[Foreign language] Tēnā koutou katoa. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the presentation of our results for the six months ended 31 December 2020. Presenting with me today is our group CFO, Bevan McKenzie. Moving to slide three, this outlines our key talking points today. I'll begin by providing an overview of the results, and then I'll run through the divisional performance in a bit more detail. Bevan will then talk through the overall financial performance for the half year. Finally, I'll sum up with some outlook comments on the half year ahead. Turning to slide four, we're now around two and a half years into our reset strategy for Fletcher Building. It's pleasing to see improved performance across the board, and this performance flowing through to strong earnings growth. I've summarized the highlights from the first half as follows. The performance and efficiency programs we've been focused on are now embedded and sustainable. The overall market activity across New Zealand and Australia has remained broadly stable half-on-half. Against this backdrop, our overall revenue has remained solid, and we saw pleasing growth in our New Zealand core businesses. We have seen margin improvements across all divisions. We generated strong cash flows, which have continued to support our strong balance sheet position. Off the back of all this, the board has declared an interim dividend of NZD 0.12 per share. Turning to slide five, group revenue increased 1% half-on-half to NZD 4 billion. In New Zealand, we saw solid overall activity in our businesses with good volumes and house sales. While in Australia, revenue was slightly lower as we felt the effects of a slower commercial and civil market. In construction, revenue was lower as we had less legacy construction work to get through, which is a positive. If we net out the lower construction revenues, group revenue was up 5% overall. We're making good progress on improving the operating performance across all of our businesses. First half group EBIT was up 47% to NZD 323 million, and our group EBIT profit margins were up 2.6%- 8.1%. Pleasingly, all divisions generated improved EBIT margins. Finally on this slide, net earnings for the half were NZD 121 million. This was impacted by NZD 86 million of significant items which related to the previously flagged final phase of our restructuring costs and an impairment to the Rocla business as we are in the process of selling it. Slide six shows cash flows improved significantly half-on-half, with free cash flow of NZD 416 million and trading cash flow of NZD 516 million. This was predominantly driven by continued improvements in our management of working capital and a lower spend on CapEx. Our net debt levels at the end of the half were NZD 269 million, and we had NZD 1.5 billion in liquidity. This continues to leave us with a very strong balance sheet position. On slide seven, we show that earnings per share has increased 85% from the comparative half to just under NZD 0.24 per share. Pleasingly, the strength of the business position has allowed us to adjust our banking agreements where we can now keep our covenant relief should we need it through to June 2021 and pay an interim dividend. Off the back of these adjusted agreements with our banks and the overall business performance and trajectory, the board has declared an interim dividend of NZD 0.12 per share to be paid in March. Looking forward, we continue to expect to be in a position to pay a final dividend for the full year. On slide eight, I outline our safety performance for the half. As I've mentioned previously, our focus is very much on the identification and elimination of critical risks across all of our businesses. With this, the elimination of serious injuries and then all injuries. We are very much in the middle of this program, and through the year, we'll be conducting many hours of development and training across all levels of our business. This training will be led by our line managers with the aim of both lifting the skills and changing the culture of our organization to ensure we achieve our goals. The right-hand graph shows the progress we're making on eliminating serious injuries. The left-hand chart shows our overall total injury rates, which continue to be in the range of five- six injuries per million man-hours worked. While these overall injury rates represent good levels when compared to our competitors and other industries, we're still targeting to get this down well under five in the medium term. Slide nine outlines some of the progress we're making around sustainability, which is now getting recognized by numerous external agencies. On carbon, we have in place verified plans for each business that map out how we'll achieve our goal of a 30% reduction in our carbon emissions by 2030. This work and our broader work in sustainability across the social, environmental, and governance dimensions of our business means we now have been included in a number of key indices and are achieving strong ratings improvements. We are now in the Dow Jones Sustainability Indices, both in Australia and Asia Pacific. Our MSCI sustainability rating now sits at an A, and our Carbon Disclosure Project rating has moved from a D to a B. This places us in a sustainability leadership position relative to our peers in this region. I'll now move into the details of operations. Starting with our New Zealand businesses, which account for around 2/3 of our revenue, I'll first provide an overview of what we've seen through the half in the New Zealand market on slide 11. In the top charts, we see that residential building activity has been very solid. In the half year, work put in place was slightly up from the same period last year, but consented floor area has risen strongly and is up 8%. As our workloads and volumes generally lag consents by around four-six months, we therefore expect to see continuing strong demand from the New Zealand residential market. The commercial and infrastructure sectors trended slightly lower through the half. Looking forward, we expect the commercial sector to continue to trend lower, but the infrastructure sector should start to grow, underpinned by strong levels of government investment. I'll now run through each of the divisions and provide some detail of the half year performance, as well as some of the operating highlights. Starting with building products on slide 12. Half year revenue was up 6%, profits were up 53%, and margins improved significantly to 14.8%. Trading cash flows were also very strong, reflecting the working capital disciplines we've now been focused on in the last three years. The strong trading performance did overly reduce some inventory levels, and we expect to rebuild these over the coming half. It was a strong performance, and there are a couple of operation highlights I'd call out. We saw a better contribution from our steel business, which recorded profits of NZD 18 million for the first half. We achieved increased market share in areas as we introduced new products and as customers showed a preference for locally manufactured product and the more reliable supply chain that provides. We site works for our new wallboard plant at Tauriko. Moving now to distribution on slide 13. Revenue grew across almost all regions, underpinned by good demand from the residential, trades, and consumer segments. Continued cost and efficiency initiatives delivered an improved EBIT margin of 7%, and this was despite the ongoing competitive price pressure in the industry. Trading cash flows were 6% ahead of the prior period. Within working capital, inventory days increased compared to the last half, and this was to ensure we had availability of key stock lines as international and local supply lines came under pressure. Operationally, we continue to be focused in the areas of e-commerce, digital, customer fulfillment, and efficiencies. In alignment with this through the half, we successfully moved to a regional distribution hub structures in Auckland and Christchurch across our PlaceMakers branches. In concrete on slide 