NN Group N.V. (NN) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning, everyone, and a warm welcome to the NN Group Annual General Meeting. On behalf of my colleagues in the Supervisory Board and the Management Board, I hope that you all are doing well. I would like to officially open today's meeting, which is again a hybrid event. We are presenting and broadcasting to you from our office in the Hague. Welcome to our shareholders present in the room with us here and also to those joining us virtually. With me here today are Hélène Vletter-van Dort, Vice Chair of the Supervisory Board and Chair of the Supervisory Board's Remuneration Committee; NN Group CEO, David Knibbe; and NN Group's CFO, Annemiek van Melick. I'd also like to introduce you to Janet Stuijt, Company Secretary and member of the Management Board as General Counsel. Janet is there. All other members of the Supervisory Board and Management Board are either in the room or following the meeting via the webcast. In addition, I'm pleased to welcome and introduce you to 2 other guests. First, our external auditor, Dick Korf, representing KPMG. And second, our notary, Manon Cremers of Stibbe, who will cast all votes on the basis of the electronic proxies with voting instructions granted to her. Before we start, I'd also like to give a special welcome to the representative of NN Group's Central Workers' Council (sic) [ Central Works Council ], [ H.D. Boonstra, ] who's Chair of the Central Works Council, along with [ Eric Stone and Anaheim ]. Welcome. I will chair this meeting in English, and all the other speakers today will also be presenting in English. If you prefer to follow the Dutch translation of the meeting via headset and have not yet been provided with one, please raise your hand. The webcast is also available in both English and Dutch so all shareholders attending virtually will also be able to listen to the meeting in their preferred language. I have a few formal announcements before we get into the content. The shareholders have been convened in accordance with the applicable law and the company's Articles of Association. The general meeting is thus able to validly adopt resolutions. No shareholders have submitted proposals to be included on the agenda. At the record date, the 5th of May 2023, the issued share capital consisted of 295 million ordinary shares. At that date, 18,477,761 shares -- ordinary shares were held by NN Group itself, so no votes can be cast on these shares. Altogether, 276,522,239 votes are eligible for casting. I will inform you on the present and represented share capital prior to the first voting item. Please note, the entire meeting will be recorded in order to be able to minute the meeting. Just a few other housekeeping announcements. I'll briefly elaborate on the procedure and the order of the meeting. Shareholders were given the opportunity to submit questions on agenda items in advance of the meeting. We have not received any such questions. All shareholders who are present today may ask questions during the meeting. If you want to ask a question, please make your way to one of the microphones. Before asking your question, we ask you first to state your name and the organization you represent, if any, so that these also can be included in the minutes of this meeting. Some of the voting items today will be briefly summarized. An extensive explanation of these items is included in the convocation letter. The proposals that will be put to a vote regard the full proposals as included in the convocation letter. Similar to last year and in line with the usual practice for hybrid meetings, votes can be cast at any time during the meeting. As you can see on your voting device or on the online voting platform, voting is already open, and you will be able to continue voting until the close of agenda item 10, which is the last voting item on the agenda. Voting results will therefore only be shown at the very end of the meeting. For reasons of efficiency, we will combine some agenda items. That means we will first explain each of the agenda items after which shareholders can then ask questions on any of those agenda items. For shareholders who've registered to virtually attend and vote during this meeting, a hybrid general meetings manual and frequently asked questions document has been published on our website. Shareholders are present today in person and who have received a mobile voting device, please keep this device with you at all times and only hand it in upon departure. Instructions for the use of the mobile voting device or voting on your own personal device are included in the presentation. If you no longer are logged in or should you need help, please raise your hand so we can assist you. Shareholders are asked not to make photos, video recordings and audio recordings during this meeting. And lastly, can I please ask everyone in the room to put their phone on silent mode. Short pause for that. So let me now turn to the first matter on the agenda, which is agenda item 2. Here, I'd like to refer to the annual report of 2022 as previously published. I'd like to give the floor to David Knibbe, CEO of NN Group. David will discuss the annual report, and we'll look back on the financial year 2022, including the financial and nonfinancial results. He will elaborate on the progress that is made on the company's strategy as well as its plans to address climate change. The adoption of the annual accounts for the financial year 2022 will be addressed specifically as a voting item in Item 4A. David?

Yes. Good morning, everyone, and welcome, and thank you all for being here, either in person or virtually. It's good to see you all here, and I'm pleased to share with you the achievements of NN in 2022 as well as some words on our future plans. Last year, we were able, again, to demonstrate strong results, and we made significant progress on the execution of our strategy despite the volatile economic and geopolitical environment. After the COVID-19 pandemic came to an end, the world was confronted with a series of developments, such as the war in Ukraine, supply chain disruptions and high inflation. And earlier this year, the devastating earthquakes in Turkey and Syria and this has all impacted many people's lives. It also had an effect on the economic outlook for the coming years, and the prosperity of our customers, our employees and societies at large. This creates a dynamic and complex environment, which requires adaptation. Recent years have shown that NN is able to deal with a high levels of uncertainty. Our business model is relatively resistant to volatility. And inflation risk is limited and hedged to a large extent. We have developed a diversified risk profile for our investments in insurance activities. Furthermore, our strategy remains well aligned with long-term market trends, creating opportunities for growth, and this enables us to stay fully committed to supporting our customers and other stakeholders in navigating the change and the uncertainty that they might face. Now let's look at our performance in 2022. Our purpose is to help people care for what matters most to them. And it's our ambition to become an industry leader known for customer engagement, talented people and our role in society. Over the past years, we have continued to make progress towards this long-term ambition. On customers, we maintained our solid Net Promoter Score. In 8 out of 11 Dutch and international businesses, we scored on or above market average. We are constantly looking for ways to better serve our customers during the most important moments in life, for example, when planning for retirement or when buying a home. On our people, especially in today's very competitive labor market, we are pleased with the high level of engagement of our colleagues as reflected by an increased score of 7.9. And for the first time, the number of women in senior management positions has reached 40%. When it comes to our society and environmental targets, we also took important steps. For example, we committed to the net zero targets in our first climate action plan on which I will elaborate later. In addition, we started the NN Social Innovation Fund. With an initial EUR 5 million of investments, the fund is aimed at supporting early-stage social enterprises focused on the increasing financial, physical and mental well-being. On our commercial and financial performance. We continue to deliver solid results in 2022 based on our strong market positions, our diverse business footprint and a robust balance sheet. Operating capital generation or OCG which is our main financial performance metric, increased by 8% in 2022 compared with 2021 to more than EUR 1.7 billion. Also exceeding our 2023 target of EUR 1.5 billion. This was driven by a strong business performance and supported by higher interest rates. We have seen that uncertainties such as the pandemic or inflation have heightened customers' awareness of risk and vulnerability leading to a greater demand for long-term health and protection products. Particularly in markets with low insurance rates. The high level of inflation is affecting people's disposable income, however, resulting in short-term pressure on sales. Nevertheless, we are confident that the structural demand for the protection products in Europe will continue to result in sales growth over time. Our balance sheet remains strong with a Solvency II ratio of 197% at year-end 2022. This gives us ample financial flexibility and also allow us to continue delivering attractive capital returns to shareholders. We have proposed a final dividend of EUR 1.79 per ordinary share, bringing the total 2022 dividend to EUR 2.79. This is an increase of 12% on 2021. We also announced a new share buyback program for the amount of EUR 250 million. In November last year, we shared new ambitious targets with the market, underscoring our commitment towards long-term value creation for all stakeholders. We increased our OCG, our operating capital generation target to EUR 1.8 billion in 2025, and we expect a mid-single-digit growth of free cash flow. To achieve this, we focused growing the underlying business based on our strategic targets around customer, people and society. Our first strategic target is about customer satisfaction, which we measure based on Net Promoter Scores. The goal is to significantly outperform the competition in NPS. We aim to do this by providing customers with a flawless digital and hassle-free experience. To achieve this, we have offered an omnichannel environment that combines digital channels with proactive personal advice when needed. And we believe that this approach will help us to meet our customer needs more effectively. Furthermore, we have 2 strategic targets around people. The first on employee engagement. We intend to outperform the sector in engagement and the second on diversity in senior management positions. Although we have met our target of 40% women in senior positions, this remains an important focus point for us. We want to retain -- attract the talent that we need for the future. This means investing in technical reskilling as well as upskilling. We also put additional emphasis on the efforts in the area of diversity and inclusion. So our employee base reflects our customer base. Thirdly, our targets reflect our community activities as well as the efforts in the area of climate change. With our work in the communities, we aim to support 1 million people with their financial, physical and mental well-being by 2025. And when it comes to our impact on the environment, we take the role we can play in combating climate change very seriously. We aim for net zero emissions across the entire business, so in our investment portfolio, underwriting portfolio and in our operations. So let's look at the specific climate actions we are taking on the next slide. This is our road map towards net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. As an insurer, we're mostly exposed to the risk of climate change through both our investments and underwriting activities. From the perspective of society in general, there is progress. But this is not going fast enough, and it will be a challenge to reach the targets of the Paris agreement, despite all the efforts in emission reduction and new technology. There's a lot of potential for business to contribute more, which goes for NN as well. Our efforts are focused on our net-zero strategy. Our Climate Action Plan outlines a clear road map to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero in our own operations by 2040 and in our investments and insurance underwriting by 2050. We are more than doubling investments in Climate Solutions, aiming to invest an additional EUR 6 billion by 2030. Our progress so far is that we have invested EUR 3 billion as part of the EUR 6 billion. And this comes on top of the existing EUR 5 billion that we already invested in Climate Solutions. In August 2022, NN raised EUR 500 million of green bonds in the first issue under our sustainable bond framework, to finance green and social projects. And another EUR 1 billion of green bonds was raised in April this year. We are also taking steps to address biodiversity as the loss of biodiversity heavily impacts ecosystems and human life. In October 2022, we signed the finance for biodiversity pledge, and we will set targets and take further actions in the coming years. In addition to our net-zero strategy, we are taking steps to help our customers reduce their carbon footprint and adopt more sustainable practices. For example, by not automatically replace it for new when we receive damage claims, but instead using recycled materials or by helping our mortgages to make their homes more sustainable via [ our label one ]. Looking ahead, we have a strong foundation for long-term sustainable growth. As a company with a history that stretches back more than 175 years, we have weathered many storms, and we will continue to do so with the same sense of perspective, long-term view and with the responsibility that has guided us so far. We believe the insurance industry is a vital part of society, and it's our goal to help ensure that NN, our people, and the customers we serve and the communities in which we operate, remain financially healthy and prosperous for years to come. In closing, I would like to extend my gratitude to all of you, our shareholders, for the continued support and confidence in NN. Again, thank you for joining us today, and we look forward to a good dialogue with you during this meeting as well in the year ahead. Thank you.

