National Grid PLC (NGG) 2018 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Okay. So good afternoon, everybody. We'll kick off the call now. So my name is Andy Agg. I'm the Group Tax and Treasury Director for National Grid. And with me today, I have a couple of members of the team as well for when we get on to questions and answers.

So this afternoon's call is to provide you with an update to -- following this morning's presentation of our half year results for 2017/'18, and the update will focus on how our businesses performed and priorities going forward as well as our future debt financing plans. So I'll talk for around 20 minutes. And after that, there'll be an opportunity for you to ask questions via our WebEx software. And we'll explain exactly how you can do this at the end of the presentation. There's a slide pack to accompany this update, which is currently being displayed on WebEx, the details of which were in the original invite sent out on the 7th of November.

So to start, I'd like to refer you to the cautionary statements included in today's announcement. For those of you who have not yet seen the full results presentation from this morning at the London Stock Exchange, there's a replay of the webcast available on our website and a recording of this call and the accompanying presentation will also be uploaded to our website later.

So now to the first half results. Headline operating profit of GBP 1.3 billion and earnings per share of 18.5p per share were both down on last year, mainly reflecting the expected reversal of timing differences. Excluding timing and FX, operating profit was GBP 25 million higher than the first half of last year and in line with our expectations. Underlying EPS of 20.4p per share is 1.8p lower than last year mainly due to higher RPI accretion on our index-linked bonds. Capital investment was GBP 2 billion, a 4% increase at constant currency. This reflects the continued investments in our core regulated businesses as well as the ramp-up of investments in our interconnector projects. Our balance sheet remains strong, and we are on track to deliver good overall returns and value-added for the year.

In terms of the performance of our individual businesses, in UK Electricity Transmission, operating profit was GBP 542 million, down 22% compared to the first 6 months of last year. Excluding timing, operating profit was GBP 70 million or 11% lower, primarily due to the reduction in base allowed revenue and lower BSIS income. For the full year, we expect to deliver totex outperformance close to last year.

The Gas Transmission total operating profit was GBP 126 million, GBP 33 million lower than the prior period but GBP 29 million higher excluding timing. This underlying increase reflects higher revenues due to allowances for the Avonmouth pipeline. As you know, these revenues will be returned next year when the outcome of the mid-period review is put through the price-control model. However, this will have no impact on returns as the allowances have been excluded from these calculations. We expect totex performance to be similar to last year as we continue to make the necessary investments in our systems. Overall, the return on equity will be around the allowed return of 10%.

In our US Regulated business, headline operating profit of GBP 433 million was in line with last year, with the benefit of FX offsetting adverse timing. Excluding timing and FX, operating profit was up GBP 59 million or 13% due to higher revenues from new rates in Massachusetts Electric and our Downstate New York gas businesses. As we previously indicated, we expect the U.S. return on equity to be around 90% to be allowed. This reflects the improved performance we expect under our new rate plans. Over the medium term, our U.S. operating profit, excluding timing, is expected to increase in line with asset growth of around 7% per annum.

Moving on to National Grid Ventures. Our existing interconnector, Grain LNG and Metering businesses continue to perform well, delivering similar levels of profitability to the prior year. The full year operating profit contribution from NGV is expected to be in line with the prior year.

The share of post-tax earnings for our remaining 39% stake in Cadent was GBP 55 million, and this compares to GBP 71 million last year on a pro forma basis. This reduction is mainly due to adverse year-on-year timing. The contribution from Cadent for the current year and for our pro forma results includes the impact of a proportionate shareholder loan from National Group to Cadent, and this means that GBP 15 million of interest income is recognized as a credit in our interest line but as an equivalent reduction in our share of Cadent's profits.

Before moving on to the financial review in more detail, I would like to talk about some key achievements and developments in the first half across the group. As you know, safety is core to National Grid, and I'm pleased to say we've had a good first 6 months. Our focus on ensuring we have the right safety plans and procedures underpins our world-class safety performance with a lost time injury frequency rate of 0.09.

Across both our U.S. and U.K. networks, reliability has also remained strong. In the U.S., we continue to see the benefits of our investments to improve network resilience. And last week, we responded to one of the most severe storms in recent years, affecting all of our jurisdictions and impacting over 400,000 customers. We provided a strong response and were assisted by other utilities. And as is normal practice for these events, we'll carry our post-storm review to see how we can improve our response in the future. In the U.K., our system operator has been working hard to ensure we have the right tools in place to efficiently balance the system. This winter will be the first year under the new capacity market rules, which has contributed to a significant improvement in the capacity margin, up from 5.7% to 10.3%.

