力拓 (RIO) 2012 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Good morning, everyone here in London, and welcome to those participating via the webcast. Our Chief Executive, Sam Walsh, is with me here in London; and Guy Elliott is presenting from Melbourne.

Rio Tinto's business performed well in 2012, generating strong underlying earnings and operating cash flows. However, as foreshadowed a few weeks ago, we also recorded impairments of $14.4 billion, which resulted in the Group reporting a net loss in 2012 of $3 billion.

These write-downs are deeply disappointing. In particular, the substantial impairment of our Mozambique coal business is unacceptable. There clearly is a need for greater discipline, in particular, in the way we allocate and manage capital at Rio Tinto.

I believe Sam is ideally placed to cast a fresh eye over how we address the challenges and opportunities in the business. He's a highly experienced and capable executive, who has already made a significant contribution to Rio Tinto; not only as an executive, but as a director of the Company.

Sam and I, and indeed the whole Board, are completely aligned on the need to pursue greater value for our shareholders, and we will be working together to achieve this. I can assure you that Sam has hit the ground running, and he's already making a tangible difference to the organization.

Looking forward, I'm optimistic about the outlook for Rio Tinto. We have great assets, attractive near-term growth, and a positive long-term outlook. That gives us confidence in the sustainable cash-generating abilities of our business. That is why we have today increased our annual dividend by 15% to $1.67 per share.

That's all from me. Thank you very much. With that, I hand you over to Sam.

Thank you, Jan. And thank you, too, for the trust that you and the Board have placed in me, to lead this Company in the pursuit of greater value for our shareholders. It's a trust that I feel deeply, which makes me even more conscious of the responsibility that I have taken on. I'm setting a clear course, clear objectives, and I am determined to deliver them.

Let me first recognize my predecessor, Tom Albanese, particularly for the support that he's shown me in my new role as Chief Executive.

This is a great company; it's got great assets. And I inherit a great team; people that I know well from my 21 years with the Company. I'm confident in our core strengths, and my ability to lead the team. I'm proud of my record, and the success in our iron ore operations. But this is a new challenge.

Now for those of you that have not met me, let me tell you a little bit more about me; the sort of person I am, and how I see my role as Chief Executive.

I joined Rio in 1991, after 20 years in the car industry. I've spent the last eight years as Chief Executive of Iron Ore. I've worked in two other product groups, including heading the Aluminium division. I'm deeply familiar with this Company, and its strengths, its challenges, and its people, and I'm committed to making a real difference; building on Rio Tinto's strong foundations to put it firmly on the path for sustainable, long-term success.

I personally place the highest importance on integrity, accountability, respect, and teamwork. These are values that play a big role in the way I do business, and what I expect from my team.

Today, I've strengthened my team with the appointment of Andrew Harding to run the Iron Ore business; and Jean-Sebastien Jacques, who will succeed Andrew as Head of the Copper group.

Andrew has spent the last three years doing an excellent job running the Copper group. He's now returning to Iron Ore, where he spent six years earlier in his career, and is very well qualified to take this product group to the next stage of its growth.

Jean-Sebastien has made a big impact running Copper's international operations over the past year, and comes with a strong track record in both the steel and aluminum industries.

Let me be absolutely clear, I will drive an unrelenting focus on pursuing greater value for you, our shareholders. I'm asking every employee to run the business as if they owned it. And I'm determined to make this a more valuable company.

Now let's move onto one of my overarching priorities, which is safety. We're showing improvement, but, quite frankly, more needs to be done. It brings me great sadness that there were two fatalities in our managed operations in 2012, and a fatality at our La Granja operation in Peru earlier this month.

I won't let up in my constant efforts to improve safety, to reinforce our strong safety culture, and to ensure that every employee and every contractor plays their part in making our workplace safer.

Our core strategy will remain; to maximize shareholder value by investing in and operating large long-life, low-cost, expandable mines and businesses. No change.

But, under my leadership, there will be a change. I'll be insisting on greater focus and discipline, and accountability for the delivery of this strategy across every part of our business.

So let me tell you, what does this mean? Firstly, it's about improving how we manage our capital. As I've said, I've made it clear to everyone that they must treat the Company's money like it's their own, and run the business like owners, not managers. To do this, we must rediscover the qualities and excellence that made Rio Tinto great.

We must get the right balance between taking risk and reward in assessing new investment opportunities. We will rigorously evaluate those opportunities against competing uses for cash; including, of course, returning cash to our shareholders. And we'll only invest in new projects with attractive returns that are well above our cost of capital. I'm committed to rebuilding shareholder confidence that our investments will deliver value.

My second area of focus is on improving our current performance. We have world-class assets, but some of these are underperforming, and that's simply not acceptable.

We will unlock productivity improvements, and aggressively reduce our costs.

We will scrutinize all forms of capital spending; not just expansion capital, but also sustaining, and importantly, working capital.

We will harness our industry leading technologies to deliver greater value from existing operations.

So, from the strategic, let me now turn to the specific, and my immediate focus and priorities for the year ahead.

Today, we've announced underlying earnings of $9.3 billion, and operating cash flows of $16.5 billion. These are good results, and they demonstrate the solid foundation of this business.

I'm refocusing the organization on a single commitment; the pursuit of greater value for our shareholders. This is a serious commitment that will inform all of the decisions that we make, all the actions we take, right across the entire organization.

And I'm reinforcing discipline and accountability. Putting it very, very simply, this means individuals will have clear targets, and will be accountable for their performance. It also means we'll strengthen our management and our approval systems, bringing greater rigor to internal debate, and having more effective checks and balances, and clearer lines of sight to critical business issues.

We will deliver on our cost-saving targets; still see an annual run rate improvement of $3 billion per year by the end of 2014, and Guy will talk us through this shortly.

We'll bring new production onstream from our approved growth projects.

We're taking a more aggressive portfolio approach to assets that no longer fit our strategy, and we're targeting significant cash proceeds from our divestment program during 2013.

At every turn, we'll evaluate alternate uses for cash, between disciplined investment, strengthening our balance sheet, and returns to shareholders. And these are the right steps for us to take. They'll build a stronger, better company.

So, with that, let me pass over to Guy to run through today's results. Then I'll be back with you to cover our operations, our projects, and the market outlook.

Thanks, Guy, and over to you.

