 Benoit for giving me the floor and it was very good indeed to see this morning the queues at the entrance to the building. I think when we started more than what is it one and a half year ago with the working group that time I think we were a bit concerned whether this problem, which is a big problem that relates to benchmarks and benchmark transition, whether it was getting the attention that it should receive and I think having all of you here around this morning is a reflection of the interest in the topic and the importance of working on benchmark transition. In February 2018 I gave the concluding remarks at the first meeting of the working group on the euro risk free rates here also in Frankfurt and since then important milestones have been achieved by this working group in the form of recommendations to the public. While the alternative reference rates committee was first convened by the Fed in 2014 and the working group on sterling risk-free reference rates was established by the Bank of England in 2015 the working group on the euro risk free rates first met in early 2018 as just mentioned. I can recall that at the time there was a common feeling among the working group members and observers of lagging behind the other jurisdictions. Thanks to the joint efforts by the private and the public sectors that feeling is now in the past. In the last 18 months the working group has put in motion a process of reform of interest rates in the euro zone that has gained momentum and has produced recommendation after recommendation and has attracted the attention of market participants both here in the EU and abroad. In my subsequent remarks as you will understand from a regulatory authority I would focus more on the regulatory and supervisory issues related to benchmarks. As you are aware we have given technical advice to the European Commission on the benchmark regulation. We have issued technical standards on the benchmark regulation and we're also participating in the colleges of Euribor, Ionia and Libor. Therefore it's only natural that with SMA's regulatory perspective our main aim is now the adoption of EU supervised entities or fallbacks in new and existing contracts. This is necessary to ensure that the relevant provisions of the benchmark regulation are complied with by benchmark users. The goal of these provisions is to increase contractual robustness and hence the financial stability in the EU financial system. We know that benchmarks play a central role in financial markets and that they're also an important building block of contracts including retail contracts like mortgages. Fostering a wide adoption of reliable and effective fallbacks across different asset classes would surely promote stable and orderly financial markets and can deal with worst case scenarios in relation to benchmarks. This in turn would enhance both the protection of investors in benchmarks and their clients making sure that their interests are safeguarded in all scenarios. However we also know that the implementation of those fallbacks have been slow to date. The working group has already started work on what is arguably the most important fallback rate in the EU, the one for Uraibor. The successful development of functional fallbacks for Uraibor is crucial for the working group in order to consider its mission fulfilled. As mentioned already by Benoit, the work on fallbacks for Uraibor should be the core topic for the working group and the months ahead. The authorization of Uraibor in July 2019 by the FMSA is certainly a key step forward confirming that the new hybrid methodology is robust, resilient and transparent and I believe that the new hybrid methodology measures the same underlying interest of the previous methodology of Uraibor just in a better BMR benchmark regulation compliant way. Indeed the authorization of Uraibor allows EU supervised entities to continue using Uraibor for the foreseeable future. The public sector is aware that identifying effective fallbacks for Uraibor and including them in contracts is a challenging task, also because of the extensive economic, legal and operational implications. However, we also believe that the working group has proven itself to be ready for this challenge considering the track record of its key achievements. First steps on the path to a sound Uraibor fallbacks have already been taken, notably the working group recommendation on a specific forward looking term structure methodology based on ESTR. Later this morning, members of the working group will discuss in detail all the main issues surrounding the identification and adoption of ESTR based term structures that could serve Uraibor fallbacks and I'm sure you will find the debate very useful. And this brings me also to the second challenge where Esma considers the rule of the working group to be decisive. Thanks to the excellent work done by the ECB as of next week, and it was already of course mentioned by Bendois, as of next week, the Eurozone will have a new and reliable interest rate that is based exclusively on transactions ESTR. While the ECB will provide market participants with a new rate that meets the highest standards in terms of transparency and governance, it will then be up to market forces to translate ESTR into a success story. I believe that the working group can play a key role in the broad adoption of ESTR. The role of ESTR goes clearly beyond being the base rate for fallbacks to Uraibor and Aeonia. In a few days, the transition from Aeonia to ESTR will start on the base of the recommendations by the working group. The rivetus markets will play a very relevant role in upgrading the role of ESTR, and in this context, the involvement of infrastructures like CCPs is a high priority. The liquidity of ESTR markets is a crucial factor for the calculation of forward-looking term structures, together with sufficient sources of relevant data, allowing the actual computation of term structures. Trading venues such as multilateral trading facilities must also be part of this exceptional transition to ESTR. The issue of establishing a liquid ESTR market and the transition of Aeonia to ESTR will be covered in detail today by the working experts, by the working group experts, and they will help you in understanding all the pieces of this puzzle. Let me then, before I leave the floor and hand over to the other Stephen, make a few final remarks on two remarks on the regulatory environment. These regulatory changes will change the benchmark regulation and will have an impact on benchmarks in the EU. First, there is the regulatory change relating to climate benchmarks, which will allow having reliable climate benchmarks. The key element for us here, I think, is the extension of the transition period with two years, which will allow that both for third-country benchmarks and for critical benchmarks, the transition period will be extended to the end of December 2021. And I think that will be very much welcomed here by the participants in the audience. The second one that I would like to mention is the ASA's review package, which includes an enhanced role for ESMA on benchmarks. Indeed, by the end of 2021, the supervision of third-country administrators recognized in the EU and the supervision of critical benchmarks will be ESMA's responsibility. And so public authorities themselves will also be subject to a transition as a supervisor, as the supervision of URIBOR will pass on from the FSMA to ESMA. At ESMA, we're looking forward to building on the FSMA's pioneering work, excellent work done by the FSMA in this area, and we're working internally to make sure that this transition is a smooth, timely and effective one. So to conclude, many thanks again to all the panelists, members of the working group and the public authorities involved, both in the work leading up to this event and the event here today. And also, finally, thanks to ING and especially Staven for the leadership and direction provided to the work in this area. Thank you very much for your attention.