Moving on to the U.S. where we see strong growth potential. In the coming years, we expect significant investment opportunity driven by the needs to replace aging infrastructure and to modernize the networks. As you know, rate filings play a key part in ensuring our capital plans are well funded.

And over the last 6 months, we've continued to make good progress on our rate filing program with our Niagara Mohawk gas and electric businesses now in settlement discussions with the New York PSC staff. To remind you, NIMO represents over 50% of our New York rate base. Our rate filing requested $331 million of incremental revenue with capital investment of over GBP 800 million per annum and a return on equity of 9.79%.

The PSC staff's initial response agreed with the vast majority of our capital investment plans and around half of our revenue requests, and this is encouraging at this stage in the process. We've worked hard to improve the quality of our engagement with the New York PSC and are hopeful that a reasonable settlement will be reached by the end of December, with rates coming into effect from April 2018. This means we'll have new rates for over 70% of our U.S. rate base contributing to an improvement in performance and enabling us to achieve returns as close to the allowed levels as possible.

Turning next to the U.K. regulated businesses. With the sale of a 61% share in our UK Gas Distribution business last year, we've reshaped our portfolio to strengthen National Grid's ability to deliver higher asset growth. As you know, in June, we returned around GBP 3.2 billion via the special dividend of just over 84p per share. And to date, we've returned 60% of the total GBP 834 million by the ongoing share buyback program.

Both our electricity and gas transmission businesses continue to deliver high levels of performance. Under RIIO, we generate outperformance by delivering efficiently. Ongoing process improvement and further innovation increases our efficiency over time, lowering the cost of delivery, which is shared with our customers. A case in point is St Fergus, our northernmost gas transmission site where we've developed innovative techniques for dealing with pipework corrosion given a projected saving of around GBP 10 million. As of March this year, RIIO has generated GBP 460 million of all these such savings for our customers.

Turning now to National Grid Ventures. I'm pleased to say we've made good progress in all areas, including on interconnectors that are currently under construction. We've completed seabed surveys for Nemo, our interconnector with Belgium. Construction work on the converter stations is progressing well, and the project is on target for completion in 2019.

On the North Sea Link, our 1.4-gigawatt interconnector with Norway, we successfully completed all civil works on the Norwegian side last month, and the project is on target to complete by early 2022. National Grid's share of investment in these 2 projects is expected to be around EUR 1.2 billion.

For IFA2, the second interconnector with France, we've commenced the offshore surveys and are now progressing the design and permit work as planned. I'm also pleased that in June, we were awarded preferred bidder status for the Shetland new energy solution, with contracts expected to be signed in December.

This 60-megawatt, 260-kilometer interconnector between the Shetland Islands and Scotland demonstrates our ability to be successful in a competitive environment, and the link should be operational in 2021. In the near term, interconnectors are a major feature of National Grid Ventures. But as we set out in May, National Grid Ventures was created to explore growth opportunities to reinforce our technological expertise and strengthen our commercial capabilities as we continue to evolve for the future, and I'll touch on these broader initiatives later.

In this financial review section, I'll cover our interest, tax, cash flow and net debt over the first 6 months. But before doing this, I thought it would be helpful just to step back and look more broadly at how rising inflation and interest rates affected group results.

In the U.K., inflation on our asset base is managed through an uplift to the regulated asset value and recovered over the life of the assets. By deferring the impact of RPI into the RAV, the regulator keeps the cost to consumers lower in the period that the investment is made but rewards shareholders over the longer term. We have partially hedged this by issuing RPI-linked debt. Higher RPI is economically positive as the indexation of GBP 19 billion of RAV is far greater than the indexation on GBP 7 billion of RPI-linked debt. A 100 basis point increase in RPI would represent a net total of GBP 120 million of incremental asset value. The cost of debt allowance in the U.K. is updated annually based on the 10-year iBoxx tracker. This mechanism has a lagged impact but protects the company in a rising interest rate environment. The key, as we've discussed before, is comparing the cost of new debt issued against the spot rate on the index.