Thank you, Sam. We've reported underlying earnings of $9.3 billion, and cash flows from our operations of $16.5 billion. Whilst lower than last year, principally due to lower commodity prices, these results demonstrate the good performance and healthy position of our underlying business.

As we flagged in January, we've recognized an impairment charge of $14.4 billion, mainly related to our aluminum and Mozambique coal assets.

The aluminum market deteriorated further in 2012, while the Australian and Canadian dollars remained strong. These factors, coupled with high energy and raw material costs, reduced market valuations substantially.

In Mozambique, we had planned to barge coal along the Zambezi River. This has not received formal approvals, but we remain actively engaged with the Government of Mozambique on all transport options.

We've revised down our estimates of recoverable coking coal, which necessitated a reassessment of the overall scale and ramp up schedule, resulting in the impairment.

The impairment charge has been partly reduced by a deferred tax asset of $1.1 billion, following the introduction of the MRRT in Australia last year.

We recognized net gains on consolidation of Richards Bay Minerals and Turquoise Hill of around $800 million.

So, overall, we recorded a net loss of $3 billion.

Let's now take a look at the key drivers of our underlying performance, starting off with price. Lower prices for most of our products resulted in a $5.3 billion drop in underlying earnings. Weaker markets were driven by two main factors; the slowdown in China, and subdued growth in the rest of the world.

Of course, the lower average iron ore price had the greatest impact, reducing underlying earnings by $3.7 billion. It was a tale of two halves for iron ore prices in 2012. The first half of the year was relatively stable. The second half was highly volatile, with prices falling to as low as $89 per tonne, before recovering to the mid-$150s in early 2013.

In Aluminium, we continued to face challenging market conditions. The 16% decline in the LME price lowered earnings by just over $940 million.

It was also a difficult year for coking coal, driven by a combination of a recovery in supply from Australia, and a weak macroeconomic environment.

In 2012, copper markets moved from a net deficit to a slight surplus. The 10% decline in the copper price lowered our earnings by just over $300 million.

On a more positive note, the unwinding of legacy contracts for titanium dioxide feedstocks resulted in $270 million of additional earnings. This sector will become an even more important driver of our earnings momentum, as re-pricing of legacy contracts continues.

One-third of our long-term contracts have now expired; increasing our exposure to current market prices, which are significantly higher than existing contract averages. By the end of 2013, around three-quarters will have rolled off.

Turning now to volumes. Volume increases enhanced earnings by $634 million. Just over half of this came from rising iron ore sales, following the debottlenecking projects in the Pilbara.

Other significant gains included higher copper volumes at Escondida, and at Northparkes; in line with a recovery in grades.

Volume declines of $943 million primarily reflected lower mill throughput and lower gold grades at Kennecott; and also, no metal share at Grasberg, where production did not reach the amount set in the metal sharing agreement.

The net volume variance, therefore, lowered earnings by just over $300 million.

We are confident that this trend will reverse in 2013 as our major projects come onstream and copper grades continue to recover, in particular, at Kennecott.

Higher operating cash costs during 2012 decreased underlying earnings by $304 million, excluding the effect of energy prices and inflation. The largest single driver of higher costs was operational readiness. These are costs which we incur in order to quickly ramp up our growth projects to full production capacity; in particular, in the Pilbara.

One-off costs principally relate to the impact of the Alma lockout, and furnace rebuilds in our Ti02 business.

Raw material cost inflation continued, particularly in our Aluminium business, where higher coke pitch and caustic soda prices persisted.

Offsetting these cost increases was less weather disruption than we experienced a year earlier.

With continued cost inflation across the mining industry, and with the Australian dollar above parity with the US dollar, a focus on costs has become even more essential.

We saw an increase in our non-cash costs due to higher depreciation in the Pilbara following recent investment, as well as higher depreciation at ERA.

Exploration and evaluation costs were lower, partly due to the gain on disposal of our interests in Kalahari Minerals and Extract Resources. We expect these costs to come down further, and are targeting savings of $750 million in 2013 as part of our cost reduction efforts.

Turning to cash flow. At $16.5 billion, cash flow from operations was lower than underlying EBITDA, mainly as a result of lower dividends from Escondida due to the financing of its investment program, and various non-cash accounting items included in EBITDA.

Cash inflows included $1.35 billion from Chalco, following the signing of the Simandou agreement.

Our large projects in the Pilbara and Oyu Tolgoi account for much of the total capital expenditure of $17 billion for 2012. This was higher than our previous guidance due to the accounting reclassification of a number of items at Oyu Tolgoi from operating to capital expenditure. This has no impact on the overall project cost, which remains on target at $6.2 billion.

We also accelerated some spend in the Pilbara, allowing us to bring forward the timing of first production from the expansion to 290 to the third quarter of 2013, with no increase to overall project spend.

Turning to acquisitions. In September, we doubled our stake in Richards Bay Minerals for $1.7 billion. We're very pleased with our increased share in this Tier 1 asset, in a market whose long-term outlook remains attractive.

Other large outflows included corporate taxes of $5.8 billion, which is comparable with 2011. We'll be publishing our taxes paid report on March 15.

Cash returns to shareholders totaled $4.5 billion in 2012, comprised of the completion of the Group's $7 billion share buyback program, and the ordinary dividend.

Overall, our net debt increased by $10.8 billion to $19.3 billion.

Now, despite this increase, our balance sheet remains healthy. In 2012, the Group successfully completed bond issues in US dollars, euros, and sterling, raising around $8 billion, with maturities ranging from three to 30 years, averaging around 12 years; with a weighted average cost of borrowing of approximately 3.6%.

We have cash on hand of $7 billion, and undrawn committed credit facilities of $8 billion.

All this is in the context of our aim to maintain our A credit rating.

Let me turn now to one of our key priorities for the coming years; our cumulative $5 billion reduction in operating costs by the end of 2014.

Approximately $2 billion of savings will be achieved in 2013. This will be sustained into 2014, and a further $1 billion of savings will be made in 2014; bringing us to $5 billion in total. So by the end of 2014, we will have achieved sustainable reductions of $3 billion in our operating cash costs, compared with our 2012 cost base.

For context, in 2012, our net operating cash costs were $35 billion, around $6 billion higher than just three years ago. This is not a sustainable trend so we're taking decisive actions to reverse it. Let me explain the rules we will apply in measuring performance against this target.

We're assuming constant market conditions, and a stable operating environment. We will also strip out the effects of uncontrollable items, including inflation; currency movements; the impact of input prices linked to quoted metal prices; and major one-offs, such as a significant weather event.

