First Half 2022 results presentation, and then capital raising presentation. Before we begin today, I would like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of this land, the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, and pay my respects to elders past, present, and emerging. Today, we have our CEO, Shemara Wikramanayake, who's joining us from London ahead of the COP26 Climate Change Forum, and Alex Harvey in Sydney. We also have our group heads on the line, Ben Way, Greg Ward, Nick O'Kane, Michael Silverton, Nicole Sorbara, Stuart Green, and Michael Herring. With that, I'll hand over to Shemara. Thank you. Great. Thanks, Sam, and welcome and good morning, everyone. It has just ticked over midnight here in the U.K., so it is morning for us as well. Thank you for joining us. Now, before I take you through the results presentation for the first half of FY 2022, I thought I'd just touch on the capital raising, which Sam just mentioned. You will have seen this morning we announced our intention to raise AUD 1.5 billion through a non-underwritten institutional placement and through a non-underwritten share purchase plan to follow that. Now, this follows a period where over the second half of last financial year and the first half of this financial year, across our four operating businesses, they've been able to deploy AUD 5.5 billion in investments where we've seen superior return for the relative risk we perceive in the investments. Alex and I will take you through in this presentation more detail of those investments we've been making. What we're doing with this raising is trying to empower our businesses with the flexibility to respond to ongoing opportunities they're seeing in each of their deep franchises that are responding to a diverse range of structural themes, and also position us with appropriate surplus capital as we constantly hold through the cycles. With that, I might turn to the result for the first half of FY 2022. As usual, you'll see we start here with a reflection on our four operating businesses and the relative contribution of the annuity style versus market-facing businesses in that group. You'd think in a conducive market environment like this, we would have greater contribution from the market-facing groups, but we had 63% from the annuity style, principally because in the Commodities and Global Markets business, in our annuity style asset finance business, we had a realization of our meters business or a portion of it here in the U.K. In Macquarie Asset Management, we had a realization of the last two assets in the U.S. listed fund, Macquarie Infrastructure Corporation. Now, all of these businesses give us very good diversification through the cycle and a position to deliver well for shareholders through the cycle. Of course, we also are focused on a group of other stakeholders, and in delivering for them, we believe we do deliver better for our shareholders. Those include our employees, our clients, our portfolio companies, and our communities whom we serve. Just reflecting on those four groups, in terms of our employees, we mentioned at this time last year in the annual staff survey we do, that despite 98% of people working remotely at the peak of the pandemic, we had a record engagement score up 5%. What's happened now with some regions having worked remotely for 19 months, is that the early results from the staff survey we've just done are showing the engagement scores are still at the same levels they were last year, which is very pleasing and a great statement from our employee commitment to our business. With our clients as well, we're working hard, especially in this still, in some parts of the world, pandemic impacted environment, to make sure we're supporting them. The clients on hardship assistance here in Australia have come down from 13%- 0.7%, but we're coming out of extended lockdowns for a large part of the population, so we'll have to continue to monitor that. With our portfolio companies throughout the pandemic, we have 100 million users of our services every day, and we stepped up and made sure they were supported. For our communities across our businesses, we tried to make sure we delivered good outcomes for the communities. Also, our foundation stepped up with an extra AUD 20 million of donations to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Now, in terms of contribution to you, the shareholders, you will have seen in this last half, we delivered a result of AUD 2.043 billion, which was almost double. Well, more than double the 985 million we delivered in the first half of last financial year, which was a particularly challenged and subdued environment with the pandemic impacts. It was also larger than the AUD 2.03 billion we delivered in the second half of last financial year. As a result, a record result for us in a half and a return on equity of 17.8%. Now, that result was up in all four operating groups compared to the first half of last financial year, which, as I said, was a particularly pandemic impacted and challenged period. In relation to the second half of last financial year, the annuity style businesses were up, but the market-facing businesses in Macquarie Capital, the result was lower than the second half of last year because we had particularly strong investment realizations in the second half of last year. In Commodities and Global Markets, while we had good growth in our portfolio in asset finance and across financial markets activity levels, in the commodity markets business, we had good income from inventory management and trading, but that was more than offset by unfavorable impact of the timing of income recognition in relation to transportation and storage contracts. Looking at it over multiple halves, this is, I think, going back over the last five halves. As I mentioned, a record result in operating income, profit and earnings per share. The board has declared a dividend at the lower end of its dividend payout ratio at 50% of AUD 2.72, bearing in mind that we are going out with a capital raising as well. Now, looking at some of the factors that have driven the result, across the board. In terms of our assets under management, they also reached record levels at AUD 737 billion. The big contributor here was the closing of the Waddell & Reed transaction, which delivered over AUD 100 billion of assets. We also had good investment and fundraising in the private managed funds and net flows into our public market funds as well. Turning to the diversification of the contribution by regions. You can see here that, typically, Asia is contributing about 10% of our results and the other three regions about 30% each. In this most recent half, the Americas stepped up to deliver 39%, which is why the other regions were a little lower. You can see here, Americas particularly stepping up. The Macquarie Infrastructure Corporation contribution, which Alex will talk about, was a contributor to that. In the EMEIA region as well, the sale of the meters in the commodity and global markets business was a contributor there. Now, looking at each of the operating groups, as we usually do each half. Some of the highlights. Macquarie Asset Management, the results were up 29% on the second half of last year and 23% on the first half. Some of the key features in the private markets business, you see their ongoing good fundraising at AUD 12.7 billion in this half, AUD 13.6 billion invested and proceeds of AUD 7.6 billion from realization of assets, which leaves us with nearly AUD 28 billion of dry powder to deploy. In those raisings, some of the notable examples, Macquarie Infrastructure Partners Five, which is our sixth North American fund, closed at a record $6.9 billion. That's US dollars. Also the Asia Pacific opportunistic real estate strategy closed at its hard cap of AUD 1.1 billion. I mentioned Macquarie Infrastructure Corporation making a particularly strong contribution with the sale of the remaining two assets in their Atlantic Aviation and Hawaii Gas. In the public market side of the business, we had not only the Waddell & Reed acquisition close, but we announced an agreement to acquire AMP's global equities and fixed income business. We also had good net flows, as I said, and 68% of strategies performing above the three-year benchmark. In addition to that, we just announced the acquisition of Central Park Group, which distributes private market strategies, asset management strategies to high net worth investors. Opening up a new channel of investors for the whole of the MAM offerings. Turning to Banking and Financial Services. The result was up material 52% on the first half last year, where we had the expected credit loss provisions driving impacts there. Up 6% as well on the second half of last year as the books continue to grow in that business. You can see there, the home loan portfolio up 14%, the business banking portfolio up 8%, the deposits supporting all of that up 9% and the funds on platform up 15%. That business really focuses on the customer experience through investment in technology and a platform that attracts much more customers to us. The businesses in mortgages, you know, heading through the high 3% and in business banking around 1%. We're still small in a big market and a lot of opportunities to keep growing there. The vehicle finance portfolio being streamlined further with the exit of the dealer finance portfolio to Allied Credit. In commodities and global markets, the business results there were up 14% on the second half and 60% on the first half of last year. The asset finance business, as I said, continues to grow the portfolio and made a particularly strong contribution through the exit of the commercial and industrial meters portfolio here in the U.K. We still have over 10 million meters left in the residential portfolio. It's only a part of that that was exited. In the financial