In the U.S., nominal regulation builds in the recovery an assumed level of inflation in the year in which it occurs. This provides a faster cash return, which means that the rate base is reduced more quickly and therefore is not affected as much by inflation. Our rate filing program is designed to adjust the cost of service and the return on equity to reflect increases arising from inflation, although the speed of recovery obviously varies by jurisdiction. The key to managing this is timely rate cases to mitigate the impact on returns. U.S. regulators take into account the cost of debt and provide for a straight pass-through of these costs to customers. And this is why most of this date is fixed rate long-term debt.

So turning back to performance in the first half. Finance costs were GBP 527 million, up 23% on a pro forma basis. We have now cycled through a full year of RPI increases, so we expect this to have a much lower impact in the second half. Our effective interest rate increased by 80 basis points to 4.7%, again due to higher RPI. The effective tax rate before joint ventures was 20.8%, down 200 basis points from last year partly due to the lower U.K. corporation tax rate. Earnings per share were 18.5p, 6.5p lower than last year on a pro forma basis mainly due to adverse timing of 4.7p.

Operating cash flow was GBP 2 billion, and this was higher than last year due to lower pension contributions. Net debt increased by GBP 3.8 billion to GBP 23.1 billion. The increase includes the return of GBP 3.6 billion of the Gas Distribution proceeds to shareholders and an underlying GBP 1.4 billion increase related to business requirements. These factors have been partially offset by stronger sterling, which decreased net debt by GBP 1.2 billion. In the first half of the year, we raised over GBP 1 billion of new long-term financing.

In the next section, I'll discuss some of our priorities for the second half of the year, beginning with the U.K. and regulation. At the end of August, Ofgem released a consultation for the needs case and options for delivery for Hinkley-Seabank. This is a significant project with expected CapEx of almost GBP 1 billion. Ofgem are consulting on 3 models for the delivery of this important connection. We've responded to this, and we await Ofgem's decision. Ultimately, our overarching goal is to remove the current regulatory uncertainty so that we can focus on the timely connection of the power station. We expect the needs case to be published in December, along with the consultation on the preferred delivery model, which will be confirmed in 2018.

Next, I'd like to touch on RIIO-T2. In July, Ofgem issued an open letter, setting out their key principles for the future framework. We're pleased to see that many of their principles are consistent with our view, including putting the customer at the heart of decisions and ensuring infrastructure is built as efficiently as possible. We firmly believe that with these shared principles, Ofgem should be able to create a regulatory framework that ensures the efficient delivery of needed capital investment while providing investors with certainty and confidence in the utility sector. As you can see from the timetable on this slide, we're still 3.5 years away from the start of RIIO-T2, and the exact financial parameters won't be known for some time, but 2018 will be an important year in the establishment of the overall framework for the price control. Ultimately, there are, of course, a number of parameters that make a successful price control, not just returns, and we've got a good track record of collaborating to achieve successful regulatory frameworks and being able to deliver against our price controls both for customers and shareholders.

As for our near-term priorities in the U.S., the first is to reach a settlement for the ongoing NIMO rate case with new rates due to come into effect in April 2018. We also intend to submit rate case filings for Massachusetts Gas and Rhode Island Gas and Electric businesses this month. Together, these 2 companies represent about 20% of our U.S. business. The Massachusetts Gas filing is the first since 2010 and will enable us to update revenues to more closely reflect our current cost of service and allow us to earn returns closer to the allowed level. The Rhode Island Gas and Electric filing will be the first since 2013. Whilst Rhode Island regulation includes capital trackers, it's important that we reset our operating expenses to ensure that we earn a fair level of return.

Finally, moving on to our near-term priorities for National Grid Ventures. As I discussed earlier, we already have a good pipeline of new interconnectors under construction and there are further opportunities, too. For example, last week, the Danish government announced its backing for the 1.4-gigawatt Viking Link between the U.K. and Denmark. A final investment decision is expected to be taken next March with completion planned for 2022.

In the U.S., we have a growing pipeline of business development opportunities, including competitive transmission, battery storage and electric vehicle infrastructure. One particular area of focus will be the transmission projects, Granite State Power Link and Northeast Renewable Link. And in July, we submitted bids to bring renewable energy to Massachusetts through both of these projects. The result from the tender process will be known in January 2018, and if successful, these would represent over $1 billion of new capital investments.