14, revenue was up 7% from strong cement volumes, market share gains, and improved ready mix and aggregates pricing. EBIT was up 27% and trading cash flow was strong at NZD 88 million. Like building products, we expect a degree of inventory rebuild in the second half of the year. Through the half, we continued our focus on carbon reduction from our cement and concrete value chain. We completed our first trials of pozzolanic cement, which has the potential to produce concrete with a 30%-50% less CO2 emissions. Through the start of the new year, we've completed the upgrades to our Portland cement plant, so it can now accept waste tires as a fuel alternative. On slide 15, we consolidate the profit and margin progress we have made across our New Zealand core businesses, building products, concrete, and distribution over the last two years. Achieving performance and efficiency improvements across these businesses has been one of our key strategic focus areas, and to date has included activities across pricing disciplines, product and range positioning, property footprint, supply chain, and distribution rationalization, and driving productivity improvements, resulting in a smaller and more effective workforce. The chart on the left breaks down where the 35% lift in half-on-half profits was achieved. Roughly 40% came from a combination of market volumes, price increases, and market share improvements, and the other 60% came from a combination of operational performance and efficiency improvements. The chart on the right shows how this progress is now translating to improvements in our bottom-line profit margins. Not only have we achieved a half-on-half margin improvement of 2.5%, we have also turned the tide on the medium-term margin compression we're experienced across these businesses. While this work remains ongoing, we are now seeing some solid progress. Moving to slide 16 in our New Zealand residential and development business. This business performed very strongly for the first half, driven by a strong residential housing market across New Zealand. Against this backdrop, our first half house sales were up on the previous year to 515. Prices were up on average around 5%. This in turn drove strong revenue, profit, and cash performance for the half. Our residential business remains well positioned with around 3,600 future lots under our control and circa 900 houses confirmed in our FY 2022 pipeline. CleverCore, our offsite manufacturing business, continues to ramp up. Our dedicated apartments team is now in place and working on scaling up this business in the medium term. The chart on the left of slide 17 brings to life the strength of the residential housing performance, showing the half-on-half impact of the increased sales volumes and margins. Looking to the second half, we expect lower sales volumes in our residential business as we rebuild stock. Overall, we expect to sell around 800 houses through the full FY 2021 year. Land development EBIT was NZD 2 million for the half, NZD 9 million lower than the prior period, as the two key transactions for this financial year are scheduled to complete in the second half. These relate to the former Crane Copper Tube site in Sydney and the Rocklea Gale site in Brisbane. We expect earnings from the combined transactions to be around NZD 40 million, which exceeds the NZD 25 million per annum run rate we guide to for this business. Moving now to our New Zealand construction business on slide 18. Gross revenue was NZD 651 million, and although 16% lower than the prior period, this was solely due to reduced work on legacy projects. Net of legacy projects, revenue was stable half-on-half. Profits were also stable half-on-half and were supported by strong margin performances in Higgins and Brian Perry Civil, continuing to be offset by the legacy infrastructure and building projects flowing through at nil margin. Trading cash flows were lower in the half. Excluding the legacy outflows, trading cash for the division was an inflow of NZD 30 million compared to an inflow of NZD 10 million in the prior half. During the half, we handed over both Commercial Bay and the new Grey Base Hospital to our customers, and we continue to progress our major infrastructure projects in line with their completion dates through calendar 2022. Slide 19 brings to life the Fletcher Construction forward order book. The chart on the left-hand side shows two key things. Firstly, the work to complete across the legacy portfolio is now NZD 400 million, down from NZD 600 million at June 30. Secondly, that we continue to make good progress building the forward order book, which now sits at around NZD 3.2 billion. The forward order book number includes being nominated as Auckland Transport's preferred contractor on the Eastern Busway Alliance project. This, we expect, will move to formal contract through 2021. It's important to emphasize that this forward order book has a much more balanced risk profile and is made up predominantly of alliance and longer-term maintenance contracts. This will support the construction business returning to 3%-5% EBIT margins as the nil margin legacy projects complete. I'll now move to our Australian division and start with a market update on slide 21. The Australian market accounts for about a third of our revenue, and of this, some 60% is exposed to the residential sector. Overall, residential work done trended down half-on-half, but we saw good activity across detached housing and renovations, with an offsetting decline in the apartment space. Residential consenting activity began to stabilize during 2020 and has now moved to growth in approvals more recently. This is a positive signal, and together with the solid backdrop around the overall Australian economy, provides an encouraging outlook for residential through the second half and beyond. As expected, the commercial market slowed down through the half, and while infrastructure trended slightly higher, we observed ongoing project delays, especially in the key water and gas sectors we're exposed to. Looking ahead, we expect commercial to continue to be weighted to the downside, with infrastructure remaining resilient. I'll now move on to an overview of the first half performance across the Australian division on slide 22. Revenue was about 4% lower as civil and infrastructure projects continue to be delayed, which flowed through to a direct impact on our pipes businesses. Pleasingly, however, profits for the half were up 46% to NZD 51 million, and profitability lifted to 3.7%. This was achieved by improving performance across Laminex, Stramit, Tradelink, and Fletcher Insulation. Trading cash flows were a positive NZD 52 million compared to an outflow of NZD 64 million in the prior half. This reflected ongoing improvements in inventory management and good debtor controls. Highlights through the half included Tradelink continuing to grow sales into the key plumber trade segment by 4%. Excuse the noise in the background, I've got a construction site next to me. Our own brand product penetration now sitting at over 25% of front-of-wall sales. Laminex digital sales now represent 27% of all transactions. Fletcher Building's insulation manufacturing facility opened in Longview, which gives share growth in H1'27. On slide 23, we look at the profitability and trajectory of the Australian division. The left-hand chart brings to life the drivers of the 46% half-on-half profit improvements. In essence, we saw our cost and operational improvements dropping strongly through to the bottom line, offset in part by revenue weakness in our pipes business due to project volume staying low. On the right-hand chart, we show the good progress we're making in Australia on improved overall profitability. The EBIT margin was 3.7% for the half, compared to 2.4% for the same period last year. After two years of hard work by the team in Australia across all aspects of our business, it's pleasing to see the bottom-line benefits starting to flow through. That said, we still have much to work on and continue to plan to drive the profit performance of the