Investor Update

Jul 24, 2025

Summary

A £250 million investment in Sizewell C is set to deliver low-teen IRR, extend dividend coverage, and enhance portfolio diversification. Strong government protections insulate against construction and nuclear risks, while the RAB model ensures predictable, inflation-linked returns.

Good morning and welcome to the International Public Partnerships Limited Investor Update. Throughout this recorded update, investors will be in a listen-only mode. Questions are encouraged and can be submitted at any time by the Q&A tab situated in the right corner of your screen. Simply type in your questions and press send. The company may not be in a position to answer every question it receives in the meeting itself. The company can read all the questions submitted today and publish responses where it's appropriate to do so. Before we begin, I'd like to submit the following poll. I'd now like to hand you over to Erica Sibree. Good morning. Thanks so much, Alessandro, and welcome to the International Public Partnerships' Sizewell C investment briefing. Thanks for joining us today at such short notice as Alessandro says. I'm Erica Sibree, Head of Capital Solutions and Investor Relations here at Amber. We're the Investment Advisor to International Public Partnerships. As many of you are aware, as a reminder, this presentation is intended for a UK retail audience and I just draw your attention to this important legal information that probably is a little hard to read, but it also appears on the website if you want to download the presentation from there. Just a reminder to you that the focus of the presentation today is investment in Sizewell C, which we're very excited about. We are in the lead up to our results, which will be announced in early September, so we're a little limited in terms of what we can say about INPP more generally, but we'll be as helpful as we can today to answer your questions. I'm joined today by Jamie Hussain, who's a Senior Investment Director here at Amber, who was one of the key leads on the transaction. Jamie and a broader team have been working very hard in the last, particularly last few months to deliver the transaction this week and take you through the details today. Also joining Jamie and I later in the presentation is Dan Watson, our Head of Sustainability. He'll be joining for Q and A. Jamie, Dan and I will be available at the end of the presentation, so we'll take you through a formal presentation before Q and A as directed. Please register any questions you have through the functions within the chat and we'll turn to that at the end. To take you through the details of the transaction and its broader portfolio of benefits, I'll hand over to Jamie. Thanks very much, Jamie. Thank you, Erica. Good morning, everyone. I'm absolutely delighted to be speaking with you today about the company's upcoming new investment in Sizewell C. By way of a brief introduction, I was part of Amber's founding team back in 2009 and have been primarily responsible for originating and structuring INPP's offshore transmission or OFTO investments. In addition to OFTOs, I've been part of a core team, which you can see at the bottom of this slide, diligencing Sizewell C since 2019, and for the last two years I've been fully deployed on the transaction structuring and risk management for prospective investment into Sizewell. The objectives for today's presentation are to update you on the long-term capital allocation to the regulated company financing Sizewell C, consistent with the Board's ongoing capital recycling initiatives, and to demonstrate the investment fundamentals and why we believe this is a highly compelling addition to INPP's portfolio. It's worth highlighting that Tuesday's preferred bidder announcement means INPP has not yet reached financial close, which is currently expected in quarter four this year. We are therefore bound by certain disclosure requirements and restricted in some places in what we can say. Please bear with us on these limitations. We'll do our best to provide you with the required transparency, and that is why you'll have hopefully seen a Folsom RNS and the reason for hosting today's presentation. Transaction highlights: INPP's appointment as preferred bidder on Sizewell C is the outcome of a decade-long consultation process during which we have helped shape Sizewell C's financing model to suit INPP's investment criteria. Milestones of this process have included the passing of primary legislation in April 2022 to cement bipartisan political support for the construction of additional nuclear generation capacity to the UK energy mix and strengthen the UK's energy security, and Amber's pre-qualification for the equity raise process run by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero in October 2023. This was the entry point to adapting the RAB model pioneered on Tideway. It has offered us pricing visibility and a collaborative dialogue to agree key contractual protections. These protections have helped create a robust regulatory and contractual framework in which INPP can invest in Sizewell C with a license granted for 60 years of operations following construction. Considering the capital allocation priorities for INPP for a moment, firstly, the previously announced commitment to fund up to £200 million worth of share buybacks remains unchanged for Sizewell. We have deliberately structured the equity commitment over five years at approximately £50 million per annum in return for a circa 3% shareholding representing a total equity commitment of approximately £250 million. The Board intends to fund annual commitments using cash proceeds from