Thank you, David. We will shortly open up for questions on this item. In order to facilitate a healthy exchange and a structured process, what we'd like to do is take all questions first. We'll respond to the questions, and then we'll open it up for follow-up questions. So I'd like to ask the speakers once again to please state your name, the organization you represent, if any. Please ask your questions and then allow the following questions to be posted. Please, sir?

Yes. My name is [ Gillian Gaia ]. I work for [ PGM ]. I have 2 questions, one concerning climate -- your climate action plan. Second one concerning biodiversity. My first question is actually twofold. So in July, NN is going to update its climate action plan. I was wondering what part of the insurer's portfolio is in scope and whether you're also considering the SBTi net-zero finance standard when setting targets. And if you're considering submitting those targets to SBTi as well. Should I continue with my second question?

Yes, please.

It's about the impact assessment of biodiversity. I'm very glad that NN signed the finance for biodiversity pledge. Congratulations on that. But could you give us an update where you stand with respect to setting targets and assessing impact?

Thank you very much. Are there other questions regarding annual report? Yes, please. Can you -- we'll give a chance for a follow-up. Please have a seat. We don't know how many questions it will be. Thank you.

[Interpreted] No problem. We have time. We're looking forward to your question, and we're interested. My name is [ Brunink ], I'm a retail shareholder from Rotterdam. And nowadays, I read a lot, and I tamper a bit with artificial intelligence, things like that. I'm quite surprised about all the possibilities of AI, so much more than more possibilities than in the past. And I would like to hear how this could impact your long-term strategy because I think this is so revolutionary that it is some food for thought, and you have to take it seriously.

Once again, if you'll state your name and the organization you're representing.

Good morning. I'm [ Jasper Blom ] of Friends of the Earth Netherlands. If you don't mind, I will ask my question in Dutch.

Sure.

[Interpreted] I'm here also on behalf of 40,000 other Dutch nationals that have sent the company an encouragement to establish an ambitious climate policy. And I'm glad that we're able to exchange some ideas with you about the strategy of NN. I'm worried about climate change, and we can read about the impact every day in the news. There is a big impact, particularly in the global South, and it's urgent that we take action because this is a very unfair situation we need to limit it. Nationale-Nederlanden, the NN Group has an important role to play. Not only is this a moral obligation, but of course, it's a matter of governance because the NN Group is running all sorts of climate-related risk as an insurance company, NN Group with its finance emissions is contributing considerably to emissions. And NN is part of the campaign of Milieudefensie to encourage companies to establish an ambitious climate policy. And legal preliminary investigation is part and parcel of this campaign. And this leads me to my questions. And I hope you can ask my question with a clear yes or no. My question is, will NN Group in 2030, at the very least, reduce its CO2 emissions in absolute terms by 45% to 2030 as compared to 2019? Thank you.

[Interpreted] [indiscernible] is my name. I'm here on behalf of the association for investors in sustainable development. Every year, we engaged with your company. And this year, again, we had an excellent conversation with your company, we analyzed your annual report, and so we came up with 3 questions. Can I ask all these 3 questions in one go?

[Interpreted] Yes.

[Interpreted] First question relating biodiversity. I'd like to thank you that you've shown your climate road map and you have already committed to the fact that NN Group is going to establish diversity -- climate -- biodiversity goals. And you're doing well in terms of biodiversity and engagement, but in your sustainable investment report, biodiversity only appears twice. So there is a possibility to increase your role in terms of biodiversity in your investments. And we would like to hear from you which specific steps NN Group is going to take in the field of biodiversity. Second question, working conditions in the supply chain. We see that NN is taking great strides, serious strides to make sure that the working conditions in NN supply chain being guaranteed. But it strikes us, especially yesterday that the European Union is developing the CSDDD, which was approved by the European Parliament yesterday. And at this point in time, the -- sorting out the last details and the role that financial parties play in this context. We're curious to hear from you which steps NN Group is taking right now to make sure that the due diligence process of the NN Group is aligned with the CSDDD. Last question concerns a new subject, lobbying work of NN Group. And here, the VBDO sees that NN Group is reporting clearly about membership of industrial organizations and overall costs, the NN Group has in terms of investment in -- expenditure in industrial organization, but we are looking forward to a clear view of vision of NN Group. What the cost of lobbying for NN Group and how NN Group views membership of certain industrial organizations, influence map shows that 89% of European industrial organizations do not act in line with the Paris agreement? It could be that indirectly through the membership of the association of insurance companies, VNO-NCW, that it may lobby against the climate goals. So we would request you to include more information about lobbying in next year's annual report and also the costs involved and how NN Group views certain industrial organizations. Thank you very much for that.

Yes. Good morning. My name is [ Kayna ] I speak on behalf of [ FEBA ]. I think it's very efficient indeed to group all the questions together. Let's also hope that the answering is effective as well. I've got about plenty of questions. So you will also got questions to the Supervisory Board. Do you also want to include them in this round?

Yes, please.

Okay. Good. Well, let's first start with the executive part. When running a company, also an insurance company, there are a couple of things which are very important. But one thing which is on top of every list of every serious company is customer satisfaction. If you deliver good products, especially also in an efficient way to your customers, in the end, those customers are happy. They will remain customer, they buy again and so on and so on. Like in previous years, I've had some critical comments about your performance, the company's performance in customer satisfaction. There are many ways of measuring it. But in the end, it was remarkable to see that in the letter of the executive of the CEO, he was rather neutral about the performance relating to customer satisfaction. Well, as your tone of voice in your Supervisory Board was more critical. And actually, if I have to choose sides, I would choose your side. Because I think there are reasons to be concerned about the progress in customer satisfaction as far as NN Group is concerned. And if I could just raise one statistic, I believe that comparing to 2021, the relative customer satisfaction improved in 2022 in 3 business units, but dropped in 8 business units. So this is more than concerning, it seems to me. So I was wondering what is the reason for the change of tone of voice between the executives and the nonexecutives or I have been misinterpreting the statistics. Let me also include a compliment. I hope you don't count as a question a compliment since another thing which is important in running a company is to make sure your employees are not only competent but motivated. And I applaud your progress, which you've been making in your employee satisfaction or engagement. I think that's very, very important. And especially in a time and era where it's more difficult to attract the right level of people for every company. We're suffering as well as VEB with that one. I'm sure you've got challenges there as well. So if your current employees are happy and engaged, well, that's a big plus as well, also helping customers and also returning some benefits for us as shareholders. Now a strategic question, a very different point. If an outsider would look at NN Group and look at your portfolio, you've got your insurance business, life insurance at Holland, non-life Holland. You got Japan. I don't know where that is coming from. You got the rest of Europe insurance and also you got a bank. Now -- every year I'm wondering how does that make sense? Is there any kind of leverage, any kind of benefits, any kind of efficiency? Or wouldn't it make more sense to do something like ASR, your competitor in Holland has done. We fully focused with all insurance activities on one country or may be a very different approach. We, as NN Group, we are only focused on life insurance as we dropped the rest. So I was wondering how you're considering your own portfolio? Is it just a matter of historically, this is the portfolio we have, and we make the best out of it? Or are you seriously considering at some point moving into something which is more streamlined or where there will be more benefits between the different parts of your portfolio. So that's the strategic question. And especially since the Netherlands, both insurance, life insurance and nonlife insurance, they are about 70%, 72% of operating profit. So the reason more -- is it worthwhile the remaining 30% to address so much management attention, so much capital. Or is the growth so much in Japan? I don't think it is. But what are the reasons to really keep the portfolio as it is right now? Then last year, you've sold your investment management business to Goldman Sachs. I was wondering, do you regret this decision? Or are you happy with it? And where does it show where the benefits for us so far? Have you -- are you still doing as much business with your previous business unit as you didn't -- done before or have been moving to different asset managers instead? So I was wondering about that. Finally, I've got a question and a compliment to the Supervisory Board. First, a big compliment. The first time I think I'm doing this. I've been visiting shareholder meetings for 20 years. That's a big -- you blame this year for me, probably 250 AGMs. Your report of the Audit Committees are best I've seen so far -- by far. And I want to show this as an example, to several other companies. This is the way how you report on your supervisory duties. So -- and this is really an example of many companies that they should follow this kind of reporting. That's excellent. However, I've got also small comments. You've got a skill matrix. You name it differently, but on Page 93 you've got a list of skills, which are needed within your Board of the Supervisory Board members. And of course, it's impossible that one person is able to manage all those skills. It's impossible. I believe, and that's my -- that's what -- I believe it's even impossible for any person on Earth to be able to make an informed decision on all those very different topics. And at some point, you have to admit -- listen, I only understand half of the story, but had trust in some of the other colleagues who are specialists in that area. So based on this trust, I say yes to this kind of decision. In the skills matrix, I've seen that every single member of the Supervisory Board is able to make an informed decision on any kind of topic which seems very remarkable to me. So I was wondering if you could reflect on that? Those are my questions. A lot but I hope I'll get a quality answer as well.