markets across foreign exchange, interest rates, credit, futures, equity, derivatives. We have seen good activity levels continue to drive growth in those businesses. In the commodities businesses, Alex will take you through more detail. We've had good results not just in energy, but also in resources and agriculture. As I mentioned, the strong income from the inventory management and trading is more than offset by the impact of the timing of recognition of income on storage and transportation contracts. Macquarie Capital significantly up on the first half of last year, which was a low result, but down 44% on a very strong second half last year, where we generated about AUD 850 million. Now, the services side of that business activity levels continue to grow even from the second half of last year. On the investment side, also good realizations, but not as strong as the second half of last year. We're managing to continue to deploy capital, AUD 5 billion invested in this half in the direct lending businesses in Advisory and Capital Solutions. On the renewables side, we've got over 300 projects in the pipeline now representing more than 35 GW of energy. Good contributions in terms of earnings from all the businesses. In terms of our funding and capital position, you can see here we continue to have our term liabilities or our term funding exceed our term assets comfortably. We raised a AUD 24.4 billion amount of term funding in this half, including the RBA Term Funding Facility. Our deposits are up at AUD 91.5 billion, up 9%. In terms of our capital, our capital surplus has moved from AUD 8.8 billion at the beginning of the half to AUD 8.4 billion. The biggest contributor to that, we of course had the earnings from this half offset by the dividend that we paid for last financial year, where the biggest contributor was the absorption of capital of AUD 3.2 billion into our businesses. If you look at second half of last year and first half of this year, AUD 5.5 billion absorbed into the businesses. Alex will give much more detail on this, but in Macquarie Asset Management, there were two of the investments included there of Waddell & Reed and AMP. We're yet to close the AMP investment that's been agreed. BFS, the ongoing growth of the book, so impacting both halves, where we're continuing to absorb capital into that, both in the personal banking and business banking. In Commodities and Global Markets, as we grow the franchise on the lending and financing, as well as the risk management products, that increases the market risk and credit risk capital absorbed in the business, as well as the growth in the asset finance portfolio absorbing capital. In Macquarie Capital, we're continuing to deploy capital, as I said, both into equity across the Advisory and Capital Solutions, key sectors in the green energy and infrastructure side, as well as into debt capital markets and direct lending. Our regulatory ratios remain strong. As you can see there, well above the Basel III minimum capital levels. That's the financial results. I might also touch on now a couple of business related changes that we've had. The first of those is that the Green Investment Group is now going to operate as part of Macquarie Asset Management from 1 April 2022 onwards. The reason for this is that we are seeing a much greater scale of investment opportunity in that area. We're also seeing a big increase in the appetite of our investors to access these investments. It seems like the appropriate time to bring this offering now to our fiduciary investors in the asset management world. What it will also allow us to do is follow those assets through a longer part of the life cycle rather than exit them earlier, as has happened on the balance sheet. That is much better for engagement with our counterparties and also for our staff in terms of staying with the assets and for the communities for which we're delivering these assets. It will let us invest now across a much broader spectrum, including development, construction and operating assets in the energy space, but also into new areas in terms of addressing climate. Now, the GIG brand will be maintained in Macquarie Asset Management, and then Macquarie Capital will continue with all of its remaining businesses and will continue to deploy balance sheet to support our deep sector expertise across the broad range of broader areas of expertise in which we have specialist teams in Macquarie Capital. We'll of course, continue to make our balance sheet available to Macquarie Asset Management in either seed portfolio investment alignment in our funds or co-investment. In addition to that, we have a few management changes to announce. The first of those is that Dan Wong has decided to step down as co-head of Macquarie Capital and from the Macquarie Group executive committee, effective today, 29 October, to pursue opportunities outside Macquarie. Now, Dan has been with us for 22 years and joined in our Risk Management Group and has had a passion for infrastructure and energy and led the building of that business and the business itself, including leading the team that acquired the Green Investment Group after he moved here to the U.K., I think, in 2004. That acquisition happened in 2017. Dan has made a massive contribution to our business and leaves a huge legacy in terms of shaping and leaving his mark on the business. I really wanna thank Dan for everything he's done for us. Following Dan stepping down, Michael Silverton, who's currently co-head of Macquarie Capital with Dan, will become the head of Macquarie Capital. Michael has also been with us, I think 25 years. He also started in the risk management group, so slaving over the same photocopier a couple of decades ago with Dan. He will continue to run that business. Patrick Upfold, our Chief Risk Officer, who's been with Macquarie 25 years and did his career in the opposite direction, having started in the investment bank, then became Group Treasurer, then went on to be CFO for six years, as many of you will remember, and has been our Chief Risk Officer for the last 4, and really lifted the strength of our platform in terms of risk management. Patrick has decided to retire as of the end of this calendar year. He will step down from Executive Committee and he will be, his role as CRO and his Executive Committee role will be taken over by Andrew Cassidy, who has been with us for 18 years, including a period in our principal investing business. Most recently has spent a couple of years working with Patrick in transition. Patrick also made an incredible contribution to the business, and will leave his mark. I really wanna thank Patrick for his contribution as well. Patrick will continue to work with Andrew, for as long as needed, at least till mid-next year for a long period of transition from now. Then lastly, we mentioned already that Michael Herring, our General Counsel, has also elected to retire after 17 years with us. He came across from King & Wood Mallesons into the investment bank, took over as general counsel in 2009 and really shaped our legal and governance platform across the whole of Macquarie and has made an amazing contribution. He will be stepping down on the 6th of May 2022 with our full year results. Happily, Evie Bruce has agreed to join us from King & Wood Mallesons. She's been the Australian managing partner for mergers and acquisitions and the banking and finance practice, and certainly has done a lot of work for Macquarie Group. Evie will join us in January 2022, and she will take over from Michael's role in May 2022, and she will join our executive committee as well. A big thank you to Michael as well. All three of these people really shaped our business and, as I say, will leave their legacy for time to come. Patrick, as his last risk management activity, apparently used a chainsaw and cut his way out of the tree that had fallen down in his house because of Victorian storms. I think he's with us today, as are Dan, Michael, Andrew Cassidy, and Michael Herring as well. Before I hand over to Alex, the last thing I'll briefly touch on is, as I mentioned, the board has declared an interim dividend of AUD 2.72, which is a 50% payout ratio. It's a 40% franked dividend. With that, I'll hand over to Alex to take you through much more detail on the financial results, and then I'll come back to talk about our outlook. Over to you, Alex. Thanks, Shemara, and good morning, everyone. As is usually the case, I'll now take you through some more of the detail of the results for the group for the first half. Starting with the income statement, you can see operating income for the first half up 41%, and the main drivers for that were a 20% increase in net interest and trading income, a 32% increase in fees and commission, investment income up AUD 370 million, and impairments and other charges down AUD 227 million from where they were in the first half of FY 2021. Expenses were up 19% for a half, and the real drivers there were increased profit share expense associated with the improved underlying performance of the business, together with employment and other expenses associated with the acquisition of Waddell & Reed that was completed at the end of April 2021. The tax rate for the half was broadly in line with where we were for the first half of FY 2021. To the underlying result, AUD 2.043 billion, up 107% on the first half of FY 2021, and broadly in line with where we were for the second half of 2021, and a record result for the group. Now turning to the operating businesses and starting with the Macquarie Asset Management business, which in this half was 33% of the overall net profit contribution for the group. You can see that MAAM was up 23% from the first half of 2021. Just in terms of the drivers, we've broken out the components here to try and display the underlying performance and then talk about the contribution from MIC