INPP's divestment programme, which remains well on track. The compelling combination of cash yield and capital growth speaks to the heart of what Sizewell C for INPP is all about, providing INPP with attractive regulated risk-adjusted returns significantly above the equivalent IRR generated on a share buyback. INPP is well regarded as a first mover in originating new investments in sectors which have reached a certain level of maturity such that we can consider them genuinely low risk, but only committing an investment at a time when the asset class is yet to be overdeveloped. Adapting the proven RAB model to nuclear construction is a showcase of INPP's effective partnership method, and we are treating this allocation much in the same way as Tideway. Although the underlying exposure to nuclear clearly differs from wastewater, the way in which INPP earns its inflation-linked returns is much the same. We'll return to this point in a moment. On a similar note, INPP benefits from enhanced protections through a negotiated government support package which insulates INPP from remote material risks associated with nuclear generation and, given the complexity of greenfield construction in the sector, material construction and cost overruns. As has been well reported, Sizewell C is a key component in the UK government's policy to strengthen energy security, having announced a cornerstone investment in this year's spending review. Once operational, Sizewell C will generate approximately 3.2 gigawatts of baseload low carbon electricity, forecast to meet approximately 7% of the UK's electricity needs. This is critical UK infrastructure which has attracted co-investment from leading institutional investors and corporate sponsors whose interests are well aligned to that of INPP's. Through its investments in 11 UK assets, Tideway and Cadent, INPP has a market-leading track record investing in regulated infrastructure, including during the construction phase. The predictability of a regulated return is highly attractive for INPP and Sizewell gives us access to additional inflation-linked cash flows de-risked to suit INPP's established progressive dividend policy. As with INPP's investment in Tideway, INPP will earn a cash yield from day one following Sizewell's financial close and revenue commencement. This will last during construction and into early operations, which are assumed until the late 2030s. In addition, we are forecasting a significant yield increase once the project is operational, reflecting maturity of the project over time and which can be seen on the following slide. This will further support the coverage of our progressive dividend. Like with most construction projects, as milestones are achieved and the regulated asset base grows over time, there is an opportunity for significant capital growth. INPP is forecast to achieve an IRR in the low teens, significantly above that currently implied by share buyback, and will benefit from a fixed regulated return during the construction period and into early operations assumed until the late 2030s. Sizewell C is a power generation asset, but INPP is investing in the regulated company responsible for financing its construction and in return benefiting from exceptionally long-term cash flows bound by predictable economic regulation that sets an allowed return. This means INPP takes no exposure to power price volatility or the demand economics of power generation, much in the same way that INPP's allocation to OFTOs are not exposed to wind power generation. For example, the enhanced investor protections under the government support package mentioned earlier means INPP is ring-fenced from potential construction delays and remote nuclear-specific risks including decommissioning. This is what we mean by low-probability, high-impact events. When we think about the government support, the contractual protections, and regulated return through construction and into operations, we do see NAV accretion over time. We have added an illustration of our financial model for the project over the next 30 years in slide 8. This effectively describes the phasing of our cash receipts to INPP on the one hand and the projected NAV on the other. Both data points are shown including and excluding Sizewell C. As you can see, the cash receipt profile is forecast to significantly increase post construction and early operations, which are assumed until the late 2030s. As such, we expect the project to further support our covered dividend over the long term. The project is also expected to deliver NAV accretion compared with our December 2024 case. As reported a few months ago, our valuation base case for Sizewell C shows steady NAV accretion over the construction period as we approach those higher operational cash flows. As such, you can see that the investment case is really compelling with a strong ability to deliver attractive regulated risk-adjusted returns. The adoption of the RAB model for nuclear construction is a coming of age for the Tideway model given the complexity of Sizewell's construction. The RAB framework ensures a strong risk sharing and allocation structure between investors, including the UK government. This materially differs from Hinkley Point C's financing method, being a contract for difference scheme where a fixed price for electricity is agreed up front but only paid once the plant is operational. The allowed return under Ofgem's license, known as the Weighted Average Cost of Capital or WACC, is applied in two distinct phases. One is a fixed rate applied during the construction phase and early operations phase, which is known as the initial WACC or IWAC, and the second is