Thank you. Other questions, please? If not, I suggest we -- yes, sir.

[Interpreted] I would like to introduce myself. My name is [ Yuwan Spille ]. I'm a part-time shareholder since 1978. And I've done some organizational work since recently, I'm retired with huge construction companies on huge projects. I was a project manager, senior project manager and NN Group is the largest risk analyzer, an assurance and a risk manager. And we built a couple of years ago a huge infrastructural project. And that was very relevant for the Netherlands. So I would like to go through a couple of ideas that refer to both things. We have climate issues with the Netherlands with the storms, with the climate change, with the projections we made to build the construction to keep floods from happening in the Netherlands. Those assumptions were a basis for major projects how are we going to maintain that with a view to the climate change in the future? So my question is, will the NN Group in 2030 reduce its CO2 emissions by 45% as compared to 2019. This is only one step in the huge issues that are facing us all. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much. Very much appreciated. I'd like to now move to answers. I'll just follow the order that we have heard. So we'll start with questions from [ Mr. Gaia from PGM ]. So questions regarding updates to our climate action plan as well as impact assessments on biodiversity and to what extent we'll be updating our targets in the near future. David?

Yes. Yes. So obviously, we now have a -- if you take a step back, so the following targets we have already said. So we've said that we will align with Paris net zero for our operations, our own operations, what we call Scope 1 and 2 and then also for our insurance portfolio and our investment portfolio. Now that is 2050, that is obviously far away still. Then we also set interim targets for 2025 and 2030. For 2025 on our own operations, 35% reduction, 70% reduction in 2030. And then neutral by 2040. In our case, I mean, we're not a production company. So this is mainly buildings, travel. It's important to do. But obviously, it's not the biggest part of our scope. So that's today for that, then we have set a target of 25% reduction of greenhouse gases for our corporate investment portfolio. So the corporate bonds, corporate equity, these type of investments. So this is what we call Scope 3 and 45% by 2030. So that's what we're working on. Additionally, and you've seen that also in the road map, obviously, this is not the full scope. So there's other scopes in what we call Scope 3 that you can think about, which is, for example, the insurance portfolio. So to what extent can we influence greenhouse gas emissions of houses that have a mortgage from us, for example. So what you've seen in the road map is that we're currently working on also targets for the mortgage portfolio to see. And that is quite complex because you need to measure output of a house. Now I think half of the houses in the Netherlands, for example, have an energy label but the other ones don't. And even these energy labels don't tell the full story. I mean if somebody has a jacuzzi in their backyard, there's quite some emissions, but we don't necessarily see that showing up. So the measurement is still complex, but I think we're making real progress, and I expect also that in the coming period that we will also announce a target for the -- let's say, for the mortgage investment portfolio. That still remains the government bond, which is obviously also a large investment, but then you have to go -- you're dealing with French government bonds or German or Dutch. There, the thinking is -- and again, this is a collective action where we're seeing how do you measure this output. And over time, we also need to set targets there. that's the, let's say, the work in progress. I think the largest part, like I said, the -- on the corporate portfolio and around footprint is already clear in terms of target and execution. Now -- so that's the scope. So insurance -- going back to the question, insurance will come in scope, but it's not yet. And that is, as I said, for example, on housing or on motor insurance. We are working on this. We will come out with targets, but these are not yet part of the targets that we have set. I mean the plan on July, a difficult question, of course, because we're still working on the plan, and I don't think this is the moment to fully disclose what we will be announcing in July that still needs to go through proper governance. But I can assure you, and you've seen it also in the [ row ], but we continue to make progress here. And you will also see that in the July plan that we will submit. I think the next question was on AI.

I think actually this, in fact, is assessment on biodiversity...

Yes. biodiversity. Yes. So biodiversity, I think I mean it's a very important topic. The intention for it is growing and rightly so. I mean I think the concern, obviously, is that the more we have a disturbance of biodiversity and ecosystems, it could become very disruptive for the world, for food, for all sorts of other impacts. I think the honest answer is the thinking in terms of biodiversity is not as advanced yet as it has been around greenhouse gases and the targets that we have set there. This is also the reason why we signed this pledge on the biodiversity. That means that we're currently working on how do we measure in all of our activities, what is actually hurting biodiversity and what activities do we have that actually support a better biodiversity. And a combination of that, we're going to -- we will set targets on. That's why we're on in all these working groups. And we expect next year also to provide insight into how we plan to do this. It doesn't mean that we do nothing in the meantime. I mean there's initiatives around clean water and other things that we already signed on to, and we support, but the full scope of biodiversity, we will give more insight into in 2024.

Please?

Some more follow-up. For the first question. I also asked where NN would consider submitting the updated climate plan to SBTi.

Yes. Yes. I'm trying to get away from that one. So yes, the -- so in July, we will come out with that. And obviously, we're looking at all these measurements because there is a lot out there. I think there's some really good measurements. I think we also need to see how well we can apply this to our business. We really want to avoid also complying with things and later on, having to come back and say, this might not be -- our interpretation was different. So this is certainly something that we're looking at, but you'll kind of have to wait until July to see it.

We'll wait, but we'll encourage you to do something.

Yes. Noted.

I hope I pronounced this correctly from [ Jer Brunink ] a question regarding AI indeed.

Yes. Yes. That was good Rotterdam question on -- so what we're really doing with this. And it is a very big topic and not just because it's big in the news now. I think the impact of AI and data is very substantial. And so we launched already a few years, our own internal policy on AI. And part of the question, obviously, is can you do it? Can you technically do it? These algorithm have been there since the 60s. So I think there's a technical question. Do you have the right data? And can you do it? But more importantly, there's also another question, which is very clear in our policy do we want to? Because -- and I think that's also the public debate. Now some of the things that AI can do, you can question from a role of society as a company, do we even want to do this? And so we have a separate debate on the technical side but also on the -- internally on our policy. Do we want to apply certain AI tooling or not? Now if you look at what we do today, to be honest, I think we're quite advanced in this. We have, for example, our own ChatGPT in our own hosted environment. So this is the existing ChatGPT but hosted in our own NN environment. And our colleagues can use that. A lot of it is just for personal efficiency. There's questions you can ask. There's even draft press release and speeches, information you can get. So there is a topic around personal efficiency. There's around 2,000 people already on that in own secure environment because it's very important for us that whatever we do in that environment is not channel back to any other provider, let's say, that we work with. So that is one topic where it is important. An example is, for example, when we use a speech to text. So we have -- when customers call us, you get -- when the call is over, you want to make a few notes on that you know what has been agreed with this customer. And AI tooling can help already draft some of the text so that an employee then can automatically just check it instead of having to write everything themselves. That creates efficiency. I think coding is a real topic. Some of the insurance companies have older systems. There's always a question on how well can you still find IT people? And I think the advantages in coding from AI look very substantial. So I think all in all, the impact is big. And that's why I also mentioned in my speech, we need to significantly upskill our own colleagues as well, including ourselves. I'm currently also going through a training. So it is -- there's a real upskilling. I think the good news is so far, the experience has been -- it is possible. So we'll have to look at around talent based but it is possible also to upskill. But I do think the impact will be significant over time.

David, I think the next question was from [ Mr. Blom ] here. [ Blom ] from the Friends of Earth [ Netherlands ] regarding climate change and our commitments vis-a-vis reduction commitments. I'd like to just tell you we share your concerns. And I know that doesn't surprise you, but I think it's important to note. Thank you for sharing them with us. David, over to you.

Yes, indeed. So I think we share the concerns, we obviously also see what's happening, we all see that when you live in society, but also from the insurance point of view, we had very bad floods in Limburg and in Germany last year. [ Weather ], it's clearly an urgent topic. I also think that we play an important role in that. And that's also why you have seen that we are very serious around the commitments and the targets that we have set. Specifically, the question on the [indiscernible] or I guess the full value chain is for us a complex question. I'm not even sure what is meant with exactly that. So what I have tried to elaborate on in the beginning is we set targets on our own Scope 1 and 2, 35%. And if I take 2030 as a date, we plan to reduce our emissions with 70% on our own scope. And then for Scope 3, today, it is on the corporate investment portfolio where we say 45%. But we also need to say that that's not our full Scope 3. And as I said, we're still working on insurance. We're working on the mortgage portfolio. So there's more work that they will do. And in the coming period, we will continue to strengthen our commitment there.

