Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us for an update on New South Wales toll reform and June traffic. We appreciate we're at the start of reporting season, and we have given you a lot of information at short notice. We're joined today by our CEO, Michelle Jablko, and our CFO, Henry Byrne, who will take you through the presentation that we lodged with the ASX this morning. Today's presentation should take around 15 minutes, and then we'll have plenty of time for questions. I'll now hand you over to Michelle to get us started. Thank you, Craig, and good morning to everyone. I'm very pleased to be speaking with you about New South Wales toll reform. From the outset of this process, the New South Wales Government was clear about its objectives, and we've listened. We approached this as a long-term investor in Sydney. We've worked constructively from day one to deliver cost- of- living relief and system reform for Sydney motorists. We know that agreements that only work for one side simply don't hold, and this one had to work for motorists, the state, and the people whose investment built the roads. That's why it took time. The result is a pragmatic solution that delivers meaningful changes and improves the customer experience. The proposed M2 and M7 upgrade means we can ease traffic pressure in one of Sydney's most important growth corridors. Importantly for you, our security holders, the outcome is value- neutral and does not negatively impact near-term distributions. In essence, there are different equalisation payments happening between concessions, but they net out to zero, with the government funding the proposed M2/M7 widenings. The next steps are for final documentation and a range of approvals to be completed. Today's milestone is the culmination of a huge amount of work from many people across numerous parties, and I want to thank each of them for their incredible efforts throughout this process. Before we go through the detail, I want to take a step back and remind you of what was involved. This was a highly complex process requiring a careful balance of 10 concessions, 11 assets, and eight distinct investors. Our job was to help find solutions that work for customers without breaking down the system that helped build these roads, and to protect the AUD 36 billion that Transurban and our partners have invested into Sydney over more than two decades. We also have different levels of congestion in different parts of the city, and motorists had to come first. Price is one thing, but the ability to move around Sydney efficiently is equally important. The solution needed to take all of this into account, and the outcome is a tailored approach. The reforms recognize the unique characteristics of each road rather than applying a one-size-fits-all model. We appreciate it took some time, but it was an iterative process, and it led to better outcomes for all parties. Let me now step through the key components, starting with the price changes for motorists. Tolls are coming down on four roads: the M7, the M2, the Lane Cove Tunnel, and the Cross City Tunnel. The package proposes two-way tolling on the Eastern Distributor, with each direction charged at 53% of the current one-way toll. The M7 toll cap will kick in at 18 km instead of 20 km. There will be a new motorcycle class at half the standard car toll and a modest increase in truck tolls. Motorists will benefit from price changes on key routes as well as the toll cap. The reason we could make these changes is that the value of our investment was protected. One made the other possible. These reforms translate into real savings, especially for drivers in Western Sydney. We know the average Sydney customer spends around AUD 12.45 per week on tolls, and the government's AUD 50 weekly toll cap is in place for more frequent drivers. These pricing changes are targeted at delivering meaningful savings where they matter most. Take a customer traveling from Kellyville to North Sydney. By 2029, they're expected to save around 9% a trip. While trips across the city will also come down, thanks to the reduction in Cross City Tunnel tolls. These aren't theoretical savings. It's money back in the hip pocket for many households. When we talk about reform, we also have to think about Sydney's growth. That's why we're focusing on unlocking more capacity in the city's northwest. The M7 and M2 are the lifeblood of this region, connecting some of the city's fastest-growing communities. I'm particularly excited about this proposed project that will enhance two of Sydney's busiest motorways. Once the final agreements are completed and the necessary approvals are in place, we'll be working alongside the New South Wales Government to widen 17 km of this corridor to improve traffic flow and provide more value for our customers. Importantly, motorists will receive the benefits of these upgrades without additional toll increases linked to the widening project. During this process, we heard loud and clear from Sydneysiders about what frustrates them most. Things like fees and the confusion that comes from receiving multiple paper toll notices very late after the trip was taken. That's what got fixed first. We've moved away from paper notices to digital notifications and switched off late fees. I'm pleased to say this all went live in July. This will make the system fairer and easier to navigate. I'm going to pass to Henry to take you through some of the detail around the various concession adjustments. We'll make some brief comments on June traffic and have plenty of time for questions. Thanks, Michelle, and good morning, everyone. I'm going to talk to some of the specific concession adjustments that underpin the announcement today, then after Michelle's wrap-up, as Michelle just