Turning finally to our recent capital markets activity and our future plans. Firstly, thank you for the support you've provided across our funding activities so far this fiscal year. As mentioned earlier, we've raised over GBP 1 billion in the capital markets across a number of transactions, including recent issues in the euro market for National Grid North America and in the 144A U.S. dollar market for Boston Gas.

Our focus in the capital markets for the rest of the fiscal year will be on funding our U.S. business, where we may issue twice out of 2 operating companies, including likely before the end of the calendar year. We may issue also from National Grid North America depending on our cash requirements.

In the U.K., it's unlikely that there will be new capital markets funding over the remainder of this fiscal year from either National Grid plc or from either of our 2 main operating companies. In terms of our available facilities, we continue to maintain significant levels of committed bank lines to ensure sufficient group liquidity. We currently have undrawn committed lines throughout the group of around GBP 5.5 billion and -- however, our group of core relationship banks continue to commit their balance sheet to National Grid.

So overall, I'm pleased to report good progress in all our businesses, and I'm confident this momentum will continue. In the second half, we'll continue to focus on our priorities as we work to finalize the NIMO rate filings, continue our engagement with Ofgem on RIIO-T2 and Hinkley-Seabank and seek opportunities to grow the business whilst remaining focused on performance optimization and keeping pace with the evolution of our industry. As I said earlier, we are operating in a dynamic environment, but National Grid has strong fundamentals that underpin our ability to create value over the long term. We have a high-quality asset portfolio, a strong balance sheet, access to solid growth opportunities driving asset growth and yield, and excellent teams that are motivated to deliver enhanced performance. I'm confident that we're well positioned for attractive growth and good shareholder returns.

So with that, I'd like to thank you all for listening and would welcome any questions. And I'm now just briefly going to hand over to our manager, [Gerard Humphries], to explain how to ask questions over the WebEx software.

Thanks, Andy. (Operator Instructions)

Okay. Okay. Over to you.

It's James Farrell here from BNP Paribas. Just got a couple of questions. Just firstly, could you give us an update on where you are with the EIB now? How much you might still have available? And what's happened in the post-Brexit world? And kind of following on from that, obviously, we haven't seen opco issuance from you, from being a huge opco issuer. I guess the EIB took away a lot of your potential bond-funding needs. Is that something that could change sort of going forward down the line?

And then secondly, a bit more of a big picture question, and apologies if it was covered on this morning's call, but I wasn't on that. But just around the whole political environment. Obviously, Ofgem are trying to keep things as stable as possible, but the political environment has changed, be it labor or the government sort of getting the helm review done. I'm just intrigued to know what you are doing as an organization to sort of prepare yourself for the potential unexpected of either regulatory changes or obviously the nationalization bombshell. That's it for me.

Okay. No, thanks for both of those. So I'll take them in order. In terms of the EIB, as you -- I think you've referenced, we had fund -- EIB funding both within our Gas Distribution business, which went with -- the business that was sold during the last financial year but also in our Electricity Transmission business. We've fully drawn that. That was all fully drawn before the end of the last financial year. There was no change to that existing drawing or existing borrowings in a Brexit scenario. And I think we've made that clear on previous calls, and no change in that position. Clearly, it may impact -- or almost certainly will impact the likelihood of future funding out of the EIB but no impact on existing drawn funding within National Grid.

In terms of your broader question on the U.K. opcos, a couple of things. So you're absolutely right, the reference there that over the last couple of years, the availability of EIB funding has reduced the need to go into the capital markets for the U.K. opcos and similarly with the refinancing and activity that we did during the course of 2016 for the Gas Distribution sale. And as we said previously, that left us in a position where we just wanted to run off some of the remaining debt over the next year or so in the National Grid Gas. So at the moment, we have no need to go access the capital markets for our U.K. opcos certainly for the rest of this financial year. But I think both of those factors, as you can imagine, will start to run out. So absolutely, we see U.K. capital markets activity, it's definitely been a part of National Grid's funding activities in the future.

In terms of the second question around the regulatory and political environment. I suppose -- a couple of observations. One is to a degree, we have -- we faced regulatory, political uncertainty over many years. Clearly, the nature of it changes. The focus of it changes, but there's been focus on energy bills, the price of energy, the likelihood of price caps and so forth for several years now. The focus on returns on RIIO has clearly been out there. So to a degree, there's nothing new. One thing I'd say is National Grid continues to focus on what we're required to do, which is deliver good, strong performance and to share the benefits of that performance with our customers. And as I said earlier in the presentation, to the end of March last year, we've shared GBP 460 million of that performance with customers.