and the contribution from Waddell & Reed in this half. Maybe I'll just talk about each of those components. On the left-hand side of the chart, you can see base fees up AUD 102 million or 11%, and that reflects a good period investing in private markets across a whole range of different mandates. We also had market movements and net inflows coming into the public investments side of the business. You can see in the middle of the chart the contribution from MIC. As people will recall, I'm sure that the team in MIC have been, over the last couple of years, engaged in a strategic review and ultimately the sale of the underlying assets of that portfolio. During the half, transactions were entered into to sell Atlantic Aviation, which was the largest of the assets, and Hawaii Gas. In relation to the first half then, MIC contributed three types of income to the group. Firstly, we had our share of the equity account of gains from the disposal of Atlantic Aviation. Secondly, we had the reversal of the impairment that we'd taken on the group's interest in MIC. Thirdly, we had disposition fees associated with the disposal of the asset of Atlantic Aviation. Hawaii Gas, that sale and purchase agreement has been entered into in relation to Hawaii Gas. That transaction is expected to complete. It's subject to regulatory approval and expected to complete sometime in the next 6-12 months. On the right-hand side of the chart, you can see the contribution from Waddell & Reed. The transaction was completed at the end of April 2021, and you can see two components for the first half. Firstly, we had an increase in one-off expenses associated with Waddell & Reed of $184 million, and then you can see the ongoing contribution of Waddell & Reed increase of $126 million on where we were for the first half of FY 2021. The overall group up 23%. In terms of the underlying drivers of the business, you can see assets under management up just over 30% in the half. The key drivers there were the acquisition of Waddell & Reed. You can see on the left-hand side the contribution of the significant investment activity that's been going on, the private markets part of the business, and as I mentioned before, the net flows and market movements associated with the public investments side of MAAM. Now turning to the second of our annuity-style businesses, the Banking and Financial Services business, which in this half contributed 12% of the group's underlying net profit. You can see another strong half on where we were in the first half of FY 2021 and also up on the second half of FY 2021. The key drivers there were an increase of AUD 125 million in the personal bank, and that really derives from a 27% increase in average balances of mortgages across the business. You can see a step up in the business bank of AUD 16 million, and so we had a 23% growth in business loans, partly offset by a reduction in our asset finance business in the business bank. You can see a step up in the contribution of the wealth business, and that really reflects the movement in assets under administration on the Wrap platform, up 27%. We had a lower contribution from impairments, reflecting an improved macroeconomic outlook for the business. As we talked about at the full year results, we had a step up in expenses in this half associated with the team's investment in the platform, in digitization, in technology, and also an increase in employment costs associated with supporting the increase in volume across BFS, as well as the regulatory obligations of the group. Importantly, in terms of the underlying drivers of the business, with the exception of the asset finance business, which declined a small amount, you can see all of the underlying products actually increasing over the period. Home loans, deposits, and funds on platform, and of course, the business loans all increasing, and that obviously all was well for the outlook for that business into the medium term. Now turning to the first of our market-facing businesses, the Commodities and Global Markets business. A very strong half, as Shemara referred to, up 60% on where they were for the first half of FY 2021. You can see the breakdown of that. Firstly, on the commodity side, commodities income was up AUD 142 million or 13%. The key drivers there were the risk management income, up AUD 371 million. That really reflects the work we're doing with clients across particularly the gas and power sector on a global basis, the resources sector, metals and bulks, as well as the agricultural sector. You can see the volatility of markets creating great opportunities for us to help clients manage that exposure over the course of the last six months. That was partly offset by a lower contribution from inventory management and trading, and that really reflects the timing of income recognition on storage and transport contracts. You can see that reduced the inventory management and trading by AUD 376 million in the first half of our FY 2022 financial year. The financial markets business was broadly in line with where it was for the first half of last year, as was the asset finance business, with the exception of the proceeds from the disposal of the industrial and commercial meters business. You can see that coming through in the middle of the chart, up AUD 465 million. The contribution of the industrial and commercial meters was about AUD 450 million, as we talked about at the full year results. We saw that coming through during this half. Credit and other impairment charges down by AUD 108 million, again, reflecting the quality of the portfolio and the improved macroeconomic outlook that we're seeing across the world. Now, a slide that we included at the full year results, we thought we'd repeat here at the half year is just the underlying drivers of the CGM business. As we've talked about before, it's a very client franchise, a client-focused business with a deep and broadening franchise all across the world. You can see the client numbers on the right-hand side of that chart up at a compound average growth rate of 5% over the last few periods. On the left-hand side, you can see that reflecting into the operating income coming through the business, which represents, depending on period on period, say 75% of the overall business of CGM. Then on the right-hand side, as we grow the client franchise, you can see the business consuming more capital as we provide solutions to our clients to help them manage risk over the course of the commodities and financial markets businesses. Turning now to the final of our operating businesses, the Macquarie Capital business. Obviously a very challenging first half in FY 2021. Pleasingly returned to profit in this half, AUD 468 million for the half. You can see the drivers there. We had a AUD 365 million increase from our portfolio of debt and equity investments that Macquarie Capital has been investing in all around the world. On the principal finance side in particular, we saw a big step up, AUD 5 billion investment across the half across debt and business services and government services and those type of businesses the team have been able to buy in recent times. That follows AUD 4.5 billion increase in investment over the 12 months to 31 March 2021. Secondly, you can see the step up in fee and commission income, AUD 206 million, and that really reflects the recovery in commodity confidence all around the world. We saw an improvement in M&A volumes here in Australia, and we saw it also in Europe and also in the United States. All around the world, M&A volumes picking up. Our debt capital markets business has had a better period of time in the U.S. and up on last year. Of course, that fee income was partly offset by a lower contribution from equity capital markets income here in Australia, following a very busy first half of FY 2021. You can see expenses down AUD 86 million from where they were in the first half of last year, and that reflects the work that the team have been doing to refocus that business on core sectors of expertise that we talked about at the half year result last year. Turning to maybe the capital first for Macquarie Capital before I go onto there. You can see the capital, alongside, Macquarie Capital's clients stepping up from AUD 3.9 billion- AUD 5.1 billion over the course of the half. This is obviously a chart we've had in for some time now. The importance of this capital is that it's really underpinning the performance of the Macquarie Capital group going forward. Over the course of the half, up AUD 1.2 billion in capital invested alongside Macquarie Capital and clients. You can see it on the investments where that's particularly gone. It's really gone into the debt investments at the bottom of that stack, and you can also see a step up in the green investments within the Macquarie Capital portfolio. Now turning to some of the other aspects of financial management for the group. Firstly, the cost of compliance. Again, a slide that we put in for many results now. You can see the cost of compliance going up at AUD 335 million for the first half, up 11% from where we were in the first half of FY 2021. Obviously, compliance is a very important aspect of the way we manage risk across the whole organization. There is a range of areas in which we're investing in. My expectation is, on a go forward basis, this cost of compliance will continue to step up as we continue to lift the platform of Macquarie across the group. In terms of the balance sheet, obviously balance sheet remains very strong. We had a good period, a very busy period in terms of accessing capital markets to support the funding requirements of the group. You can see we raised over AUD 24 billion in the half, including a drawdown from the RBA Term Funding Facility of AUD 9.5 billion. A very strong and busy period for the team in terms of raising capital and funding for the group. Importantly, we've