said, I'll come back and speak briefly to the traffic data we've also put out with this announcement. Firstly, on the New South Wales toll reforms, Michelle's noted we've engaged constructively with the New South Wales Government to achieve a broadly neutral outcome on both cash flow and a net present value basis with an appropriate adjustment for risk. This outcome is designed to maintain the integrity and value of our existing contractual agreements and provide investors confidence on a go-forward basis. Value and cash flow neutrality is achieved through three core elements. The first are price adjustments and associated traffic impacts. The second relates to equalization payments and associated funding. The third stems from a proposed new enhancement project of the M7 and M2 that Michelle just referenced. Let me step through these elements one by one in a little more detail. We're implementing pricing adjustments across five of our assets in the New South Wales portfolio, and these changes are expected to take effect at different times. The first changes are expected to come through in July 2027 for the M2 and Lane Cove Tunnel. The next changes on the Eastern Distributor and Cross City Tunnel will align with the Western Harbour Tunnel opening around 2028. The final toll price changes on the M7 will be aligned with the M7/M2, and the timing of this will be dependent on the government approvals of the widening project, as previously mentioned. In terms of what changes will occur, the Eastern Distributor will introduce two-way tolling at 53% of the status quo price, leading to an expected increase in aggregate average daily traffic in both directions and making it value positive. Hills M2 will see a 10% price decrease at the main toll plaza and NorthConnex ramp, and these changes, alongside the widening project, are anticipated to improve traffic volumes. Upon the proposed widening of the M7/M2, Westl ink M7 will reduce the toll cap by 10%. This change, alongside the benefit from the proposed widening project, will improve traffic volumes as well. Lane Cove Tunnel and Cross City Tunnel will have 10% and 20% price reductions respectively, that are expected to improve volumes as well. We've estimated the traffic impacts from the price changes on a risk-adjusted basis. As a broad rule of thumb, we've observed historically that a 10% change in price should have around a 2% change in traffic. Finally, while they only represent a very small percentage of our customers, you'll see on toll price multipliers, a new motorcycle category has been introduced at half the cost of a car. The heavy vehicle multiplier is also being standardized at 3.15 times across the majority of the portfolio. These price adjustments and expected changes to our traffic flow on a given asset create a delta to our status quo modeling. That delta is bridged through the asset equalization payments between the government and the relevant concessionaires, which will be paid over a five-year period. These payments offset the net financial impacts of the price changes, traffic adjustments, and enhanced traffic flow from projects like the proposed M7/M2 widening. We will assist the government in funding these equalisation payments through the early payment of the M2 Promissory Notes and the Eastern Distributor Concession Notes by settling them early. By settling them early, the government will gain immediate funds, allowing it to make the equalization payments without using its own balance sheet. Finally, as Michelle mentioned, a proposed widening of the M7/M2, if approved, will be government-funded. The project is expected to widen approximately 17 km between Richmond Road and the Windsor Road Bridge, enhancing traffic flow through a heavily congested northern corridor that is expected to experience high population growth over the next couple of decades. Importantly, these arrangements in aggregate do not negatively impact near-term distributions. From a financial reporting perspective and to assist with the modeling, we intend for these equalization payments to form part of our Free Cash Flow. We've received positive initial engagement from credit ratings agencies and expect to finalize any required financier consents in the coming months. Operationally, the reform process also delivers tangible benefits. We anticipate savings from enforcement reforms, which offsets the toll notice administration fees that customers will no longer pay. Crucially, the net equalization payments for all assets effectively offset the value forgone from toll price and traffic changes, with the proposed early repayment of Promissory Notes and Concession Notes assisting the government from a funding perspective. This value source helps protect taxpayers from funding the equalization payments while reaffirming a value-neutral outcome for concessionaires on a risk-adjusted basis. Included in the equalization payments we're making is an AUD 75 million contribution to support the monthly toll cap the government has announced, and that's factored into our calculations to ensure value neutrality. I'll now hand back to Michelle for some final comments on the toll reform announcement. Thanks, Henry. I just want to pause for a moment to reflect on the importance of today's milestone. We're really pleased to reach a solution that works for motorists, the government, and for our security holders. We've also taken an opportunity today to provide you with a traffic update. As we've been in a period of macroeconomic and geopolitical uncertainty, we've been giving you more regular updates. What I'm going to do is get Henry just to step through the details there, then we'll go straight to questions. We just wanted to call out a couple of things on the traffic data we put out with this release