division into at least the 5%-7% range in the medium term. I'll now hand over to Bevan for the financial results. Thanks, Ross, and good morning, everyone. Turning first to slide 25, we show the group income statement. Ross has already talked to the key driver of the group's underlying operating significant items related to the period. Firstly, the final phase of our group restructuring program, as flagged at last year's annual results, and an impairment of the Rocla business, which is now held for sale. I'll provide more detail on these significant items later in the presentation. Funding costs of NZD 23 million in this half were materially lower than the NZD 35 million in the prior period. This resulted principally from the early exit of our USPP 2012 debt in July 2020, which has reduced our funding costs by NZD 17 million per annum. Tax expense in the half was NZD 57 million, and our effective tax rate, excluding the impact of significant items, was 26%. Going forward, we continue to expect the effective tax rate to track back to around 29%. We also expect to resume cash tax payments with respect to the New Zealand businesses in the second half of calendar 2022. Slide 26 provides a summary of the key drivers of earnings improvement in the first half of FY 2021. Overall, around 15% of the group's EBIT uplift in this half has come from market-facing factors, volume, share, and price, while around 85% is attributable to the net benefit of our improved operating efficiency. As Ross has noted, these efficiency benefits have come across all divisions and a result of the programs of work put in place over the past three years. For FY21, our target was to achieve a gross fixed cost reduction for the full year of NZD 150 million, with the variable cost base to be flexed to the level of market activity. The net cost benefit of NZD 87 million achieved in the first half is predominantly from fixed cost reductions, especially from manufacturing and supply chain optimization and reduced overhead labor costs. I'd highlight that these savings are net of some input cost inflation that we have seen in certain areas, for example, in energy and resin costs. We're therefore confident that the gross cost out benefits are meeting the targets we set on a run rate basis. For the balance of FY21, we expect the benefits from the efficiency programs to be broadly in line with those delivered in the first half. On slide 27, we provide more detail on the quantum and phasing of significant items in FY21. The top table shows our updated view of the P&L charges, and the lower table shows the timing of cash flows for those charges which were recorded in both FY20 and FY21. Firstly, with respect to restructuring costs, the solid market environment has meant less restructuring activity than previously planned, and we've also had lower cash costs on exiting certain of our properties. As a result, FY21 significant items are now expected to be P&L charges of around NZD 65 million, down from the NZD 90 million previously flagged, and FY21 cash outflows are expected to be around NZD 95 million, down from previous guidance of around NZD 140 million. The second part of significant items incurred in this half relate to a non-cash impairment for the Rocla business which is held for sale. We're currently in the latter stage of our divestment process, with completion still targeted by the end of FY21. Based on a reassessment of the likely proceeds through our half year review, we've impaired the business by NZD 51 million. This leaves the remaining operational funds base for the business of NZD 76 million. I'd note that this excludes the property assets in Sydney and Brisbane, which as we said last year, are being developed and sold separately by our land development business. Slide 20, more detail on the strong group cash flow performance. As shown in the middle of the table in the highlighted line, underlying trading cash flows improved materially to NZD 516 million in the half. This was driven by a combination of improved operating earnings as well as favorable working capital movements, which I'll provide more detail on in the next slide. Further down the table, there are also lower cash outflows on the legacy construction projects as they near completion. Overall, this has resulted in cash flows from operating activities for the group of NZD 428 million, which is a significant uplift on the NZD 5 million outflow in the prior half. On slide 29, we provide more detail on the key drivers of working capital. Starting in the top table, the large number of house sale settlements in our residential and development business contributed to a NZD 50 million cash inflow, with the underlying construction business also delivering a positive working capital position this half. In the core manufacturing and distribution division, the key feature was effective management of receivables and inventories. This led to the working capital cycle in these businesses improving by 7.6 days. As Ross has mentioned, we do expect a level of inventory growth in the second half of the year as resilient stocks are rebuilt in some areas of the New Zealand core businesses. This may be an impact in the order of NZD 25 million-NZD 50 million above normal seasonality in the second half. Once this normalization has occurred, we consider that working capital in the core divisions is now well positioned and efficient, with material additional cash release unlikely. On a like-for-like basis, the working capital cycle in the core divisions has improved by around 10 days in the past three years, which is well ahead of the target of five days improvement that we set in June 2018. Slide 30 shows the CapEx in the half was NZD 68 million, which included some receipts from asset disposal from the period. Around 70% of our CapEx in this half was on maintenance investments, predominantly on the manufacturing plants and our core products businesses. It included NZD 31 million for the new Winstone Wallboards plant 4 facility, which we expect to commission in 2023. The remaining 30% of CapEx in this half was on strategic growth initiatives. Spend on digital remains a key priority, as well as investments in more modern and sustainable manufacturing. For example, an upgrade to our Humes pipes business in Auckland and also the tire-derived fuel facility in Golden Bay, Northland. For the full year, we continue to expect CapEx to be approximately NZD 200 million. The other key point to highlight is that as we've reviewed the group's medium-term CapEx needs, we're now confident that the group's underlying CapEx envelope will be in a range of around NZD 200 million-NZD 250 million from FY 2022 on. This is substantially lower than the annual run rate expenditure of approximately NZD 300 million in recent periods. We've said in the past three years that once these investments that were made to improve the quality of key assets were complete, CapEx would track back closer to depreciation, and we're now confident that we're at that point. I'd note that this guidance for future CapEx does exclude the remainder of the one-off investment in the Winstone Wallboards plant, which is expected to be around NZD 220 million next year and around NZD 100 million in FY 2023. Turning to Slide 31, we show the net debt bridge for the half. Strong underlying trading cash flows, partly offset by legacy projects and significant items cash flows resulted in our net debt position reducing materially to NZD 269 million. As we'll see on the next slide 32, this has translated to leverage of 0.4x. While this is below the group's target range of one to two times, our target capital structure takes into account the remaining investment in the Winstone Wallboards plant, as well as the remaining legacy construction outflows. Accounting for these cash outflows over the next two years, we will continue to maintain a preference for prudent balance sheet metrics as we execute the group strategy. Slide 33 shows the maturity and liquidity profiles of our funding sources. We continue to make excellent progress in resetting our balance sheet. During