Mr. Dargan Fitzgerald:

Thank you. Well, first of all, for the 2007 and '8 audits that I supervised and, ultimately, signed as auditor, yes, I am so satisfied. Looking back and to your question in relation to both of those comments and if I could take the management letter from 2005 and without necessarily ... this was wasn't my own audit team, rather I wasn't supervising the audit team that carried this out and subject to that, nonetheless, if I just explain the purpose of this communication. So, as auditing standards require, that's auditing standard 260, reporting to those charged with governance, as I previously mentioned, where we come across an issue or an improvement point that needs to be brought to the attention of management of the audit committee, our management letter typically contains it and it typically contains it in the sort of format that one sees there. So the topic, in other words, what, sort of, part of the financial reporting is involved, the observation, what we found, and then the risk and the comment that you quoted from the two comments under the heading, "Risk", their purpose is to illustrate - we sometimes call them "what could go wrong", they illustrate, if you like, the worst case, if this control point is not acted on, of what could happen. So, where we write appropriately, "As a consequence, monthly management finance reports may be inaccurate", just to highlight that those would not necessarily mean that there would be pervasive error in management accounts but that arising from, and in the context of euro bank account reconciliations, there might be misreporting. The key point is that is highlighting the risk of what might go wrong and then our recommendation and the response of management ... we highlight in our recommendation what we feel should be done to, if you like, fix the problem and then management under the column "EBS response" identifies how they intend to resolve the issue, assuming they agree with it. It would typically be our practice, just for your additional understanding, then in the following year to follow up to see that such items had been cleared and then they may be replaced, of course, with new comments but that that item would be closed in the following year-----