Performance against this target will be measured by pre-tax, unit cash cost improvements, shown in our earnings variance analysis. Productivity gains that reduce unit cash costs will be reflected in our performance against the target.

Equally, any increases in unit costs as a consequence of operating conditions, such as greater haul distances, will need to be more than offset.

All earlier cost reductions that we've talked about are included in our new target. This includes the cost savings from our aluminum transformation program, and from our service and support cost review.

However, our planned reductions in exploration and evaluation spend of $750 million, and further reductions in sustaining capital, are in addition to this target.

Nearly two-thirds of the $5 billion cumulative savings will come from our Aluminium and Energy businesses. These have experienced the highest cost increases over recent years. Central service and support costs also make up a substantial part of the reduction.

What sorts of initiatives are we taking to get there? Well, a few examples may help explain.

In our Energy business, we've implemented a salary freeze, which will result in a real terms cost savings. We're also improving labor sourcing strategies. We've recently completed the first round of our service and support cost review, which included significant headcount reductions, and the downsizing of a number of high cost city offices. We're now reviewing our central office locations and are aiming for substantial savings through further relocations, outsourcing, and offshoring.

Beyond our cost reduction programs, we're also taking action at some of our higher cost operations. For example, at Gove, we're working closely with the Northern Territory Government to finalize agreements for gas supply, and are advancing plans to convert the refinery from high cost fuel oil to gas.

Turning to capital expenditure, we would expect 2012 to be our peak year of investment. We currently estimate that we will spend around $13 billion on approved capital expenditure in 2013. This may rise if we choose to approve further projects, such as Oyu Tolgoi Phase II, or south of the [Ambly]; or if we introduce new partners to provide funding without additional cash commitments by Rio Tinto.

We will be looking at existing projects with a fresh pair of eyes, and considering alternatives. These include continuing with the current plan; slowing down; introducing partners; or cancelling projects all together. For example, we have slowed down the development of Kitimat over the winter period, given aluminum market conditions. And we've deferred work at the Argyle underground project, not required to bring first production on stream.

And we're looking at options for reducing the capital we've invested in shipping, including novating two existing new ship orders to a third party provider of freight services.

But we are mindful of the lessons learned when we put projects on ice in the wake of the global financial crisis in 2009. It can be significantly more expensive to demobilize and then restart projects than to keep going. So it's too early to give a definitive list of what we'll do, but this is a high priority.

So, to wrap up, our business performed well in 2012, generating strong underlying earnings and operating cash flows. However, we're deeply disappointed by the substantial write-downs, which led to the net loss of $3 billion.

Looking forward, we will be delivering major volume growth in the near term as two of our landmark projects are scheduled to come onstream.

We will remove excess costs from all our businesses as we seek to save $5 billion in total over the next two years.

Our priority is to deliver greater shareholder value through the disciplined allocation of our capital. To that end, we will only invest in new projects that generate returns considerably higher than our cost of capital.

Last year, we rebased our dividend by 34%. We're now increasing it by a further 15% today, demonstrating our confidence in the long-term outlook for our business.

With that, let me hand you back to Sam.

Thanks very much, Guy. In a number of ways, 2012 was a difficult year with the fallout from the global financial crisis still having an impact on us. But our underlying business performed well, and there are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about 2013. Let's now take a brief look at the outlook, starting with the near term.

The global economy ended 2012 in a healthier state than forecast, largely due to a better, or perhaps I should say less dire, performance in the OECD countries. This in turn reflected a shallower recession in the eurozone, and a weak but steady recovery in the United States.

However, the slowdown in China did not turn out to be more pronounced. This raised fears of a hard landing, and sparked a debate on the sustainability of an investment-led growth in China. This in turn led to increased risk aversion towards commodities.

But, importantly, we did see some recovery in China at the end of the year, together with an improvement in confidence in the OECD. We're seeing this positive momentum being sustained in 2013, with Chinese GDP growth expected to return to above 8% growth this year. We do, however, expect uncertainty and price volatility to persist.

Rio Tinto is a company that's always focused on the longer term. Here our view is unchanged; that over the course of the next two decades billions of people will move from rural to urban areas, driving up consumption of the metals and minerals that we produce.

Again, of course, China will be key. The Chinese population is still only 50% urbanized, and we'd expect that this would rise closer to 70% towards 2030, with around 200 million additional people moving to the cities in the next decade alone.

But, importantly, it's not just about China. As India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia, and other South East Asian countries urbanize and industrialize, they will increasingly demand more of the metals and minerals that we produce. This gives us the confidence that, despite all this short-term volatility, we're well placed to take advantage of the strong growth in long-term demand.

So the outlook for our markets is positive. And within this context, most of our businesses are performing well. We have strong growth prospects in a number of products, as you can see from the chart. But two of our businesses are not delivering adequate returns, and I will address this.

The aluminum industry is likely to face challenging market conditions for some years to come. A structural shift has occurred, driven by the decoupling of the supply chain for bauxite, alumina, and aluminum, and continuing growth in the Chinese smelting industry.

We have seen some smelter closures, and they've been announced. But we've also seen local governments across the globe providing incentives to ensure that loss-making smelters continue to operate. These actions are preventing the rationalization of the high cost capacity that's required to exit to rebalance the industry.

The impairments that we've recorded against our Aluminum business in recent terms demonstrate that the impact of this structural market shift is extremely serious.

We've achieved a great deal through our transformation efforts at Rio Tinto Alcan. But as our results today show, it, quite simply, isn't enough. We need a fresh look at this business to ensure that it's able to generate the returns that we would demand.

This means we need to take action to reverse the cost increases that we've experienced. We need to improve the productivity of our assets, and the returns we generate on capital invested. I'll ensure that no stone is left unturned to turnaround the performance of this business.

Secondly, our Energy group also gave disappointing performance in 2012. Under Harry Kenyon-Slaney's new leadership, I expect significant new steps to be taken, costs to be cut, and underperforming operations to be closed or divested. Harry's already taking tough decisions to turn that business around.

So, as I said, there's a lot to be done.

Now, turning to our investment program, we have a number of projects at varying stages of completion. We're focusing on delivering our major capital projects on time, and on budget.

In Queensland, Yarwun 2 was completed in mid-2012, and we've ramped up at an unusually fast rate to 90% of capacity. New tonnes are also being delivered from our Australian thermal coal operations, following the completion of Brownfield expansions in 2012.