Thank you. I think we can go to questions from Mr. [ Sculton from VBDO ]. Comments on biodiversity like concrete steps we will take in the future, our influence on work situations in our value chain, a specific reference to something that has just now been issued, the CSDDD on Europe. So how we will think about that and respond. And then finally, a couple of questions regarding our lobby activities and what you can expect from us in terms of our vision on lobbying in our next annual report?

Yes. So I think I tried to cover on biodiversity important topic, signed a pledge will come back in '24 with more progress on how we plan to do this. I think working conditions is an important topic. So when we talk about engagement with companies, obviously, there's a lot of attention for greenhouse gases and emissions and rightly so, but we engage on a lot more. Living wage is an important topic that we also engage on with companies, sometimes together, sometimes individually. And I also see some real progress there. I think a very good example is that we've been actively engaging with the cacao or chocolate industry on 3 topics, which is around child labor. It's around access to -- access to education and overall paying what we call living wages. So on those 3 elements. Now if we look at the progress, then we were around 43% of the companies that we were engaging with. We're actually meeting the 3 criteria. That has moved up to over 70% since last year. So we do see that engaging also on broader topics can work, not always. But it is an important topic, and it is part of our engagement scope, which is clearly broader than just the -- let's say, the greenhouse gas and the climate impact. I cannot answer the question on CSDDD yet. What exactly -- I mean, that just recently came out, but we will for sure take a look at it and see whether we can incorporate that in our engagement with our -- let's say, are the companies that we invest in. On lobbying, yes, we have disclosed as much information as we can. We are not -- I would say the individual lobbying is not we don't hire individual lobby firms to lobby for NN so that is all very limited. So what we do is we work through associations. So in the Netherlands, Verbond van Verzekeraars, could be FENO in Netherlands. And there's other European insurance Europe, there's other European groups where we are part of. The ones that we are in, we take a very active role. There's many of these lobby organizations. The ones that were in, we take a very active role. So for example, Verbond van Verzekeraars is currently chaired by Chair Bosklopper, my colleague, even the Life Board -- the life from Verbond is also chaired by an NN person. So I think I'm personally quite involved in FENO. So I'm not so concerned that we are part of lobbying efforts where there would be things that are being lobbied on that we disagree with. We are the ones that we are participating, we take a very active role. There is always a give or take. In this lobby organization, you cannot always get what you want, but an important topics. We're always very aligned and involved in these things. And we'll continue to report on that, see where we can -- for me, even more next year. But I just want to manage your expectations. There isn't much more than these branch organizations that we are part of.

Thank you, David. We'll now go to the questions from Mr. [ Kayna from FEVA ]. Most questions as well as a few comments, which will no doubt respond to all. I think first probably best if we cover the questions that I think we're directed toward you, and then I'll come back and address the issues that were directed to the Supervisory Board. So what I picked up is a little bit of interpretation of our numbers regarding where we are vis-a-vis our client relationships. I understand the question. So I'm also looking forward to the answer. We ask the same question from time to time. A compliment on employee engagement. Please don't step over that. I think it's quite important that we also demonstrate that here. And we had a question regarding our portfolio, strategic question as you place it. So if I summarize it, I won't repeat it, does our portfolio makes sense? Are we the best owner? And then finally, a question on having sold NN IP, I mean well about a year ago, what do you think about that decision now? And how can we see the benefits for the NN Group?

Yes, customer satisfaction. Yes. Interesting you picked that up. To be honest, I didn't, but I don't think we are misaligned there. There is always kind of perspective of glass half full or glass half empty. We have set a very clear target on 2025, we want to significantly outperform the market on customer satisfaction. For '23 that meant that we set a target that we want to be in line with the market. The reality was in many of the markets we were below. If I look at where we are today in 2022, as we said, we said 8 out of 11 markets we are currently on or above. Now numbers move. And there's many things that influence customer satisfaction. Some we influence, some we don't. I could also -- so we also -- it's also a relative game. What I'm pleased with is the progress that we have seen. 8 of 11 is progress. I've seen, obviously, also the look through for Q1, and we continue to see a positive trend. So that is the good news. Reality is also, if we want to significantly outperform, that means not a little bit, but significantly, that's still quite a way to go, given that 2025 is not that far away. And I think so it's a -- so therefore, we're -- now it's an important target. We're focused on it, but it's not one that is clearly already in the bag. This is still we require a lot of work from all of us to achieve that. And so we'll continue to steer on it, I will continue to report on it, the progress also going forward. What is very clear is that the underlying trend is positive. And whether that is, first of all, we need to sustain that and it also needs to ultimately translate into significantly outperform. I mean we have examples in markets where we're a little bit better than the competition, but we don't count it because it needs to be significantly above. Thank you for your compliment on engagement. It is very important. I think when we launched this in '19, it wasn't as common. I think now -- I mean we all see tight labor markets, how important it is that you have -- you keep talent in your company and that they're engaged on it. So it is something that we continue to work on. On the portfolio -- no, the portfolio, and you've probably seen that is something that we very actively manage. If you go back a few steps, we had, for example, we divested Bulgaria. We have divested a closed book in Belgium. I will come back on NN IP, obviously, where we also divested investment partners to Goldman Sachs. And we invested a lot. We acquired VIVAT. We acquired a while ago [ Aegon in Slovak ]. More recently, we acquired MetLife in Greece and in Poland. So it's what we call very active portfolio management. So we continue to ask ourselves the question, are we the right owner of a business? And that is essentially 2 criteria. One is the unit itself needs to make a good return. So by itself, it needs to deliver results. And the second criteria does it add also to -- strategically to the group. And to name a few, you mentioned the NN Bank, for example. And the bank is a substantial bank in the Netherlands. It's very important for us in order to originate mortgages, which is an important part. It also brings in a lot of savings customers for us. And these savings customers are very digital. They're very online. They are constantly on their app in their portal, and it creates a lot of digital traffic that also creates opportunities for other business units. So the bank is very integrated there. We don't advertise the bank. We call it all Nationale-Nederlanden but it is a very integrated part of the propositions that we offer, and we've seen that customers also don't care whether it's a bank or an insurance. They just want a savings products and mortgage or a pension product. You mentioned Japan. You said how did that happen? Well, that happened more than 30 years ago. Japan has been part of NN group more than 30 years ago. We have a very strong position in the protection space, in the SME space. It's a very large market in that space, the corporate life space. We're a top 3 player. So we're actually very proud of our Japanese unit. On the question of overall portfolio, yes, we want to remain an international company. We think the mix of a strong Dutch business, combined with international markets creates a very good platform for growth. It also creates diversification effects. It creates scale. We focus on life protection mostly in those markets, so we also see synergies there. So the overall aim is to maintain an international footprint. And you might have seen also the targets for 2025 that there's a significant step-up in growth of capital generation for Europe also. So Europe is becoming more and more substantial versus the Netherlands, if you look at the development of the targets. Then there was a question now on GSAM, do you regret it? No. I think in hindsight, the deal was well timed, but this was not about timing. This was about a strategic view that we were convinced that NN IP, given the size that we have in this global consolidation of asset managers which struggled to be very successful in growing by themselves. So that was the angle of NN IP. It created for us the opportunity and you're asking where can we see this. It created for us the opportunities to work with multiple asset managers based on different mandates and also the ability to select for different products, different asset managers. So far, and that's been happening. We work with over 10 asset manager, GSAM or NN IP still -- obviously, our largest partner. But we do work with other asset managers. And -- but over time, how this goes, these mandates are typically 3 years, and so we will need to continue to evaluate whether we have the best asset manager for our products, and that's both for our customers and we have investment products for customers and for our own general accounts. Overall, we're happy with the progress and the benefits that it's bringing. And then on the skill set of the Supervisory Board. I'm also very curious. Let me listen to that...

Let me just follow up on the question about are we satisfied with the decision [indiscernible] NN IP. As David just indicated, in hindsight, the timing looks pretty good. You never know that upfront. And the economics associated with the transaction, we were also from a supervisory perspective, happy with. I can tell you it wasn't a difficult decision from an economic point of view. But the primary reason we took that decision, it continues to be the primary thing we're looking for today is how to best position ourselves to provide the most attractive products and services to our clients. It was overriding strategic decision. And we think through the structure that we set up now, both the relationship with GSAM but also the possibility to use other providers that we put ourselves in a position to offer the best products and services to our clients. And before I get into the skill set of the Supervisory Board, which I certainly will come back to. Let me first compliment you on your style. I think it's actually quite constructive. I have questions, critical questions, but also where you see something that you appreciate that you also note that. I think that's a very, very healthy style. So I'm going to start with the same [ time ]. I'll compliment you on 20 years of persistence, and I would even say, not just of persistence but also effectiveness. So I think having a constructive dialogue in these types of meetings, 20 years and 250 is a lot, though, but compliments to you on that is actually exactly what we'd like to see. So compliments to you but also thank you to you. The difference in view between the [Foreign Language] that we have to implement new policies, you have to go through diligence procedures that aren't necessarily the thing customers are looking to us for, but it's a part of life, we have to do that well as well. So we recognize it from time to time the dips, but our aspirations are high as David has suggested, and we see the progress, but we also see that there's still work to do. Now as to the skills matrix, Page 93 of the annual report, whether or not all of us are indeed in a position to be able to take informed decisions. A couple of things I'll say about that. When we look at ourselves, we do try to both recognize the skills but also the gaps, the whole purpose of that skill matrix is to say, what is it do we think is necessary, collectively, to be able to fulfill our role as a Supervisory Board. This is not rocket science what we're doing here. In order to be an effective Supervisory Board member, I think it takes commitment, engagement, an open mind, an independent mind, willingness to learn. And if I think about the process that we as a Supervisory Board go through and preparing ourselves for decision-making, informing ourselves both from management as well as from other parties, exchanging ideas amongst ourselves, I believe we indeed put ourselves in a position all of us to be able to make informed decisions. That does not mean to suggest that we're experts on everything because we certainly are not. The reality is when you're looking to constitute a Supervisory Board or any team for that matter. I think you look for diversity. And you're always looking for the proverbial, in Dutch, anyway, there's a saying, the proverbial 5- or even 6-legged sheep. We haven't found any of those. But what we have found is we found colleagues on the Board who are willing to add their experience, add their personalities, their characters, add their critical views and complement one another. And I think that collectively then also puts us in a position working with the management team to be able to come to informed decisions. Not perfect decisions but informed. Thank you.

