 Thank you for your very good speech and my name is Pinti Hakkarainen from ECB. You took up also non-performing loans and that problem and also some initiatives made to solve the issue. My question is when public authorities are now entering that field most strongly. What is the role of the banking industry and the banks? What is their responsibility to clean the mess? Thank you. Well, I would say it is primarily the responsibility of the banking industry and that's exactly where our proposals are heading. When we are discussing, for example, the supervisory action, it's exactly supervisory action to stimulate banks to address NPLs issue more actively. When we discuss the framework for secondary market of NPLs, we just note that in several countries, for example, this is quite restrictive. Even if banks were willing to dispose of NPLs, sell them on the secondary market, often they are facing quite substantial administrative obstacles for doing so. So this is the element which we can address. When we are discussing national asset management companies, what we are doing, we are now preparing blueprint how to do it within existing state aid and banking union rules. As we know, banking union has been created with aim to reduce taxpayers burden for dealing with the financial sector problems. And this point remains valid and this point remains while we are preparing proposals and action plan how to deal with NPLs. Until 2006, and then we experienced a very deep process of financial disintegration. Now things certainly are going better, but my question is seen from Brussels, what has been impeding the fact that some big banks, for example, would come to countries like Italy? Use the passport, enter the country, conquer the market and to a certain extent wipe out the non-performing Italian banks. This would have been a fantastic proof that the single market wins over the crisis. Well, and this exactly is our aim when we work on initiatives like banking union and also capital markets union. One of the aims is to remove cross-border obstacles for doing banking. It concerns regulatory obstacles because what we had been also observing with our system with EU passports that often countries are still, so to say, gold-plating requirements and banks and other financial market participants are still not feeling themselves like in a single market, but rather still dealing with different national markets, so it's addressing those regulatory obstacles, which is often impeding for this cross-border finance. Of course, since the crisis, one of the obvious reasons was also increased risk awareness as banks were removing and sometimes actually kind of urged by their supervisors and regulators to consolidate, to return to their core domestic activities instead of being active in other EU member states. We had also seen this as a response to the crisis, so this is another element which we need to address within the banking union, capital markets union. Currently we are looking also on how to create enabling framework for FinTech industry, whether also some EU passports in certain activities, like for example crowdfunding or peer-to-peer lending would be necessary to allow also FinTechs to scale up in Europe instead of starting in Europe, not being able to scale up and then moving to US or Asia and scaling up there and competing from there. So there are a number of elements which we need to work with, so it's both regulatory elements, supervisory practices, risk aversion of the banks themselves and indeed this increased financial sector integration in Europe is one of the aims of both banking union and capital markets union. The commission probably achieved one of the highest success in the financial industry with USITs directive, basically blueprint that is copied around the world from Latin America to Asia in how to run mutual funds, but they have one constraint, liquidity daily if not two weeks, 99% of USITs are daily liquidity. Now because European companies non-listed account for 80% of jobs, so basically company not listed, they cannot benefit out of USITs directive. Is there any work the commission is doing to create like a USITs type platform for funds which can invest in non-listed company because they represent 80% of European jobs? Well I would say currently we are rather concentrating on how to facilitate that companies get listed. When we are for example simplifying prospectus requirements which has been already been done, when we are creating those SME gross markets and so on and so on, we are creating framework how more companies can be listed and how companies can actually raise more finance from the capital markets. So that's I would say currently the main direction of work which we are considering instead of other way around. I'd like to ask about the commission's proposals regarding the ESRB. It's enhanced authority in certain areas. In the proposals, is there any recognition that the ESRB should in the future evolve to be a more powerful macro prudential supervisor in the European Union? I guess I look at the issue concerning the fact that now it can only issue recommendations and warnings, but it has no real legal power to back up any of its work it's been doing. And if it does not, do you think there's any type of asymmetry with the European supervisory authorities? You've discussed how you've enhanced their institutional structure a bit more and they will have greater powers and be more independent of national authorities. And do you feel that the ESRB framework should be more symmetric with the ESAs? Well, as I was telling on our proposals for ESRB, we were acknowledging that actually ESRB has been for a good start of this work. So we are rather, we are not overhauling the framework. We are coming with some targeted changes in certain areas in governance. We are extending areas where ESRB can also issue warnings, including to the ECB to correct also, as I was saying, some asymmetry between national and banking union level. And we also give more visibility for ESRB to ensuring that European Parliament or ESAS are more systematically notified. So those are the main changes we are currently introducing so we are not introducing some legislative powers at this stage. Mr. Vice President, thank you very much for having been with us for the second time. It's a great honour. I have now the good news and I'm pleased to invite all of you to reception, which is taking place in this direction. Tomorrow at 8.30 we are starting with the welcoming address. It will be me who will be welcoming you. I will tell you about the work which we are doing in four areas. You will see that the fact of having soft low powers also enables you to speak and think about many issues. I will speak about commercial real estate, investment funds, CCPs and other issues. Thank you very much to the Vice President of the European Commission and I would like to invite all of you to the reception. Thank you. Bye.