applied in five-year cycles over the operational phase, which is known as the regulated WACC or RWAC. The IWAC is fixed for the duration of the construction period. It is also applied up to the first four years of early operations, where the asset is tested and production ramps up progressively in a stepped process. This means INPP's investment is not expected to be subject to any regulatory return reset until the late 2030s, and we therefore have full visibility of the return profile during this time. Once Sizewell is fully operational after the first four years, INPP benefits from the certainty provided by the regulated return, which is set every five years. Like other Ofgem-regulated regimes, including Cadent, naturally, the equity commitments fund the CapEx to support the construction period, all of which contribute to the overall value of the RAB. On this basis, there is an opportunity for NAV accretion. Over time, Ofgem has put in place incentives that align equity investors' interests with those of the supply chain so as to get Sizewell built as efficiently as possible. However, in the event of a construction cost overrun, the government support package protects INPP in the most severe downside cases. This means there are robust protections in place to sit alongside the cash yield earned from day one. INPP has no obligation to provide further equity commitments to fund Sizewell's CapEx in the event of cost overruns. This is because there is government support that makes financing available by the government. In such a severe downside scenario, INPP is investing alongside trusted partners. The investment advisor has secured governance rights that, all things being equal, are greater than the proportionate 3% equity stake. This includes board representation at the holding company level and an observer at genco, the licensed entity. Because of its observer status, INPP is insulated from liabilities relating to the safety and security of the nuclear plant. The Board's conviction in the adoption of the RAB model for Sizewell is born from our experience with Tideway, and that is why we believe capital allocation and a portfolio weighting to regulated investments further strengthens INPP's investment case. We've just discussed regulatory downside risk protection through the government support package in the previous slide, and although Sizewell C is the first UK nuclear plant financed using the RAB model, it is not the first of its kind. Simply, Sizewell C is borrowing a very mature design using lessons learned from Hinkley Point C, deploying proven technology already in operations across the world. In effect, 80% of Sizewell C's design for infrastructure built above ground level is fully replicated from Hinkley Point C. To put Sizewell C into perspective for Hinkley Point, the replication process is already positively impacting the cost of the second phase of its construction, known as Unit 2, which is being delivered 25% faster than the first phase. Sizewell C also has the potential to create 10,000 new jobs at peak construction, thousands more in the nationwide supply chain, and 1,500 new apprenticeships. There is also a great replication of skills from other civil engineering projects. We've been very pleased to see some familiar faces at Sizewell C's project team who have moved across from Tideway as the tunnel enters full operations. Whilst the transaction structure insulates INPP from the downside case for construction, the replication of proven design at Sizewell C does serve to reduce construction overrun risk and lowers cost uncertainty. The Investment Advisor, our own advisors, and co-shareholders have confidence in this model. As a result, since 2022, INPP's share price has traded at a discount to NAV following a 16-year trading performance at an average premium to NAV of 4%. The Board continues to believe the current share price discount materially undervalues the company. As a result, the Board and Investment Advisor initiated a capital recycling program for INPP, which has included the realization of over £315 million of portfolio assets during the last 24 months to date. This is against the backdrop of an enhanced buyback target of up to £200 million, £82 million of which has been funded to date. Since December 31, £39.4 million of buybacks have added an estimated £0.004 per share to the December NAV. When assessing the investment case for Sizewell C, the Board has diligenced the returns profile relative to a share buyback in line with the target return policy introduced in 2024. To confirm, we anticipate a low teen return from Sizewell C driven by the fixed return or IWAC during the construction period and into early operations. This is therefore significantly above the return implied by a share buyback given the stepped equity investment in Sizewell of approximately £50 million per annum over the next five years. The Board intends to fund these commitments by semi-annual cash payments, principally using cash proceeds from ongoing divestments. For example, the first circa £30 million tranche of investment in Sizewell C later this year will be funded using the £49 million of cash proceeds from the realization of some of INPP's UK schools PPP portfolio, and we remain well on track with our ongoing divestment program. Moving forward, we will continue executing our well-progressed divestment pipeline. The Board is applying the principle that not only is Sizewell C accretive to a share buyback, but it is also accretive to the lower returning assets to be divested. To support the equity commitment, INPP expects to issue approximately £225 million of letters of credit using its corporate debt