before we go to questions. As outlined in our monthly traffic updates, uncertainty in the macroeconomic and geopolitical environment remains a feature of the operating landscape. June was a better month for traffic, that trend has continued in July, we're not reading too much into that yet. We saw in March and April what can happen when people get nervous about fuel, particularly around its availability. With that in mind, we continue to monitor the macroeconomic environment, noting that there are renewed hostilities in the Middle East. The end of the fuel excise subsidy is also a factor we're watching closely. Positively, commercial vehicle traffic has remained resilient across our Australian markets, providing a degree of stability despite softer conditions in parts of the passenger vehicle segment. In North America, our assets continue to perform strongly. Traffic on the I-95 and the I-495 corridors increased by 2.6% and 10% respectively for FY 2026, which reflects the ongoing strength of these markets and the value of our diversified portfolio. Obviously, the strong value proposition continues to support the pricing outcomes we've achieved in that market. We've also highlighted the West Gate Tunnel weekly traffic data in the material today and the trends observed on that asset. You can see average daily traffic on that asset since opening to June 30 was approximately 37,000 vehicles per day, you can see on the chart here that that's remained broadly flat for a number of months now. The M7 is a different story. Since the completion of the M7/M12 Widening Project, the June data shows an 8.3% growth year-on-year, which is broadly consistent with our expectations of the uplift from that project. They're some brief comments, I'll hand back to the operator to moderate our Q&A section of the webcast. 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're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. The first question comes from Rob Koh from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Good morning. Yeah, congratulations on what I can only imagine is a really long deal for you all. I hope you're pleased. I guess my first question is around risk allocation on the M2 and M7 widening. Say if it's delayed or there's cost overruns, is that all, I guess for the state? Hey, Rob. Thank you. I would think of it in a very similar way to the M7/ M12 widening that we just completed and opened. We've got a pretty good template there, and we'll just work through it in a similar way. Okay. I guess my next question, I guess looking at just completing the deal is financier consents, and I guess you've had a positive sounding with the rating agencies. I think the biggest change in revenue mixes at the M1, where you'll be tolling both ways. Can you give us a sense of are you changing the debt amortization profile there? Maybe you could give us a steer on what kind of traffic elasticities you'd be thinking about there? Yeah, sure. I'll take that, Rob. Maybe if I start with the traffic elasticities. We've deliberately, again, guided everyone to a rule of thumb that we've used historically around the elasticity of demand that we see around price changes, and that's effectively to say for every 10% movement in price, you should see around a 2% movement in volume either way. If you think about the Eastern Distributor here, we're talking about effectively a halving of the price. It's a little bit over, we said 53% of status quo. If you think about in broad terms, a halving of price, you start to get the dimensions of the traffic volume increase that we would expect as a result of that. Indeed, that principle sort of broadly holds when you look across all the other price increases or adjustments that we've announced on the other concessions. In terms of the Eastern Distributor specifically, well, we've got Concession Notes buybacks on the Eastern Distributor and Promissory Notes buybacks on the M2. The ED, we'd expect to fund those with project-level debt. That will then be factored in. All adjustments to debt amortization on the Eastern Distributor need to be agreed with the state. There's an agreed amortization profile, that's a process that we'll go through. Then the Hills M2, the buyback there, we would expect to fund that, given it's 100% owned asset, with corporate-level debt. That sort of gives you a sense of how we're thinking about the funding. Okay. Thank you. Just so that I understand. For the M1, where you're dropping, what is it, northbound tolls, then we should just multiply that out by that 20% kind of elasticity, I guess. The other way, where you're introducing a toll, is it the same kind of thinking? Yeah. Rob. You can see that's why with the equalization payments on the Eastern Distributor, there's essentially a net payment to the state, which reflects the increase in volume, and the change in price. Yeah. Okay. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Your next question comes from Justin Barratt from CLSA. Please go ahead. Hi. Thanks very much for the opportunity. Just wanted to ask, I heard a couple of the arrangements rely on the opening of the Western Harbour Tunnel, which is currently scheduled for 2028. I just wanted to understand a little bit like Rob's question on the M7, where does the risks lie in the event that for any unforeseen circumstances, the Western Harbour Tunnel opening is delayed? If I sort of step back, it made sense for a number of the changes to happen around the same time as the Western Harbour Tunnel opening, because it helps manage the traffic flow across the network. We've given you the dates for the price changes. I don't think it materially changes if the Western Harbour Tunnel is a bit earlier or a bit later. Okay, great. In relation to the widening of the M7/ M2, appreciate