the half year, we completed the early repayment of our highest cost source of debt from the USPP. This has reduced our funding cost by NZD 17 million per annum and has reduced the average interest rate on the group's debt materially to 4%. As we look ahead to the full year, we expect FY 2021 funding costs to be around NZD 55 million. Following the USPP repayment, we continue to have available debt facilities of NZD 1.8 billion. These facilities have good tenure, with around 90% maturing in F23 and beyond. Finally, total liquidity for the group remains strong at NZD 1.5 billion. On slide 34, as Ross has noted, the group will pay an interim dividend of NZD 0.12 per share on the 24th of March. In June last year, we updated our banking agreements to enable the company to rely on more favorable terms for covenant testing through to the end of 2021, if required. These amendments provided for lower interest cover ratios and a normalization of fourth quarter FY20 EBIT. Importantly, this put us in a strong position to navigate an uncertain period and focus on business performance with our funding line secure. As part of this agreement, the company committed to not pay a dividend until it returned to compliance with and agreed to be tested by its normal covenants. Given the very strong performance in the half, the company has this month been able to put in place an updated agreement with our lenders. This allows for payment of an interim dividend while retaining the ability to rely on the more favorable covenant terms, if required, until the end of this financial year. We appreciate the flexibility shown by our lenders in this regard. Given that the group does not currently have tax credits available, the interim FY21 dividend will be unimputed and unfranked. Finally, as Ross has noted, the board does expect to be in a position to pay a final FY21 dividend later this year. On slide 35, we provide a summary of the half year performance contributing to the group's financial strength and our focus as we look ahead. We're seeing the clear benefits in this half in both New Zealand and Australia of the performance improvement and efficiency programs put in place over the past three years. This has led to savings through more efficient supply chains and manufacturing facilities and a reduced overhead base. The result is a substantial uplift in margins in this period to around 8% across the group, and we will continue to target group EBIT margins of around 10% in FY 2023. Our ROFE target of 15% is on track to be achieved this year. Working capital management is now robust across the business, and while we expect a degree of inventory rebuild in the second half of FY 2021, working capital overall is now at efficient levels in the group, and we've materially outperformed the targets set three years ago. Our CapEx program in the past three years has been a key contributor to our improved operating efficiency, and we're now at a point where we can reduce underlying capital expenditure to a range of NZD 200 million-NZD 250 million in the medium term, much closer to underlying depreciation. Our capital structure is well positioned with NZD 1.5 billion liquidity, good tenor on our funding lines, leverage towards the bottom end of our target range, and low funding costs. This provides a strong foundation to continue to execute our strategy, driving performance and growth in the medium term. Finally, we're pleased that the group's strong performance and a revised agreement with our lenders has enabled the group to return to dividend payments earlier than expected in the past. I'll now hand back to Ross to provide the final summary and outlook for the year ahead. Thanks, Bevan. Moving to slide 37, I'll briefly turn to the outlook across our markets and our businesses. Looking ahead, we expect an ongoing solid market in New Zealand and Australia for the second half, with core volumes remaining at current levels and good ongoing demand for residential housing in New Zealand in particular. Activity since we started back in the new year has been a bit slower as the trades seem to have taken a bit of a longer January break. However, as we get into February, demand and volumes seem to be normalizing back to expected levels and in line with what the market macro indicators are telling us. We have seen some supply chain disruption, but we are managing this well. On earnings, we expect the FY21 full-year EBIT to be in the range of NZD 610 million-NZD 660 million. Within this, we have a stronger than usual first quarter in our New Zealand core and residential businesses. This means the group earnings will be less weighted to the second half than in previous years. We also expect the efficiency benefits that we've been achieving so far to be broadly steady across the year. The only caveat on this is that there are no major COVID-19 shocks. To date, partial lockdowns in New Zealand and the Australian states have been manageable and not overly impacted our performance. Any long-dated or higher-level lockdown of the construction industry would clearly have an impact. Finally, we look forward to catching up at our Investor Day in May, where we'll provide a further update on market activity and trading performance. With that, I'd now like to hand back to the moderator to allow us to take questions. 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 your handset to ask your first question. Your first question comes from Lee Power from CLSA. Please go ahead. Hi, Ross. Hi, Bevan. Ross, is it just possible to step through that guidance range that you mentioned, the NZD 610-NZD 660? I just kind of struggle to get there when you think current indicators pointing to volumes. You've got cost out. It seems very weighted to the first half at the bottom end of the range. It'd just be good to get a little more clarity around how you get to that range, if possible. Thanks. Yeah. I'll give you a little bit at the helicopter level. Firstly, I pointed to in my comments that we had a very strong coming out of the COVID-19 lockdowns. We had an unusually strong July, August first quarter. Usually, it's a bit more subdued, so that was one indicator. The second thing I'd say is the trading days in the second half are a bit shorter. You've got more holidays. You've got the ANZAC Easter sort of break. You do end up with a reduced number of trading days in the way the holidays are falling through this year. Really what you get to at the end of the day when you step right back is between the bottom and the top of the range, it really just comes down to volumes. What we can't quite predict is, we don't get zero impact from the state shutdowns or the lockdowns. It does have some impact. It does subdue things a bit. What will really drive it between the bottom and the top of the range is just what the volumes do, and that'll be a little bit predicated on how many clusters emerge and how many sort of interim shutdowns occur. That'd be my main comments. I don't know, Bevan, would you add anything to that? Yeah. Perhaps a slightly different lens on the same point, Ross, is that the typical driver of the second-half weighting of the group or the biggest driver has been residential and development, which, if you think that in the past, the group has sort of had 53%, 54% second-half earnings. Given those very strong house sales in the first half, you've got much more first half weighting in that respect. That's leading us more towards a, if you take the midpoint of guidance, more towards a 50/50 split for FY 2021. Okay. Yep. Just on residential, you touched on how strong the market is. Can you just remind us of the lots you have under control and how comfortable you feel replenishing them as you track towards that 1,000 houses an annum target? We have around 3,600 under control. When we look towards FY 2022, what you're always doing now is if you don't have the lots under control and you don't have the sections coming through planning, you're not going to do it. We're very confident we've got complete visibility of around 900 houses in FY 2022, which are basically locked and