In British Colombia, the Kitimat modernization is expected to deliver first metal by the end of 2014.

Looking further ahead, we continue to make good progress at Simandou. In 2012, we formed the joint venture with Chalco; received a $1.3 billion earn on -- earn in; and we also focused on the social and environmental impact study. We anticipate further progress once project financing has been put in place, and approvals granted by the Government of Guinea for work on the ground.

Turning now to Mongolia and the Oyu Tolgoi copper and gold project. I'm very proud of this project and what the management team in Mongolia has delivered. As you can see, this is a truly world-class project. It has potential to make a material contribution to the growth and prosperity of Mongolia, as well as delivering value for Rio Tinto shareholders.

The project was constructed on budget, over an optimized schedule of 34 months, and has already achieved key commissioning milestones, including the first concentrate, produced in January. It remains on track to ramp up to commercial production in the first half of this year. This high quality ore body will further provide options for growth.

We're continuing to optimize a Phase II feasibility study, and now expect it to be completed in the first half of 2014.

Our investment of over $6 billion in Mongolia to date is underpinned by the investment agreement signed with the Government of Mongolia in 2009, and which came into effect in 2010. This agreement, as with any other investment agreement, is the foundation of the project, and it's essential safeguard for investments, in Oyu Tolgoi.

I'm concerned by recent political signals within Mongolia, calling into question some aspects of the investment agreement. This undermines the partnership that we've built, and the stability on which a project of this size and scale depends. It puts at risk future investment, not only by Rio Tinto, but by others considering investing in Mongolia. I'll be totally supporting the Copper team in their finding a solution.

It's important that we continue to work in partnership with the Government of Mongolia to bring the benefits of OT to all parties. But I'm also focused on delivering and protecting value for our shareholders. This requires proper safeguards against risk, and continued respect for the implementation of the investment agreement.

In Western Australia, our Pilbara expansion project will see us grow annual iron ore production from 237 million tonnes per year today to 360 million per annum by the first half of 2015.

As you know, in November we re-rated our annual capacity from 230 million tonnes to 237 million tonnes, with minimal capital investment.

Today, Guy mentioned that we brought forward completion of the 290 million tonne a year project from the fourth quarter of this year to the third quarter of 2013, delivering value faster. As a result, our global iron ore production will grow to around 265 million tonnes in 2013, on a 100% basis.

In 2014, we'll have a full year of operating at this higher capacity, delivering further year-on-year growth. This will be quickly followed by an additional 50 million tonnes of annual capacity by the end of 2014, and a further 20 million tonnes by the end of the first half of 2015, to reach an annual capacity of 360 million tonnes per annum.

We've also saved $1 billion of capital by removing the wet plant at Brockman 4 from the expansion project. This means we'll be able to maintain a capital intensity in the Pilbara of mid-$150 per annual tonne, despite facing some of the highest inflation rates in the industry, and major headwind from the strong Australian dollar.

Importantly, this is an achievement unmatched by any other developer of a major iron ore project. We run a highly efficient, fully integrated mine, rail, and port network in the Pilbara and I welcome last week's decision by the Australian Competition Tribunal regarding third party access to our rail. This protects the value of the system that we've created over decades of investment.

To sum up, you've heard me say that greater accountability will bring better performance from our people, from our operations, and from our projects, and that getting the basics right will ensure the fundamentals stay strong.

We'll invest wisely, prioritizing the highest returning projects, bringing in approved expansions onstream, and realizing good value from divestments.

I will be determined, and I will demand focus from my team. Expect me to be disciplined, and expect me to instill discipline in all who work at Rio Tinto. I require my management team to be accountable to me, and all of us to be accountable to you, our shareholders.

This new approach is all about one single aim; pursuing greater value for our shareholders. You'll hear a lot more about that from me. You'll see me relentlessly focus on the principals and the projects that will get us there. And I expect the entire organization to do the same.

I hope today that I've given you some indication of the kind of leadership that I'll bring, and given you a confidence in the future as we build a stronger, more sustainable Company, delivering greater value for our shareholders.

It's now time to take your questions. I'll just relocate to the chair and table.

What I'd like to do here is to take three questions from the floor here in London, and then move to the phone and take three phone call questions, and then I'll come back to this room. So, perhaps, if we could take the first question here.

Rob Clifford, Deutsche Bank. Thanks for the presentation. I have three questions. Firstly, can you give some examples of some of the excesses you've seen creep in over the last seven years, that you think are easy to tackle?

Secondly, do you feel you see that the Board relationship with the executive team will adjust with the changes we've seen over the last couple of months?

And thirdly, the changes you're talking about require some significant cultural change from the last few years. Have you got the skills within the leadership team, across the levels to deliver, and specifically the two big divisions, Energy and Aluminium?

You talked about the fact there's a lot of changes already in Energy, but Aluminium has been looking for these changes for some years. How can they do things differently to get the outcome that you require?

Look, I've got the track record of running the largest earning business at Rio Tinto. Many of you heard me talk about the fact that we have an operations center near Perth Airport, and that optimizes the business in real time.

The fact of the matter is that the total business operates in real time; making decisions, being more nimble, being more focused. This is fundamental to the way that a business runs. And I think as businesses get bigger, they become less nimble. Small businesses, in a way, it's lucky because they have to be nimble to physically survive.

What I'm intending is to overlay the approach we've taken in Iron Ore to the broader business. It is about cultural change, but it's nothing radical, it's nothing revolutionary. It's a way that businesses evolve.

As businesses get larger, sometimes the businesses get slower in terms of how they look at information and how they respond. So I'll be refocusing the business to pick up the type of culture that we operated in, in Iron Ore and taking that across the broader business; ensuring that we're more responsive; ensuring that we're nimbler in terms of the way that we look at data and the way that analyze things; ensuring that we make well informed decisions on the basis of data that is responsibly generated so that you've got clean line of sight, so that you can understand all of the issues that are impacting.

I mentioned earlier that we're facing more volatile times. Well, it actually means that you need to change the way that you operate in an environment like that.

These are some of the over arching changes. But I mentioned focus, I mentioned discipline, I mentioned accountability. This is not rocket science. If you get out any management handbook, I'm sure it will make mention of these types of things.

But I seriously mean it. I seriously mean this is what you need to run a business in 2013, and to succeed. Businessmen, businesswomen running the business as if you own it; these are characteristics of a business as it's formed. It's the characteristics of smaller businesses.