I think we have one more question.

Yes. We do. [ Mr. Spille ].

On behalf of [ Phoebe ]. Just to avoid becoming too friendly to each other. I've got some critical remarks on your answers, all great answers except [ 2 ]. The last one, I fully agree that if you look at the skills matrix of the Supervisory Board as a collective, then I believe and I hope, because that's what you have as a collective, you are able to make informed decisions. I strongly doubt still despite your explanation, every individual and every single topic is able even after explanation, either after commitment and the training and so on is still being able to make an informed decision. And your business you may say, well, it's not that complicated -- I think this is bloody complicated from a financial point of view or from an IT point of view. I think strategically, it's much easier to understand if your IQ was above 110, I'm sure you all have that. So I strongly doubt or you're maybe too lenient towards yourself. Well, informed it means do you understand the sentence? But can you really judge whether a yes or no is a good answer. I doubt that. So maybe you're more lenient in that respect. The real criticism I'm having is on the comment of [ Mr. Kanabe ] on the customer satisfaction, namely that a lot of progress has been made, let me say, that the trend is positive. That's what you said. I'll just repeat from your own annual report. In 3 -- in only 3 of your markets, you were above average, so better than the competition. Last year, a year earlier, you were better in 5 business units. That's not a positive trend. That's -- you're lagging behind. NPSR scores improved in 3 business units. You mentioned that, but you dropped in 8 business units compared to last year. So the trend as far as '21 to '22 is not -- certainly not positive. As at best, it's a mixed bag. And finally, maybe that's a hidden question. That makes me a little bit suspicious on Page 15. You say, "Well, I know the customer satisfaction reporting and said, it's a delicate matter. It's very difficult to get a grasp on it and to compare years and to compare business units, compare countries, I understand, I think, the challenge that is facing you. I'm not sure however that your solution is the right one because you're indicating you're planning an aggregate reporting. It means you're bundling probably several business units or countries together. So we see less volatility in the results. And we can sleep much more safely and without too much -- being too anxious. Actually, I want to see the volatility because then you can really pinpoint this business unit in this country, we have an issue. And then -- and I'm sure you will still do this internally, but you will not provide the transparency to us as shareholders. So I'm actually still concerned about becoming more -- we're reporting more aggregate level. But underneath, there may be some really big issues hidden. And volatility is not the issue we're having. And the issue is that you're not catching up on the competition, certainly not outperform the competition with the speed that matches your own ambitions in 2025. So that's my critical comments. So I'm sure you'll find me less friendly right now, which is actually I'm fine with that. But I'm more critical than you are. It seems as far customer satisfaction is concerned.

Okay. Thank you very much. Actually, I'm not unhappy with your critical comments. Quite the contrary. It's also our role to be critical with each other. Constructive criticism is very helpful. So again, thank you. I'll start first and then I'll get to David on the customer satisfaction. You know what, I may surprise you. And I'll simply say, we'll look again at the Supervisory Board. We look at that every year. We're always in the process of also benchmarking ourselves in some ways or another and looking for new members, looking at our own succession planning. And I think it's a very healthy thing to do. And I'm perfectly willing that we take a good look again at the way in which we've scored ourselves on the various skill set. And we'll certainly come back to you with the next report. So you'll be able to see it, and maybe we can continue the discussion.

Yes. Most other companies have seen those skills matrix and many other companies as well, they leave blanks. You should not be ashamed of yourself that you're a legal expert and you try to manage also, keep your financial knowledge up to speed like business from [indiscernible]. However, that you say IT, that's really -- I know the IT myself. I've worked at an IT company in the '90s. We've got an IT expert within the [ VB ] and we're a very simple small organization. At some point, I have to -- I trust you because I'm not sure. I'm not sure but I trust you. Is that an informed decision? No. It's because I trust my colleague. And it's risky. I understand that, and it's called more risky if you're running a big company like yours. So I think you should not be ashamed that in the skill matrix, there are some open spots with every single individual. But as a collective, all the spots are covered for your whole Supervisory Board. So I think that's what other companies are doing as well. So well, as your Audit Committee report as an example to other companies, maybe you can learn a little bit of modesty from other companies as far as your skills are concerned.

Thank you very much. David, over to you.

Yes. I understand your conclusion. If you just judge at -- the disadvantage of what we do with these targets is like one moment in time measurement, and that's the one where we report. I think we have the luxury that we look at a lot more. For example, NPS transaction. So we monitor very closely on every time a customer does transaction with us, how does he experience that? And we've seen -- and over time, if you have enough transactions, the relationship NPS will also move. Now this takes time because unfortunately, we are in a business where we have limited customer contact. People don't call us every week. So we don't have a lot of opportunities to do that then well. So there's a couple of underlying trends that make me more positive than just the [ pinned bound in time ] are you 3% above or below, which is rightly so what you're pointing at -- so transaction NPS continues to develop well. That's one. Two, and that's, by the way, was also out in Dutch media, there's the broker satisfaction scores in the Netherlands. And for the first time, we've seen that NN has become the #1 insurance company according to brokers in the Netherlands. So I haven't seen that in over a decade. In fact, there's 9 categories. And in all these categories, we were in the top 3. And then collectively, we were voted as best insurance company. So I see underlying both in transaction NPS in distribution channels in the interaction, I see an underlying positive trend. As I said, I've also had the luxury to see some of the Q1 measurements. So I have no doubt that there is a positive trend. It might not always be reflected in an NPSR because, as I said, there's many things that influence that, and it could be if there's an election or there's something happened with banks, you get different people, customers suddenly give different scores. It's a fact of life. It is a subjective thing. But I have no doubt that 2 things are true here. There is a positive trend. However, we still have a big step, and that's probably where we agree. We still have a big step to go towards 2025. And the positive trend is based on more than just the point in time NPS measurement. So you could have the same answer to me next year, if suddenly 7 units are doing very well, that I will still be quite critical because, again, we look at more than that. I think on putting it together is a different reason. And I don't want to diminish some of the business units. But by just talking about 11 units, you judge the Netherlands with the same way there's Turkey. Well, Turkey is a very small operation. The Netherlands is very big. So that's why we said it's also good to put it a little bit in perspective that the large units where most of the customers are -- should also have a heavy weight in our overall performance as a company because we have 17 million customers, but they're quite concentrated in Poland, in Turkey, in the Netherlands. So these need to weigh probably a bit heavier than the other ones. There's no intention on hiding individual scores if that's your question.

Thank you. Before we go through the question from [ Mr. Spille ], I'd also just like to recognize and thank you for your compliment on the Audit Committee report. As he is also sitting in the room here, I think it would be fair for me to also recognize Hans Schoen, who's the Chair of our Audit Committee, who has a very significant role in that. Of course, other members of the committee and the company support him and that activity, but thank you, Hans. And now to the question from -- the last question from [ Mr. Spille ], Actually, 2 questions with reference to prior year's construction projects and issues with water. I think he had 2 questions. The first is somewhat broad. We'll, in NN, be able to keep its head above water, given the changes going on in climate? And number two, he has a specific question regarding a 45% target for Scope 1, 2 and 3.

Yes. So obviously, the second one is the same question that already answered what is in scope for our 45%. And also what is not versus what you call the full value chain. So nothing new to add to that question. I think on the flooding, yes, that is a very serious concern. I mean, as I said earlier, there is a -- we have serious floods in Limburg, even more in Belgium and in Germany. And we are -- in our modeling, in our ORSA, which is around risk assessment, we are calculating with -- that these events, unfortunately, will happen more often. So higher frequency and also a bigger impact. There's 2 things obviously, that are important and for us one is the -- when it happens, can we deal with it? And the Limburg experience has started a lot. And that means that we're dependent on other reinsurance companies, we're also dependent on the government and there's a lot of discussion ended up on who's responsible for what. The positive outcome of that is that we are in a very good cooperation now trying to sort out with the Dutch government on -- and the Belgium government and on who's responsible for what, because insurance companies cannot fully cover flood risk, but we do cover to a certain extent, certain risks. And where exactly and we want to really avoid that customers get stuck between either the government or insurance companies. We sold it in Limburg by essentially just paying out more, but this is not a long-term sustainable solution. So like the terrorism pool, the antiterrorism, which is also a difficult risk to ensure where we worked out something with the government, the plan is to do that also for flood risk. In terms of financial impact, this is what we take into account into our modeling. I mean, as big as the floods were and how much impact it had on people's lives, the financial impact in our case after reinsurance was EUR 40 million, which is still financially a very manageable number, but obviously, the impact for people's lives was huge. And so I think that's one part. The other part is prevention. What can we do in terms of prevention, warning people? Is there things we can do? And this is also part of the -- for bond scope on what can we do in terms of prevention. When people live in certain areas. And then third, obviously, is a very big picture, which is around climate change and what can we do in order to influence our footprint through our -- mainly our investments in our own footprint, which is the targets I spoke about.