continued to diversify the sources of funding. We've accessed a range of markets around the world in the last six months. The other thing we've been doing is lengthening the maturity profile of the group's balance sheet. Now out at 5.1 years versus 4.8 years when we sat here at half year talk, at full year talking to you about the results in May. In terms of deposit growth, up to AUD 91.5 billion worth of deposits, a really good story. A 15% compound growth rate over the last six and a half years. Great to see the team diversifying the type of products that we have in the market and attracting customers to the products that we're providing. In terms of the funded balance sheet and the loan and lease portfolio, just in terms of where some of that funding's going, we've obviously got up about 13.7% from where we were at March 2021. You can see where that increased funded loan and lease book's gone, really in the BFS business, in the personal loans, and also in the business loans. You can see them both up considerably during the period. The other thing we see is a step up in the asset finance business, and that really is the funding business that sits within CGM. Looking at shipping financing, looking at fund financing, and we've seen a step up in activity across that part of the business. Then at the bottom of the page there, you can see the increase within Macquarie Capital in the corporate and other lending area. That's gone from AUD 6 billion- AUD 8.9 billion at the end of the half. In terms of the equity investments, just to start, we have changed this slide slightly since we presented to you at the full year in response to some feedback we had from shareholders and analysts. We've changed this slide to include consolidated investments on the balance sheet that we expect to sell. We've also included, obviously, equity investments or investments through the equity account and investments that are valued at fair value through P&L. It gives you a broader range of the equity investments that are basically held for sale on the group's balance sheet. You can see that stepping up from AUD 7.7 billion at 31 March to now AUD 8.8 billion at September. I guess there's a range of movements there. To highlight one in particular, you can see the step up in the green energy investment from AUD 1.3 billion- AUD 1.8 billion as at September 2021. Now, turning to the regulatory update. There's always a lot on this slide. It's a very busy period. Regulatory reform is very active at the moment. A couple of things that I thought I would highlight on the way through here. Firstly, we are getting toward the end, or APRA's getting toward the end of the Basel III unquestionably strong reform process. We'd expect to receive final standards by the end of this year with an implementation date of January 1, 2023. Obviously, we're well advanced in terms of the preparation there, and as we've said for some time, we have been holding capital back in the group to support the additional capital obligations that will come with the introduction of the unquestionably strong capital reforms. In addition, I wanted to point out, obviously in response to the APRA letter of the first of April, as we said at the time of the announcement, we had a range of programs that were in place to deal with improving our risk management, regulatory compliance and so on. We've incorporated some of those programs over the course of the last six months into a remediation program with APRA, and that remediation program really is looking at things like governance. It's looking at things like group structure. It's looking at things like incentive to ensure that we meet our ongoing regulatory reporting obligations. A very important program of work that we've now staffed up and obviously working hard to make sure that we lift our approach in this area. In terms of the capital ratio from a bank viewpoint, the step one ratio from the bank at 11.7%, so very strong. Obviously, a step down from where we were at March, reflecting the additional capital requirements of the group, just given the underlying performance that we've seen over the last six months. A strong liquidity position. Nearly AUD 70 billion worth of unencumbered cash and liquid assets. From an LCR viewpoint, obviously very strong. Nearly 180% LCR for the September quarter. In terms of capital management, I'll come to the capital raising in a moment. Just a couple of other things. Obviously, during the half we issued shares to satisfy the dividend reinvestment plan in respect of the final dividend for FY 2021. We also issued shares in respect of the MEREP grant that was part of the profit share conversation for FY 2021. Today the board obviously has declared a dividend of AUD 2.72 franked to 40%. As Shemara mentioned, the dividend reinvestment plan remains on, although no discount is in place for this dividend. In terms of the capital raising, we announced this morning, as Shemara mentioned, we're seeking to raise AUD 1.5 billion in the form of a non-underwritten institutional placement. We're following that by a non-underwritten share purchase plan. The stock's obviously in trading halt while we go through the placement process today. We'll come out of trading halt. We'll announce the price, and we'll come out of trading halt on Monday. In terms of the SPP, the SPP will open on the eighth of November. In terms of pricing, the pricing for that SPP will be the low of the placement price adjusted for the dividend or 2% below the volume-weighted average price of Macquarie's ordinary shares trading ex-dividend during the five days of ASX trading immediately prior to and including the SPP closing date. I probably covered the timetable. As I said, the stock will come out of trading halt on Monday, and we expect to allot the shares. In terms of the SPP, the allotment date will be the third of December, with holding statements dispatched on the sixth of December. With that, I will hand back to Shemara for the remainder of the presentation. Thank you very much. Thanks, Alex. I'll now move on to taking you through the outlook. As usual, the short-term outlook first and then the medium-term outlook. As we always do, we're looking at this short-term outlook via the outlook for each of our operating groups. Starting with Macquarie Asset Management, we expect the base fees to be broadly in line, as we said, with last year. We expect the net other operating income to be slightly down on the previous year due to the significant one-off items we had last financial year. With the Waddell & Reed acquisition, as Alex mentioned, it's not expected to provide a meaningful net profit contribution this financial year because of the integration and one-off costs that he showed you in the slides he took you through. Banking and Financial Services, we see ongoing momentum in the loan and the deposit and the platform volumes, but we continue to see competitive dynamics putting pressure on margins in that business. We're also continuing to invest on the cost side, as Alex mentioned, in both technology and regulatory compliance costs. Now, we'll have to also continue to monitor provisionings in the COVID-19 environment in the BFS business. Turning to the market-facing businesses, Macquarie Capital. We're expecting transaction activity in the second half of this year to be up on the activity levels even on the second half of last year. In terms of the investment-related income, we're expecting that to be significantly up on the results of last financial year, with improved outlook for investment realizations to continue in the second half of this financial year, and also ongoing deployment of balance sheet. Commodities and Global Markets. In the asset finance portion of the business and in the financial markets part of the business, we expect ongoing contribution from the growth in those franchises. The portfolio growing in asset finance and also the market base and client activity across financial markets. In the commodities part of the business, we're expecting the income there to be in line with FY 2021, after taking into account the impacts of timing, of income recognition on storage contracts and transportation agreements in that business. Centrally, we expect both the compensation ratio and the effective tax rate to be broadly in line with historical levels. Now, as usual, this short-term outlook is subject to a number of factors, which include things like the duration and speed of global recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and the extent of government support for economies, market conditions, including significant volatility events and the impact of geopolitical events, potential tax or regulatory changes and tax uncertainties, completion of our period-end reviews, and the completion rate of transactions, and the geographic composition of our income and the impact of foreign exchange. Given all of this, we continue to maintain a cautious stance with a conservative approach to all of our capital funding and liquidity that should position us well to respond in this environment like all environments. Over the medium term, as we've often said, we think we're well positioned to deliver superior return for the risk based on the diversity of our franchise in terms of those four operating groups and the diversification by geography, by product, and by sectoral themes to which they're responding, coupled with our strong and conservative balance sheet and our proven risk management framework. As you've seen over the long term, this is delivered. Our annuity style activities for the average of the last 15 years delivered a return on equity of 22% and 24% in this last half, and the market-facing activities delivered 16% average return on ordinary equity over the last 15 years and 21% in this last half. At the group level, after taking into account the surplus capital we hold, we've delivered a 14% average return on equity over the last 15 years, and in this last half, 17.8%. With that, I'll hand back to Sam, and we'd be pleased to take any questions that you may have. Sam. Thanks, Shemara. Given we are doing this briefing virtually, Chorus Call will be handling the questions. I'll hand over to the operator. Thank you. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question is from Andrei Stadnik from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Pardon me, Andrei, your line is now live. Please go ahead. The next question is from Andrew Triggs from J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead. Thank you. Can you guys hear me? We can. Yeah, I can hear you, Andrew. Hello? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thanks very much. I had a question firstly on the Green Investment Group business. Obviously we know the capital that is invested within MacCap in the renewable energy space, but there's relatively little disclosure on earnings for that business. Just thinking, just after perhaps some assistance on how to think about the timing and quantum of project development profits in that business over the next few years, noting that there is ongoing capital deployment in the first half with relatively little in the way of realizations. Yeah. Alex, I might let you go through the detail of that, but basically that book will run off over the next few years. You've seen the size of it in terms of the slides that Alex shared and where that's grown to. Alex, did you wanna cover that in terms of- Yeah. Quantums and runoff profile? Yeah. Thanks, Andrew. You can see some of the earnings coming through in the half, and obviously as we've talked about before, we see some earnings coming through from share of joint venture gains and losses. Obviously that's bringing some income through in this half. You can also see in the other income line within Macquarie Capital. Obviously that's partly offset by things like platform costs and development costs. 'Cause as we've talked about before, a lot of those early stage developments we're actually expensing the early stage of development while we actually create the asset. You get a, I guess there's a few lines in which that income and that expense is coming through. Yeah, generally speaking, in terms of the platform, you can see, obviously, when we last spoke to you know, we're sitting on about 30 GW of pipeline that we're expecting to develop across the world. Typically, that's in the solar area, offshore wind, onshore wind, waste to energy. You know, we're continuing to invest in those assets. Over the course of the half, that 30 GW has grown to 40 GW. We're actually building a portfolio of assets on the balance sheet. Yeah, typically it takes. I guess it takes sort of somewhere between 18 months and three years before you start to see, you know, some of those investments actually create assets and turn into profit. What the team are doing is they continue to build out the solar platforms, the wind platforms, and over time, we're sometimes divesting those assets, and you saw some of that during this half. Other times, actually, we might look to divest the entire portfolio itself once it's been built to scale. You know, probably somewhere between 18 months and three years. Obviously, as we've talked about, Andrew, before, you actually see partial sell downs over time as we start to de-risk these assets. Thank you. Is that timeframe still true of the very large offshore wind developments that you've been engaged in, but more recently? It tends to be. I mean, obviously a lot of those. It depends, you know, what stage of investment we might have gone in on. If you look at, you know, an asset like, you know, East Anglia ONE, for the sake of example, where we've come in late stage construction, you might actually be able to buy that asset at one IRR, continue through the construction phase and actually sell down at a premium relatively shortly thereafter. Then we might hold that asset through to its operating stage, which might take several more years, and then sell down at that, sort of operating level IRR. Depends on when you come into that stage of construction. Some of the newer investments obviously are a little bit longer dated because you're actually going into a very early stage, you know, development of those assets, and it takes a while to actually, you know, go through the permitting process, go through the contracting process, and start to get some of that IRR compression. It depends a little bit about the stage of investment that the team's actually taking in the first place in terms of the overall timing for exit and profit. Great. Thank you. If I could just ask a follow-up, with the GIG going into the MAM division, do you envisage any changes to the cooperation agreement that's already there between those two businesses, including how sort of safe harbor rules will work and, you know, whether MIRA needs to take minority stakes in projects to ensure there's some market price mechanism on the transfer? Yeah, I might have a go at answering that, Alex, and please add if you have any further information. There's clearly a meaningful portfolio on the balance sheet, and this transition isn't taking effect till the first of April next year. The teams in Macquarie Asset Management and GIG will work through what of those assets and also the platforms. We have platforms, as Alex mentioned, Cero is a solar platform here in Europe. What of that will go into the asset management offering and what of it will be run off on the balance sheet? The point you make is a fair one in terms of transferring assets into the asset management business. We need transparency and validation of the valuation if we are to do that. You know, if we are, some of them may be attractive assets for the asset management business, but we may well have to run a transparent arm's length process and get validation of the price by selling down a portion of it to a third-party investor. That's something our teams will be working through in a lot of detail, taking into account the interests of the fund investors, as well as the balance sheet in terms of determining where those go. All of those assets are ones that we're happy to hold on the balance sheet if we had to. If there is scope to make them available to our fund investors earlier, that's something the team will work on. Anything, Alex, you'd like to add to that? No, I think that covers it, Shemara. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from Andrei Stadnik from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Good morning. Apologies, it was just a bit of a lag between the webcast, so I missed my cue. Could I ask two questions, please? Could I ask firstly around the carbon offset and emission certificate trading opportunities in CGM? Could you talk a little bit about how much that could be in terms of the revenues today and that market size, and how you see that evolving into the future? Yeah. Look, at the moment, Andrei, it's a small and growing market, and we are looking to position ourselves early in that market. CGM is starting to offer carbon offsets and tailored programs as well to some of the big energy companies. We expect that will grow in our usual patient organic adjacent growth approach. Nick O'Kane is actually on the line from Houston, I think, and I don't know, Nick, did you want to add anything to that, or at this stage, does that cover it? Yes. Good morning, Shemara. I think at this stage, you've covered it well. It's a nascent market for us. There's certainly opportunity. We think it's an adjacent space to our existing business, and our customers are certainly looking for activity and looking for help in this space, and we're preparing to respond to that. Thank you. The second question I wanted to ask around the traditional asset management division, and maybe it's two parts to this question, if I can. In the Waddell & Reed had about $184 million one-off costs. You know, do you expect a broadly similar amount over the remaining future periods? Then you're clearly going for operating scale in this MAM division. Where would you like that business to get to in terms of what would be a good level of operating scales? Any kind of AUM targets? Alex, I might let you cover the first part of the question. Sure. I'd say, Andrei, briefly that the one-off costs are one-off, that we shouldn't continue to have those integration costs. Once we've actually transitioned the business to the state we want, then we should just have the ongoing income contribution. I'll let Alex give more detail. In terms of what sort of AUM we target, we're already at scale. When we were able to make the Delaware Investments investment and get about, you know, at that stage, about $100 billion at least of assets under management, we had enough assets to cover all the costs involved in having an operating platform, a 120-person distribution team to service the U.S. market, legal compliance, etc. Now when we make further acquisitions like Waddell & Reed, we pretty much are able to take a lot of the costs out and keep the new portfolio management strategies, et cetera. They're very accretive to us now that we are funding all the base costs of the platform through the Delaware Investments we were able to make. Alex, did you wanna- Thanks. Elaborate on the one-off costs? Yeah, sure. Thanks, Shemara. Thanks, Andrei, for the question. Yeah, just in the first half, obviously, there were some redundancy costs come through there, but also we inherited as part of the transaction an asset with an onerous contract in it. We obviously anticipated it, and so we wrote that contract down to what we thought was the fair value. So that came through in the first half. Obviously the process of integration is still at a relatively early stage and we will, you know, we're going through that. It'll probably take another 18 months or something to two years to actually get through that complete integration. Obviously we're making quite quick progress in terms of, you know, getting down to the right size of organization and getting down to merging the underlying products and funds. I think maybe putting that together with what we've said for the full year outlook, you can see obviously we say Waddell & Reed, we went from a slightly negative contribution to a not meaningful contribution. I think implicit in that, you can probably think about what the second half of one-off type expenses might be to get down to that sort of result. There's a process that we're obviously going through to actually merge these businesses and obviously has to be handled carefully to make sure that the clients at Waddell & Reed are well looked after, that the portfolio managers, you know, performance can be maintained and that we properly integrate the business so that, you know, we achieve the success with the acquisition that we're hoping. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from Matt Ingram from Bloomberg. Please go ahead. Oh, hi there. Thanks very much and congrats on a very good result. I just wondered if you could please drill into the capital side of things a bit. You've obviously got a commitment to shareholders for a dividend payout, and you've paid out at the bottom of the range, but you are raising capital at a record high share price. I just wonder if you could please clarify for us what sort of surplus you wanna maintain above the APRA requirements. Because you are at AUD 8.4 billion now, and that seems like a substantial amount. So if you could, I guess, just clarify for us your thinking on that, please, in terms of the surplus and in terms of the payment of the dividend and the capital raise at the same time. Thank you. Look, in terms of the surplus capital, obviously the surplus we always express is over that regulatory minimum. Within that surplus, we're really trying to do three things. We're obviously holding buffers, so internal buffers over the regulatory minimum. They obviously scale with the size of the balance sheet. You know, as we've said for some time, there's a range of regulatory reform here in Australia. Most obviously, things like unquestionably strong, which will increase capital requirements for banks. We're holding capital back to support that. The other thing that comes out of the surplus, obviously, is supporting the growth initiatives of the group around the world. What we're doing today, obviously, is having looked at all that and looked at the investment capital over the last 12 months and what we see as the outlook for capital usage over the medium term, we feel like it's an appropriate time to go and raise capital to support the business going forward. Obviously, at the same time, make sure we meet those buffer requirements and the regulatory change that we're seeing here in Australia. In terms of the dividend point, you're right. At the AGM, the board made a decision to reduce the payout ratio down from 60%-80%, which it had been since 2013, down to 50%-70%. At the time, we made the point, obviously, that the outlook for capital usage was very strong. We thought it was appropriate to reduce that payout ratio to give a bit more flexibility to support the capital needs of the group. Just putting together the capital raise today with the lower dividend payout ratio, I think the board has in mind very much that obviously the underlying story of that 15% rally over a long period of time is a good story and something that's been hopefully attractive to investors in the company. There are a range of other stakeholders that would like to see the dividend as well. I think the board, in thinking about the overall capital strategy, is trying to balance the need to make sure that there's a nice dividend flow coming out to shareholders at the same time as supporting the capital needs of the group. Yeah. If I could just wrap up and say the way we've always run the business is that we sit with a good buffer over the regulatory minimums. Last time we raised, we had a buffer of a bit over AUD 5 billion. As Alex says, the business has grown materially since then, so a similar proportionate buffer now is a much bigger absolute number. We've always sat with those buffers and as you saw in the material we shared, being able to deliver mid-teens returns on equity, which we think are, when you blend our business lines, good returns even after holding the buffers. That's why we're maintaining the buffers while going out to raise capital for investment opportunities. Sure. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you. The next question comes from Brett Le Mesurier from Velocity Trade. Please go ahead. Thanks very much. You mentioned that you made AUD 450 million profit on sale of less than 5% of your U.K. meters. Does that mean that you're sitting on potential gains of close to AUD 10 billion in respect to the rest of the portfolio? Well, Brett, the reason we sold the industrial and commercial meters is there's strong appetite for industrial and commercial meters, and there were people who were prepared to invest in that portfolio at much lower required returns than we were looking for from the portfolio, so we exited that. The rest of it for us is good annuity strategic business that we want to keep. The income stream is valuable for us and we think the returns we're making on the residential meters are attractive. We sold several hundred thousand in the industrial. We don't see that similar sort of strong external appetite for the residential. We may be able to make some profit on selling it, but at this stage, the returns we're making are attractive and we're happy to stay in that business. Could you give me an indication as to the potential gain that you would get on selling those, should you decide to? It depends if we ran a process, what sort of required returns investors may have on that. The returns required on the industrial and commercial in our estimation were in the single digits at levels that we would not wanna continue to invest. We haven't seen people approaching us or transactions happen in the market on the residential meters at a comparable level. The gain really depends on whether there's a market there that's prepared to pay those sort of returns, and we've not seen it at this point, so we're comfortable holding onto the portfolio. Obviously, Brett, we're always balancing, you know, the return that we can get for our shareholders with that portfolio of assets on our own balance sheet versus the return you might be able to get by capitalizing that stream of income at somebody else's discount rate. You know, as Shemara said, you know, we've been building this portfolio for some period of time. We're obviously in the process of, you know, converting it from a, I guess, rolling out from a traditional meter business to a smart meter business. We think that's an attractive place to have capital and a good return on equity for our shareholders based on what we're seeing so far. in residential How much capital you have deployed in it, by the way? Relatively small amount of capital. Yeah. Obviously employed in the business. Okay, thank you. I was just gonna say we're at much bigger scale, obviously in residential, so our returns are stronger as well. Thank you. The next question comes from Matthew Wilson from E&P. Please go ahead. Yeah, good morning, team, and thanks for the opportunity. I wonder if you could talk to what's going on in the European and U.K. energy markets and how Macquarie fronts into that space. I would have thought that, you know, there's a bunch of opportunities and challenges there as well with suppliers under pressure, but your hedging book, your own cadence, but then there's a price cap. You know, there's a whole lot of complexity in that market, which I'm sure you're well abreast of. Can you sort of give us a feel for if this volatility persists, you know, how Macquarie fares in that environment? Yeah. Nick O'Kane's on the line, so I'll let him speak. We do see these levels of volatility from time to time in sectors in which we have a deep franchise in terms of servicing producers and consumers and having access to transportation and storage assets, et cetera, to respond in challenging periods like this. We saw it during the polar vortex, we saw it during the Permian issues, we saw it during the Texas storms last year. This year, I think, basically what we're seeing is a big surge in demand coming back out of the COVID pandemic, where goods demand is up higher than services demand because services are still harder to access and goods are more energy intensive. In that very heightened demand environment, if you have the slightest shocks to supply, the impacts on prices are exacerbated even more. I think Alex was talking about in European gas, Dutch gas price, was up at one stage about 7.5x, and it's now up about 4x. All of that plays into other markets because the markets are connected. It's had impacts on North American gas in terms of Henry Hub prices. It's flowed into oil and even thermal coal. What we're able to do in some of those markets is step up and service our investors more if we actually have a presence and a franchise in that market. Nick, do you want to elaborate a little bit on that? We're obviously helping in terms of risk management, transportation, storage, financing. Yes, thank you, Shemara. Look, that was a very comprehensive answer. I think primarily our role here is to assist in the risk management of the volatility that our customers are experiencing. Obviously with the amount of activity in the market, we are seeing some elevated customer activity, which you've seen in some of the numbers that have been presented and Alex has described earlier. Primarily across the European markets for us, it translates to opportunities