Somehow, as a business develops it gets a little bit more removed from the sort of things that we're talking about here today. Well, I want to inject that straight back into the business. I want to ensure that people within Rio Tinto understand that the prime driver for the business is pursuing greater shareholder value.

That's why we're here. The shareholders are the owners of the business. The shareholders have invested in us, they've had the confidence in us to deliver this value, and I'm committed to creating greater value for our shareholders. It's just a fundamental of what is the basis of the business.

Rob, you mentioned excesses. Look, quite frankly, I'm not about looking backwards. History is interesting. History does have learnings for the future, but I'm more focused on delivery. I'm more focused on the future. I'm more focused on ensuring that this business is run tightly; is responsive; is responding to the marketplace; is reflecting what governments and other stakeholders expect of us; and, most importantly, that we're delivering value.

I think there's huge opportunities within the business. Yes, I've got to find the key to unlock that. Yes, it's going to change some of the ways that we do things. But this is not a revolution. In a way, it's reinstating a lot of the strengths that this Company has within the business.

And when I talk to leadership about the sort of things that I'm mentioned here today, they feel very comfortable. They get it, they understand, they know exactly what I'm talking about.

Board relationship, I think we are extremely fortunate with our Board. Our directors come from a very diverse background. I am amazed, at times, at the commitment and the time that our directors spend in terms of their engagement and involvement in the business, and how seriously they take their responsibility.

I've had the advantage, in the past week, to be a part of committees that [near-sight] I'd seen minutes of. And I'd seen the output of those committees, but I'd not seen the details rigor and analysis and whatever that goes in.

I don't believe that there's an issue in relation to relationship between Board and management; I just don't see that.

I do see that there were instances of poor judgment by management. I do see that two of my colleagues were separated from the business. I do realize that the Board takes their responsibilities very seriously, and that's reflected on what we have seen. But it doesn't reflect on the broader relationship.

This is a great Company. The foundations are very sound. We do have good assets. We do have good people. We actually do also have a good Board.

I think in relation to the culture change within the organization, some parts of the organization are already operating in the culture that I'm talking about.

I think if there's a significant re-thinking, in a way, about how people within the business operate, it's this creation of businesswomen and businessmen, business people, in terms of their outlook; in terms of spending money as if it was own; acting as if they're owners of the business. This is a cultural shift in terms of how a large organization operates.

But again let me say, this is not a drastic shift from where we've been; it's a reorientation. It's a new way of looking at how people operate.

But many of the fundamentals I'm talking about you'll recognize from the Rio evolved. You'll recognize that, well, Sam's making sense here; Sam's talking about the things that help make this Company great. I'm just ensuring that we've got the focus there; that we've got the nimbleness that we've talked about; we've got the sense of urgency; most importantly, that we've got this focus on shareholder value.

I want to convert mining engineers, and geologists, and accountants, and HR specialists, I want to convert them into businesswomen and businessmen; that to me is probably the biggest cultural change. But I think it's something that people will jump for joy, and they will say, well, thank goodness; thank goodness we're recognizing what the Company needs to do.

So, perhaps, another question here. That was a bit longer than I thought, by the way. You get me wound up, Rob.

Myles Allsop, UBS. Maybe just two very quick questions. But, first of all, when do you think Rio will be in a position to start properly considering returning cash to shareholders? In terms of what net debt level do you feel comfortable with your single A rating? If divestments accelerate that process, will the Board consider bringing forward cash returns?

And secondly, just in terms of management change, Guy was planning to retire at the end of this year. Are you going to revisit that plan to ensure continuity at the top?

Yes, let me start with the second question first, and then, Guy, in fact, if I could get you to respond on the cash return to shareholders.

Yes, we announced quite some time ago that Guy would be retiring at the end of the year. He will be staying on the Board through 2013. And we've always indicated that at the time that we bring on his successor she or he will move into that role, of course supported by Guy in terms of a hand over, but that we will retain Guy's experience and expertise through the end of the year. That is very, very important to us.

In relation to considering cash returns, Guy, why don't you pick up on that question?

Thanks, Sam. Well, Myles, you said when are we going to start properly returning cash to shareholders, and I think we are returning to shareholders right now. We've just -- we had a 34% increase in the dividend last year, and here we have a 15% increase in the dividend, so that is properly returning cash to shareholders. But I know what you mean; you mean when might we have another buyback program?

Now, we've been very willing to enter buyback programs, as we demonstrated in the period 2004/'05/'06, that sort of time; and then again more recently in the period 2011/'12, when we returned $7 billion through buybacks.

I think we are serious, though, about our single A rating. And I think that taking into account the level of capital that we expect to spend this year, there is no immediate likelihood that we would return the cash to shareholders through buybacks.

You mentioned disposals. It is true, as Sam said, that we are looking at further disposals than the ones that we've announced. Depending upon how many of those are accomplished, when they're accomplished, and how much we get for them, I suppose it's possible that the balance sheet could return to a point where that question became relevant. But I would not encourage you to expect that this year.

However, we are serious, as we have demonstrated in the past, about the idea of returning cash to shareholders, if that makes sense. We have said, by the way, both today and in previous announcements, that we are measuring our investments against that sort of approach. So we're looking at our investments against the alternative of returning cash to shareholders, although that's not an immediate prospect, for the reasons that I've said.

I should also add to Guy's comment that you generate shareholder value in a range of ways. Certainly, returns is part of it. But delivering real value increase for the business, that also is an incredibly important part of delivering this increase in shareholder value.

James Gurry, Credit Suisse. There's a lot of focus on the areas of the business where we've invested a lot of capital but there's not much returns there, but at the moment I think it's all about iron ore. Can you talk a little bit more about the Iron Ore; the pace of ramp up in your expansion in the Pilbara, and how you see the iron ore market over the next year, and perhaps three to five years?

And just further to that, given your in-depth knowledge of Simandou and IOC, can you just outline your long-term vision for those two projects, and where they sit?

I would comment that the business is broader than iron ore. As I mentioned in relation to Yarwun 2, coal, Oyu Tolgoi, we have a range of projects that are in the portfolio. And we are a diversified -- importantly. Different parts of our business go through different parts of the cycle, and they have their time in the sun.

