Good morning, thanks for joining us at IAG's results presentation for the year ending 30th of June 2021. We're joining you today from Cammeraygal and Worimi land, I want to pay my respects to their elders, past, present, and emerging. I'm joined today by our Chief Financial Officer, Michelle McPherson. Michelle and I are delivering this presentation from our homes, supported by our IAG team, also at their homes. We're recognizing the COVID-19 restrictions that are currently in place across Australia. I'm going to start with some high-level comments on the numbers that we shared with you at the end of July. I'll hand over to Michelle, who's going to talk through the financials in a bit more detail, including our capital position and dividends. I'll come back at the end and just cover guidance for FY 2022, and a bit more detail on our strategy being delivered over the next two years. I'll just start by making some high-level comments. As I outlined with the preliminary results released in July, we have been encouraged by the sound underlying financial performance that IAG has delivered during the year. I'm pleased to share we're paying a final dividend of AUD 0.13 per share, given the level of cash earnings that we've generated over the 12-month period. Despite this performance, though, the company has delivered a loss driven by a number of disappointing, unusual items. These relate to historical issues that we've identified, we've provisioned for, and we're rectifying. In this regard, we've made significant investment to lift our risk and operational capabilities to help reduce the risk of these types of issues occurring again. I'm confident that the organizational changes that we've made will drive improved performance from IAG, setting ourselves up for success over the next three to five years. Just a snapshot of the numbers that we've delivered. We grew our premiums by just under 4% over the last 12 months. This was a pleasing result, maintaining the momentum that we shared with you at the half. We've also delivered a resilient underlying margin performance, which was a bit lower than the first half, when we did benefit from lower motor vehicle claims frequency relating to the lockdowns. We've made no changes to business interruption provision that we established last November, and Michelle will give you a bit more color on that. Our capital position is strong, and which will be further assisted with the sale of our Malaysian business. Finally, we've reintroduced guidance given our confidence in how our business is performing. We've made significant progress on our new operating model, and we're pleased to be reporting two different segments for our Australian business. I'll just focus on some of these divisional highlights. Our direct business in Australia continues to operate strongly. We grew rate and volume in our direct business. We delivered healthy underlying margins that were stable at just under 20% in both the first and the second halves, excluding COVID-19 adjustments. We previously indicated that our intermediated business has been reporting unacceptable returns. While margins still remain low here, we are moving this business in the right direction with an underlying margin of around 4% recorded across both halves, helped by high rate increases that are starting to flow through that business. Finally, we also held our normalized margins at healthy levels in our New Zealand business. The lower second half underlying margins of around 14% really have been driven by some slightly higher costs and some elevated large loss experience that we saw. I'll now hand you over to Michelle, who's going to provide a bit more detail on the financials. Thanks, Nick. Good morning, everyone. I'll start with a few key call-outs from the headline numbers you can see on this slide, most of which were shared with you when we released our preliminary results in July. As Nick has outlined, we're encouraged by the resilient underlying insurance profitability and premium growth that we delivered in FY21. We also reported an almost AUD 500 million positive swing in the investment income line, driven by the equity market recovery we saw during the year. The AUD 427 million net loss after tax included the impact of our business interruption provision that we recognized in the first half. It also reflected additional provisions in the second half, and the impairment losses we recorded on the upcoming sale of our Malaysian business. In line with our usual practice, we have excluded these unusual items from cash earnings, which was AUD 747 million for the year. Gross Written Premium momentum remained relatively strong, with growth of 3.8% across the year. Most of the growth was rate-driven, with some pockets of volume growth. A few highlights I'd like to call out. In Direct Insurance Australia, we lifted premium rates at mid-single digit levels and experienced some volume growth in motor and CTP, partially offset by volume losses in home. Our intermediated business continued to achieve solid rate increases averaging 8% across the year as a consequence of deliberate actions we've been taking across certain portfolios, and this did constrain our premium growth. Our New Zealand business delivered low single-digit rate increases and 2.8% overall GWP growth in local currency terms. To our underlying margin performance. For the full year, this was reported at 14.7%, lower than 16% in FY 2020. The first half included net COVID-19 benefit of