10th Meeting - 1st Session Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems 2026

Excellencies, distinguished delegates, we now turn to agenda item six, other matters. Under this agenda item, I propose that we exchange views on the preparation of the group's final report to be submitted to the seventh review conference of the convention in November, as well as on the organization of the intersessional period. With regard to the report, I intend to prepare the draft following the usual structure. The introduction section will recall the relevant decisions of the meeting of high contracting parties, including the mandate. The second section will outline the organisation and work of the GGE since 2024, and I intend to keep this section as succinct and factual as possible. The conclusion section should, if we live up to the expectations also outside this room, contain a factual reference to the group's agreement on a set of elements of an instrument, including possible measures. Concerning the recommendation section, I would like to underscore a key point. I intend to adhere strictly to the mandate as agreed. Accordingly, I do not envisage including recommendations nor engaging in discussions on arrangements beyond the conclusion of the GGE on laws, and that is September. In my view, our focus should remain on substantive issues until the very end, leaving it to the review conference to determine the way forward. As I currently see it, there are two possible approaches for reflecting our substantive outcome, the set of elements, either integrating them directly in the conclusion section of the report or annexing them to the report, similar to the approach taken with the 2019 guiding principles. I intend to circulate a zero draft of the report well in advance of the second 2026 session, to allow ample time for inputs and informal intersessional consultations, including on the procedural parts of the report. On the basis of our deliberations this week, I will undertake revisions to the rolling text, which will subsequently be incorporated into the zero draft for further consideration. I would like to open the floor to hear initial views of delegations on the report and on how we should structure our last intersessional period of the current mandate. I can already share from my side that my intent is more or less the same as always, that I have informal bilateral consultations and that can happen as of five o'clock tonight or something. We will organize the informal collective consultations for high contracting parties and for observers. And then we might even have an extra round this time after the summer break because we have to be prepared in the best possible way. But that's it for my side and the floor is now open. I recognize the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation. Sir, you have the floor.

Thank you very much, distinguished Chair. I would like to thank you for a detailed introduction of your plans related to the preparation and circulation of the zero version of the draft report of the GGE. Overall, we share what you just said. Nevertheless, we would like to make some comments for clarification, to say how we see the process of preparing the report, both from a substantive point of view and also related to the deadlines and time. We agree that we have to use a traditional structure of the report as we have done usually when we prepared similar documents that were adopted by this group. As far as the section related to conclusions is concerned, We believe that we should include in this section those understandings and ideas that we are discussing together with your rolling text. We believe they really have to be reflected in the substantive part of the report. Moreover, We believe that as we work on the draft report, we will be able to continue to exchange our views on these ideas and understandings. We believe that such understandings will be directly related to the mandate of this group, as you just said. In order to avoid any unnecessary discussion of how the mandate relates to these understandings and ideas, we believe that at this stage within this group, we hardly need to do that. And in all of that we also believe that it will not be advisory to introduce any subsections in this part of the text related to conclusions in the conclusion section. We believe that this is something that is not required and in many ways it would take away a lot of very valuable time that we have as we conclude our work in this format. We believe that it is more important to spend this time in the discussion of substantive matters in order to agree and find compromise-based solutions. on as many understandings and ideas that we can that are substantive in their nature. On the section of the recommendations, we also agree with you, distinguished Chair, that if we will indeed have any recommendations for the review conference in the context of the existing mandate, that is very good. But if that will not happen, if we will not have enough time or we will not have enough diplomatic skills to agree to having such recommendations, well, it will really not be a tragedy. For that, we have a review conference that could, at its own political level, look into these questions and look at what will be done in the future after the conference. And also we agree with you that as part of the work of this group, we do not have any mandatory objective to consider the steps that will be taken in the short term or in the midterm. those steps that may be required in the future in light of the understandings of substance that we will be able to agree to. This is indeed something that we would hope to achieve but it's really not something that is mandatory. Now in terms of deadlines, distinguished Chair, in light of the fact that we only have one session for our work before concluding the work of this group. That session, as we understand it, and we do hope that this will indeed be what will happen, namely work on the draft report, we believe that all delegations have to prepare very well for that session. and our delegation will also take all efforts possible in order to come to the upcoming session in the best possible way in terms of preparation. But in order to be well prepared, we need time, especially since such preparation will involve a lot of inter-agency work at the national level. And this is why, distinguished Chair, we believe that it will be fully justified to use a hybrid format for intersessional work. We believe that before the beginning of June, we could easily continue our work on your document, the rolling text, but we would prefer that the latest in the beginning of June to receive the zero version of the draft report in order to be able to very calmly carry out all the necessary internal work at the national level and also in our delegation working on that document and to ensure that we follow all the necessary internal procedures that are necessary to prepare for the final round of our negotiations. We should not forget that this will in some way be made more difficult because there'll be summer vacations. So we would prefer, as we just said, to receive the zero version of the draft report at the very beginning of June. Now, for all the rest, we would like to say that once again that we are really grateful to you for a very effective organization of our work and we do hope that such an effective approach will continue during the intersessional period and during the next session of the group and we would like to conclude this statement by saying something that we said in the beginning of this session, the way we started the work of our delegation, reaffirming that you can fully count on the support and assistance of the delegation of the Russian Federation, both during the intersessional period and also during the next session of this group. Our delegation is fully interested in reaching substantive results and to ensure that we will implement the mandate of this GGE fully and completely. Thank you.

