures are discussed and deployed should be discussed and deployed in conjunction with agreement with institutions. Pierre Muscovici mentioned Elstat, the Greek statistics office, and suggested there should be no revision of the legal framework and the autonomy. We understand perfectly well the need not to return to the bad old days of Greek statistics and we as a government have absolutely no intention whatsoever of interfering with the work of Elstat. Let me say that this kind of autonomy has to cut both ways in the sense that both the Eurostat and the Greek government and every member state and all the institutions must have confidence in the workings of Elstat. At the moment I cannot tell you that I do. That is a separate issue from keeping Elstat at an arms length from government. What I would like to do is discuss with institutions and with Eurostat ways in which we can regain confidence in Elstat. But that is completely separate from the point that Pierre Muscovici made. I shall reiterate the point. We shall under no circumstances do anything to jeopardize the autonomy of Elstat and we shall do nothing without the consent of the commission of the IMF of the ECB of the Eurogroup in this direction. But I do believe, this is the view that some of us in this government have, who've looked into the way operation of Elstat over the last few months, that we need for all of us together to have another look at the way that Elstat functions. But again, let me make it very clear. This is not something we tend to do alone. We want to do it in conjunction with you. Regarding the financial sector and tax compliance, this is a point that each one of the institutions made. There is lack of trust regarding installment schemes. Let me remind you that this installment scheme that is now on the statutes here in Greece, was introduced by the previous government. And I do believe that the institutions had objections to that. We are happy to look at these installment schemes together with institutions and with all our partners. There is a very crucial problem here. The level of arrears, tax arrears, as you probably all know, reaches 90% of the Greek government budget. Now that is a huge amount that has to do with the result of the deep crisis of this social economy. And we need to deal with this and we need to deal effectively with it by ensuring that whatever it is that we do does not encourage, that indeed punishes strategic non-payment, while at the same time finds ways of dealing with dealing, of giving those who can afford to pay a portion only of what they owe a way of doing this, especially given the current state of our financial situation. On the MPLs, and I take very seriously what Mario Draghi and the ECB are saying, about the need to ensure that the capitalization of banks is not threatened by our policies regarding MPLs. Again, it is important to note that we have very special circumstances in Greece which are not to make any unilateral move on this and of course we need to have the backing of the ECB in everything we do. But since we are talking about this, let me point out that there are special circumstances. We have a real estate market that has tanked and the notion that we are going to have auctions of first residences in order to bolster the capitalization of the banks is one that needs to be discussed. And we need to discuss it with you, this is not a venue to do it, but there are serious worries that we have that a massive increase in auctions in a tanking market is not going to help the banks while at the same time is going to create side effects in the capacity of the social economy, both to increase the tax take of the government and to increase economic activity. But let me say that this government is determined to discuss with institutions in order to reach common agreement with them on how to deal with these matters. Now, on the question that Mario Draghi raised regarding the EFSF and the HFSF let me just state it for the record to rest everyone, rest assured everyone that this government is not going to request for an amendment of the Friday Eurogroup Agreement. We are more than happy to go along with that agreement and to see the EFSF retain the control of the remaining funds in order to use them for the purposes of recapitalization of the banking sector and resolution, possible resolution. On the question of a rollback, especially when it comes to privatizations on this matter as you will see from the relevant entry in our list we have made it very clear that completed privatizations are going to be considered to be sacrosanct from this government. The ones that have been launched will be dealt with in accordance to the law and in ways that combine the public interest with the need, the necessity of collaborating with institutions and with the Eurogroup. Let me finish by addressing Christine Lagarde's two points. The first one is an assurance that I can give Christine and everybody in this conference call that there exists no separate Greek list, separate from the one you have. Of course, as you can imagine, this list is only a five-page document. We have a series of commitments to the Greek public. We shall not make any moves, as I said before, that undermine the bonds of trust that we're trying to build currently, but there is no such thing as a separate Greek list. There may be different interpretations of the current state of negotiation, of exchange between us, of commitment, and let me just make this point a bit more tangible. I heard from all three institutions the statement that this list is not a replacement of the MOU and that this list is going to simply be grafted upon the MOU or we will have to negotiate ways in which the current MOU will have to be amended. Now, as you know, we've spent three Eurogroups discussing the imperative of combining the existing program with the new government's priorities. And I was under the impression, and this government was under the impression that we're making a fresh start without challenging the legal existence of the MOU. We shall insist on maintaining in a collegial manner this constructive ambiguity and we are going to do our best in order to ensure that the review is completed on the understanding that this government's list that you have in front of you is taken as the starting point regarding the judgment that is going to be passed upon us over the next four months. The next four months is a very short space of time. If we can do what we agree that we should do by April and do it in the spirit that confirms both the existing program and the intention of moving on and moving ahead and moving to a new relationship after June, I think that will be an excellent way of moving ahead. I was asked also by Christine Lagarde to explain the liquidity condition of the government. I'm not in a