AUD 60 million-AUD 70 million, mainly due to lower motor claims frequency, as Nick's touched on earlier, whereas there was no net benefit in FY 2020. Also, as we shared this time last year, IAG no longer assumes a 1% release from reserves in calculating the underlying margin. The COVID-19 difference, the change in our normalized reserve release assumption, and lower interest rates explains most of the full year change in margin. Looking at the half-on-half change, the underlying margin reduced from 15.9% to 13.5%. If I exclude the first half COVID-19 benefit I referred to, the first half, just as underlying margin, was around 14.2%. There was negligible net impact from COVID-19 in the second half. The reduction to 13.5% reflects some additional expenses in Australia and New Zealand, which are not expected to recur. We did see elevated large losses in New Zealand in the second half, and changes in reinsurance costs also had an impact. I'll unpack each of these areas of our underlying result on the coming slides to make sure I'm providing a clear picture and remove any uncertainty in respect of the adjustments I've called out. Moving to underlying claims. We recorded an underlying claims ratio of 53.7% in the current year, similar to 54.1% in the previous year. This ratio excludes all peril costs and prior year reserving changes and focuses on our working claims. As reflected in the graph on this slide, we thought it would be helpful to back out the COVID-19 influences half by half to highlight the trends in more detail. As you can see, these underlying loss ratios have been stable with small improvements in recent halves. This reflects both positive and negative influences, which we provide more detail on in our investor report that we've released today. The earn through impact of higher rates has been a key driver on the positive side, particularly short-tail commercial products, where some of the largest rate increases have occurred in recent periods. We expect this to continue into FY 2022. I understand many of you will be interested in our expense trends. This slide highlights the change in our gross expenses, excluding the impact of levies, commissions, and quota share effects. FY 2021 gross underwriting expenses were 5.6% higher than FY 2020. As I highlighted in our first half FY 2021 presentation in February, this increase includes higher compliance and governance costs and corporate insurance costs. In addition to these impacts, we incurred some one-off additional expenses of approximately AUD 30 million on a pre-quota share basis in the second half, associated with implementing our new operating model across the group and property consolidation costs in New Zealand. I've expressed the AUD 30 million on a pre-quota share basis to align with the gross expenses in the table on this slide. If I exclude the one-off costs, second half gross underwriting expenses were relatively flat compared to the first half. Nick will talk further on about our strategy, which will enable improved outcomes in this area over time as we drive efficiency through our cost base. We saw further reserve strengthening of AUD 66 million in the second half, taking our full year reserve strengthening to AUD 81 million, which is up from reserve strengthening of AUD 48 million in FY 2020. This outcome reflects more adverse claims development across the number of long-tail classes than we've observed in recent years. The main impact has been felt in our commercial liability classes in our intermediated business in Australia, which, as you know, is a key area of focus for us. We have been experiencing higher average claim sizes in recent accident years, driven by superimposed inflation for medium-sized bodily injury claims as claims frequency has improved. We've also called out professional risks and workers' compensation, where we've also had to address reserve adequacy in both halves. We believe these trends reflect mixed economic conditions, enhancing customer and their legal advisors' focus on personal injury compensation. We are watching the developments closely to keep ahead of this challenge. I'll touch briefly on peril costs and reinsurance. We finished the year with natural peril costs of AUD 742 million, a touch below the attachment point at which our FY21 peril stop-loss cover would have kicked in. This was in line with the update we provided on 16 June, however disappointing to be above our perils allowance again. As we look into FY22, our aggregate cover has now transitioned to a financial year basis and is broadly similar to previous years. We have added over AUD 100 million to our natural perils allowance for FY22 to arrive at AUD 765 million for FY22. This has increased significantly from AUD 658 million in FY21, which benefited from additional reinsurance cover provided by the 2020 aggregate cover program. Our pricing has been anticipating this and has continued to reflect this step change in FY22. In materially stepping up our perils allowance, we have made the decision not to purchase the perils stop-loss cover for FY22 on the basis that it was uneconomic, and we have improved confidence in our allowance. I thought it'd be helpful for me to take some time to walk through detail on the AUD 200 million in pre-tax charges that are included in our net corporate expense line in the second half. As we shared in July, there were no changes to the overall business interruption provision in the second half. To give you some more color