Let me thank the distinguished representative of the Russian Federation for sharing the views and expectations from his delegation with regard to our work, and especially with regard to the final report. I am also grateful for the support that he assured me of as chair of the committee. Rest assured, we will do our utmost to give you the necessary time. You are not the only one who has asked for that, and I am fully aware that, in many capitals, this will be an issue of interagency coordination. can be quite complicated and needs time, so we will try to cater for that. I also welcome your availability to have hybrid consultations with regard to the text. I think that could also help us And with regarding to your expectations on the schedule, I think that coincides more or less with what we have been internally discussing so far. We will have to fine tune that, but indeed my intent is not too long after returning from New York to review conference of the NPT where a number of us will be, then indeed to circulate the text. And with regard to, for instance, the chair summary, we hope to also do that in due time. That takes also quite some work, of course, especially looking back at the excellent discussions we had yesterday and today and to capture that in my summary. But I hope to come with that somewhere at the end of the month of early April. Who else would like to take the floor? And there's no need because I know how it works if one or two start then everybody because if everything has been said, it has been said, it does not have to be said by everyone. But I see a further request for the floor from the UK. You have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And from the UK, we'd just like to express our thanks for all of the work that you've undertaken this week and your team to help us get to the point where we are, which we think is a very positive point that we're at. And we'd like to support all of the way forward that you have articulated to us just now and rest assured that the UK will engage very fully in all of that. We would like to just emphasise that I think the when we look at the rolling text next, we need to look at it in a sort of conceptual manner. And so we urge you that the next round takes that into account. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I can be short to react on that. Yes, we will do that, of course. And let me again assure that we will have a much higher intensity than earlier with regard to informal consultations and bilateral consultations because There is only one more chance to come up with a total revision and then I have to get it right, or as right as possible, because only five days is short and we have also to do the report. Next on my list is the distinguished representative of France, who is available.

Thank you very much, Chair. I will speak briefly. We wanted to thank you for your presentation on the work to prepare the report and on the forthcoming sessions. On the report, we can support your approach, either that the rolling text draft is included directly in the report or placed in the annex. It seems to us important that the work done over the past three years and all of the progress that's been made be accurately reflected in the report. We also believe that informals will be useful to try and resolve the differences, and we're encouraged by the spirit of compromise that we saw last night. In more general terms, and to conclude, my delegation wanted to thank you for all of the efforts you and your team have made, but also the secretariat, and our thanks to the interpreters too. this week, but also in the past years, all the efforts that have been made to make sure our work can progress. Thank you.

Let me thank the distinguished representative of France for the words of support and encouragement. Any further requests for the floor? And if that's not the case, I will now proceed. Austria. Oh, sorry, Austria.