some of the timings that you've given us, how do you think about the traffic impact? Whether that be during the construction phase and then thereafter, how much do you think that the things sort of step up on a normalized basis once it's completed? Yeah. Let me take that. There's two dimensions around the traffic impacts that we're going to see on both the M2 and the M7. The first is the reaction to the pricing adjustments, and as I was just saying a moment ago, use the broad rule of thumb around demand elasticity is there to gauge those, and then over and above that, there will be an incremental benefit from the widening. What we would counsel you to look at is the previous examples of widenings where you've typically seen mid-single-digit declines during construction period, and then, as we're observing currently on the M7 from the M7/M12 widening, you see that bounce back into a ramp-up period where you get the recovery against the depressed base, which can take you into the high- single- digit, low- double- digit for a brief period of time in ramp-up, and then dropping down into mid-single- digit profile as a sort of an actual increase to volume. That's a long way of saying use the existing widenings that we have done on the corridors, including the most recent one, as a rule of thumb for this one. Great. Thanks a lot, Henry. Thank you. Your next question comes from Matt Ryan from Barrenjoey. Please go ahead. Oh, thank you. I am interested in the way that you layered on the pricing adjustments for the five assets, and I guess just any metrics that you were looking at when deciding what adjustments needed to be made. Thanks, Matt. It was a very iterative process. It started with the independent review that was done, then we built on it and iterated. What we worked through was we looked at various price adjustments across the network. We looked at the traffic implications of that, including some of them could cause congestion on the network, which would not have been a good outcome. The government had to weigh up the cost to taxpayers of those. The government also put in place a permanent weekly cap. That had to be taken into account, then we just worked through an iterative process to sort of get the balance right between motorists and taxpayers against the backdrop of protecting the value of the assets. It very much was an iterative process, looking at both traffic implications for motorists and price benefits for motorists. Getting to value- neutral, are there any sort of mechanisms in place to protect you if that does not end up being the case? Can you talk about the equalization payments and whether there is any adjustment in those as time goes on and, I guess, you realize whether that price elasticity assumption is correct or not? What we worked through, I think Henry mentioned that the equalization payments were determined on a risk-adjusted basis because we were conscious that we were changing price for traffic in a number of instances, so we took that into account, not dissimilar to the way we would on a road widening, is the way I would think about it. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Matt. Thank you. Your next question comes from Anthony Moulder from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Good morning, all. If I can go back to the M2/ M7, is this a new way that the government will progress lane widenings within your network? Is it something that you think will continue as far as them funding it? There being no price increase and no concession extension? It's a bit hard to comment on hypotheticals into the future, Anthony. What I can say here is it worked in the context of the toll reform broader transaction. It made sense because by reducing pricing, whether that's on the M2 or the change in the M7 cap, we were changing congestion in that part of the network. That essentially brought forward the need for the widening, it made sense in the broader toll reform negotiation that that would get funded in that way. I think future widenings will always be a question for government. I think what it does show is we're able to work together with government to find something that, as I said, works for motorists, works for taxpayers, and is good for the investment as well. Wouldn't you have preferred to have done that lane widening yourselves? I think it all gets taken into account in the overall deal economics, I don't think it ultimately makes a difference. Yeah. We took into account not dissimilar things than we took into account on the M7/ M12 widening. I don't think it makes a difference, Anthony. Okay. Just coming back to that question on, I thought the reform wanted standardization, it wanted simplicity as far as the pricing of the toll network. Obviously, that hasn't occurred, and it was difficult, I get, from the outset to achieve that. How did you land on these five roads that should get the discounts, whereas others don't? Yeah. Look, we worked through that, and I think as I mentioned, it was quite an iterative process that had to take into account the cost to taxpayers and the benefit to motorists. That all had to be worked through. Different parts of the city are quite different in terms of congestion and maturity of assets, to try and come up with a standardized price across the whole network would've had negative consequences either for motorists or taxpayers. We essentially looked at it in terms of what I'd say as corridors and then individual assets. I do think quite a lot of things are simplified and standardized, whether that's the multipliers, whether that's the way where payments work, and certainly the two-way tolling of the EDs matching what's happening on the government roads as well. Yeah. No, that's fair. Quick question for Henry. Just how should we think