on this, we undertook extensive scenario testing of the provision in second half 2021, taking into account the stronger economic rebound and consideration of a number of short duration lockdowns. We also ran scenarios for the current greater Sydney and surrounds lockdown, assuming it runs for eight weeks from the 26th of June, and we also included Victoria in that scenario. We concluded that we are comfortable with the adequacy of our BI provision under most scenarios, especially given the substantial risk margin established when we set the provision up in November 2020. As the outcome of the second test case becomes clearer in coming months, we'll of course revisit this view. On the other provisions that impacted in the second half, the customer refunds provision has been updated to reflect the latest position of our view of the refund programs and administration costs over the life of the program. This has resulted in an additional charge of around AUD 160 million in the second half and includes a significant allowance for uncertainty, now at AUD 100 million of the overall provision. To arrive at this provision, there has been a comprehensive review across our products and policies to ensure we identify any issues and make it right for our customers. We've now finalized the identification phase of the review and are well advanced with our refund program, which we expect to complete over the next 12-24 months. We've also previously flagged a payroll compliance review similar to many large Australian corporates and have recognized a pre-tax charge of AUD 51 million for prior period remediation payments and related program costs. Another area I know you'll want to understand is the potential claims that could arise from our previous ownership of BCC Trade Credit. As communicated in early March, we have no net insurance exposure to trade credit policies. This position has not changed. When you have the chance to review our financial statements in detail, you will see an AUD 437 million gross provision for claims in our accounts, offset by an identical amount of reinsurance recoveries. Our financial statements and investor report provide more detail on this topic, and we can discuss further in Q&A today if that would be helpful. To capital. Our capital position remains strong. The CET1 ratio reduced to 1.06x before dividends, compared to 1.19x at the end of December, mainly due to the payment of the interim dividend. We're also calling out on this slide the increase in risk charges driven by a range of factors, including higher investment assets, increased claims reserves, and a slightly higher insurance concentration risk charge. When we finalize the proposed sale of our Malaysian business that we announced in July, our capital position will improve by around AUD 150 million, and our CET1 ratio will increase by around six points. For my final slide, I'll take you through the approach followed in determining our AUD 0.13 per share final dividend that the board declared today. IAG's normal approach is to identify unusual non-recurring items, record these in net corporate expense, and exclude the items when calculating cash earnings. A consistent approach is being followed this year. The dividends in FY21 represent a payout ratio of 66% of cash earnings, close to the midpoint of the 60%-80% payout range that we target. I'll now hand you back to Nick. Thank you. Thanks, Michelle. I want to share how we're strengthening the fundamentals of our core insurance business to build a stronger and a more resilient IAG. Six months ago, we said that we would hold ourselves to account on the four strategic pillars that you'll see on the slide, and we'll share progress with you every six months on what we've done. Our redesigned operating model to create three core insurance businesses is in place. Each division is aligned to the insurance needs of specific customers and the way those customers want to engage with us. Intermediated in Australia has clear accountabilities, and I've ensured appropriate executive focus on this business. I want the fundamental insurance capabilities here to be stronger so that it can continue to support our important partners and our brokers. This business has underperformed in recent years, and we've prioritized this as a significant opportunity under our new structure. I'm also excited about the new team that we have in place at IAG. We have three high-quality external appointments that have joined us, Michelle, as our Chief Financial Officer, Jarrod Hill, who starts in a couple of weeks as our Group Executive in charge of our Australian intermediated business, and more recently, we announced Tim Plant is joining us as Chief Insurance and Strategy Officer. Tim's role is a new one at IAG, and he will use his deep insurance experience gained in senior roles that he's had at a number of other large insurers to improve our overall underwriting discipline across the entire company. Michelle, Jarrod, and Tim, of course, complement the existing executive team and will play a major role in delivering a stronger and a more resilient IAG. Our four strategy pillars have provided a clear roadmap for us, and I'd like to share some of the progress that we have made. It's been a pleasing year for customer growth, with some tangible milestones achieved. We've added 75,000 new customers across our Australian and New Zealand business in our direct businesses. This represents just over 1% growth in our customer base for our