loaded. I made that point in the presentation. We're managing quite effectively to keep building what I call that longer-dated future to keep that momentum to the thousands. We think we'll do about 800 this year. We've got locked and loaded for 900 next year, and we've got 3,600 in total under our control. Yep. Finally, just on Australia. You've obviously got a longer-run EBIT target out there. How comfortable do you feel about tracking towards that? The recovery seems quite good thus far. We're very comfortable. We've maintained the fact that we're targeting, when we go right back 2.5 years, we had a 5%-7% target and by FY 2023, that's the target we remain on. It's just nice to now see those improvements flowing through, and you can see evidence of it because there's been a fair bit of cynicism around that goal. I think it's a good first step, and we're seeing the performance or the things we've done, the cost out and the general performance, and it's been a long, hard two years starting to flow through. I'm quite bullish with the trajectory we're now on. What feels like where the residential market's going to go, that we should have a very high degree of probability to pull off that sort of margins performance across that business in the next couple of years. Okay. Thanks, Ross. Thanks, Bevan. I'll leave it there. Thank you. Your next question comes from Simon Thackray from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Thanks very much. Good morning, gentlemen. Ross, you made a comment about the slightly slower start to the year, January, February feels like a bit of a COVID-19 hangover, to be honest with you. I think people were pretty weary after 2020. That was being seen both sides of the ditch. You did mention things are starting to return to normal now, which is terrific. How do you think in the strength of the residential pipeline on both sides of the ditch, how are you thinking about industry capacity and inflation on both sides in particular? Can I start with that? Yeah, sure. We did see that dynamic both sides. I think everyone just took a bit of a longer break. What we're now seeing as we get into the later part of February and through all the various holidays, that we're sort of back to where we thought we'd be. When we look at inflation, what's really driving it to date has been where supply chains got tight or where commodities have actually increased. Some of that might be resins, it might be steel. Given the environment we're in, what we're finding is the ability to pass price on as being quite strong. We're seeing, therefore, to the extent we get inflationary issues, we're able to take price just because, particularly in the residential sector, it's quite busy. That's the dynamic we're experiencing right now. Okay. That's very helpful. Just noting in Australia, your expectations for ongoing softer civil and commercial activity, which is about 40% of the Aussie revenue. If I may, how does the margin compare in those sectors versus the resi market as we do look at this very strong pipeline of new housing and renovations in Australia? Look, it's a bit frustrating. What we're finding in our pipes business now, given we're selling rock, I'll just focus on Iplex, is we've put a lot of work into getting that reset. For the first time, what we're seeing resins going up, we're actually able to take price in there. We're seeing more sane behavior amongst the competitive set, which is good. What we are also seeing is we are doing a lot of project pricing. What we just haven't seen in the Iplex business and in the project work, we're seeing a lot of pricing. We're doing a lot. It's all out there, it just hasn't started converting. The real outlook for us, Iplex has sort of been a burden. It's lost a bit of money through the first half. Soon as that project work starts flipping in, we'd expect that business to move quite quickly. It's just it's hard to predict when it starts to flow. Everything tells you it should start to flow, we just haven't seen it yet. At pricing levels or what jobs are pricing indication, hopefully it's sooner rather than later, we're sort of not baking that in yet. We want to see it before we start forecasting it. Okay, that's helpful. Can I just swap across to the guidance in terms of the Wallboard expansion, Bevan? CAPEX, I believe, was NZD 31 million for the Wallboard expansion in the first half, and yet the full year guidance is NZD 50 million of CAPEX. I'm just wondering why the slowdown in second half 2021, sort of NZD 19 million in the second half, maybe that's just project scheduling. With the NZD 220 million target in FY 2022, what does the first half, second half split look like for the Wallboard expansion? You characterized it 2021 very well. Simon, just timing of payments is determining the sort of 30% in the first half, 20% in the second. If you look into FY 2022, we'll be going full steam both on the construction of the building and the warehousing and distribution, as well as our supplier on the plant. That's going to be a broadly even split in 2022 between the first and the second half. It'll depend, of course, a little bit on progress on site, but at the moment, broadly evenly split is the right way to think about that. Okay, that's helpful. Just finally, if I may, appreciating you've delivered substantially on your NZD 300 million gross cost out. There's always a bit of confusion between what's gross, what's net, and what the run rates are first and second half. I also want to understand if and when you see additional opportunity in the event that the cycle sort of stalls or flat lines from here. Hello? Hello. Sorry, Ross. Ross, do you want to take that or I'll jump in? Yeah, you take it. Sorry. Oh, the question, sorry. I wondered why we'd stopped. No, you go, Bevan. Sorry, my apologies. I thought we'd lost someone. Okay. Sorry. I thought I'd lost myself. Yeah. Apologies. Different locations. The perspective I'll give you, Simon, is that we've got really good control of that fixed cost base now, and we know where the additional opportunities are. In the past, we've pointed to additional work and property that we're continuing to work on, but it's a bit tough to get. It takes a little bit longer. I think it's all going to be about control of the variable base to the extent that the market moves. Again, what you've seen through this period is that where we have had a bit of downside of the market in Australia, we've been able to flex the variable to that. I guess across both dimensions, we get comfort that should we need to move further, we have the ability to adapt to the market. Okay. I understand that. Just to be perfectly clear of the NZD 87, from memory, in the first half, is that likely to be similar in the second half? Yeah, similar on a growth basis. Obviously, when you compare the two halves, you need to look at the base that you're building off, and we already had a bit of savings built into the second half of FY 2020. Yeah, on a run rate basis, the growth is quite similar. To give you some more color, Simon, the fixed and variable split of that NZD 87, it's about 70% fixed, 75% fixed, and around a quarter variable. As I said, it's mainly the fixed cost base, which is delivering those improvements. Leave that there and give someone else a turn. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Brook Campbell-Crawford from JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Yeah, good morning. Thanks for taking my question. Just back on the EBIT margin target in Australia, 5%-7%. Ross, just sounded like you were, talking about a strong market, really, to underpin improvement further in margin. If you're able to just clarify if that's what you meant, just to start off with. No A follow-up as well. No, look, obviously any market improvements and volumes help because once you get your cost base down, you leverage the upside and we always assume eventually residential will start growing. I think there'll be a bit of a tailwind there. Fundamentally, what we're doing in there is all around just getting the businesses cleaned up and positioned and running well. What you're seeing, we actually have achieved this margin expansion against in a falling market broadly through this half. That gets us in a good place. We've basically got activities across each business around whether it's ongoing, continuing focus around operational improvements, whether it's on the pricing, whether it's on the product positioning and sort of some of the adjacencies we can play in. Broadly, and focusing on where our margins are more healthier, and you can sort of see that in Stramit where the emphasis has gone to the sheds business, which is higher margin, and that's where we've seen the growth. The go-forward momentum there is fundamentally around more of the same, and we're hopeful, though, that we do see some the project work, say, in Iplex come through, because without it, that's going to get stuck in a hard place. Eventually, that'll come through. That will require some of the market to actually drive that growth at the speed we want. Broadly, we should continue to see improvement off the back of the volumes we've got. Plus, we should get a bit of improvement beyond that with the growth market. The stronger the market grows, then it will take us to the upper ends of that margin range and maybe beyond it. Yeah, that's how I think about it. That's why we say 5%-7%. Should get to 5% base. If the market's a bit of a trend, we should be at the 7%+ range. Okay. That's very clear. Thanks. Just back on your comments on January, sounds like it's a little slow. Are you able to provide any sort of figures or quantify what the shortfall was in January? It's either probably a quiet month in general, but trying to understand how significant that slower start to the year is. Oh, not at all. It's not so much the quantum of impact. We're never really sure what's going to happen in December and January. In this December and the way, if you look at our half year result, we guided to range and we did a bit better than that because December the trade seemed worked really strongly up right up to the death. You're never really sure when they'll go on leave. What the consequence of that almost was is that as we got to January, they seemed to take about a week or just start slower. It's not really, it doesn't move the dial a lot. It might be NZD 5 million, NZD 10 million here or there. What we're more concerned about is looking at the run rate. It's not so much the absolute quantums of January, it's more. The longer it doesn't get back to what I call a full run rate, then it starts to cause a hangover through the year. What we're always focused on is, okay, what January's plus or minus, whatever it is, but how does February start, and do we have good momentum towards the end of February? Because our big trading months then are March particularly is an important trading month for us, and April's always a bit sloppy because of Easter and ANZAC, and then May, June. It's more the run rate. That's what I pointed to is that the run rates are now where we thought they'd be, which is what we were looking for and would've expected. Okay, great. Thanks, Ross. Thank you. Your next question comes from Andrew Scott from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good morning, gents. Just wanna get back to the cost out and maybe touch on something a bit to the adjacent to what Simon was talking about. Firstly, well done. Very few of our companies have actually taken the opportunity to take meaningful cost out of the business. I just wanna explore that a little bit, and there's a couple of comments I'm struggling to reconcile. Generally, with these programs, we expect them to ramp up and to maybe exit with a run rate that's ahead of what you might have delivered in a backward-looking period. I note that you've continued to spend on restructuring in this period, and you flagged there's some next period. I'm just struggling to reconcile that with the comment that the cost out program's largely complete, and first half will broadly equal second half. I know you had some back from last year, but I'm just struggling to bring those comments together. I would've thought you should be having some further momentum as we go forward. All right. Andrew, I'll let Bevan, he's the reconciler in charge, so he can put some color on it for you. Yeah, I think the perspective I would bring, Andrew, is that we did the lion's share of this work. I've put it in the past to figure around 80% or 90%, in the period as we entered into this financial year. May and June last year, it was kind of the major area of activity. If you look at the balance of the work that we've done, yeah, they've given us a little bit of further improvement. In the overall scheme, it's not material between the first and second half split. It's really the fact that we got cracking, through May and June, we got the work done. As we entered into this year, we were largely there. I guess the other variable as the prior question pointed to, there is some offsets there that we're dealing with, and we've factored those into the second half in terms of guiding, I guess, to a net impact of those benefits. Okay. Maybe just one more on that then. Could you just give us some color on the NZD 35, I think it was, that was spent this year and the NZD 30 that come in the second half, and just where that is targeted and why there isn't necessarily a further benefit attached to that? You've pointed in the past, Andrew, that's been related to a couple of the major rationalizations in Australia, in Iplex and Fletcher Insulation, specifically. Just the way those work through the cost base of those businesses, they won't move massively because we'll continue to supply out of additional locations. There is some benefit. Again, relative to that, overall NZD 150, which is the growth fix that we've pointed to, they're not massive movements. They happen to be big numbers in terms of the shutdown costs because they are major plants that we've rationalized there. That's the reason, I guess, for that disconnect and the cost to shut versus the benefits coming through. Okay. Got it. Secondly, Bevan, you've done a great job again on cash and balance sheet position is great. In the presentation, you say you expect to move to the lower end of the target range one to two times in FY 2022-FY 2023. I know you call out construction cash flows and wallboard, but I think on my numbers at least, it seems pretty hard to get there. Are there any other lumpy cash flow items we should be aware of? That seems a pretty conservative forecast. You're absolutely right. Those are the two big lumpy ones. There's nothing beyond that, and I've pointed to ongoing run rate CapEx getting closer to that underlying depreciation number. I guess, as we look at it, Andrew, there's roughly NZD 400 million of cash outflow to come between wallboards and the legacy construction projects, and that's worth between 0.4 and 0.5 of a turn on the leverage ratio. That's what gets back, you're at that lower end of the range around, call it 0.9. Right near the bottom end of the one-two range. Okay. I guess the crux of the question was, if we are sitting below or at the bottom end of that range, do we start talking capital management? I think the thing that's been most important to us, Andrew, is to get those dividends flowing again. That was very important to us. We did some good work with the lenders through the past month to enable that. On broader capital management, we'll continue to review the capital structure. We've said we wanted to be positioned towards the bottom end. If over the medium term we end up lower than that, we'll need to review that, of course. For the moment, we feel like we're tracking to where we said we would, which is again, about the bottom end of the target range. Okay. Understood. I'm gonna sneak one more in there if I can. Ross, just quickly, Rocla, obviously the write-down. Understand the initial decision to explore a sale, but on the books for only NZD 70 million, I thought there might be an argument here that Fletcher Building could add more than just the sale proceeds if they were to run that business