Thank you very much. We are also happy to proceed, but since the flag was up, we also, I mean, as other colleagues, we want to thank you, your team, and all the interpreters for everything that happened this week and all the hard work that went into the different texts and the late night sessions. I also want to thank colleagues for the intense discussions that we had, especially yesterday and today. Um, the, the feeling that we are having after this morning particularly is rather positive, I think we had some breakthrough this morning with one of the key issues, we had some halfway breakthrough on another key issue earlier in the week. So we are generally quite positive on what we have and how we can move forward. And this brings me also to the question about how to organize this in the next session. We are open to all kind of informal discussions. We know that for some delegations this is challenging, so it's also important that all the discussions that we are having then are also to some extent recapped at the formal session in September. But from our point -- from our side, we are ready for informal consultations also to find solutions that can then present it in these discussions. On the format, on the design, on the text, we are also quite open. It probably depends also on the product. The rolling text itself, we see it as a unit, so the most logical thing would probably to have it treated in the same way as the guiding principles in 2018. which would also then give us some flexibility in the earlier parts of the report to explain a little bit what else was going on and what we have discussed. So we would look into a more traditional way of organizing the report with the introduction, organization, conclusions, recommendations, which then also would give a hint on what to do with our products. and then adoption of the report. So we are in your hands in this as well, and it probably also depends a little bit on our further work in September. But having said all this, we agree with your approach forward and what you have presented today. Thank you.

Thank you for that. I see two more requests for the floor, Belgium and Pakistan. But let me first pass the floor to the distinguished representative of Belgium. You have the floor.

So, Mr. Chairperson, we wish, of course, to commend you and your team for tremendous efforts you have made in bringing delegations closer together. We do not see a lot of chairs or teams that could have led us as far as we are now. So, as we said before, the rolling text is strong, still room for further refinement and to improve certain paragraphs. But in our view, the substance needed for a set of elements is already there. We still have one week to go in September, and those delegations that strive for a wide scope in a strong framework have already made significant concessions. And we hope that in September, other delegations will show similar flexibility, which is needed to get us over the finish line. Mr. Chairperson, since the inception of this process in the framework of the CCW a decade ago already, the world around us has changed significantly. The technological developments have made things that were once the domain of science fiction today's reality. And ethical considerations or the dictates of public conscience, as the CCW puts it, are not our only reason to make haste. Our military commanders that will apply these systems need a clear framework because they will be held accountable if something goes wrong. So they demand systems that provide predictable and controllable effects. Similarly, our defense industry and our scientists, our developers are calling for states and the international community to provide guidance to mitigate also legal risks. When laws go astray, also their developers and manufacturers will be held accountable on the grounds of the due diligence that is expected from the private sector. As became evident once again at the Re-Aim Summit in Spain and at the AI Impact Summit in India, this call is not limited to arms manufacturers, but stems from all those involved in the supply chain, including the AI industry. Mr. Chairperson, this brings me to the final report we are discussing. Belgium supports your approach. We want to avoid a scenario where the rolling text gets caught up in deleting through consensus spree. Therefore, we see value in drafting the report in such a fashion that our collective product is supported and maintained. while not requiring every delegation in this room to actively or positively endorse every word of the rolling text. Many delegations have stressed that our discussions should stay anchored in the CCW. Our delegation respects this view. At the same time, we should keep in mind that the CCW is made for for the world, for us, and not the other way around. Its aim is not to facilitate intellectual exchanges on IHL for the sake of the exercise itself. Its aim is to contribute to continue the codification and progressive development of the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, as captured in its preambles. In Belgium's view, This means working towards an instrument on legal autonomous weapons systems with real added value for our world. We mentioned the military commanders, we mentioned the industry, the developers. And this instrument should offer the guidance that the world expects from us and also what the taxpayers expect from us. We should not forget that, as we speak, people are being attacked by AI-driven autonomous systems. When my colleagues and I joined this forum, as was expressed by several delegations, we were surprised by our ability to have such sophisticated and open and constructive technical discussions on this topic while the world around us is burning. This is our strength, but it is also our Achilles heel because bringing too much politics in the technical discussions will grind to a halt. But with not sufficient politics, maybe this forum risks to become a debating club. So we should be careful not to insulate ourselves too much from the real world. At some point, this bubble we have built needs to produce something that connects with the real world and that's something with a real world impact. So we are sure that under your skillful guidance, we will be able to conclude our work in a way that brings us closer to that end. I thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