In relation to iron ore, I mentioned Chinese GDP growth increasing greater than 8% this year. That's an important indicator. Also, in January I made comments about the fact that we're expecting volatility in iron ore prices. We had seen a ramp up of prices surrounding potential weather effects in the Pilbara; in fact, elsewhere in iron ore production.

Also, we'd seen destocking. We've not seen that restocking take part at the pace that we expected. The iron ore stocks at the major Chinese ports is hovering around 70 million tonnes. It used to be around 95 tonnes to 100 tonnes, so there is restocking that's required. But we're seeing continuing investment in urbanization. We expect that, that will flow to industrialization during that three-to-five year period that [you mentioned].

We've also seen it in India. We've seen steel capacity there come on, and we've not seen commensurate increase in iron ore mining. That's been as a result of a number of factors relating to land access, relating to infrastructure, and relating to power, and these are issues that are slowing down expansion of iron ore. India has made the decision to drastically reduce their exports of iron ore.

So those things are helping produce an iron ore market that's a bit stronger.

Iron ore prices are currently $155 per tonne CFR [for fines]. Will prices remain at that level? I suspect not. But I think that they're still remain relatively robust, particularly when I look back and think that I can remember when prices were $25 per tonne. It certainly -- I think it's a good outlook for iron ore; notwithstanding the fact that we'll expect volatility during 2013; notwithstanding the fact that we expect that iron ore prices will come back a bit.

I think in relation to Simandou, there are two critical issues for Simandou. Firstly, I should say that Alan and his team are doing a great job there in terms of taking the project forward. We are, however, waiting for the framework agreement to be put in place. We were expecting that the end of last year, and Alan and his team are working with the government of Guinea in terms of taking that forward.

That is like a State agreement; it's like an investment agreement. This is needed to be the fundamental underpinning of that project, and the investments there. All parties understand that. They're complex, but that needs to be put in place.

The second is the funding of the government of Guinea's share in the project. Again, a lot of work is being done there, but we need to see that funding and that financing put in place actually to move the project to the next stage.

We're continuing with work on the ground. But we're very focused, as are our shareholders, government of Guinea, Chalco, and International Finance Corporation, in terms of getting those two building blocks for the project put in place.

IOC has brought on its concentrate expansion project one; it's working through the second phase of that. Step two, concentrate expansion project two. They've had a difficult year in relation to those projects, and in terms of weather events. We're working with the IOC team in terms of what more we can do in relation to that business, in terms of generating value for shareholders.

But let me come back to the fact that we are a diversified, we are a portfolio company. Iron ore's important, and it's got its time in the sun today, but I'm very encouraged by the work that's happening in other areas.

So, perhaps, it's time to move to the phones, and if we could take a question from the phone line.

Clarke Wilkins, Citi.

Congratulations on the new role. Just a question, I suppose, on iron ore, and also just on returns. When you look, you are a diversified company, but at the moment the vast majority of earnings come from iron ore, and we saw a lot of volatility in the iron ore market last year. Is there anything you can do, as the second largest, maybe going to the biggest producer, to smooth out the volatility in terms of pricing (inaudible), etc.? Or with the transitions of these spot prices, are we basically stuck with this volatility? And could we expect similar episodes in the second half of the year?

The second question, you talked about greater discipline on investments, etc. Does that require higher returns on some of the projects, like Simandou, to justify the investment given some of these projects get into increasingly risky countries?

Firstly, Clarke, on your question about volatility, I think the entire industry would prefer a scenario where we had reduced volatility, but the old days are past. We won't see a return to annual prices. Quite frankly, both customers and iron ore producers are moving to even more frequent pricing reviews, whether it be monthly, or in fact daily.

This is no different to what we see with other traded commodities; no different to aluminum and copper. It reflects, to an extent, the vagaries of weather that I've just mentioned; it reflects seasonal factors; it reflects holiday seasons; it reflects a whole raft of issues. So we need to step back, and we need to look at overall at the trends that we can see with iron ore.

Importantly, this urbanization, industrialization that I talked about is going to continue, certainly in China. But then we'll see the benefit of this flowing forward in terms of India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia. We're seeing it in South America; we're seeing it in Eastern Europe.

And if I want to really stretch your imagination, it'll happen in Africa too. We're seeing growth there. And we'll see a time when there are actually more people in Africa than there are in China; there's already 1 billion people in Africa.

All of these are building blocks. They're building blocks of developing economies. We're very fortunate to be in a position where we're providing the fundamentals that provide these building blocks.

I think in relation to the rate of return for projects, as Guy mentioned, we've hit our peak in capital. Last year, just over $17 billion of capital. This year, from the charts, you've seen that we're predicting $13 billion. There are some unapproved projects there that relate to some of the growth, but that depends on the market, it depends on a range of factors. But we've seen the peak.

Now, importantly, as we go forward, ensuring that we invest in the projects that are well above the rate of return, well above and highly competitive in terms of the return, this is physically important to us and it's the way that we'll evaluate projects.

I should also mention that we have revised the way that our systems operate into projects review; reinforcing the disciplines in our decision making there to ensure that we are making the best decisions; ensuring that we've got rigorous analysis; ensuring that we review the sensitivities that you would expect; and ensuring that there's very rigorous debate as these projects go forward.

This will ensure that the projects that actually get to be reviewed by the investment committee and the Board will be the projects with the highest rate of return.

Lyndon Fagan, JPMorgan.

Sam, a lot of the issues you've talked about trying to resolve are the product of M&A. I'm just wondering if you're prepared to rule out M&A for the foreseeable future. That was the first question.

Then in terms of Oyu Tolgoi, I guess we're talking about an underground project that could cost up to $8 billion. I'm just wondering if you've got sufficient confidence in the geo-political situation at the moment to actually be going ahead with that project. Thanks.

Okay, firstly, in relation to M&A, I should indicate to you that I am not spending any time looking at potential acquisitions.

One, I've learnt in my career you can never say never, but it's not on my radar screen. My radar screen is focusing on delivering the projects that we've got in the pipeline; ensuring that future investments in our organic growth are the best possible projects; ensuring we're delivering on our commitments in relation to cost improvement, productivity improvement, the way that we're physically operating our business.

As I said, the foundations are sound. It is a great company. These are fundamental things in relation to how a business should be operated.

In relation to OT, I've mentioned that the Phase I of that project has gone very well. I think Andrew and his team have done a great job there in terms of bringing that project on. First concentrate in January. We're expecting that Phase I will be up and operating in the first half of this year.