direct businesses. The highlight here has been the online rollout of NRMA Insurance across Western Australia, South Australia, and Northern Territory, alongside our new customer loyalty program, which has been piloted as part of that rollout. I've already highlighted the significance of changes to our intermediated business as part of our efforts to build out better businesses. Pricing capability initiatives will continue to support our portfolio management efforts in the intermediated business going through into FY 2022. Our progress on digital initiatives and efforts into the future are underpinned by the creation of a single core insurance platform, which we're rolling out across IAG. After completing stage one, we now have a single claims platform that can be used across the entire organization. Stage two, which is underway now, will consolidate and simplify multiple policy and administration systems that we have in place. When we complete this work, we'll be able to provide consistent products and services to customers wherever they are, on whatever digital platform they choose to engage with us. Uplifts in our risk infrastructure also give me confidence. We've implemented an AUD 100 million program of work to fundamentally improve the risk practices across IAG. After 18 months, this program, which internally we call Project RQ, is near complete, and it has considerably strengthened the control environment of our company. Embedding RQ will continue to be a big focus in the year ahead. As you can see, we've established good early momentum on the implementation of our strategy. Given our confidence in the underlying performance that we've outlined today, we've reintroduced guidance for FY 2022. This will include the following key metrics, low single-digit premium growth expected in FY 2022, and a reported insurance margin in the range of 13.5%-15.5%. We've provided on this slide a roadmap on the underlying assumptions around that margin improvement. We expect an improved underlying performance in FY 2022, underpinned by the changes that we've already taken. We are targeting rate increases that will continue to flow through both our personal and commercialized portfolios. We'll also be leveraging the efficiencies and greater focus that will flow through from our redesigned operating model that we've announced and already have in place. In closing, just a few comments. This slide summarizes our value proposition to our shareholders. It outlines the financial outcomes of the strategy I've discussed today, and how we'll be delivering against those four pillars. Creating a stronger, more resilient IAG will deliver our targeted cash ROE of 12%-13%, and an insurance margin of 15%-17%, and growth over the next three to five years. This goal encompasses organic customer growth that at least matches the market across our direct businesses. It also includes an insurance profit of at least AUD 250 million to be delivered by our Australian Intermediated business. It includes delivering further simplification and efficiencies in the cost structure of our company, as well as strong risk infrastructure. This is the type of return profile that you should expect from us. We look forward to sharing more about this in an Investor Day that we've planned for 11th of November. Michelle and I are now happy to take any questions that you may have. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name it to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you want to speak with our team, please pick up the headset to ask your question. Your first question comes from Andrei Stadnik from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thank you for your time. I wanted to ask a question firstly on GWP growth. In this FY21 result, it looks like IAG has lagged Suncorp by about two and a half percentage points in terms of cleaner underlying GWP growth. This feels like historically a record gap. Is there anything behind that? Was IAG distracted by having to handle business interruption issues? That just feels like a very high gap by history. Andrei, hi, it's Nick. I mean, without lining up the two results, our overall sense would be within our Direct Personal Lines businesses across Australia and New Zealand, we've grown thereby over 1% in customer, as well as rate has flowed through. What we have seen though, and you'll see this in the detail within our Australian intermediated business, we have seen customer numbers and volume come back a bit. We've had rate flow through as a positive, we've seen customer numbers come back. There's still been a little bit of portfolio remediation that's occurring there. That might explain some of that. Overall, we feel like we've got the business set up the way we want. As you can sort of tell by the outlook comments, that we are pretty confident on directionally where our company is going and the growth opportunities that are in front of us. Thank you. I wanted to ask another question around cost out. I think, Nick, when you started as a CEO, in one of your first kind of media statements, you said you want to run a more efficient IAG, and you mentioned a number of different systems. It looks like your cost ratio is quite a bit higher than some peers. When can you move on this? Is this something we can expect to hear more about on the investor day? Yeah, there is sort of multiple parts to this story, Andrei Stadnik. We are looking at technology simplification across the whole company, and I mentioned