Let me thank the distinguished representative of Belgium for his reflections on our work so far, but also on our work in the future. I have one more request for the floor from the distinguished representative of Pakistan. Sir, you have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. Chair, I join others in, at the cost of repetition, of course, in thanking you and your entire team. for the excellent work that you have done with the assistance of the ISU. And we think that we have made progress this week and we stand ready to make progress in the intercessional period as well as in our next last session of this group. We are in your hands in terms of the format, the methods of the work. Despite being a small delegation, we stand ready to engage as many times as you wish is essential for producing substantive outcome and result out of this process. Chair, I have taken the floor just to highlight our understanding of where we are in terms of the process as we draw to our conclusion. Chair, when we look at the mandate that we have had and that you have also cited in your remarks, which will guide the conclusion and culmination of our work in terms of the final report. We consider this mandate to be very different as compared to all previous mandates of different GGEs. And our mandate has not remained static, of course, even in those years starting from 2016, We look at the progression that we were able to achieve in different years, the work that was done in terms of the guiding principles, and then arriving at this point. We think, Chair, and we have multiple examples in terms of our final report of this group. At times, we have been able to include elements of substance in our conclusion section. On other occasions, we have been able to provide very clear guidance and recommendations about the future work of the group, if there is consensus, and we remain open to that possibility. We think that it would be useful if the group were able to converge on clear recommendations going forward. Regarding the elements of the rolling text, whether they should be under the conclusion section or they should be in a separate annex, Chair, we see again, I think, as was already pointed out by the delegation of Austria as well, and it was also implicit in many of the eloquent remarks that was just made by the delegation of Belgium, that the work that we have done, it needs to be preserved, it needs to be built upon going forward. So in that spirit, to us at this moment in time, of course it would depend on the final product, but given the progress that we have made on the substance, it makes more sense to us to have this substance in the rolling text preserved as part, as an essential component of the final report, preferably as an annex, as we treated the guiding principles. Of course, we always have the opportunity under the conclusion section to comment if there is convergence on the work that we have done. What we would like to avoid, and I would like to share very honestly our expectations, we would like to avoid a repeat of previous GGEs when in the end we are faced with time pressure. And I remember it was my first GGE back in 2023 when we were sitting late in the night. I don't even remember correctly whether it was 2:00 AM or 1:00 AM. And we were just asking delegates Can you live with it? Everybody, you know, found it at that moment in time difficult to swallow large chunk of good text. And at the end of that late night, we ended up deleting almost everything from the report. So what we would like to avoid is that scenario. I think the work that we have done for these three years, the energy, the efforts that we have invested, and the richness of discussions that we have had, it demands from us that we follow an approach that is that is meritable to this effort that we have undertaken and also that is justifiable to the mandate that was given to us. Therefore, we are open, of course, to the methodology and the template that you wish to choose in terms of the report. But this is how we see the conclusion of the work that we have done so far. Thank you.

Let me thank the distinguished representative of Pakistan for sharing his views on the way ahead, also with the report and especially with the substance of the elements. I've always been very clear we have a free mandate, but there are also that's quite substantial because in the past it was a single year mandate. On the other hand, it also raises the expectations. And I have said that I think also during informal consultations yesterday evening, I would personally see it as a failure if I if we could just report that we had a good discussion on the following topics to go even a little bit further than what you were just saying. No, my aim has been right from the beginning and will be that, and to the very end, to deliver on the mandate and have a set of elements of an instrument, et cetera, et cetera. So, but I'm in your hands. We are in this together and we will have to do it together. And looking back at yesterday and this morning, I think we can also do it. So let's do it. And I think the world is expecting it from us. So we should take up this challenge and especially make best use of the month ahead and then have a very thorough discussion in September and hopefully indeed we have something to celebrate on the last Friday then. But yes, I got your message. Any further requests for the floor? I recognize the distinguished representative of Cameroon and then Australia. You have the floor.