about the timings for these cash flow payments? Is this more FY 2027 that you'll have most of them? How much of this leaks into 2028, please? No, you should think about the concession note, promissory note buyback in 2028. Our equalization payment then as well on the Eastern Distributor, the government's equalization payments to us, which follow happening over a five-year period from 2028 to 2032. Right. More uniform over that period. They're spread evenly over that. Sorry. We show you by concession on slide 10 of the deck, you can see the quantity for each concession, and then it's spread evenly over that period. Got it. All right. Perfect. Thank you very much. Thank you. Your next question comes from Owen Birrell from RBC. Please go ahead. Yeah, thank you. Look, I guess my two questions firstly are just on this is a restructure of those five concession agreements. Is that correct? As opposed to some synthetic overlay. Correct. Yes. The concession agreements essentially are being amended. Yep. Okay. In terms of the amendments to those concession agreements, it's fair to say that the toll structure is going to be reduced, but there's an equalization payment that's going to be included within that agreement? Yes. Exactly. Finally, in terms of does that need any sort of parliamentary adjustment or something that has to go through parliament, or is it literally just a commercial agreement between the current government and the concession holders? It's a commercial agreement with a couple of caveats. There's still some process to go, and there are a few approvals that need to be put in place. Henry spoke about financier approvals. There are planning approvals that will be needed for the widening and the two-way tolling on the ED. There are still some approvals to come, but it doesn't require parliamentary approval. Okay. Just I guess a final one from me. Just on the Sydney Harbour Bridge and the tunnels, those toll regimes are excluded from all of this restructuring. Is that correct? They're a matter for government. That's a separate matter. They're not part of our negotiation. Okay. Just one final one from me. The repayment of the Promissory Notes, are you going to, I guess, raise some debt funding at the group level, or elsewhere to fund those repayments? Yeah. As I was saying a moment ago, Owen, we anticipate funding the Eastern Distributor promissory notes at the asset level and also the equalization payment that we will make to the state for the value uplift there. Then for the Hills M2, which is obviously 100% owned, we will look to fund that at corporate level. Okay. That's excellent. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Cameron McDonald from E&P. Please go ahead. Good morning. Just a couple of questions from me, if I can. Are there any tax implications around the early repayment of the concession notes? Secondly, how are the equalization payments actually treated? Are they treated as income, or are they going to be treated as a capital payment? Maybe I'll start and then Henry can jump in. To the extent there are any tax payments, they're taken into account in the value neutrality. In terms of the equalization payments, I think Henry mentioned that the payments from us to the government or from concessionaires to the government are essentially funded with debt at the start of 2028. The equalization payments coming from the state to concessionaires will happen progressively over five years, and because they're compensating for price changes, they'll be taken as income. Maybe the only thing I'd add is, we would expect to treat the payments to us, Cam, as free cash, but it will still be a discussion with our board around how we then formulate the distribution. That's a discussion that we're yet to sort of have, and that will obviously be from 2028 onwards when we're looking at that incoming equalization payments to us. Yeah. They're adjusting for the price changes down. It's sort of net from a distribution perspective, we don't expect any negative impact. No. Yeah. Yeah. Just on the M2, sorry, why pay the earlier? I understand the repayment of the Promissory Notes of AUD 600 million to help fund all of the other equalization payments, et cetera. On the M2, why pay AUD 500 million and then receive AUD 400 million over a couple of years? I think there's a. Why not just made it a AUD 100 million payment up front and then be done with it? They're quite separate in terms of how the mechanics worked around them, it was just the way it all got put together, it was the most efficient way for the state and effective for us. Right. Okay. No problem. Just in terms of West Gate Tunnel, you've said that it's now flat for the last four months. Is there any other comments you can make about what's impacting that and what you think is actually stopping people from using it? Maybe I'll add a couple. I'll start with a couple of comments, Cam, Henry might add. As we've been saying probably since February, the truck usage has been really positive. Trucks are really seeing the value. Cars are taking a little longer. There's a little bit of a macro sitting over that. Also I'd say travel patterns in Melbourne have changed over recent years, and certainly since the project was devised. It is taking longer for cars. Long term, we still see the growth in that part of Melbourne, and the population growth there will support the project over the longer term, but in the nearer term, it's taking a little bit of time. There is some work we're doing on things. We continue to work on education and signage and things like that. It's just taking a bit longer for cars. I don't know, Henry, if you want to add anything. The only thing I'd add is, probably emphasize that point on the background growth is a factor that really has played into