Thank you very much. With that, I would like to close this portion of the meeting. This agenda item and move to the next agenda item. Yes, of course, please.

[Interpreted] Yes, my name still is [ Brunink ]. And what I haven't heard today is the whole story from the financial officers, the CFO. I've been here for an hour now, and I still don't know whether you made a profit or incurred a loss. I do know that interpreting profit and loss numbers of insurance companies is far too complicated for me. So I would like to hear an explanation of the financials and also how to interpret the financials.

I the question is -- to summarize, well, first, did we make a profit? But perhaps more importantly, can you give a little bit of a sense regarding our financials and how they should be interpreted?

Yes, I can. Thanks for the question. When we look at our financials, and I agree, even as a CFO for an insurance company, it is not the easiest and it's also not the easiest to explain. We really focus on reporting our financials on 3 items. It's the operating capital generation. We also have a target for that. We actually performed pretty well on that last year, and that went up by 8%. If you would exclude the impact of the sale that we -- if you would include the sale of NN IP, if you would leave that out, it actually went up by 16%. It's an important metric to us because it shows what we, on a sustainable basis, actually have contributed to the company, and it works from a long-term investment perspective and it leaves out model and assumption changes. So it gives a bit of a more of an underlying view. The reason why it has increased is partly based on the increased interest rates while we have seen it develop pretty strongly. We've also seen pretty good underlying business performance there. We also look at our solvency ratio and how that has moved. That has moved last year from 213% at the end of '21 to 197%. What happened there is that essentially, we did generate sufficient operating capital to cover all the capital return, the dividends and the buyback that we have distributed to our shareholders, but we did see the impact of financial markets on solvency and that was primarily driven by spread movements and by equity investments. If we look at the overall financial stability, we're very comfortable with 197% of solvency. We also have a large cash capital buffer at the group of more than EUR 2 billion at year-end. Plus we have a low leverage ratio, and that leverage ratio is in line with our credit rating ability. So from the capital that we've generated from the total balance sheet strength, we're very comfortable. On the operating profit level and on the net result level, there are 2 different trends. On the operating result level, we've seen a slight deterioration that was -- we ended at around EUR 1.7 billion, where we basically decreased by EUR 300 million versus the year before. That EUR 300 million decrease of operating result was half related to the sale of NN IP because we didn't have those results anymore in our basis. And the remaining EUR 150 million was partly related to the businesses and partly related to the fact that in '21, we had some extraordinary dividends in our life company from all private equity investments. So from an operating results perspective, it was relatively stable despite all the turmoil that we've seen in the market. The net result is a different story. That actually decreased and that decreased quite a bit, that decreased by over EUR 2 billion. And the main reason for that is what we've seen there, the impact of markets which we don't take into account in the operating result. But if interest rates rise, we do -- we've seen various impacts on the assets that we have. That has a lot of revaluations, for instance, in the case of our real estate portfolio and the equity markets have also moved a lot, which has led to impairments on the equity markets. That's why from a net result perspective, it was not a positive year. If we look at our balance sheet, I already added there that we're very comfortable with the solvency ratio, with the leverage position that we have. We have seen a fluctuation in the equity, which is also largely driven by the movements in the markets. So our equity position has actually come down quite a bit. We're not worried about that because it's market movements. And if we look at the introduction of the new accounting rules, because from a financial community, people have been working really hard on the introduction of IFRS 17, we actually see that, that introduction of new rules will make our equity more stable. Because what we've had in the past, flowing through our equity position, if interest rates would go up, then the value of our fixed income would come down and we would have a negative impact on equity. On the liability side of our balance sheet, we would not have that re-rating. On the IFRS 17 that will be more aligned. So we will not just have the large fluctuations in equity. It will be more stable. So from that perspective, I would guess that from the annual report next year, which will be about 23 under the new IFRS rules, we would see that there the development of our equity position will be more in line with Solvency II and will be more stable. Net-net, I would have to conclude from operating capital generation perspective, our most important metric. It was a very good year. We still have a stable level of solvency, good cash capital position and a solid credit rating.

[Interpreted] I'll do this in Dutch [ says the speaker ]. My name is [ Bergit ]. I'm a retail shareholder. I'm also speaking on behalf of the environmental organization, Milieudefensie, [ speaker needs to speak into the microphone for the interpreted here ]. Yes, I wanted to talk about the Paris agreement. I just saw in your presentation sort of [indiscernible] with all sorts of goals and only at the very end, did I see Scope 3 with the overall portfolio. As far as I know, the judge has issued a binding ruling that in 2030, you reduced your CO2 by 45% as compared to 2019. So yes, I was wondering why wasn't that on the slide? And I'd like to hear, yes or no, are you going to commit to that? To also Scope 3, reduce your emissions by 45% because it was a binding judgment issued by the court. So this was for Shell. So why wouldn't it apply to you? And so I'd like to hear a yes or a no. And then you say, "oh, that's difficult, difficult mortgage portfolio, difficult, difficult. How can we reduce emissions?" Well, you are being paid for difficult issues. So I think, put your money where your mouth is. And I also hear, "well, we insure everything, but we do have a good deal with the government that we don't have to pay out too much." But you are insuring the people who are breaking your windows or the people who are setting fire because apparently, you make more money with that than with insuring houses. I'd like to hear your comments and whether you're going to comply with the climate agreement. That's what it boils down to. And why not? If you're not going to do it. And I don't want to hear that it's difficult, difficult.

Excuse me. Thank you very much.

Yes. So a couple of things. I mean if we look at our own -- so obviously, we have set the targets on our own Scope 1 and 2. which, by the way, more than the 45%. Yes, Scope 3, whether we like it or not, is a very complex monster because there's a lot of angles and not always that easy to measure and report because, as you can understand, we are dependent also on other companies that we invest in on their disclosures in order for us to report progress on it. And we also want to avoid setting targets that sound really good, but that we don't know exactly how to achieve an influence. So it is work in progress. And I actually think we're at the forefront of this. I think we're doing a lot but also, like I said, we still need some time for mortgages and some of the other items. I do expect that in the coming period, as you can see in the chart even this year that we will come out also with plans for those parts of the portfolio. I couldn't follow your comment on insuring [indiscernible] and some of these other things and on the flood risk. So maybe I should elaborate a bit what I meant. What happened in Limburg is that we've seen people's houses that are -- were flooded, unfortunately. And you end up in a debate in that house that if this water is what we call horizontal water meaning it comes from the Maas, which is then covered by the government? Or is it coming vertically from the sky? Or does it come from a little creek because then it's not the Maas and then we cover it. Now this is -- it all sounds very nice, but practically, you're standing in somebody's house that is flooded, there's a meter of water in there, and you're wondering is this horizontal or vertical water. I mean that doesn't work. So what we ended up doing is then saying, "okay, fine" and we've actually been in the newspaper with that as well that we have extensively covered that and ended up just paying out instead of trying to figure out per house exactly what this was. What I was saying is this is not a sustainable way because if we start covering everything, it just means we have to increase our premiums a lot. And by the way, it's also a -- the government has a facility for it. So there are things we can improve but we're very serious around taking our social responsibility here, and that's why we try to solve also the Limburg case. But also then going forward, we need to find a more structural solution that works. On insuring, first of all, it's good to be aware we are primarily a retail and small SME insurance company. So the large projects is not in our scope, but we still will look at how we can improve our footprint around our insurance, as you have seen in our chart.

[ Mrs. Beaumont ], I think you have a follow-up question?

[Interpreted] Yes. I just wanted to clarify. What I meant to say was that with the arsonist that you insure them, what I meant to say was that you invest in oil, in the bio industry and everything causing these floods. So you are co-perpetrators, you are also responsible. You haven't done anything to stop these floods. And nonetheless, you still have that in your portfolio. Scope 3, you still invest substantially in oil, in the bio industry. And so if you stop doing that, then in any case, people in Limburg, in the south of the Netherlands would feel supported by you. i.e., that you are no longer investing in the climate crisis and that perhaps in the long run, you have -- you won't have to pay out as much insurance coverage. And then I'd like to hear whether your answer, yes -- is it yes or a no, whether by 2030 -- because I'm hearing a no, could you actually say, no? I see no, no on the slide on the screen. Could you say that in 2030, you are or are not going to realize a 45% emission reduction in scope?

And so I think [ all about ] the scope, I could take the questions. So we have Scope 1 and 2. We have defined what we today mean, we have 45% under Scope 3 and we will -- yes, but you're asking about something in the future. And so we will -- as I was saying, we are still expanding our target setting on Scope 3. So -- but today, this is a scope that we have defined, which is the corporate investment portfolio for Scope 3.

[Interpreted] But you don't have a vision for 2030?

What I'm trying to explain that we are working towards the mortgage portfolio. We're looking at government bonds, which is, by the way, just a broader discussion. And thereby, we will increase our scope for the investment part and we're actively investigating how to influence also our insurance footprint, which is also a work in progress, and you'll see next year that we've also set steps there.