But that said and I think where your question was going, clearly, it's part of our job as management to consider all potential risks and look at what we, as a company, might need to do to respond to those. We work hard with all our stakeholders, both in government, in opposition and outside of parliament as well to restate the case for privatized utilities and the benefits that, that has brought in terms of increased investment, stability and delivery of efficiency both in terms of the ultimate cost of bill if you look at how much that has come down in real terms since privatization, for example. So we continue to focus on that, telling our story, the benefits of privatization. But you're absolutely right. We -- it would be naive of me not to say that as management, we look to continue to plan for all eventualities.

Yes. That's very clear. But just -- actually, just to clarify on the first question. As far as you're concerned with the EIB new funding, that's off the table for now. Is that correct?

Well, we have fully drawn. We don't -- as I said earlier, we don't need new funding for our U.K. businesses certainly for this financial year. So we haven't actually pursued it. I think we have just been clear that there's no change to existing fundings. We haven't specifically asked EIB for new funding at this point.

I guess my question is theoretically, could you? Or have they said -- have they got an official position on sort of new funding for [EIB]?

I think at this stage, we haven't tested it, but -- so I'm not really in a position to answer that.

It's Andrew Moulder here from CreditSights. Can you hear me?

Yes. Go ahead. Yes.

I'm on the web link here. Anyway, I just had a couple of questions. I wanted to actually ask you about your hybrid bonds and particularly whether you might be considering it sort of asset liability management, especially in light of the S&P request for comment which came out I think last week, which kind of said you could refinance by tendering as long as the all-in cost is lower than the existing cost of the hybrid. I just wonder if -- what your view is on that and whether you might consider tendering for any of your hybrids.

And perhaps just sticking with debt. I'm sure this is a stupid question. I think I know the answer, but when you talk about your average cost of debt being 4.7% and then I look at companies like Gas Natural, which is talking about an average cost of debt at 3.6% and even EDP is talking about 4.5%, why is yours so high, up 4.7%? Maybe you could just clarify that for me. I think I know the answer, but I just want to hear what you say.

Okay. No. Thanks, Andrew. In terms of the hybrid, yes, so they were issued in various tranches back in 2013, and we're -- I think we're a couple of years out from the first tranche in terms of either extension or refinancing. And we continue to look at all those options. We're obviously looking at the S&P changes. Given the nature of our particular hybrids, it hasn't actually changed the position significantly for us. So the options that were available to us previously haven't really changed. But clearly, we'll continue to look at that as we get closer to our own refinancing or extension, which I think is, as I say, still a couple of years out.

In terms of the cost of debt, a couple of things. I mean we -- as I said earlier in the speech, one of the things we look at in terms of how we manage our issuance program is against our cost of debt allowance. And therefore, we're very focused on when we do issue in terms of where we are versus spot at that point.

I can't comment specifically on what other companies do, but a few factors I would lead to. One is average maturity. And if you look across our debt book, particularly in our U.S. businesses, working with our regulators there, they're very keen that we look to issue long-term debt after those opcos through the 144A route.

And we -- if you just look back over the last couple of years, we've issued a number of 30-year tranches in there, which will tend to have a higher coupon attached to them. And then within our book, as you know, it's part of our approach to hedging inflation. We have some very long-dated RPI debt.

And again, as you've seen over the last -- so the 80 bps increase, for example, is very much all down to the RPI in affecting that portion of the debt book. So I suspect there's a number of reasons. We're satisfied with the performance of our debt book, and we're here to fund this business for the long term. So maintaining a sort of average maturity of around 10 to 12 years, where we've been consistently for the last few years. We're very comfortable with that.

Okay. No, no. That's good. I mean I thought those were the reasons, I just wanted to be sure. And I just have 2 more questions, if I could. Again, I'm sure this just shows my ignorance of the U.S. market, but when you talk about getting a target of 90% of your allowed ROE, why can't you target 100%? I mean when it's an allowed ROE, 90% seems -- sounds to me like you're underperforming. I mean is it just that the costs that you had -- your actual costs are only really reflected in the rate cases when the rate case comes into effect and that there's no sort of trackers within the rate to sort of track your actual cost? I mean I just don't really understand why can't you get to 100% of an allowed return? I mean it is an allowed return after all.