the car volumes that we've seen there, which have obviously been behind expectations and driven that kind of flat period that we've seen. The commercial vehicle use has been a real positive though, at least that, which we all know has a very strong value proposition with the connection into the port, and that has played out. At the moment, it's sort of in part a, it's a background network story for us there in Victoria, which is then accentuated on this new asset. Okay. Final question, just in terms of the 3.15 toll multiplier for trucks in New South Wales, have you had any or engaged with the commercial transport players, et cetera, as part of this process? On average, that looks to be sort of a 5% toll uplift just straight off the bat on the multiplier, before you start putting through the escalations over time. Also do those price reductions that you've spoken about, I'm assuming they apply to the trucks as well. Yeah. Sort of getting the reduction, but the multiplier kicks in somewhat, not fully, but somewhat offset that. Correct, Cam. I think that's the way to think about it. The trucks will benefit from most of the savings. If you take the M7 as an example, you've got currently the number of trucks that benefit from the cap would be sort of just a bit over 20%, and that's going to more than double to over 40% that will benefit from the cap. That, as you know, is a very, very important freight route. All of that got taken into account. The other thing I'd add is the reason for the multiplier increase is the government is proposing to use it for some, to fund some benefits for the freight industry as well. Again, all of that got taken into account. Great. Thank you. Thanks, Cam. Thank you. Your next question comes from Andre Fromyhr from UBS. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good morning. Can I just confirm for the changes in the concession toll levels that are being made here, that's just a step change reset. You're not going back and changing the escalation drivers? Correct. That's correct, Andre. Yep. I guess somewhat related, but also relating to one of the questions earlier about the sort of approvals and finalization of this. Have you got any level of commitment from the government that we're done, that this is the last time that these contracts will be reopened, or is there a chance that in five, 10 years' time after some more escalation that affordability becomes a political topic again and you're back at the negotiating table? Flip the question a bit, Andre, to say that I think by working constructively with the government, we were able to deal into what was important to them today and protect the value of the contract. One made the other possible. The fact that contracts were binding enabled us to make changes that worked for the government. I think things like digitization is a real big plus for motorists. Turning off admin fees and as Henry said, we were very happy with that as well. I don't see it as a bad thing that we sit down and work with governments. We're long-term invested in Sydney. We approach this as a long-term investor, and you've seen what's come out of it. Contracts protected, benefits for motorists, a widening project. I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing, Andre. Just a follow-up on Henry's comment about the monthly traffic update. I understand something like the M7/ M12 completion is an unlock for traffic growth, but at least we're not used to seeing the month-to-month data. How much volatility is there normally in monthly traffic, and what would that have looked like a year ago that could explain some of the improvement into June? Yeah. Well, you can sense the caution in our comments. We have seen some improvement in volumes in recent months, that's unambiguously the case when we look at the June and July numbers. Aided in our largest network in Sydney, obviously, with the benefits that we expected to see from a major enhancement project delivering in line with expectations, which is a good thing. We remain, as I said in my comments earlier on the call, we remain cautious, and we're certainly monitoring the broader geopolitical and macroeconomic environment, noting that the conflict in the Gulf now sort of appears to be heading in the wrong direction. We have some other more kind of near-term factors around the fuel subsidy here in Australia, which we're just watching to see how that plays out in our numbers. Look, the direction of travel is positive, to be honest, in recent months, we just remain cautious is the reality, Andre. Maybe just to add to what Henry said is I think what the numbers show is some quite good resilience in the traffic when things normalize, particularly if you compare June, July to March, April. I would call out the commercial traffic, which was particularly soft in May then stronger in June. Sometimes you will get changes in timing of when commercial customers move things around the network. That's just one to take into account as well. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Andre. Thank you. Your next question comes from Ian Myles from Macquarie. Please go ahead. Good morning, guys. Congratulations. Firstly, WestConnex specifically, that was probably seen probably one of the more expensive roads going through more of the Labor electorates and didn't get any change. Kind of wondering the thought process why that may have been the case. Thanks, Ian. Maybe if I sort of step through WestConnex. We and our partners paid AUD 21 billion for WestConnex in recent years, and if you combine that with the fact that most people spend AUD 12.45 a week or less, even a small change in WestConnex could cost taxpayers quite a lot and not have that much impact on people's hip pockets. The cap, if you look at, I can't remember what slide it was in the presentation, the weekly cap is quite well used in those suburbs along WestConnex. For people doing the more regular trips. You've got the trip cap on WestConnex as well that already exists. Okay. Just for clarity, does the M5 South-West Cashback Scheme continue post- Yes the concession converting to WestConnex? It does, yeah. Yeah. Okay. I think that was confirmed today. Yeah. Okay. In terms of the M2 and ED, with the repurchase of the Concession Notes, I assume the IRR caps are removed on those two roads in terms of sharing with government? I may need to come back to you on that, Ian. Can we take that one on notice? Sure. The second question is, those two roads carry A credit ratings, whereas the rest of the group is BBB+. Have you got intentions to regear those roads to BBB+ credit ratings and release the capital to the broader group? Look, that's not been part of our current thinking. Not as we sit here today, but again, we still have a number of years to play out on those concessions. Whether our capital strategy around those assets evolves is something that I reserve judgment on. Okay. On the truck tolling, that sort of 5%, is it fair to say on trucks that a 5% toll increase will have two parts of bugger-all movement on traffic? That they're more pretty inelastic at that small level? I think that's fair assessment, yep. Okay. Look, that's great. Thank you very much. Thanks, Ian. Thank you. Your next question comes from Suraj Nebhani from Citi. Please go ahead. Thank you guys. Well done on finalizing this. I know this is something that's been going on for a while. A lot of the questions have been asked, but one from me for you, Henry. What is the expected traffic and volumes from M7 and to widening? Maybe more importantly, how sensitive is the package on the Transurban side to another value integrity test should there be two bad traffic accidents? Maybe I just couldn't quite hear, Suraj. I think your two questions were around the widening and traffic sensitivity and what we should assume. Secondly, the risk profile of that traffic. Were they your two questions? That's right. I guess briefly, I think it's frankly is the value and integrity principles, is there any risk around that with respect to traffic outcomes on the M7 and M2 and what those outcomes actually are, please? Yeah. Okay. Maybe let me break it apart. If I deal with the second part of the question first in terms of the kind of risk- adjustment that we've taken through this. As Michelle said earlier, our approach has been broadly consistent with how we would approach all our other widenings, and it's generally a consistent kind of discount rate we're applying there. It's entirely consistent with what we've done here in this negotiation, and that's how we're thinking about that widening going forward. In terms of then the traffic impacts that you should expect to see on the M2 and the M7, as I said earlier on the call, there's two components. There's a reaction to the price adjustments. There will be a positive reaction to the reduction in the prices on those assets, and that's broadly consistent with our rule of thumb of 2% movement in traffic volume for every 10% movement in price. There's a weighted dimension there. Secondly, in terms of how you think about the overlay over and above that movement from the widening project on those assets, I would guide you to the historical examples that we have, and there are a number of them, including the most recent one on the M7/ M12, which had a period of traffic decline during the build of disruption, and that's typically we observed mid-single- digit. You see a benefit flow through in a ramp-up period trending back into a mid-single- digit uplift, is what you typically expect from these projects. In broad terms, that's the best rule of thumb you have to guide your thinking on this uplift as well. Thank you. Just one more sort of question with respect to Transurban's position, obviously in this it's good for the motorists. Is there any sort of increased likelihood for Transurban to participate in the future of, in the build or funding like that if there was to happen in the future? I think what happens into the future will depend upon government priorities at that point in time. I think what we've demonstrated is that we've listened, we've shown up, and we've tried to find a solution with patience and with working sort of constructively through the complexity to find a solution that's good for motorists, works for taxpayers, and protects the investment. What government wants to do in the future is always going to be a question for them, but it was really important for us to show up in the right way. Thank you. Thanks, Suraj. Thank you. Your next question comes from Nathan Lead from Morgans. Please go ahead. Hi, Michelle and Henry. Congrats on getting what is a pretty complex negotiation tidied away. My question to you comes to the comment about the rule of thumb about a 10% change in price, 2% change in traffic. How do you get confidence in that estimate, given as far as I know, we've never really had a 10% change in price coming through? How do you unpick that? Because it's obviously a pretty important part of the value equation. That's my first question. How do you isolate that? We've got a wealth of data underpinning this going back decades, Nathan. There are examples where there have been more exaggerated price movements on the network historically going back in time when you had more lumpy movements in price. I can think of examples on Eastern Distributor back in the day where you would have quite significant price movements because they weren't necessarily happening on a quarterly basis the way they do today. There's a number of examples we can point to even in our current