for customer activity. We have a slightly smaller presence from a physical perspective than in some of the other markets like North America. However, the customer activity is quite robust given the challenges they're facing trying to navigate the uncertainty heading into the winter months. Just as a follow-up. Nick, if I could Is the market less freer than what you've experienced in Texas and New York when you've had extreme weather events? You know, there are price caps, et cetera, or, you know, you front into the same opportunity. Sorry, what was the first part of the question? Is the market- Yeah, well, just is the market in U.K. and Europe, you know, less free, i.e. there are price caps on, you know, retail gas, et cetera. Does that prevent you from enjoying the same opportunities that you did in Texas or New York, or should we think about it the same way? They are all different and separate markets, and the way the European markets operate is different to the way that the North American markets are operating. I'm not sure that the retail price caps impact the wholesale market, and we're primarily operating in the wholesale market, so that's less of a concern for us. The difference is just in the underlying business themselves. The size of the markets and the scale of our respective businesses is different, so we have a larger business in North America versus our European business. Okay. Is there credit risk then, given your wholesale selling to retail and some of those retailers have obviously struggled with, you know, their input costs? From a risk management perspective and a credit perspective, we approach each market in the same way. Given our proximity to the markets, we have a fairly good idea of what stresses to apply to our underlying credit exposures. We're very mindful of those, but nothing particularly of concern at the moment. Okay. Thanks, Kane. Thank you. The next question is from Brian Johnson, from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Congratulations team on a truly phenomenal result. A few questions if I may. Recently we've had the sale of One Rail Australia. We've got the sale of Axicom. Now, I'm guessing these were sitting in the Macquarie Australian Infrastructure Trust, which was set up in 2015. Should we be thinking that this is progressing towards generating performance fees FY 2024, FY 2025, FY 2026 or is it earlier? I had a few others as well. Yeah. The Macquarie Australian Infrastructure Trust, the MAIT trust as they call it, has only just started realizing assets, Brian. The One Rail sale to Aurizon, and I think that's the one that's progressed, but the Axicom Towers will take a while to progress. Usually what we do is go through a period where we're reaching catch up before the performance fees get higher. It's early in its exit of assets and will probably run over the next couple of financial years, probably the sort of timeframe we're talking about. Right. When is our high point of the tail of performance fees to come through, Shemara? Yes, that plan should definitely generate performance fees. I think at the moment, the sort of funds that are generating performance fees now are things like our third North American Fund, you know, some of the European funds, et cetera, in this financial year. Fantastic. Shemara, the next one is when we have a look. You know, in the near term. This year, next. Shemara, when we have a look at Green Investment Group sitting within MacCap, historically it's been kind of like the investor in the development side, and it hasn't basically sold the assets at the end of the development side into MIRA. I'm just wondering, philosophically, transferring Green Investment Group into MAM, is there an opportunity to even lower the capital intensity further by basically raising external funds to do that and Macquarie participates in managing them during the development stage as well? That's effectively what we're doing, Brian, is that we're seeing investor appetite now to be involved in the development and the construction phase. When we first started investing, we were investing in the operating phase, and there wasn't fiduciary investor interest in that. Gradually, as they got familiar with the asset class, their interest grew, and that's now done as a fiduciary offering. As time has gone on, we're seeing increasing investment from our fiduciary investors to be involved in the construction phase as it's become de-risked and more familiar to them, and then even in the development phase. I think we're seeing other industry funds invest throughout the spectrum with fiduciary capital, and that's what we're moving to do with the Green Investment Group now operating as part of Macquarie Asset Management. I think maybe, Brian, just to add. Just to clarify. Just to add something from me maybe for a second. I think the other thing that's happening, though, is as Shemara talked about when she was talking about that slide, is just the scale of the opportunity is changing, Brian, as well. I mean, obviously, you know, 10 years ago it was one scale of opportunity. Today, you've got a lot of institutional capital looking for opportunities to invest in renewable. But the opportunity to actually go through solar, offshore wind, hydrogen's obviously coming, hydro, you know, battery. You know, the scale of the investment opportunity is increasing sort of daily or monthly or quarterly or whatever you like to describe it as. I think, you know, what we are seeing is as that scale expands, the opportunity to combine the expertise that's resident in the GIG group with the expertise on managing and developing assets within MAM, and actually taking that whole sort of life cycle to the fiduciary investor universe is something that we think is really compelling. That's why the timing now from our viewpoint makes sense. You know, the underlying story I think is that, you know, there's a decent runway in terms of actually, you know, participating in and facilitating, if you like, that green energy transition. Alex, this not only does it accelerate the growth in like the traditional MIRA funds, but this also Well, I think, I mean, I think that's yet to be seen. Obviously, as Shemara talked about, there's a process that the team's going through in terms of actually how you integrate the two businesses. And then we've obviously got a bunch of portfolios, Brian, sitting on the balance sheet today, you know, in solar, in wind, and in offshore wind, that we're in the process of actually, you know, developing assets. And maybe some of those assets end up in the renewable funds or the fiduciary business, maybe some are sold to third parties, maybe there's a combination of both. I think it's a bit early to tell exactly what you know might happen with the assets we've got sitting on our balance sheet today. More generally, I think what we are seeing is you know more regions and greater scale in developing and participating in this sort of you know energy transformation. We think what we're able to do is obviously we've got balance sheet appetite for doing that, and we've also got investors that are seeking to get exposed at the earliest stage of that investment. Combining our own balance sheet to get, you know, perhaps through funds with fiduciary investors and then really bringing that expertise, that human capital that we've talked about before, together in terms of both the development piece that's sat in GIG together with the asset management expertise that sits in MAM, we think is a pretty interesting combination obviously for all of us, you know, within the group and for all of you as shareholders, but also obviously for our fiduciary clients within MAM. Alex, just a final one, if I may. At the moment, we've got the construct of a lower target payout ratio, which makes a lot of sense. Mm-hmm. We've got 40% dividend franking kind of running back in recent years. Can we just get a feeling, what is the outlook for basically the franking capacity? Is it gonna stay at 40%? How do you think of the interest rates? You broke up a bit, Brian. I think your question is: what's the sort of medium-term outlook for franking? Was that the question? Yes, that is correct. Yeah. Yeah, I think so. Look, I think in the medium term, we feel reasonably good about the, you know, our capacity to frank sort of at that 40% rate, at least into the sort of medium term. I mean, obviously the, you know, if you look longer term, the underlying driver is just the composition of international income versus domestic income. So, you know, for instance, in this half, the international income was 72%, domestic income was 28%. So you know, as that mix shifts and you start to see more income coming from offshore, that'll obviously flow its way through into the franking capacity. But certainly for the medium term, it feels like for the medium term, we should be able to frank at that 40% rate. Thank you very much, and congratulations. Thank you. The next question comes from Brendan Sproules from Citi. Please go ahead. Good morning. I just have a couple of questions on your CGM division. Just in terms of the unfavorable impact timing of income recognition in the inventory management, are you able to give us some guidance of what that would look like in the second half? Then my sort of next part of that question is that income that you've already recognized, or is that the timing means that you'll be recognizing that either this next coming half or even next year? The second question I have is just on the amount of capital that you've deployed into this division. I think it's up almost 50% in 12 months to almost AUD 7 billion. Are we expected to see, from a revenue perspective, the impact of that capital coming through, you know, greater revenue in lending and finance and asset finance, or will we see it come through, you know, the bigger revenue lines like, risk management products? Yeah. Alex, why