[Interpreted] Yes, but we simply don't have that time.

[indiscernible] Trying to explain because I think it's important to explain our policy. So our policy has been, and we've actually updated also our oil and gas policy and it came out this week. But what is important is that we are actively engaging with -- also with oil and gas companies. However, there is criteria. So there's companies that what we call are not aligned with Paris, for example. And then there's front runners. There's companies that are actually very serious around getting to -- not only to Paris, but also to earlier targets on net zero. And those are the ones that we like to invest in because we want to support these front runners in -- because these companies need time to actually get to a net zero policy. So that is our policy. And that means that if companies, for example, an oil company that is like big oil that is not aligned with Paris, you won't see any new investments from us in that company. But we do support front runners in sectors, and that could be in cement, that could be in steel, it could be an oil that are, in our view, serious around this transition. And that's an important role for us because we are a long-term shareholder, and we can support those companies because they need time to get there.

[Interpreted] Yes, but we all need time, and we simply have run out of time. Of course, we can wait for others to take steps before you take steps. But someone's got to start first, and it would be fantastic if you could realize that by starting to do that now. And if you impose those requirements, those companies can act upon that because this is really a deadlock, who's going to do what?

As I said, I strongly believe that with the right engagement, we can actually achieve more with these companies as a long-term investor by supporting them in a very difficult transition. I mean I mentioned it earlier, I visited [indiscernible]. So [indiscernible] was a company that 8 years ago, 3/4 of their earnings was oil and gas. So if I would follow your reasoning, it would have been a very good idea to dump the stock and say, not good. But [indiscernible] had very ambitious plans to say we want to change our footprint, but we need time. If you look at today, 2/3 of [indiscernible] footprint is actually coming out sustainable. It's coastal protection. It's setting up wind parks in the ocean. I'm actually very pleased that in those 8 years, we remained a shareholder, we engaged with them, and it gave them time to transition their company from an oil and gas oriented company to a much more sustainable company. I think these are the type of engagements that can be very effective, but we can only do that if we're a shareholder. Had we exited 8 years ago because they were in oil and gas, our right to speak, would have been gone. And so engagement is difficult. It takes time, but I still think it's more effective then in this example, exiting a company simply because -- now they need to be genuine about their commitments, and that is our judgment call that we need to make. Are they genuine or are they not? And that's the judgment call that we make, we used to be able to look at companies and say, "can they make a good return?" Now we think can they make a good return, but are they also genuine around climate or about social work, working conditions, and that's the judgment calls that we need to make.

[Interpreted] Yes, but our prosperity. I mean it's simply -- it costs too much. The climate crisis is taking place now, so we need to act now and we need to engage now. And I understand your reasons to become shareholders in those companies. In fact, it's the exact same thing that I'm doing. I am in favor of that, but I do think you can be stricter. It's not that you are a minor entity. I mean you can make requirements and set conditions, I mean all this green washing and all this nice talk. I mean, for Scope 1 and 2, we're going to tackle that. But it's all about Scope 3 because that's a big chunk. We need to move towards that and not only serve vegetarian sandwiches in the company restaurant.

And we take them also quite seriously. And I think we've had an opportunity to hear each other well and to explore it. And so I'd like to suggest that we -- once again, we commit to doing our part, playing our role. We take it very seriously. We're on a journey. We also would like to be a front runner. Just as you, we think engagement is the right approach. But we need to have a clear sense that the people that we're speaking with are genuine and want to work together with us for this shared goal. I think we have a shared concern. And as we've indicated, we want to do our part.

[Interpreted] We have the same goal, but the goal is 2030, 45% reduction of carbon emissions. This is the goal. This is binding. This is the Paris agreement. Everybody has to comply with the Paris agreement. Everybody is committed to that. So why can't we just not hold each other accountable? Why do you say, "Oh, well, we might make it a yes or a no." Why don't you just simply say yes?

And I think you've asked and some of your colleagues as well, and we appreciate the questions, it's perfectly fine and we actually support that. And we've given our answer. So I think it's now probably time that we close this agenda item and we move on to the next item.

So with that, I'd like to close this agenda item. I'd like to, before we move to the next item, as I promised you earlier, I present the present and represented capital today, which should come up on the screen. So you're going to be seeing it more or less when I see it. So we have 70.72% of the capital eligible for voting is present and represented today. So thank you very much. Now I'd like to move to Item 3, which is a proposal to give a positive advice on the 2022 remuneration report. This is a voting item. I'd like to refer to our 2022 remuneration report, specifically Pages 122 through 138 of the 2022 annual report. And I'd like to invite Hélène Vletter-van Dort, who's the Chair of the Remuneration Committee of the NN Group Supervisory Board, to give an explanation of Item 3, which is, as you know, is the first voting item on the agenda. Helene?

Thank you, Dave. I would indeed like to provide some context and background in relation to the remuneration report for the year 2022. Let me start by summarizing the key topics that we as a Remuneration Committee discussed last year. I will then talk about the decisions that were taken regarding the remuneration of the members of the Executive Board. The remuneration committee addressed a wide range of relevant topics last year. A key event during the year was saying goodbye to our previous CFO, Delfin Rueda, and subsequently welcoming Annemiek van Melick to the NN Group. Annemiek was appointed as a member of the Management Board as of the 1st of June of last year and as a member of the Executive Board and CFO of NN Group for a term of 4 years as of first of July 2022. As from the same date, she also serves as Vice Chair of the Executive Board and the Management Board. The Remuneration Committee was closely involved in setting the overall remuneration package for Annemiek which has been published on the NN Group website. She is remunerated in accordance with the Executive Board Remuneration policy that we have in place and which was approved in 2022 -- 2020, I should say, by the general meeting. On behalf of the Remuneration Committee, I have engaged in an extensive stakeholder consultation with investors, with proxy advisers, a shareholder representative body, our Central Works Council, and representatives of Dutch trade unions. As suggested during the 2022 Annual General Meeting, I also spoke with NN Group trainees and young professionals within the company. An important topic that was addressed in these dialogues related to how we align the objectives and remuneration of our Executive Board members to the overall long-term strategy and strategic commitments of NN Group. Strategic targets around customers, employees and society have been a part of the objectives of the Executive Board and linked to their variable remuneration for many years. Another important topic that was raised during the stakeholder consultation sessions was the wish for more transparency around the logic, the target levels and the performance measurement of the individual objectives in the remuneration report. We made further steps this year to provide clear, concise and useful information in relation to the performance of the members of the Executive Board against the 2022 so last year's financial and strategic objectives, and I hope that, that was seen. We would like to express our gratitude to all stakeholders who gave their valuable time to provide the Supervisory Board with their views and recommendations, and we intend to continue these dialogues in the future. Now let me move to the remuneration decisions that the Supervisory Board took for the members of the Executive Board. I'll take one step back. The primary objective of the remuneration policy for the Executive Board members is creating sustainable long-term value for all stakeholders while keeping in mind that we need to be able to attract and retain expert leaders, senior staff and other highly qualified employees. The remuneration of executives and senior staff is frequently benchmarked with relevant national and international peers, both within and outside the financial sector. The peer group consists of companies which are similar to NN Group in terms of number of employees, revenue, market capitalization, total assets as well as international footprint. External experts, I should say, are asked for advice in determining the peer group. Now in line with the remuneration policy, the Supervisory Board aims to set the remuneration levels below market median for the Executive Board members. When determining the remuneration of the Executive Board members, Supervisory Board takes into account the interest of different stakeholder groups, our customers, obviously, our shareholders, employees and different parties within broader society, both within and outside of the Netherlands. The Supervisory Board has concluded that David has consistently shown strong leadership and performance in his role as CEO. The Board intends to reappoint David Knibbe, an unusual last name as well, as a member of the Executive Board and to designate him again as CEO and as a result, as Chair of the Executive Board for a term of 4 years as will be formally notified to the general meeting under agenda Item #6. During 2022, Supervisory Board performed an assessment of the Executive Board's remuneration taking into account, amongst others, the position compared to the market, internal pay relativities and the interest and opinion of stakeholders. As I mentioned, input was obtained from various stakeholders. Consideration has also been given to related remuneration developments in as well as outside NN Group. In view of all of this and after a balanced and thorough assessment, the Supervisory Board has decided to increase David's base salary by 9% with effect from 1st September last year. David's remuneration package has not been increased since his appointment, which happened on the 1st of October 2019. Even after the announced increase, David's remuneration package continues to be positioned well below the market median and continues to be in line with the requirements of the Executive Board remuneration policy. I'd now like to move on to the succession of Delfin Rueda by Annemiek van Melick. At the end of 2021, NN announced that Delfin Rueda after 8 years of service will be succeeded by Annemiek van Melick as CFO of NN Group on the first of July of last year. In this context, NN and Delfin jointly agreed the conditions for the termination of his contract. NN Group is grateful for Delfin's valuable contributions over a period of 8 years. Given that Annemiek was appointed as EB member as of the 1st of July, the Supervisory Board decided that there was no reason to grant an increase of the base salary for Annemiek for last year. As her appointment, Supervisory Board decided to award a sign-on bonus to Annemiek. Annemiek needed to step down from our Management Board role at her our previous employer with immediate effect in October 2021 to make the transition to NN. As a result of contractual restrictions, Annemiek was only allowed to start at NN in June 2022, as I mentioned. This resulted in a somewhat forced period of in between roles without remuneration. Based on these exceptional circumstances in combination with our specific role and market value, the Supervisory Board decided to grant Annemiek this sign-on bonus. The sign-on bonus will first vest after a full year of employment. Let me now move on to the variable remuneration decisions that the Supervisory Board took. The Executive Board's performance was assessed against the performance objectives as were set by the Supervisory Board in January 2022, so last year. Details of the performance assessments for the financial and the nonfinancial or strategic objectives have been provided in the remuneration report. Supervisory Board concluded that the Executive Board showed strong leadership throughout the year 2022, a year challenged by several economic and geopolitical uncertainties. Supervisory Board has assessed the overall performance of the Executive Board, and we have assessed that, that was well in line with expectations. Based on the results of the assessment of the achievements in relation to the financial and strategic performance objectives, Supervisory Board concluded to award David a variable remuneration of 15.6% of his base salary, which corresponds with 97.2% of target. For Annemiek van Melick, a variable remuneration of 16.0% of her base salary, which corresponds with 100.1% of the target. In his capacity of Vice Chair of the Executive Board and CFO up to and including 30 June 2022, Delfin Rueda is awarded a variable remuneration of 15.4% of his base salary, which corresponds with 96.4% of target. Further details about the rationale behind these percentages can be found on Pages 128 up to and including 134 of the Remuneration Report, as I mentioned. I thank you for giving me the opportunity to provide some context and background in relation to the remuneration report for the year 2022. And I hand it over back to you, Dave.