that we now have one claims system across IAG, and we have built and launched and using a policy and admin system. We are going down a Guidewire path. That is now in place. We need to migrate multiple systems onto that. That will take the next couple of years. In addition to that, organizational design, and one of the objectives of the way we have structured the company going forward is that we are a simpler, more efficient organization. Greater clarity of accountabilities, and there will be some efficiency gains that come out of that as well. Some of that is even within the guidance, as I indicated, for next year. What we want to do is we're building out those plans in more detail, and we're seeing the benefits flow through. We'll provide the market more color on that as things progress. One of those opportunities, as you've said, will be at the Investor Day in November. Thank you. If I can sneak in one final question, please. The New Zealand Earthquake Commission proposal reforms are quite substantial at first glance, trying to propose an increased rare cap from AUD 150,000 to AUD 400,000. That would imply very substantial reallocation of premiums away from private sector insurers such as yourselves. What is the latest on that? How can you mitigate any potential impacts on your New Zealand business? Andrei, just to check, there hasn't been any announcement today, has there? I haven't seen any of that. You're just saying what's been discussed as the potential changes to the scheme. Is that right? Correct. Yeah. There was a proposal come out. Yeah A year and a half ago, just as COVID hit, so it was a little bit hard to keep a track of everything over time. It's just a proposal for now. Potential proposal, yeah. Okay. Just making sure that I haven't missed something today. No. The New Zealand government has been reviewing effectively the retention that they have around earthquake. That is still being discussed, my understanding, within government. There hasn't been anything announced around that. We're working with industry, IAG New Zealand, Industry in New Zealand are working with the government around the way that scheme is going to work going forward. I suspect it will increase above the current level. I doubt it'll go to the level that you described, the AUD 400,000. I'm thinking somewhere in between is likely. We'll just work with that as that's announced. It's likely to have some sort of timeline as well in relation to the implementation, I would've thought, over the next sort of 12-18 months. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Andrew Buncombe from Macquarie. Please go ahead. Hi, thanks for taking my questions. I just have two, please. The first one is in relation to the new gross provision that you've incurred for BCC and Greensill. Are you able to give us a bit of color as to how much of that provision is IBNR, but also have you put a claim to the reinsurers yet? Thanks. Hi, Andrew. It's Michelle. Thanks for that question. It's all IBNR at this point in time. Sorry, I think there's a small amount that's been paid, but the AUD 437 million is largely IBNR. We have picked up the equivalent reinsurance recovery associated with that, and you'll see that in the financials. We've been working with our reinsurers as we work through that process and meet the requirements of all the information. Very comfortable with the recognition on both sides of that equation at this point in time. Yep, that makes sense. Just in terms of my second question, it's in relation to the margin targets of 15%-17%. My understanding previously was that they were targets for FY 2023, yet the documents today seem to suggest that they're medium term. Have they been pushed out? Am I interpreting that correctly? They haven't been, Andrew. Sorry, Nick, you go. No, you go, Michelle. You go. No. Andrew, there's been no change. It was over a three-year time horizon, the same as what we talked about in February. I mean, Andrew, I'll just make a comment there. We're trying to get there as quickly as possible. In sort of framing the financial setting of the company, my view is sort of an ROE, sort of targeting that sort of range that we've indicated, which means an insurance margin of about 15%-17%. That's the sort of setting that I believe we can also be delivering a growth profile as well. We're trying to get there as quickly as possible. Sure. Then maybe just a quick final one, please. Just interested in how the Star versus Chubb court ruling from last week may impact your BI provisions. Thanks. I think it's quite a technical finding, the read-through to us is quite modest. In our view, we've obviously had the first test case, which has sort of clarified the quarantine biosecurity topic. Second test case was what we need clarity from around how our policies are going to respond. The answer is particular to the Chubb. It's a small positive, the read-through for the type of policies we have and implications for IAG are quite modest. Excellent. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Kieren Chidgey from Jarden. Please go ahead. Morning, Nick. Morning, Michelle. A couple of questions to starting around growth. You've been making very strong margins in Direct Australia and New Zealand, and don't seem to be pushing rate as strong as sort of your largest peer in that market, but still seeing some volume growth. Just wondering, in your mind, what are the key catalysts to achieve sort of that medium-term target in both those businesses of growing at least in line with market, given the margins are sort of already sort of around target levels there? Hi Kieran. We're quite close. Our Australian direct businesses were growing in customer numbers by just over 1%. We're starting to see some genuine organic growth of IAG, which we know in the past, a lot of that growth profile has just been price. We're trying to get that balance right between just increasing the number of customers that we engage with as well as price. We're seeing some of that already. Things like having an NRMA offering now, across Australia or ex-Victoria. It's going to make a little bit of a difference. We're having a simplified technology platform will make a difference because it'll be easier to put digital platforms on top of that, consistently across the way we run our company. We're just being a bit more active in how we go to market and our brand propositions, our advertising, and sort of the sum of those. There's already momentum in our place around this topic, around genuinely growing the company and having more customers next year than last year. We're seeing that already, and I want to try and build on that over the next couple of years. I think the sort of the settings are kind of already starting to be put in place. It's now driving that agenda forward, and we've got evidence of that working already. All right. Thanks. Just secondly, on the commercial business, you've flagged margins, underlying margins still around the 4% level in second half FY21. You're achieving rate rises of around 8% on average. Can you just indicate where you think inflation is in that part of your business, and how long you believe you need to sort of maintain those positive jaws between rates and inflation to get the margin up to that 10%+ level you require to get the group back into the 15%+ range? Sure. It's almost there's three parts to that business. There is the intermediated personal lines business, the Coles, the Steadfast Direct, and some other partner personal lines businesses we have. There is the short-tail commercial business, and there is the long-tail commercial business. They kind of got some different themes in them. In the personal lines business, we have had some challenges there around profitability. There is just rate increases flowing through because of our starting position. We are seeing a little bit of claims inflation in some of the property classes in home, but relatively modest, and a little bit in motor. In short-tail commercial, that business is increasingly looking better, I'd say. Low single-digit type inflationary pressure within that business. The call-out for us is some of those long-tail classes, particularly the liability, where we are seeing inflation. That's sort of a different issue around settlements around damages, injury, where we're seeing 10%-type plus inflationary pressure within that part of the portfolio. I think in relation to expectations, we'll still see certainly significant rate increases across those long-tail classes. Less so on the sort of the commercial and the personal lines portfolios as we're increasingly having those portfolios deliver a reasonable return. That's great. One last question, just a quick clarification. The AUD 30 million of non-recurring sort of corporate and New Zealand costs you've called out, can you just give us a feeling for the split between the halves? Was that predominantly in second half? It was all in the second half. It's a combination of costs associated with the implementation of the new operating model that Nick announced on becoming CEO in November last year, together with some property consolidation costs in New Zealand as we're looking at our ways of working as we move forward. Okay. The AUD 30 is pre-quota share, is that correct? It is pre-quota share just for the purposes of how we've shown the gross underwriting expenses on the slide in the presentation. You see the reinsurance quota share adjustment at the bottom of that table on the slide. Perfect. Thanks. Thank you. Your next question comes from Nigel Pittaway from Citi. Please go ahead. Morning, Nick and Michelle. First question, just on the FY 2022 reported margin roll forward. You obviously call out the impact of the increased perils drag at AUD 150, which is probably a bit severe as obviously there's some premium growth there as well. Nonetheless, just looking at that number, would we be right to say that's completely offset in the dotted box up top, in that you've repriced for that already? Is that still sort of not completely offset? Nigel, hi. As I called out when we talked about the increase in the perils allowance, we've been pricing for that as we move through, and we continue to take expectations around perils allowance into account as we're setting prices moving forward. Yeah, I guess I'm just trying to work out how far through you are, whether or not there's still more to go. Have you already repriced, so the impact should be offset? Well, I'm comfortable in terms of that we're getting rate increases in line with inflation, taking into consideration that perils allowance. Yeah, I think we're well-placed as we move into FY 2022 around that. Okay. Secondly, just on the professional risk portfolio, we've asked questions about that before. We were told it was relatively small, a small portfolio, not to worry about it. Obviously, we did have an increase in top ups in the second half. Can you give us a little bit more sort of info as to