don't you answer the question on the accounting? Yeah. It's a difficult one in terms of when that timing will reverse. Yeah. No problem. Why don't I do that first? Thanks, Brendan. Yeah, this accounting versus economic P&L. The first part of the question is, if you think about it really relates to the infrastructure assets that support the physical movement of, or storage of commodities around the world. You know, oil storage assets or pipelines or power transmission lines. The way the accounting requires, we obviously from a management P&L viewpoint mark to market the value of those assets. If, for instance, spreads change at, you know, one end to another of a pipeline, obviously the pipeline itself, you know, goes up or down in value. We actually mark these assets to market, if you like, from an economic P&L. From an accounting viewpoint, if the gain or loss is coming through because of the change in value of the underlying infrastructure, you've got to unwind that gain or loss through the P&L over the period of the contract. That's the way that the accounting actually requires you to do it. In terms of you know the setup, there's probably you know Nick could probably talk about this in more detail if need be, but there's probably you know 18-20 contracts on a range of different assets and around the world. They have various duration, but let's call it an average duration of about 18 months or something like that. That income that, or the deduction from the economic P&L this year will unwind into the P&L over the future periods. And just, but obviously the amount of that clearly obviously changes based on, you know, spread movements for the sake of the example or new contracts that we might enter into. It's obviously not a static calculation. If everything stayed, you know, as it is, that AUD 380 million of income that we held back this year would unwind over, say, the next two or three years, on, say, an average basis of, say, 15-18 months. Does that help? Yeah, no. Just to follow up on that. In terms of the economic side of this- Mm-hmm. Has the value of these assets gone up because, you know, the value of storage has effectively just gone up in price and you've marked to market and that's really what's the economics of driving this particular part of the business? I might have a go and then Nick, you might wanna come in. I mean, obviously, you know, as we've talked about in previous result periods, the infrastructure to move product, you know, from where it's being produced to where it's being consumed hasn't really kept up with the demand and supply. What the value of that particular piece of infrastructure means from one period to the next obviously varies 'cause it depends on price between, you know, those two periods. Generally speaking, there's been a relative underinvestment in the physical infrastructure that supports the movement or storage of commodities around the place, you know, versus the demand and supply of commodities that's actually come on stream. You know, that creates potential value in those assets. As I say, whether it's a positive or a negative, you know, one period to the next depends on how prices have moved, depends on how demand and supply have moved. Generally speaking, there's been a relative underinvestment in physical infrastructure. Now, that obviously catches up, Brendan, over time. I mean, obviously takes it, you know, there's a timeframe over which you can actually develop this sort of infrastructure. Over time that dynamic changes. Generally speaking, there's been a big pickup in demand and supply for the energy and less investment in the infrastructure piece. Nick, is there anything you want to add to that? I think that was a very comprehensive answer as well, Alex. I would just make note that the value or perceived value changes, you know, very quickly given the short-term nature of changing supply and demand for commodities based on things like weather. It does move around on those types of factors as well. The underlying amount of production that's impacting the value of these things, along with the amount of demand that's driven by, as Shemara mentioned earlier, things like, you know, demand for goods, which is increasing demand for energy to produce those goods. Things like from a consumer perspective, weather, to heat people's homes and things of that nature. Brendan, I think your other question might have been on the capital footprint. If you have that question as well or have we covered that? I was just interested in when, which revenue lines is this capital that you've deployed. I can see you've got some obviously in credit, but obviously you've got some in markets, and I was just seeing what sort of revenue lines will be impacted by this deployment of the capital. Yeah. Maybe just generalizing for a second. I mean, obviously if you look at the. We've again talked about this a few times at our results and so on. I mean, the franchise or the footprint of the CGM business is obviously expanding in terms of its capabilities, its geographic reach, the clients it's dealing with. You've seen that over the last couple of halves as we've put up that slide talking about the customer franchise. The other thing that we're seeing on the customer franchise, Brendan, is that flowing into operating income from customer business. You know, for the sake of going to the slide in this pack, you saw the customer numbers up by 5% compound annual growth rate over the last five halves. You saw the operating income up 3%. There's a correlation obviously between, you know, customers and what we're seeing for operating income. In terms of that customer business, some of it's providing risk management solutions to help them manage, you know, volatility or price risk. You know, some is the extension of funding to support, you know, the acquisition of a ship within the asset finance business. You know, what we are seeing over time is that there's an increase in capital to support the growth of the franchise within CGM. Obviously, there's a bit of variability there. We saw, you know, lots of volatility across a number of the segments in CGM in the first half. You can see a big pickup in credit risk capital, and you can see a big pickup in market risk. That varies from period to period. The real underlying story here is that the franchise itself is actually growing. Obviously, if you then, you know, one area where, you know, it's very much, I guess, in focus is really in the energy mix. At the moment, obviously, CGM, you know, is well positioned, I think, to play a role to help clients manage that energy transition. You know, that from time to time generates a, you know, capital need as well. Obviously, some of it is quite, you know, immediately responsive in terms of return you get from deployment of that capital 'cause it's all a mark-to-market book and others obviously, you know, come over time in terms of the return you get from extending a loan, for instance, to support the acquisition of a ship. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from Ed Henning from CLSA. Please go ahead. Hi. Thanks for taking my questions. I've just got two quick clarifications just on the GIG transaction or the transition. Firstly, you talked about being completed by April. How should we think about the other transitions of the assets, the funds all being sold? Will that be done by April or is that gonna be drip-fed over the next couple of years as we think about potential realization gains there? And then just secondly, on GIG, obviously moving it to MAM and we understand why. But in MacCap, are you still gonna be doing some green energy investment there, or is that all gonna be captured now in MAM? Thank you. Yeah, Ed, in relation to your first question, that one April date is just for internal moving of assets. Will we leave them with Macquarie Capital or put them in the asset manager? If they're in the asset manager, will they stay on the balance sheet or be transferred into funds? That's an internal discussion. But the assets that are on the balance sheet and as we discussed earlier, if we're gonna transfer them into the funds, we need some price validation and transparency so the fund investors see it's an arm's length price. Probably there won't be too many transferred into funds. We will run them off in the same time profile that we would ordinarily run them off on the balance sheet, the existing portfolio. Alex talked about that earlier in response to a previous question, where it's 18 months to a couple of years that we'd run those assets off. Basically what we're finding is for the new assets, we're likely to deploy capital on behalf of investors into that area now that the investors are comfortable with it and happy to put their capital there. Macquarie Capital will probably invest in the sort of areas where investors are not comfortable to invest, where they're too early, the risks are too complex, and so we need the balance sheet to be taking on those investments. Typically higher risk, but hopefully higher return as well if we do them well. In that specific green investment area, what we will do is not compete with the fund mandate. Macquarie Capital will be supporting its clients still in terms of investments they want to make. In terms of principal investing, if there are areas where we don't see that the fund investors will have interest in investing, then Macquarie Capital can continue to pursue those. Okay. That's very helpful. Thank you. Good. Thank you. The next question is from Brian Johnson from Jefferies. Please go ahead. You just answered the question, Shemara. Thank you. Right. Thanks, Ed, for asking. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Dobson for closing remarks. Great. Well, thank you all for your interest. We look forward to catching up with you over the course of today and the next couple of weeks. Thank you very much.