facility, or CDF. To be clear, though we do not intend to fund the Sizewell commitments with cash from the CDF, the Board and Investment Advisor share a high degree of confidence in our ability to execute the divestment program as part of a broader capital recycling initiative, having realized £315 million in assets in the last 24 months to date. The governance structure of Sizewell C is of particular importance as the agreement guarantees good representation for Amber and strong alignment of interest between the different parties. INPP will invest alongside a strong group of private shareholders as well as the UK government. As discussed earlier, our engagement with the government reaches as far back as 2015 when INPP invested in Tideway and we believe the robustness of our strategic alignment is reflected in the government's framework. The shareholder structure includes the UK government holding circa 45%, French nuclear utility company EDF at 12.5%, and a consortium of private investors holding circa 42.5%. As indicated in the RNS, the consortium includes a leading global infrastructure investor holding 20%, Centrica holding 15%, and the Nuclear Liabilities Fund at circa 4.5%. The latter will be managed by Amber, who will de facto manage a total of circa 7.5% of the initial shareholding in the HoldCo. INPP's interests will be represented through Amber, who will benefit from a seat at HoldCo. Meanwhile, at the generating company level, Amber will have an observer role. GenCo is the entity that benefits from the OFGEM license and has primary decision-making authority for matters in relation to safety, security, and the environment. As such, we have successfully negotiated governance rights which are proportionately higher than those implied by the size of INPP's equity stake. Importantly, while the UK government acts as the strategic sponsor and lead shareholder, the majority of HoldCo is owned by experienced private investors who will collectively help shape Sizewell C's commercial delivery with a focus on performance and capital discipline consistent with the approach INPP has taken on other major UK infrastructure projects like Tideway. This overall structure is underpinned by clear principles, starting with a strict separation between HoldCo and GenCo, meaning nuclear safety matters are only dealt with at GenCo as mentioned earlier and the latter will be supervised by a fully independent board of non-executive directors. The protection of minority shareholders like INPP has been given due consideration with negative control or veto rights in place for reserve matters. In addition, given the culmination of several roles in the project for EDF as a shareholder and a contractor and the government as a shareholder and a debt provider, voting restrictions will apply on key decisions relating to transactions between Sizewell C and parties related to a shareholder. The investment in Sizewell C is a natural evolution of INPP's portfolio composition. INPP has a long track record in working with governments, regulators, and other public procuring authorities to create financing models which both meet bipartisan policy priorities to improve critical public infrastructure and create long-term investment opportunities for low-risk investors demanding inflation-linked income or a sustainable liability match. Sizewell C provides INPP with early first-of-its-kind access to a mature regulated utility investment applied to one of the most critical policy priorities, the next generation. That is how the UK strengthens its energy security with low-carbon homegrown power to provide electricity to the equivalent of over 6 million homes for the years to come. The Board has a high conviction that there is intrinsic value in INPP's first-mover advantage because it allows INPP's investors to access risk-adjusted returns from assets that are, one, effectively de-risked by government-backed guarantees, two, protected by reliable economic regulation to enhance and protect multi-decade underlying cash flows even in uncertain macroeconomic cycles, and three, partnership with co-investors and a supply chain capable of implementing complex construction engineering projects of scale supported by strong downside contractual pressure protections. These attributes are all central to INPP's DNA and since the company's allocation to primary social infrastructure investments, subsequent NHS LIFT programs, and in the last decade INPP's vanguard investments in OFTOs, digital infra, and Tideway. We have a compelling track record to give our investors access to the next generation of infrastructure, but crucially in line with the capital allocation priorities of the day as demanded by the company's shareholders. Sizewell C will further strengthen our ability to generate a blend of stable long-term inflation-linked returns and the potential for capital appreciation we've highlighted on this slide. The expected changes across key portfolio metrics between what we reported as of December 2024 and once Sizewell C is fully deployed in 2030. As you can see, Sizewell C is expected to have a portfolio weighting of circa 10% of NAV by 2030, with the sector NAV split expected to remain well balanced and diversified, and with transport still representing the largest portfolio weighting, followed by energy transmission. Looking at the key portfolio metrics, the inclusion of Sizewell C brings several significant enhancements. First, the project's 60-year operational life extends the long-term cash flow visibility and has a positive impact on the fund's weighted average life, reaching 38 years again in 2030, with Sizewell C adding four years back to a weighted average