and get it running a bit better. Is there something you think that is pushing you out the door, even at that much lower expected proceeds? Our view is we will continue down the path of selling it, and I don't think that level of where we've got the level two changes our view on it. We will continue with the sale process, basically, is the short answer. All right. Thanks, gentlemen. Thank you. Your next question comes from Stephen Hudson from Macquarie Securities. Please go ahead. Oh, good morning, Ross and Bevan. Just a couple of quick ones from me. Just firstly on CleverCore, I just wondered if you could give us an idea about how large that business could be, say, in the next two years, and what sort of land bank you might need to support that level of activity. Secondly, I just wondered if you could comment on what you are seeing in terms of imported competing product. We're sort of seeing wallboard, for instance, falling off, but some of the bright bulk volumes coming in unabated. I just wondered how you saw generally the import parity pricing pressure at the moment, whether or not it's getting better or worse. Lastly, the 30+ day outage at Golden Bay Cement, can you size what the cost of that might have been? Sure. Okay. On CleverCore, so we did about 34, I think, houses this first half, Stephen. The last couple of years, it's all been about getting it refined and working well and I won't bore you with all the complexities of that. We're sort of hitting our straps now from the whole process from design through to delivery and installation. We expect to be at a run rate of above 100 per annum by the time we get to May, June, in this coming calendar year. What we've always assumed, looking at our own housing stock, we believe about a third of the houses we build will be suitable to what CleverCore does. If we're doing NZD 900 next year, we'd start to try and push it up to the NZD 200-NZD 250 as we work through that year in a run rate. What we're looking to do in FY22 is start to sell externally because we've proven our model up and have a lot of confidence in our pricing points and our capacity to deliver. I'm quite bullish about the outlook, both within our own portfolio as well as external. I think as we've refined it, we've got quite a compelling offer there and product there. That's sort of the plan of that, and that's where we're heading on that. On the import, because there's always pressure from imports. What's happened a little bit, and I sort of alluded to it, and there's been a lot of topical conversations just with basically congestion at ports and just particularly containers. There has been a bit of less pressure because people are looking more at locally produced products as a result of that. Obviously, we still have to struggle sometimes with our own to replace make of our own container shipments, so we've had to increase inventory there. Where you're on those sorts of products, local sort of got a preference. Where it's bulk, we're not finding any real problems bringing bulk stuff in. If people are buying an entire ship, that's less problematic. We're not seeing too much competition abating in those style of imports. If anything, if I had to step right back, it is probably there is a preference for local supply chains as that pressure has come up. On the Golden Bay Cement, the shutdown to put the tire-derived fuel in, I think it was about NZD three million, NZD three and a half million was probably the impact. Bevan, is that correct? I think it was that sort of order of magnitude. It's spot on. It's NZD three and a half million impact, which flowed into the January numbers. Okay, yeah. as a result of that shut. That's great. Thanks, gents. Thank you. Your next question comes from Rohan Koreman-Smit, from Forsyth Barr. Please go ahead. Morning, Ross and Bevan. Hopefully just a couple of quick ones. Firstly, on the cash payments difference, what's the large driver in the change there? Just seems like a very big move. Second, CapEx was very low. I think it was NZD 50 million down year-on-year at a gross level. Should we expect CapEx to come in at the top end of the range in FY 2022, given NZD 200 million-NZD 250 million as a bit of a catch-up? Third, do you have any color on how much it's going to cost to restock the resi land bank? It looks pretty thin once you take out NZD 400 million for the second half of this year and then NZD 900 million for 2022. You're down to two years' supply at your target run rate. I'll start with the last one, then Bevan answer the other two on cash payments and CapEx ranges. On the restocking, we've always said what we've said is we want to hold that business into a CapEx envelope of NZD 700 million. That's sort of the amount of balance sheet we want there. I still remain comfortable we can do that, even as we scale up some of the other elements of it, the apartment side and everything. While it's certainly down a little bit now, and because we've actually got a lot of stock out, a lot of our capital, that envelope is not in the land. It actually ends up being in the work in progress in the houses. That's the far larger majority of it. Because we've been selling so much stock, that's where a lot of the capital's been freed up, more so there than on the land we control. The real dynamic there is I'm quite comfortable about our ability to restock land, both in what we're sourcing and within that constraint. The real dynamic you've seen through this half and this year around it is just we've basically been selling stock very quickly. The rebuild in capital may have been more around just having stock for sale as we start to build up for next year. Bevan, do you want to grab the other two? Sure. On the cash costs of the significant items, there's two reasons why they're lower. The two key drivers of the cash outflows are redundancies and then cost to exit properties. The redundancies have been lower because, as we pointed to, market environment's been better than we flagged at the full year, and therefore, we've had fewer redundancies in the variable part of our cost base. It's been one driver, and the second driver, as I say, we've just done better on exiting the properties than we had expected to. That's what's improving the cash number there. On the CapEx range, we said coming into this year that we'll spend NZD 175-NZD 200 in FY 2021, and we're going to come in towards the top end of that because we've obviously been in a better environment, and we've had some good opportunities to go after. For FY22, too early to say. We're running through our budgeting process at the moment, and we'll look at the detailed opportunities. Again, the key point is that we're confident it will be between NZD 200-NZD 250 because some of those larger catch-up investments that we had to make, we're through that piece now. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Marcus Curley from UBS. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, guys. Just a few from me. I just wondered if you could talk more specifically to what you're seeing with building materials pricing in New Zealand at the moment. I suppose industry commentary would suggest that they're running pretty hot. I just wondered what you are putting through as a starting point. Yeah. There's no debate what hot means, but the environment we're in. Double digit. That's not everywhere. I don't agree with the double digit, to be honest. We're certainly taking price. I wouldn't say that when you get to the big commodity lines, they're double digit at all. I think that's not correct. You're certainly taking price. We're certainly taking price above what I call the input cost. That's not everywhere. If we look at a classic example is, we haven't been able to take any price on our roof sheeting. That's not quite correct. Certainly at the broad level, I'd characterize it as you're able to take price at better than what the costs are. You're seeing some margin expansion in there, is how I'd talk about it. Could you just touch a little bit specifically on steel? Obviously, that's been a big mover for yourselves. How much do you contribute to higher prices relative to you holding onto inventory as a component of that recovery? Hence, how sustainable do you think the steel EBIT performance is? Okay. With steel, I'm very comfortable it's nothing to do with inventory repricing. One of the issues we had to deal with in cleaning that business up was actually around those disciplines and get them very robust, that we weren't taking revals of stock to profit as the main profit generator. We put ourselves through that pain this time last year, basically. What we're seeing, the result there is a very clean result. It's driven by actual operating profits and not revals. The other thing we're seeing, the market's behaving more sensibly. There's not this big volume game going on. I think the disciplines we're seeing from competition is more around sensible pricing. I don't mean, there's always competition, but there's no silly stuff going on. You're able to run the business sensibly now. We've got, as I said, no issues of what I call inventory revals flowing through our numbers. Secondly, I think you've touched on this, but can I just confirm, with the ongoing chatter around supply chain restrictions in New Zealand or impacting New Zealand, in your forecast, you're not incorporating or not expecting to see any material impact in the second half from those? No, we're actually confidently managing it. There's areas where it's tight, and ultimately, that will keep a lid on what I call how fast growth will go. Bevan, do you want to pick this up? I've just got this saw going on in the background, sorry. I guess the way we'd characterize it, Marcus, we've been on the front foot in managing this, and Ross alluded in the presentation to some advanced positions we've taken in the distribution business where I guess the pressure has been most acute, as you've got container delays into the country and then some of the local supply lines. That's why we say to this point, we think we've done a pretty good job in getting on the front foot and managing it effectively. We just point to that because if it does deteriorate further, and obviously with, in particular, the New Zealand market running stronger, that's the sort of thing that can slow things down and have a volume or a top-line impact. For the moment, again, we've been managing through it effectively. Bevan, just one last one for you. From what I gather, your reference to NZD 400 million including legacy projects. By default, that's about NZD 80-odd million to go on cash flow out on legacy projects? Yeah, that's exactly right, Mark. At full year 2020 results, we said there was about NZD 175 of construction cash flow on the legacy project. You said just over NZD 100 in the first half. The delta is what is remaining. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Keith Chau from MST Marquee. Please go ahead. Good morning, Ross and Bevan. A couple of follow-up questions or maybe one follow-up question on the outage in the Portland cement plant. Just wondering, the cost is NZD three and a half million, but there are expected to be some benefits from that project. Can you characterize what those benefits could be on an annualized basis once that project is complete? Look, the benefits are in what I call fuel savings. It's about order of magnitude of a mil, just over NZD 1 million. What we really get is we reduce carbon. I think it's about 30,000 tons a year of carbon and also from the country's point of view we're consuming around about 3.3 million of New Zealand's 5 million per annum waste tires. We're sort of consuming and getting rid of, in a clean environmental way, although 50% of the waste tire stream. It gives us some economic benefit, but it's actually as much about reducing carbon and the environmental outcomes. Ross, just to confirm, that's NZD 1 million on an annualized basis, isn't it? Yeah, it's give or take that sort of level. It does give us some efficiencies, but it's not huge. Okay. Just a follow-up question on the guidance and potentially some of the impacts in the first half. You've mentioned NZD 3.5 million From the cement plant outage, potentially NZD 5 million-NZD 10 million from the late start to the year. If you look at the trading days impact for the second half, what could that be from an order of magnitude perspective? Off the top of my head, I'm not sure. Bevan, do you have a view on that? I guess the high level, we're sort of saying it's more 50/50, in terms of the overall how we're thinking about the splits, and then we're just trying to unbundle some of the things going on. I think there's about seven less trading days in the second half from the first half. Is that about right, Bevan? That's exactly right. There's seven fewer. I guess the point is the way it does fall in this year, if you think, for example, Auckland Anniversary versus Waitangi weekend, is also how they fall, which matters. As Ross alluded to, ANZAC into Easter can impact the activity during those periods. Okay. Thank you. Just one last question on the residential business. There were 515 houses sold in the period, in the first half period, and bear with me here. I think in the first four months, there were 372, so half of that being 171. On an underlying basis for the first half, excluding that pull forward or I guess the catch-up from the prior year, the underlying number would've been closer to 344 in the first half. If you're guiding to 800 for the full year, it seems like, given the momentum in the market, that could be a bit of a conservative guidance. Can you pass some comment on that, please? Yeah. Look, we could clearly sell more. We just don't have the stock. I think at this time last year, we were very cautious as to what the market may look like. The 800 will be defined by two things, how much stock we've got to sell, and don't forget, with the way the accounting standards work, if you haven't settled it doesn't get booked. What we sell from mid-May and June actually end up being in the following financial year. The 800 is really about what we'll be able to produce and have for sale. Even as we look into FY 2022, it's again limited by just more by what we can actually produce, which is why we can look and say, look, we're comfortable with around 900 for the following financial year. We've always said, look, once we get to 1,000, we're quite content at that level. We're sort of saying to get to the annual throughput that we think we want to focus on as a sustainable level of that business. Okay, great. Thanks very much, gents. Appreciate it. Thank you. Your next question comes from Chris McKegg from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Oh, hi team. Just a couple from me. Was going to ask on the throughput there that you've just answered that. Just on the resi and development, are you able to talk to some of the work you're doing to scale up the division's apartment business and what some of the targets and time frames are there in terms of volumes? Yeah, sure. What we've got there as a team and what we're looking at over the next two or three years is to scale it up to circa 300 apartment unit a year style of business. It'll take that long. We've got a couple of projects now that we're focused on, which we're coming out of what I call our natural flow. I'd say three years' time, I'd be looking to do 300 apartments a year. That will be absolutely dependent on what the market looks like and as we scale up, we're just happy with the model. We've proved it up to date, now as we scale it, we'll keep those checks and balances in place. We're not just going to charge in a cavalier sense. We want to be quite considered. That's great. Thanks. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I will now hand back to Ross Taylor for closing remarks. Thanks, everyone. Appreciate you taking the time. As I said, we'll obviously have a number of interactions over the coming two weeks anyway, then ultimately back with everyone in May for our broader, more strategic overview and investor update. Thanks very much for your time. Thank you. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.