position to do this presently. As everybody knows, especially the International Monetary Fund, our liquidity condition given the destabilization of the Greek economy over the last two months is not good at all. But my understanding was that today what we are doing is we are setting the scene, establishing the base, the foundation for beginning immediate discussions on all those matters, including the fiscal gap that we're facing over the next few weeks, in particular the repayments of the IMF loans and installments which are coming up soon. It was a discussion we couldn't have until today's hurdle has been overcome, but it is a discussion that we are prepared to begin even tonight if you so wish. I think I've spoken enough. I want to thank once more the institutions. The way I understand this conference call is to answer the question whether our list is sufficiently comprehensive to act as the starting point of a process that will stabilize Greece and our relationship with the Eurogroup and the institutions in order to build trust and to move ahead. Thank you. Thank you, Janus. Let me, before opening the floor to other ministers, reiterate that the basis that we are working on is the Eurogroup statements which talks about on the basis of the framework of the existing arrangements underpinned by a set of commitments which are then spelled out. And I think one of the key ones there is that starting from the current arrangement there can be use of the given flexibility, but it has to be always after consulting and agreeing with the institutions and the changes to the arrangements. I think that's the issue. And you also underlined how the Greek government is committed on this point. On top of that, we now have the list which is the first list of reform measures based on the current arrangements and the institutions that provided us with their first views, which if I summarize it, that the list is sufficiently comprehensive to be a valid starting point for a successful conclusion of the review. I think those are the key elements. This is where we are. This is how we will work. And all of this, if the national procedures are started and successfully finished by the end of the week, then very intensively the work can start on many of the issues that were brought up and many of the issues that you mentioned, Yannis. Now I'd like to... Can I just come in for a few seconds to reinforce your point and also mention just for the clarity of what we've been in the next few days that the review is a comprehensive review. It cannot be a scattered fragmented review of some items and not others. It has to be comprehensive in order to lead to success and then disbursement. But it's comprehensive. That's right. Thank you for your remark. The floor is to the ministers. Who can I give the floor? If I may, Jerome, if I may, I can say a few words. I would just thank the institution for this first view on the list which we got in time from great authority. So therefore we are in line with the statement from Friday and that is the key. On this basis I think it would be very helpful that we will not change anything that I just mentioned in the HFF. It must be totally clear what we are asking our parliament is an extension of the given agreement. Nothing else, not an amendment of the agreement. It has to be very clear. We will do it. I have already initiated the legislation procedures. I need, of course, the common decision of the Eurogroup in this conference call. But I think on the basis of the list we got from great authorities and with the use of the free institutions we should move on in this way. I think so, but I would like to add to remarks. In the Greek list there has not been mentioned. It's not a must. It must be mentioned, but I would like to repeat it. It's a causal issue of the budget 2015. It is a major issue for the ongoing review for the successful contribution of the program. And then I would like to add that in the list of the great authorities the BRID implementation is not mentioned. And I think Greece should transpose this directive into Greek law as a matter of high priority. And last remark in the area of labor market reform, the issue of collective dismissals is not yet addressed. It's also a thing which should be in mind until the end of April when the time in which the list will be further specified and agreed with the institutions. But once again, if it is clear on this basis we could agree to a comment statement that on the line of this first view, on the basis of this first view of the free institution we would go on in the national procedures to agree on an extension of the program in this week. I think on the issue of the budget 2015 the statement makes quite clear where we stand in terms of the fiscal targets, the Friday statement and the other two issues will have to be picked up in the process in the coming weeks. And the same would go for the collective dismissals. If any changes there would be wanted or necessary or required then it would have to be in the context of changes to the MOU which can only be decided together with the institutions at the latest end of April. Any other comments or questions from the ministry? Janis wants to speak. Yes, Janis. Thank you, Iroon. I would like to thank institutions for a great job and I agree with all ministers and institutions. I would like to add only one thing that for the sake of integrity of Eurozone and EU whole program countries should be treated equally and I hope that it will be. And I would like to ask some help from Janis. Janis, help us please to keep in calm our public opinion and our public opinion and don't push us to answer your signals from Greece because it's not fair that we sit in one room and decided about one and then we get an opinion in 180 degrees and I think it's not fair. We have electors too in our countries and we should tell them something and please help us to keep in calm this situation. Thank you. Thank you, Janis. I think your point on helpful communication is made by all of us also. The institutions refer to it. It will be very helpful for the credible of the whole process that we are now entering, that we communicate in one way and not differently in Europe as at home. I think that's a very valid point to make. Jeroen, this is Luis. Luis, go ahead. Thank you very much. First of all, let me thank institutions despite the fact that these are the endorsements with more caveats I have heard in my life. Well, I think that perhaps it's an indication of a high level of skepticism that I think that is something that is relevant. But anyhow, I would like to stress two points. The first one is that we are starting a process and this is something that is quite relevant because we will have to finalize in April a new memorandum that will be based in the percent arrangement. And this is something that I think that we have to maintain and to keep it very clear. The second one is about communication. I fully agree with Janis that to be coherent is good in life. Schizophrenic approaches only create problems in terms of communication. So it will be so important that all the messages are fully aligned with the process that we have started now and that, you know, this is the beginning of the process and that creating unnecessary noise is not going to be very helpful. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you, Luis. Any other colleagues? Hello, it's Michael. Michael, go ahead. Yeah, I'd like to welcome the work of the institutions also like other colleagues done. When I saw the Great List, I was disappointed. I thought it lacked specifics. There was no arithmetic underpinning it. But in the context of what we were seeking is an extension to the existing program and any substitution of conditions would have to be fully costed and fully vouched for by the institutions. Then I'm prepared to wait and see and go ahead with the process. But I can see some difficulties at the end of the process for a successful review of the program. That being said, I want to end the meeting. Thank you, Michael. I think it's fair to remember that this was only a first list of reform measures from the Greek authorities which we asked. And it's not been elaborated on not being negotiated on with the institutions. So it is what it is. And the question was formulated by the European whether it was sufficiently comprehensive. So I think that's where we stand. And the real negotiations and getting the details right is a long process yet to start. Any other colleagues at this point? Can I ask a question? It's... Hi, everyone. I'd also like to echo thanking the institutions for this first assessment and I'm sure we'll all have a lot to discuss in the coming weeks and months. But getting to the point that several colleagues raised communication is critical here. So maybe you were going to say it anyway. But I think that we should have an agreement here on what to communicate. Will the letters of assessment of the institutions be made public? Will there be a statement of today's meeting? How do you intend to communicate going forward because we have the whole correct way to hear what comes out of this conference call? Thank you. Marie-Louise, thank you. That was the last item on my agenda today to talk about communication. So let me come back to that in a minute and just check if there are any more comments on the list and the commission's first... sorry, the institution's first view on the list. If not, we can turn to communication issues. One is that with your question what is public or going to be made public in the... Before...just to make sure that I have understood, do I understand that the Friday's agreement will be fully respected? Absolutely. Thank you. I'm not going to change a single word. The first question by Marie-Louise was what documents will be made public? The commission has made its letter on the list, public. I don't think the other two institutions have done the same. So perhaps they can indicate whether they want to make it public or not. And Yanis, perhaps you can indicate whether your list is made public or will be made public or how would you like to proceed with that. Can I ask Marie-Louise first? Yes, certainly. We can make it public. No problem. Thank you. Christine? Yeah, we can make it public too. We thought it would be polite to the group to wait until the conference call was over. Indeed. Thank you. Yanis? Yes, we would very much like to make our list public. For some reason it has already been made public, even though it certainly did not leak from our side. But if I may say on the question of communication, Jeroen, that the view that Louis expressed is the one that we can run with very happily and profitably. And that is that from our perspective we see today as the beginning of a new process that we very much look forward to completing in association with our partners and institutions. Thank you. And colleagues, as we are speaking there is a very statement and draft which is being sent to your deputies. It should come in any minute. It uses exactly the words of Friday's statement. And it sounds like this. The Eurogroup today discussed the first list of reform measures presented by the Greek authorities based on the current arrangement which will be spurred further specified and then agreed with the institutions at the latest by the end of April. The institutions provided us with their first view that they considered this list of measures to be sufficiently comprehensive to be a valid starting point for a successful conclusion of the review. We therefore agreed to proceed with the national procedures with a view to reaching the final decision on the extension by up to four months of the current initial assistance facility agreement. We call on the Greek authorities to further develop and broaden the list of reform measures in close coordination with the institutions in order to allow for a speedy conclusion I should say a speedy and successful conclusion of the review. So that is the draft statement. It should come in in your deputies' email boxes. Perhaps you can look at it for a minute and I would ask for reactions. Jeroen, I'm quite happy. This is Yanis Varoufakis. I'm quite happy to accept it just from having heard it. Jeroen? I have one suggestion. In the last paragraph it says we call on the Greek authorities to further develop and broaden the list of reform measures based on current arrangements. Okay. On the current rate it will become the list of reform measures based on current arrangements. That is the point we work. Any other comments from colleagues? So I think that we can use this and we'll put that out shortly after this conference call. Any other business? Let's see. I think there is a Euro working group on Thursday, a regular meeting on Thursday. We can take stock of national consultations. They may not all be finalised by then but just to take stock and talk about the further procedures for the EFS Board of Directors and they can in the end take the formal decision following the Euro working group meeting and once the national procedures have been concluded of course. At our next meeting which is the 9th of March we will again take stock of the developments in Athens and of course in the meantime I invite the institutions and the Greek authorities to continue their work thanks again for all the hard work that has been done over the last couple of days to continue their work and that would allow for a successful conclusion at the review as soon as possible. If no other comments then I think I can thank everyone for joining this meeting and I will close this Eurogroup meeting. Thanks again. Thank you.