And my second question is just if you could update us. On your net debt to RAV in the U.K. business, what is that at the moment?

Okay. So in terms of the U.S. question first, yes. So what we've said is that this year, we're aiming to get at least 90% of allowed. I think we wouldn't say we're sitting back and satisfied with that. We continue to look to drive the achieved return on equity up as we go through the 90% number.

And clearly, our job is to get as close to allowed as possible, but the 90% is the target for this year. I think there's a few factors which make achieving and sustaining 100% challenging. It's -- there is -- and it varies by jurisdiction, but certainly in one of our jurisdictions, Massachusetts, for example, you're basing your rate case on a historic test year.

So to the extent -- by the time rates come into force, which is another -- after a year's long filing process to an extent you're recovering revenues that are already 2 years out of date. So you've already got that inflationary lag dragging on your return. And remembering that -- as you'll have heard the comments around the NIMO rate filing, for example, where at the moment, the settlement is offering up to around half of what we asked for.

You don't necessarily get all of the cost of service that you ask for every time. And therefore, that, again, will potentially put a drag on what you can achieve.

So our role as management is to keep pushing to get us close to achieving allowed. And you'll have seen actually some of the downstate cases that we settled last year in KEDNY and KEDLI, that we've been able to introduce some incentive performance, which gives us sort of 40 to 50 basis points of outperformance potential for the first time for several years. So we're starting to work with the regulators in our jurisdictions to introduce those types of upside potentials as well, which will all be helpful towards getting closer to allowed.

In terms of the second one -- sorry, in terms --- sorry, I was just -- I hadn't written your second question. My apologies. It was -- what was it around?

What's your net debt to RAV in the U.K. at the moment?

Yes. So we -- just to be clear, we tend to look at net debt to RAV at an operating company level, both U.K. and U.S. across each individual opco and then at the group as a whole. So -- because in terms of holdco funding, it's fungible between the U.K. and the U.S.. We don't tend to look specifically at a U.K. total gearing ratio. Our target gearings for our U.K. opcos are slightly different. So we target our regulatory gearing levels. So for Electricity Transmission, that's 60% debt to RAV. For Gas Transmission, that's 62.5% debt to RAV. Where we are in terms of the group as a whole at the moment is low to mid-60s, and that stepped up a little bit at last year, if you may remember because of the FX rate. We sustained that around sort of the low to mid-60s this year.

Right. Okay. That's good. And maybe just one more question then. Green bonds, I mean they're a big sort of hot topic at the moment, and you strike me as a natural company that will be able to issue them. What was your thinking on those?

Yes. So I mean the green bond market, we keep an eye on that with interest and we have for a little while. And we've certainly seen how that's evolved and become quite successful in recent times. And as I said -- well, I said a couple of times now, given we don't have U.K. or even plc funding needs in the short term, we're not expecting to necessarily target that market for -- certainly for the rest of this financial year. But at the point where we have U.K. opco financing needs in the times ahead, absolutely, the green bond market will be one potential source for that. The critical thing I'd say is ultimately, the pricing still has to be right. And we ultimately will go for funding in the most efficient way, whether that's the green bond markets or elsewhere. So green bonds are good, but clearly, the pricing is what really matters.

Can I just follow up on that, then I'll give somebody else a chance. You talked about the U.K. Is that because -- I mean is there not a green bond market in the U.S.? I mean again, I'm showing my ignorance, but I don't know. Are they not popular instruments that you could issue in the U.S.?

No. There is a green bond market in the U.S. I think where we are though -- and again, this can change over time, but the general approach that we have with our various state regulators in the U.S. is they do like, for being a foreign issuer, the 144A route. They like the clarity, the transparency, the longevity of that. That's not to say that we won't be able to work with them in the years ahead if we think there's a consumer benefit from the green bond markets for the U.S. business that we have today.

Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Well, that's -- I can't hear any questions coming through or on the software. So unless there's anything else, thank you very much again for listening. If there are any questions that you want to ask or that you want to follow up from the questions that you have asked, as you'll be aware, we have a dedicated debt investor e-mail where you can submit those questions through and the team will get back to you, which is debtinvestors@nationalgrid.com. But with that, I'll leave it there, and thanks very much again.