life that would have naturally decreased otherwise. Second, the portfolio inflation linkage, already a key strength, improves further, rising by 10 basis points to 0.8%, which enhances INPP's ability to deliver real returns. Third, the accretive return profile of Sizewell C raises the portfolio's weighted average discount rate by 30 basis points to 9.3%. Finally, and crucially, Sizewell C strengthens our progressive dividend by extending cash flow such that fully covered dividends will extend from 20 to 25 years, a 25% increase in coverage duration underpinned by predictable inflation-linked revenues. Next slide please. In summary, Sizewell C provides INPP with attractive regulated risk-adjusted returns that will provide support to INPP shareholders' demand for stable long-term inflation-linked returns based on growing dividends and potential for capital appreciation. The adoption of the RAB model and associated regulatory and contractual protections, with which INPP is familiar via our investments in Tideway, Cadent, and OFTOs, to Sizewell C's financing, create a compelling investment case that is accretive to the IRR generated on share buybacks. The stepped equity investment allows for a strong strategic fit with the Board's capital recycling initiatives. We are therefore confident in our ability to execute the divestment pipeline over the next five years to support the funding commitments. This transaction is core to INPP's DNA, providing investors early access to de-risked investments among the next generation of low-risk infrastructure. Lastly, on practicalities and next steps, we are expecting closing of the deal in quarter four 2025 with a few formalities to address in the meantime, and with that I'll now hand back to Erica. Fantastic. Thank you so much, Jamie, and I think we will now turn to the Q and A. Many of you have already kindly pre-submitted questions, so we'll run through those first. Where possible, I might try and synthesize things if there's a bit of duplication, so bear with me while we work through them. Perhaps, Jamie, taking a step back, one of the first questions relates to the portfolio more generally, and I think one of the viewers has attended several of our presentations in the past. They've noted that at the last presentation and in our annual reports, we show declining asset values over the medium and longer term. I think we had that cash flow chart in this very presentation as well. That is sort of indicating, as concessions come to the end, there's a question just more generally about the company's policy of intending to maintain or grow the asset value over time. Perhaps you just comment on that in the first instance. Yeah, sure. Thank you, Erica. Yes, I think what we hope to illustrate with that cash flow graph and NAV graph is to show the longevity and strength of INPP's predicted or forecast cash flows and NAV. It is a snapshot in time and therefore assumes that no further action is taken, which hopefully sends a strong message that if INPP did nothing further in terms of investments or divestments, it has nonetheless a very strong forecast cash flow and NAV for the foreseeable future. Of course, as anyone can see from our track record, INPP and the board take a very close look at the opportunities afforded to INPP. Where attractive opportunities present themselves, we will look to pursue those and potentially invest in those and bring them into the portfolio. Those will therefore naturally provide additionality or accretion to the portfolio metrics. We are not obligated to, and it is down to a decision at the time, depending on the opportunity at hand. Thanks, Jamie. Now, turning back to the transaction specifically, and we touched on this as you ran through how we're thinking about the investment more generally and the risks involved. The question specifically is, can you tell us which scenarios you'll be losing money in and provide some sensitivities? I guess there's a whole lot of detail that sits behind that, but perhaps more generally, just around the kind of return expectations in various scenarios. Sure. I suppose every investment does carry some risk, albeit we see this as a very attractive risk return profile. In many ways, maybe the risks for investors here is more of the loss of the upside potential in returns, given the strong downside protections. The principal risk to investors at this stage is the construction costs and timings, but we are confident that they've been suitably mitigated through the government support package that I mentioned earlier. As such, once construction costs, should they reach a certain threshold, then beyond that threshold, INPP is not required to commit any further capital, and indeed, it is the government, through that government support package, that can step in to support the remainder of the project and insulate INPP shareholders. For context, obviously this is an area we diligenced very thoroughly and looking at scenarios, pretty extreme scenarios, where there are multiples of the forecast construction costs thrown through our model, the sensitivity in the analysis still shows a strong return and downside protection that is broadly in line with the company's current weighted average discount rate. Thanks, Jamie. A somewhat related question, and it's partly answered by what you've already articulated, but just for clarity, assuming no change to the risk-free rates and that the project runs to time, could you tell us how the project's discount rate is expected to evolve over its life and the associated impact of the group NAV? I think we've run through some of that in the stats within the slide, but maybe just to recap on