the nature of that portfolio, and give us some ability to assess whether or not we should be worried about it moving forward? Yeah. It is interesting. The reserve strengthening, Nigel, that we have seen coming through that portfolio has been linked to historic large claims that we have seen as we have seen them developing further, and that is part of what is driven that strengthening. With some of the areas like D&O and those sorts of things, as we said before, we are not at the large end of town, if I can call it that. It is a mixed portfolio. I would probably need to take on notice some questions about too much more lower-level detail, unless Nick wants to jump in there. It is linked to some of the historic larger claims we had out of that portfolio that has seen the reserve strengthening. Yeah, Nigel, as we've said, it's a relatively small portfolio that what we have seen is larger claims. Our current period loss ratio for that portfolio, we've also reflected our experience in. There's a bit of drain in the current period around those loss ratio ticks for sort of underlying margin for the now as well. We're trying to get ahead of it is our response, and try to reserve for anything we know about, and then set our current period loss ratios with that in mind. Okay. Then maybe just finally on this sort of growth of your sales versus Suncorp, one of the areas where it was particularly stark is in New Zealand personal lines, where I think you were sort of calling out some fall in retention in the direct book, and obviously Suncorp's getting good growth in AA. Anything to sort of comment on there as to why you think there's such a stark difference in that market? Is that partly a decision on your part, or what exactly is happening there? I'll turn that around and say that's got to be an opportunity. We do have very strong brands there. Obviously the AA had a good period. We've got strong brands there with AMI and State, and that's got to be an opportunity for us. I don't think there's anything structurally wrong with our business in New Zealand that means that we shouldn't be participating in that growth opportunity, probably more than what we've just delivered. I turn that into an opportunity, really. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from Matt Ingram from Bloomberg Intelligence. Please go ahead. Morning, all. Thanks very much for the update this morning. Just wonder if we could please touch on this vicious cycle regarding the perils allowance. I know, Michelle, you said you're sort of pricing for that as much as possible. We have seen the allowance jump substantially as a percentage of net premium earned. You also comment in the slides that pricing may sort of impact your gross written premium growth. I guess could you please talk me through how we're getting this increase in the allowance? Is your modeling suggesting an increased incidence of events? Then I guess if you could please help me understand how you're going to get off that sort of mouse wheel so you can actually catch up with the pricing, if those allowances keep increasing. Thank you. Thanks, Matt. I might take the first part of that and let Nick help me out with the second part of that. I think it's worth highlighting that you recall our AUD 658 allowance in this current year, FY21, benefited from some protection from the aggregate covers that we had in place. We've been calling out off the back of perils experience sort of 2019 that we needed to have a step-up. Because the perils experience in 2019, early 2020 had been so significant, our aggregate covers kicked in, we didn't have to put that increase through into FY21 perils allowance. We have to do that into FY22, which is why we're going to the AUD 765. The team have done a lot of work on perils experience and the modeling. There's no doubt factors such as climate change and those sorts of things influence that. We believe the journey from here won't have as many significant step changes, if I can put it that way. It really does depend on what we see coming through in experience. Nick, did you want to add some more to that? Hi, Matt. There's probably just a generalization, isn't there? We know that we're expecting We've got a big footprint, we've got a lot of property exposure. We know we're sort of expecting increased severity and frequency of events hitting Australia, therefore most likely this perils allowance will be continued to be lifted, then we'll need to be reflecting that in pricing. We're trying to get ahead of it. We know as an industry, say over the last 10 years, that the element of our pricing reflecting perils has probably not been there, that we've been under. This is our attempt at sort of rebasing that up, sort of ensuring that we are reflecting our best estimate of that perils exposure on our current portfolio. This topic will continue year-on-year, and we'll need to be continually updating that perils allowance and continually being able to reflect that increased risk within our pricing, particularly for the property classes. Okay. That's great. Thank you very much. My comment there, sorry, Matt, is it's not really a one-off, is it? I mean, this is going to be a Yes, we've done a bit of a catch-up, and we're trying to get ahead of it, but this topic will continue, unfortunately. Sorry. Yeah, thanks. I guess that's sort of the clarification I was after. I mean, everybody in the Australian market's reporting similar trends. It does seem there's been a step change in that incidence and severity, as you said. That's sort of what I wanted to clarify as well. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Siddharth Parameswaran from JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Good morning. A couple of questions, if I can. Just following on from that last question, I just wanted to clarify exactly what you have pushed through in terms of pricing increases in the home and what you're saying you're pushing through at the moment. From the commentary, I think you're saying you pushed through about 3%-4%, in line with loss cost inflation. The perils allowance did go up by AUD 100 million. You're not really saying that you're pushing through very large increases in any of the commentary. At the same time, Nick, you're saying that you're trying to get ahead of this increase in peril. I'm just struggling. It feels like there's a bit of a disconnect between what's happened on price and the perils allowance. What am I missing? I mean, could you just flesh out just the timing differences, and how I'm meant to reconcile some of the statements in your pack with the overriding comments you're making on allowances? Yeah, sure. Hi, Sid. I mean, when I said we're trying to get ahead of it, as in we're trying to lift our allowance and then reflect that in pricing. I don't think we meant we're trying to get ahead of the allowance. Really, what we've done is stepped up the allowance, and then that has been reflected in pricing that has been occurring over the last six months or so. We're not sort of starting FY22 having to now think about how we can reflect increased allowances into our pricing. I feel like we've already got momentum on that. Maybe sort of step back and say, in total, are we sort of comfortable with, say, the direct personal lines type margins? I mean, I think we are, as an example. One of those inputs is perils cost. In total, looking at that sort of profitability of our direct business, say, in Australia, we're sort of comfortable that's the level of profitability. Therefore, pricing that's been flowing through that portfolio, and then particularly around property, needs to be able to reflect the increased allowance and a little bit of inflation. I don't see that as We're not trying to get ahead of those allowances. We're trying to reprice in line with our expectations of that allowance going forward, is our comment. Okay. I think that's quite helpful. Thank you for that. Just a second question, if I can. Just on the quota shares, could you just remind us when the next ones are actually due to be renewed and whether you're expecting to see any impact on underlying margins from that? Hi, Sid. It's Michelle. Thanks. I probably didn't need to say it's Michelle, given that Nick and I are. In terms of the smallest of the 12.5% quota share elements is due for renewal at the end of FY 2022. In terms of where we're at, we're well progressed in terms of engaging with our quota share partners and understanding how they're thinking about it. I'm not expecting to see any significant shift associated with the financial impact linked with our quota share arrangements as we move through that over the next sort of 12 to 24 months and beyond, working with our four partners that we have at the moment. Okay. Thank you. If I could just ask another question just on timing of some of the arrangements you have. Just Coles arrangement and Steadfast Direct, are there any sort of timeframes as to when either of those agreements come up for renewal? Sid, the Coles deal was a 10-year deal, distribution deal, from the date of acquisition of the sort of Wesfarmers lump in the portfolio. That's the timeline there. Steadfast Direct, I think is not such a structured timeline type deal. That's just an arrangement that we have in place with Steadfast, which is more common with other partners. I'm just trying to remember the Wesfarmers deal was 2015, no, 2014. two or three years to go. Okay. Just to be clear, I mean, your intention is to remediate the profitability of these books, not to terminate these books. Is that right? I mean, we've got to make not just Well, I wouldn't just point out these two portfolios. I think across the entire business, we've got to make decisions around repricing, remediation, or potentially exiting. That's sort of the role that we need to play. In relation to Coles as an example, that's been quite a strain on us for the last number of years. That's actually looking a lot better. There's been quite a significant improvement there over the last couple of years. The Steadfast Direct business has still got its challenges in relation to profitability. That's certainly something that we're reviewing at the moment. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Hawkins for closing remarks. Okay. Hey, well, thanks for joining us at this busy time. I mean, as we've demonstrated here today, our core insurance business continues to deliver stable underlying performance over the last 12 months. Our premium growth has been encouraging. That's really been supported by strong rate increases and some volume growth across our direct personal lines, which we believe will continue and is sort of starting the foundation of being growing at least in line with market over the next two years. We're very confident in our plans to create a stronger and a more resilient IAG. Look forward to talking to you all again over the next six months. Enjoy the rest of your day. Thank you. Thanks, everyone.