In relation to Phase II, we're going through the normal process that we go through in relation to a project as we move from pre-feasibility into feasibility in terms of the value analysis and value engineering that we take to ensure that we're optimizing the project, to ensure that this is the best possible project that we could expect. We're expecting the results of that work will be completed in the first quarter of 2014.

In relation to the political scene on the ground, we are, as we sit here, engaging with government in relation to the investment agreement, which basically is a certainty that that's behind the project. These are important issues for us in terms of how we make investment decisions.

I am an optimist. I am optimistic that through those discussions we can put forward our point of view, the point of view of our shareholders, that we've invested on the basis of the fundamentals in this agreement; that, that certainty is absolutely critical to this industry. Quite frankly, we're not just doing this on behalf of Rio Tinto; we're actually doing it on behalf of anybody who's looking to invest in Mongolia.

The sort of certainty that we're looking for is the certainty that you see elsewhere in the world. So this is nothing strange or peculiar that we're talking about here; this is a fundamental requirement for any project when you're investing this sort of money.

Perhaps, with that, if we could move to the next question on the phone.

Peter O'Connor, Merrill Lynch.

Sam, congratulations, as well. Three questions. Pacific Aluminium, can you give us an update about the mechanisms that you're looking at to divest or move that asset, and what time frame we should expect?

Secondly, I'm mindful that when you use words you use them very carefully, and your significant in your release regarding asset sales this year. How do I understand the term significant? Is that $1 billion to $5 billion, $5 billion, or more, or how do I read that?

And lastly, with regards to the Australian political landscape and doing business in Australia, how you've seen that evolve this year given recent political -- or potential political changes. And particularly with your comments about MRRT, etc., how do you see the landscape going forward?

Yes, perhaps, if I move backwards through those three questions. Peter, thank you very much for your congratulations. If I can move backwards through those three questions, and, Guy, if I could signal to you that I'd like you to cover the issue of Pac-Al.

Australian, political landscape, politics is politics. I think a week is a long time in politics; well, seven months is an even longer time. We've seen the calling of an Election for September '14, and I'm sure that, that will see a lot of gyrations between now and September '14.

Importantly, we work with governments all around the world, and we respect the government. We've got a good relationship.

If I were to actually just focus on the Gove refinery just for a moment, I think the support that we've seen from the Federal Government, and the Northern Territory Government, in relation to those negotiations, I think it's been first class.

Clearly, a very complex and difficult issue for both governments in terms of taking forward, and clearly for us. Moving to a more competitive source of energy for that refinery, absolutely essential.

Yes, we did take a tough stance in relation to that, and, yes, if we didn't get gas we would have, in fact, mothballed that plant. But through a process of very healthy engagement, working with both governments, we've moved to a situation where, not only for the people of Nhulunbuy and the Northern Territory in Australia, but also for Rio Tinto, we've got the best possible outcome.

We'll have an asset of Pac-Al that is an integrated aluminum business, bauxite, alumina, and aluminum; that's important to maximize the value of the sale. But importantly, the gas will enable us to move that operation into the low area of the second quartile, cost quartile. That is physically important.

In relation to asset sales, I'm sorry to disappoint you, Peter, but I'm not going to get into any details there, except to assure you that we're very focused on delivering value here.

There are assets that we're looking at for divestment that are not core assets, they're underperforming assets, but delivery of value here is a very important issue. I guess my focus here is to ensure that we're putting the same sort of priority and focus on this that we are elsewhere in the business.

Clearly, the team there has done a lot of good work. We've seen over 20 projects divested, generating $12 billion of value. So that team has shown that they've got the capabilities of delivering value, and I look forward to the work that they generate during this year.

I think in relation to divestment of Pac-Al, Guy, why don't you walk us through the number of potential scenarios we're looking at there?

Well, first of all, let me say, Peter, that the readiness of this business for sale is very well advanced. The separation has all been carried out. We've been running it, as you know, under Sandeep Biswas for just over -- more than -- just over a year now. I must say, the team has done an excellent job in preparing this business for sale; in terms of costs, in terms of culture, and in all sorts of other terms.

You may have read that we've appointed an Advisory Board. Sam has talked about what we've done at Gove. All of these are positive for the future value of this business; introducing more certainty, more option value to the business.

The approaches that we might take to sell it are the same as we have always said; namely, that we might sell it to a trade buyer as a whole, we might break it up, we might IPO it, or we might spin it to our shareholders. All of those options are being run concurrently.

I think that I'm not going to say which of them we're likely to follow, and nor am I going to say when, for exactly the reason that Sam just gave, which is that while we do want to move this business along, and we want to do that before too long, we are driven by value. And we're going to want the best value outcome that we can find from each of the different options that we're looking at. So that's what we're examining.

But what I would say is that the separation and the readiness of this business for sale is now well advanced, particularly with the Gove solution, which of course has got to be finalized, and we've got to get all those agreements actually ironed out. Thank you.

Thanks, Guy. And thanks, Peter, for your question. Let's move back to the room in London, and we've got a question over here.

Menno Sanderse, Morgan Stanley. Coming back on the cultural change, Sam, clearly, the financial industry has gone through a very similar process in the last three years. The only thing that seemed to work was a change in incentive, and a change in discount rates, and cost of equity. Are you implementing things like that in the Company, changing management incentives, changing discount rates, i.e., increasing discount rates on projects, to accelerate this cultural change?

And secondly, on the volume side, volumes were clearly negative contributor to the business this year. There is, clearly, a bit of tension there between depletion and negative volumes; and, on the other hand, capital discipline. Clearly, the business wants to grow, therefore, more eager to approve new projects; on the other hand, you want them to slow down and only go for the best. How do you deal with that tension?

I think in relation to your first question about incentives and discount rates, certainly, in terms of our establishment of short and long-term incentives for the business is something that we give a lot of thought to.

We are considering some changes in relation to how that operates. Not totally reinventing it, but ensuring that it relates to the sort of focus that I've been talking about here; reflecting the priorities of the business, particularly in relation to cost reduction and the focus there.

In relation to discount rates, that's something that we continue to evaluate, and it's something that's important in terms of how we look at projects.

But equally so, the assumptions that we have in relation to forward commodity pricing and exchange rates, that's equally important. And the sensitivities that we put through projects, ensuring that they reflect realistically the potential outcomes that you could have, and the projects could face; and rather than taking stock standard sensitivities looking at the cases that could actually represent movements that we're seeing in relation to various inputs and outputs for the projects.