portfolio where you have more exaggerated movements. I think the broader point we go to is that this is a central facet to the traffic modeling that we do. We have, I would say, a reasonably high degree of confidence based on a very, very deep fact set that we're looking into here. Nathan, just to reiterate something Henry said earlier about the way the math worked through this was taking into account risk-adjusted outcomes. It was all part and parcel of the analysis that was done. Okay. Just second question is just through the approvals process, et cetera, is there anything out there that could derail a deal? I'm just assuming you've negotiated with pretty much everybody involved, is there anything out there that you're concerned about? Thanks, Nathan. There are some things that are already in place, like for example, the toll notice changes. They're done in place and happening. Some of these changes, we've still got some formal documents to sign. There's nothing I'm aware of, I think, that would stop those. We've got financier approvals. We're not expecting anything of note there. To Henry's point, we've been engaging with rating agencies, et cetera. The widening and the two-way tolling need planning approval, and there are mechanisms to adjust if they don't happen. Thank you. Thanks, Nathan. Thank you. The next question comes from Rob Koh from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Thank you for indulging me in some extra questions. I guess, if I'm looking at slide 10, you're roughly indicating value neutrality here with your cash flows. If I do that on a proportional basis, kind of looks like, I think, UniSuper and IFM have to pay a little net, and then QIC and CPP get a little bit of benefit. Is that the right way to think about it, or are all your partners being treated with economic neutrality? All is value- neutral. The payments get you to value neutrality, Rob. For example, with the Eastern Distributor, there would be value upside from the two-way tolling, and so that's why the Eastern Distributor is a net payer to the state. The opposite happens in Northwestern Roads Group, given the price changes net of the widening and traffic implications. All concessions we had to negotiate every concession on its own, and every concession had to be value- neutral. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Everybody, all the partners have agreed, I guess. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Just a little bit more on the M1. I guess I am asking because that is one of your roads that I use the most on my way in from the airport. Is there any CapEx involved in two-way tolling? Then with the expected bump up in traffic, does that bring capacity on the road, like getting to full capacity on the road, does that bring that earlier? Thanks, Rob. There is a little bit of CapEx, it is gantries, et cetera. It is pretty small in the whole scheme of everything. Sorry, I missed your second question. I guess you are expecting an uplift in traffic, then, I think the road expires, the current concession expires in like 2048. Does that reach capacity materially earlier with the traffic uplift? You've got to take into account that Western Harbour Tunnel's opening as well, which essentially takes traffic, is essentially another route for people to travel on. Without the Western Harbour Tunnel, I think your answer would've been yes. With Western Harbour Tunnel opening, that gets taken into account as well. Okay. Great. Thank you very much. Thanks, Rob. Thank you. Your next question comes from Owen Birrell from RBC. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thanks. Just for the follow-up question. I just wanted to confirm equalization payments all essentially end around 2032, 2033, and that's to line up with the timing of the widening project to bring additional traffic on. Correct. There's no other- Correct equalization payments into the tail of any of these concessions. That's correct. Yeah. Okay. Just as the other one is the AUD 75 million contribution to the toll cap that Transurban is essentially paying. I think you've mentioned that's on a 100% proportional basis. Are you able to give us a sense of what the contribution from Transurban's share of that will be? It's most of it, but not all of it. I can't remember the exact number, Owen, but it's probably roughly 2/3 of it. That's just a one-off payment, isn't it? There's not an ongoing one? It'll happen in increments. It's AUD 75 million increments over five years. That AUD 75 million is spread over five years. I guess the way I sort of come back to this and say the toll cap cost in aggregate should be around about AUD 675 million, is the way that you guys have kind of estimated that. Yeah. I mean, the cost is a matter for government in terms of. What we've done is, as part of the overall equalization payments, allocated part of that to the toll cap. Yeah. I wouldn't- The weekly cap add AUD 75 million onto the approximately AUD 600 million here. What we're saying is that the AUD 75 million is embedded within those payments, Owen. Okay. AUD 600 million is roughly the cost of the offset over the whole concession. Yes. Correct. You've got equalization payments and part of those is an allocation to the toll cap, the weekly cap. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Owen. Thank you. That does conclude our time for questions. I now hand back to Mr. Craig Stafford for any closing remarks. Thank you, operator. As I said at the start of the call, we appreciate we are at the start of reporting season and we have given you a lot of information at short notice. Just to remind everybody, the investor relations team will be available today and over coming days to help you with any questions that you might have. Thank you again for your time.