Thank you very much, Chair. Chair, on behalf of my delegation, I would like to once again praise your efforts. Despite the differing views related to the future normative framework, I would like to express my view that your leadership is helping us move towards a text where The points of agreement will be confirmed around several main points. First, the primacy of international humanitarian law in the context of lethal autonomous weapon systems, regardless of the distinction made of its principles and legal rules that can be applied in connection with such weapons. Number two, preserving human judgment and control throughout the lifecycle of such systems. The delegation of any decision related to life or death to a machine will be a central question related to moral and legal responsibility and accountability. Three, taking into account ethical considerations in a framework where there is bias. that represents a significant risk in the use of laws. And four, a progressive approach towards reaching consensus. Finally, Chair, I would like to praise the different contributions that have enriched our discussions on these very interesting issues that helped us continue to work on our text. This progress is a very important foundation for the continuation of the work of this group during the upcoming session. and also it stresses the importance and relevance of the framework provided by the CCW representing the adequate framework for the continuation of our discussions on laws in line with the objectives and principles of the Convention. Thank you.

I would like to thank the distinguished representative of Cameroon for sharing the views of his delegation also with regard to our work and our future work. Next on my list is the distinguished representative of Australia, to be followed by Canada.

Thank you very much, Chair. Thank you also for facilitating this initial opportunity to outline some expectations on next steps. I would also like to echo the thanks by the colleague from France, expressing appreciation to your team, the secretariat, and the translators. I have two reflections from my delegation. First, we would encourage the informal consultations to be targeted on the outstanding issues and that what is intended to be discussed at each formal is circulated in advance. This would give delegations the opportunity to consult and potentially offer compromises at the informals. And second, we would encourage you to provide written updates in the intercessional period on the progress of the report so that we might get an early sense of your approach as it progresses. We would expect that many elements would still be in square brackets or still to be determined, but it would be helpful to see an indication of the structure in advance. Thank you.

I would like to thank the distinguished representative of Australia for sharing her views and expectations. Next on my list is Canada. Let me pass the floor to the distinguished representative of Canada. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. I can be brief. My delegation would just like to echo the sentiments expressed by many other delegations this afternoon in thanking you for the excellent work this week in guiding us through some challenging discussions. We agree with others in recognizing the progress that's been made this week and appreciate the additional efforts by all colleagues during the evening sessions. Chair, we've listened closely to your explanation on the way forward and the interest in the intercessional period and we're in your hands on how you wish to proceed for the final session in September. We would appreciate any advance notification if possible on the format for the final five days of the GGE in September, including advance notice on the matters to be discussed in evening sessions so that we can best prepare ourselves to contribute in a substantive manner. And as always, you can count on my delegation's full support. Finally, we would like to share the views that have just been expressed by distinguished colleagues from Australia, and echo a request to you and your team for updates on the progress made on the draft report, so that we can be better prepared for the progress.

I thank the distinguished representative of Canada for sharing the views of his delegation and the expectations, and for referring to other remarks that have been made earlier. Any further requests for the floor? I see Brazil. Yes. Let me pass the floor to the distinguished representative from Brazil. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. I will be very brief as I don't want to prolong our discussions. We've heard very important and powerful suggestions already this this afternoon with which my delegation is in almost perfect alignment. I would be remiss not to express the gratitude of my delegation to you and your team and for all those that helped make this meeting the success that it was, including the interpreters, and would like to offer very brief ideas on the way ahead. As for the informal consultations like Pakistan, we are prepared to meet informally in hybrid format as many times as you need in order to ensure that we have all the elements for success for our last session in September. We, like Australia, agreed that we should focus on the outstanding issues with regards to the final report, we have a preference like Pakistan for the inclusion of the set of elements that we are working on as an annex to the report in order to preserve its coherence, internal coherence as a text, as a test that stands on its own. And finally, Chair, we also join Russia in calling all delegations to come to our September session as prepared as possible. We believe that these preparations should include an examination of options that would expand the envelope of possibilities for a successful compromise. I thank you, Chair.