that. Yeah, sure. It is fairly typical that the discount rate, which reflects the risk of an investment, reduces over time during the construction period as the asset is constructed and therefore de-risked over time. We could therefore expect to see a reduction in the discount rate used to value the forecast cash flows of the opportunity of Sizewell C. It may be worth noting that the forecast NAV that we presented on slide 8 actually assumes a static discount rate. The NAV growth there really reflects the growth driven by us moving towards those higher operational cash flows. We could potentially see further NAV growth beyond that through the reduction in the discount rate as the construction risks reduce and the investment becomes more like a steady state operational regulated asset. Thanks, Jamie. Just turning to another question because I think there's a little bit of duplication in some of the questions that have been submitted. It's a bit more prosaic in that it relates to INPP per se and perhaps I can actually address it. There was a question about when the company is going to start paying quarterly dividends. This was a new initiative that we announced. We are expecting to pay a quarterly dividend from September, which would be the first quarterly dividend for 2025, and that will be announced in the coming weeks. Just to cover that one off quickly, the next question also relates to dividend and whether it's covered by free cash flow. I think the answer is yes. You might want to elaborate, Jamie, on the benefits that Sizewell C brings to that coverage as well. Yes, certainly. The investment will pay a yield or a distribution to the company that is INPP from day one following close, and that contributes to INPP's ongoing covered dividend, which, as mentioned during the presentation, we see increasing in length from the forecast 20 years to 25 years. In short, yes, the free cash flows will continue to cover INPP's progressive dividend policy for the foreseeable future. Thanks again. We've partly covered these questions, but for clarity, there's a question around benchmarking the risk return ratio of investing Sizewell C versus a risk-free asset such as a gilt or sort of a low-risk government investment to something like Sizewell C and Offshore Wind. I guess just trying to place Sizewell C relative to other investments that the audience might be familiar with. Sure. I think this gets to the heart of why we see the investment in Sizewell C as a really attractive risk-adjusted return. I think we've already highlighted the low teen returns expected during the construction period, which are underpinned by the allowed regulated revenue during that period. That underpins a strong level of returns relative to the risks, which I've outlined throughout the presentation, which are themselves underpinned by the government support package. Therefore, when you consider those return levels relative to something like a gilt, which is the closest thing to a risk-free investment, those returns for Sizewell should look fairly attractive. Thank you. Just a quick question around why Sizewell C is a better use of cash than buying back discounted shares? I think again it goes to those the point around returns. That low teen return is higher than that implied by share buyback. At the current share price, buying shares back has an implied return that is lower than 11%. You can see therefore the premium that shareholders are getting by investing in this project over a share buyback. There's another question that relates to what the risks are that INPP are assuming and how that impacts the potential. I think we've covered that one already in some of the earlier questions and throughout the presentation. There's a quick question around one of the stats that we have in the slides about the weighted average life of the fund. Perhaps a bit of confusion there in terms of there's two numbers where we're stating that at 2024 the portfolio weighted average life was 38 years and out to 2030 with Sizewell, it's also 38 years, but we're indicating it's plus four years. What is this investment missing? I don't think you're missing much. It's a little confusing, but I'm sure we can clarify. Yes, absolutely, I can understand. It's weighted average life of 38 years, which was projected at December 2024. What we've done as the comparison for Sizewell, because of the stepped investment profile over the next five years, we've therefore assumed that for the comparison of our metrics purposes we are sitting in 2030 and therefore we're effectively in that sense maintaining the same 38 years. Without Sizewell, that weighted average life would be expected to have reduced by about four years to 34 years come 2030. Because we will have invested in Sizewell, that will actually increase by four years to 38 years. Hopefully that clarifies up to that. A question about the portfolio construction post the Sizewell C investment and whether it will reflect the sectors that are anticipated in realization proceeds or the realizations that we're anticipating. What assumptions, I guess, if we make there. I think we've been fairly generic in the assumptions around where those investments may come or those divestments may come from. Yes, that's right. I think it's fair to say that the board and investment advisor keep a very close eye on the diversified nature of the portfolio to maintain a suitable balance. That goes for both when we are considering new investments as well as considering divestments. The divestments we've done to date have come from a range of different sectors, and I think it's fair to assume that will continue and therefore maintain a suitably diversified