Volumes are important to our business; they're important to any business. But getting the trade off right between value and volume is an important issue. Importantly, I'm focusing on every part of our business in relation to how they're contributing to our earnings, and how they're contributing to our cash generation.

The business is seeing an increased focus on granularity in terms of how we're physically operating, and where value is or is not being generated. I mentioned before volatility, and I agree that if the world were less volatile that would be a wonderful thing. But, unfortunately, I don't drive that. But it's important that as we move the business forward that the nimbleness and the responsiveness that I've talked about, that we're reflecting that in terms of how we're physically running the business.

Annual plans and annual reviews are an important part; they provide the foundation for how you're operating. But if circumstances change then you need to physically respond to those. And it's not adequate to say, well, in October last year this is what we plan, but the world's changed completely in the meantime. It can be -- by the way, it can be positive changes, or in fact it can be negative changes. You need to take stock and you need to take advantage of both.

So we're not an organization that's committed to volume for volume sake. We are an organization that's committed to value, and we're committed to delivering shareholder value. That needs to take into account the very trade offs that I've been talking about in terms of many moving parts, in terms of the world economy, and that effects on different commodities in different ways.

Fraser Jamieson, JPMorgan. Really, a question around the cost saving targets, first part of which is could you just confirm that, that $5 billion number is not reliant on disposals to be reached?

The second part, could you just remind us about the existing targets that are already feeding into that. I think we've got $1.6 billion of EBITDA improvement in Aluminum, of which about 50% is cost related. Could you just remind us what else is in there?

And then the third part is just around Guy's comments on absolute and productivity driven costs. If we look at the pie chart, is it reasonable to say Aluminum and Energy divisions not growing, not scheduled to grow much over the next couple of years, therefore, we should think of those cost savings in absolute terms, and the Central costs; whereas Iron Ore and Copper you're obviously going to get the benefit of higher volumes so, therefore, they're more productivity and fixed cost leverage related?

Okay, thanks very much, Fraser, for your question, and I will hand that to Guy. Guy gave us certainly a feel during his presentation of what was in and what was out, but I think we need to clarify the points you raise. Let me assure you, disposals are not included in cost reductions.

But I think in relation to the existing targets and the pie chart, Guy, could you pick that up for me?

Yes. I think we're trying to make high quality sustainable cost reductions here. So if we make a disposal, which we may do, as we've discussed just now, it'll have to be deducted from both the starting point and the end point, so we'll have to make an adjustment for that. I've given all the conditions that apply to this.

But to try and answer your question about existing targets, we have existing targets that relate to Aluminium, as you said. Actually, the $1.6 billion of improvement in EBITDA came from multiple sources. So, for example, it came from revenue enhancement through various means; the creep of capacity through getting higher premiums; from things of that sort.

We have in there also deferment or more efficient use of capital. We have improvements in working capital, as well as cost savings. So what we've done is subsume the cost savings that were in the $1.6 billion within the $5 billion. But the other improvements, the ones that I've just tried to describe, are still underway and being pursued by Rio Tinto Aluminium.

On the question of absolute and productivity driven costs, I think that the characterization that you have described is approximately right. We do have the benefits of volume. And because this is fundamentally based on a unit-cost approach, we have the benefits of volume in those two, Iron Ore and Copper, divisions, as you say. That will be part of the contribution that's being made by those.

Also, as you say, Aluminium and Energy aren't really expanding and we're having to look elsewhere. I gave some instances of it but, to give a little bit more color to this, we're looking very hard, for example, at procurement. Can we achieve better deals, negotiating hard with those who supply us? Can we really reconstitute the areas on which we spend money? Can we eliminate whole areas of cost, as well as reducing the price of the things that we're buying?

We want better visibility and KPIs on all our costs.

On top of that, of course, there are all the labor productivity benefits that we're looking for. And this applies everywhere, but especially in those two divisions.

I touched on offshoring and outsourcing. I think those would be important.

I touched on the salary freeze in Energy.

I think there are volume increases a little bit in Aluminium, particularly in the area of bauxite and alumina. But I don't think they're going to be quite as marked in their effect as in the Iron Ore and Copper areas, of course.

We're looking at organizational design changes in Aluminium in various ways. Productivity improvement through the use of technology, that's not confined to Aluminium, but it is present there.

So I think there are multiple sources of all these improvements. It is a very serious commitment that we're making here, which pervades the discussions that we're having with the product groups about their plans and about their performance every month. What you can be assured is that we're going to chase this improvement so that we actually can make it a sustainable improvement in the cost base.

So that gives a bit more texture to it. And when we next get together in August, I'm hoping that we will have some flesh to put on these bones.

Thanks very much, Guy. I've just been handed a wind-up note. So, perhaps, if I could just take one quick question from the phone, and then I'll need to meet the hard close of 10 o'clock.

Glyn Lawcock, UBS.

Just wanted to check two things, or question you on two issues. Firstly, you said government have been stepping in, and they're a barrier to rebalancing the industry. I think that was your quote. And then you went on to say we've accepted the government's handout to keep Gove open. I'm just trying to understand how do you justify those two comments, because they seem counterintuitive to each other; that you've said the industry won't rebalance if we take handouts, and you have, and so --?

And then secondly, I'm just trying to understand the mineral sands cuts that you've announced today. Just if you had any feel for if that's just for a year, or you haven't really thought it through this far yet. Thanks very much.

Yes, thanks very much, Glyn. In relation to Gove, there is no government handout. This is physically the government of the Northern Territory making available gas. There is no cost to them. In fact, they've got take-or-pay obligations that will be removed. So there's actually a benefit to the Northern Territory in there, but there are no handouts by government.

In relation to mineral sands, that relates to the market dynamics. It relates to where we currently see pricing for industrial minerals. It's part of what I've described in terms of being responsive to market forces.

I think, with that, if I could thank everybody for your questions. I think we've covered the field pretty well. I certainly look forward to spending more time, speaking to investors over the course of the next few days, weeks, and months.

Today, I've set out how I intend to deliver the strategy and my priorities for the year ahead. But if I leave you with just one impression, just one important message today, I want it to be that I'm single-minded; that I am determined to deliver greater value to shareholders. This is what drives me. This is what makes me tick. This is what gives me great satisfaction. This commitment will inform all of my decisions, and the actions that we take across the business.

Thank you all for being here. Thank you for those on the phone line. Thank you very much.