I would like to thank you for your remarks and indeed also your views on the way ahead. I am looking around again. We move now to agenda item number seven. Adoption of the report. And I would like to kindly remind you that the 2024 meeting of the High Contracting Parties recalled the decision of the 2023 meeting of the High Contracting Parties that the group should submit a report to the seventh review conference. Para 23 of the final report of that meeting, document CCW/MSP/2024/7. It's my plan to consider and adopt under this agenda item the report during our second session, which will take place from the 31st August to the 4th of September this year. As I have already indicated, my intention is to devote the bulk of our remaining efforts to the formulation of the set of elements we have been mandated to develop. The remainder of the report will be limited to procedural content. The draft report will be shared with all of you well in advance of our second session, as I said before and as we have discussed under agenda item 6. I trust that that approach is agreeable to delegations. That brings me to agenda item 8, which is the closing of the meeting. As we conclude this first formal session of the final year of the Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, allow me to extend my sincere thanks to all delegations for the active participation, constructive spirit, collaboration and commitment you have once again demonstrated in pursuing our shared mandate to consider and formulate by consensus a set of an instrument without prejudging its nature and of course further measures. In my view, this week has been marked by substantive progress. We undertook a full reading of the rolling text, which I believe brought us an important step forward. My expectations regarding the working characterization, as well as on the issue of human involvement, have been met. The detailed exchanges we had throughout the week allowed us to not only identify areas of convergence more clearly, but also to explore concrete options for bridging remaining differences. At the same time, we are still working on a number of very specific and complex issues. I am particularly encouraged by the progress achieved in Box 1, and believe that we are approaching a landing zone on a working characterization that could serve as a compromise solution and move us towards consensus. With regard to human involvement, following the discussion of yesterday evening and today, I believe we now have a range of converging ideas on how best to reflect this notion and its operationalization in the rolling text. I was encouraged to see that boxes two and five continue to enjoy broad support, while fully recognising that consensus has not yet been reached and that additional modifications will still be required. With respect to box four, we received a number of useful suggestions and comments, and we will therefore continue our work of this section, not only on its own, but also in close connection with revisions in box three. Looking back at the expectations I expressed at the beginning of the week, I am reminded once again that there are no easy fixes in this process, and that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. At the same time, it's equally true that several parts already appear acceptable to many delegations, which is an encouraging sign. Dear colleagues, we now only have one formal session remaining before the seventh review conference, only five more days and nights, perhaps. This means that a window of opportunity is closing. To deliver on our mandate, the coming months will be decisive. The work ahead cannot wait for the next session alone. It must continue during the intersessional period. As during previous intersessional periods, I will continue working actively to advance our discussions as much as possible and to help identify a possible landing zone for our work. At the same time, my team and I leave this week with a substantial amount of homework following the exchanges we have had. In the short term, I intend to deliver two key outputs. First, a chair summary of this session issued under my own authority. And second, a next iteration of the rolling text without boxes, reflecting the constructive deliberations and proposals that have been put forward during the meeting. I am aware that delegations expect to see a draft of our final report soon. As I indicated earlier, I intend to circulate a zero draft of the report well in advance of the second 2026 session, in order to allow ample time for inputs and informal intersessional consultations. including on the procedural elements of the report. I remain available for bilateral consultations in the months to come in order to gather your views while working on the revision of the rolling text. However, progress cannot depend on the Chair alone. It will require sustained engagement from all delegations. I therefore strongly encourage delegations to use the intersessional period actively. to reflect carefully on the remaining issues, to explore possible bridges across differences, and to come to consultations and our final session ready to engage constructively in finding concrete solutions, and to reach out to other delegations in order to prepare the ground for the necessary compromises. If we are to succeed, our final session will need to focus on identifying workable compromises that can command consensus. I count on all of you to help ensure that we are able to produce a final report that lives up to the substantive discussions we have held over the past three years under this mandate. The urgency of our task is clear. Expectations from the international community remain high, And our responsibility is significant. We must therefore build on the positive momentum generated this week and maintain the spirit of compromise, flexibility, creativity and collaboration that has characterized our discussions. We may not be crafting literary masterpieces, but what we are shaping is far more significant, an outcome that reflects the principles of international humanitarian law underpinning the CCW and that responds meaningfully to the risks posed by laws. Allow me once again to thank all delegations for their constructive and dynamic engagement. I am also grateful to my team, the Secretariat, the Friends of the Chair, the Conference Service Officers, the interpreters and the security officers for their dedicated support throughout this session. And a special thank you to those who unfortunately won't be able to participate in the last session of the GDE, but have significant contributed to our discussions over the past couple of years. Dear colleagues, we are now in the final stretch of our mandate. The work ahead may not always be the easiest part of the journey. But step by step, through continued dialogue and determination, we can continue moving forward and find our landing zone. I look forward to continuing our work together in the months ahead. I wish you all a pleasant evening and a very good weekend. The meeting is now closed.