portfolio. Thanks. Kind of an obvious question to ask, but why do we think that Sizewell C will complete on time and on budget, given that pretty much every new build nuclear in the West has massive delays? I think this investor sounds like they're quite abreast of the kind of spirit in which we're investing and also who bears those cost overruns. Yeah. I think this goes to the heart of the reason for using this model. It's an approach we have considered as well. It goes without saying large projects, nuclear projects have got a track record like that. I think there's perhaps two points here. One is the replication strategy that is being used, copying the Hinkley Point C construction and design. There are very detailed design plans that Sizewell C will benefit from from day one, which gives it a distinct advantage over other nuclear construction projects. In addition, there's also things like the supply chain, the contractors themselves, management, civil engineers. A lot of them will, once they've finished on Hinkley Point C, start to move towards Sizewell C. A lot of that knowledge that has been relearned in many ways on Hinkley Point C will be transferred over to Sizewell C pretty quickly. Therefore, we see the construction risks significantly mitigated because of all those kind of favorable conditions. Having said that, we are not relying on that alone. I think this is a really key point that as investors we're investing here into a regulated investment, not necessarily a nuclear construction investment. It is that regulated investment and the safeguards that are provided through the government support package that protect and insulate investors from those severe downside scenarios where construction costs overrun. I think I mentioned earlier that there is a point at which once construction costs exceed a certain threshold, then the government will step in and insulate shareholders. In that sense, we are confident and comfortable that INPP shareholders are protected from those potential construction cost overruns, should they occur. Great, thanks, Jamie. I think we're kind of nearing the end of the Q and A. Perhaps one last one that I can see. Unfortunately, there haven't been too many for you, Dan, so we'll let Jamie perhaps take this last one. It's about the general environment. The Sizewell C package and other recent changes to renewable energy contrast different look like incentives for infrastructure investors are starting to reflect higher interest rate and build cost environments outside of energy. Are you seeing similar movements in other infrastructure sectors that INPP considers? Has your pipeline of opportunities grown recently? Yeah. I think we can all recognize that the level of investment in infrastructure required in this country and indeed acknowledged by the government. I think what's also very positive is the government's desire to bring in private sector capital, partly because of the capital itself, given constraints on public finances, but also bringing private sector expertise. A good example of that is indeed Sizewell, where including private sector shareholders to instill a private sector ethos and financial discipline and holding management to account should drive the right incentives and behaviors to deliver the construction project on time. Therefore, thinking more broadly, the government are considering other uses of models, such as the RAB model or indeed other methods to attract private sector investment. We asked private sector investors, and we are starting to see that more. Yes, I think the pipeline is looking more attractive and crucially, it's all about ensuring that those models provide the right risk return profiles for investors with the right incentives. One last one popped up while you were speaking, and I will take that and that will conclude. Perhaps it just warrants a bit of confirmation because I think it was something you covered off in the presentation. Just to reiterate, there's a question around the fact that the debt is being provided by government through the National Wealth Fund, the National Wealth Fund, and how we're managing that conflict of interest through our government's arrangements. Yes. It's a very good point. It's one that we considered very carefully as well. Actually, as part of the negotiations, and indeed the government also recognized this as well, certain voting restrictions were put in place so that where there are people, potential or perceived conflicts of interest, for example, the government being a provider of debt and equity, they will be restricted from voting on certain matters. That was considered very carefully, and sorry, I should add, we feel suitably mitigated. Thank you. That looks to be everything. Thank you so much for joining us. Appreciate that. Again, that was at short notice. Hopefully you found that helpful. We will report in September, and no doubt we'll be picking up on this topic again during that time. Of course, we'll hold our usual session on this platform in conjunction with our result announcements. The team will be available at that time as well to answer additional questions that I'm sure may come to mind. We very much appreciate your time and your continued interest in the company. Thank you so much for joining us today. I'll hand back to the platform provider. That's great. Thank you very much for updating investors today. Could I please ask investors not to close the session, as you will now be automatically redirected to provide your feedback. On behalf of the management team of International Public Partnerships Limited, we'd like to thank you for attending today's presentation. Good afternoon to you all.