Thank you very much, Helene. I would like now to move to questions. As we did with the previous agenda item, we'd like to take all questions first, at which point we will -- then give our answers. Are there any questions related to this agenda item? Mr. Kena. Once again, please state your name and organization.

My name is [ Kena ]. I speak on behalf of VEB. With all the compliments, 20 years of experience doing these kind of things, actually are overlooked that there was a sign-on bonus, and that's the red flag for a [indiscernible]. We at VEB, we really dislike and discourage any company to provide any kind of sign-on bonus. However, the kind of explanation that you've given seems reasonable to me. Can you help me since I didn't read it, I was too fast probably, how much was this sign on bonus?

EUR 175,000.

That is more or less this couple of months that she was in between those jobs?

That was -- yes, she needed to go down in October 2021, and she was able to start here on the 1st of June.

Okay. So even though in principle, we are at VEB, against any kind of sign-on bonus, I think the explanation is fair. So we don't mind in this case, a very exceptional case. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. [ Kena. ] Are there other questions regarding this agenda item?

As I previously mentioned, the voting on this proposal to give a positive advice on the 2022 remuneration report as any other agenda item is open until the end of the meeting. With that, I'd like to close this item and move to the next agenda item, agenda Item 4. It's a proposal to adopt the annual accounts for the financial year 2022. This is a voting item. Here, I'd like to refer to the annual accounts for the financial year 2022 as included in the 2022 annual report, Pages 157 through to Page 300, as well as the presentation of David Knibbe related to Agenda Item 2. Just a brief explanation from my side. The annual accounts were drawn up by the Executive Board in English on the 8th of March 2023 and have been available on the website of NN Group as from the 9th of March 2023. The annual accounts were also available free of charge at NN's Group's head office for inspection by shareholders. The annual accounts were audited by the external auditor. He has issued an unqualified auditor's report, which you can see on the Pages 301 through 316 of the 2022 annual report. The Supervisory Board advises to adopt the annual accounts. Before introducing the external auditor, Dick Korf from KPMG, I note that NN Group has released KPMG from its obligation to maintain confidentiality in order for Dick Kor to be free to comment on the audit performed and on the auditor's report for the purposes of this meeting. The external auditor has an obligation to rectify [Foreign Language]. This means that in case of statements in relation to the annual accounts or the auditor's report that might give a materially inaccurate view of the affairs of the company, Dick Korf may request that corrections be made, either during this meeting or prior to the adoption of the minutes of this meeting. With that, I'd like to give the floor to Dick, please.

Good morning. Thank you, David. My name is Dick Korf. I am the -- as mentioned, the external auditor to NN Group N.V. on behalf of KPMG, and I'm happy to give you a brief presentation about our audit and about our audit opinion on the annual accounts 2022. Let me start with the scope of our work. Our auditor's report relates to the consolidated and company annual accounts of NN Group, which are, as just mentioned, up for adoption on the agenda of this meeting. We issued an unqualified audit opinion on those annual accounts. Next to our audit of the annual accounts, we also issued a so-called limited assurance report on nonfinancial information. That report is included in the annual report and mainly relates to a number of ESG-related disclosures. We also issued unqualified auditor's reports on regulatory returns as prepared by the group and its regulated entities in the Netherlands on behalf of the Dutch Central Bank and issued a review opinion on the interim accounts for half year 2022 as published by the group in August last year. We meet every quarter with the Management Board and the Audit Committee and Risk Committee of the Supervisory Board. In those meetings, we discuss our audit plan and the progress made with the execution of our audit during the year and year-to-date as well as our reporting on the procedures that we perform for internal purposes on quarterly accounts. I also have one-on-one sessions at least each quarter with the CEO, with the CFO, Chair of the Supervisory Board, Chair of the Audit Committee to discuss current and evolving topics. In all of those meetings, I experience active engagement and good responsiveness to the issues that we bring up and our audit findings and observations. For our audit of the annual accounts, we applied a materiality of EUR 140 million, which is the same amount as last year and represents 1% of core equity. Misstatements in excess of EUR 7 million were reported to the Management Board and to the Audit Committee. We have allocated our materiality to all components in scope across the group. Based on the scoping that we applied, we realized a solid coverage of 92% of core equity and 90% of profit before tax. For more complex areas in our audit, we involve KPMG specialists in our team, for example, in the area of IT, cybersecurity, forensics, ESG reporting, actuarial and valuations. In our auditor's report, you may have seen that we explained our response to topics such as the risks to fraud and noncompliance with laws and regulations and going concern. These did not result in significant findings. We also provided insights into our audit response to the risks related to climate change on the annual accounts. Climate change represents a key risk for the group, which according to management is expected to increase over the mid- to long term and which could affect the viability of the group's strategy. For our audit, we therefore, performed a risk assessment of the potential impact of climate change on the annual accounts to determine whether the annual accounts are free from material misstatement. In this regard, one could think, for example, of the impact on the valuation of assets and liabilities, but also the need, if any, to recognize provisions due to enhanced commitments to climate change. We concluded that climate change risks have no material impact on the 2022 annual accounts. We also read the disclosure of climate change-related matters in the annual report and considered material consistency with the annual accounts. We identified as part of our audit, 4 key audit matters and discuss those with the Management Board and the Audit Committee. Key audit matters are those matters that, in our professional judgment, were of most significance to our audit and are therefore included in our auditor's report. Next to key audit matters, we reported various other matters that we deemed relevant to management and to the audit committee, such as our management letter with control observations and our findings on the group's preparation for the first-time adoption of IFRS 17 and 9 as from financial year 2023. I refer to the note disclosure that the group included in the annual accounts about the impact of IFRS 17 and 9 on the opening balance sheet as of the first of January 2022, which is the date of transition to these new accounting standards. This brings me to the end of my presentation. Thank you for your attention, and I'm happy to take any questions that you may have. David?

Thank you very much, Dick. Once again, we'll follow the same procedures. So first take any questions that may be for the external auditor. Yes, Mr. [ Kena ]. Yes, we know who you are, but still for the minutes, please if you would state your name and organization.

My name is [ Kena ]. I speak on behalf of VEB. I don't have a question directly to the auditor, but based on his comments, I understand that his first priority, key audit matter was the insurance liabilities. And do you have enough buffers to cope with these liabilities further into the future? I think in normal language, that's what it is. And the conclusion of the auditor was that literally he says, the reserve adequacy or the buffer showed enough margin, but it dropped significantly due to higher interest rates. I think it comes back to the explanation, which Ms van Melick gave in the beginning, equity markets, real estate or turbulence in the markets and so on. Now the comment saying it dropped for this buffer, dropped significantly -- the margin dropped significantly due to high interest rate. My question to you is what would happen if we have another year like last year? Would it then still be a very solid margin. I would assume, yes, because the solvency ratio is very high, but should we become worried if we have another year like in 2022?

Thank you very much. I think Annemiek, I'll turn to you for the answer.

We should not because our solvency at 197% is sufficient to sustain that.

So it means if another 3 or 4 years like this?

It should be sufficient to sustain it and that specific test will also not be performed anymore under IFRS 17 because now there will be far more alignment of the assets and the liabilities. And with regards to interest rates, we really hedge our interest rate on an economic basis were cash flow matched. So from a solvency perspective, which is the key metric...

There was hardly any impact of...

We're confident there. Yes.

Thank you. Other questions regarding this agenda item? If not, we'll close and move to the next agenda. Thank you, Dick.

So Items 4B and 4C will be combined in the introduction. Item 4B is a discussion item, the explanation of the dividend policy and then Item 4C is a proposal to pay a dividend, pay the dividend, which is a voting item. Here, I'll refer to our dividend policy as published on NN Group's website. Specifically, I'll give a little bit of explanation of the dividend policy. So according to NN Group's dividend policy, NN Group intends to pay a progressive ordinary dividend per share. Under normal circumstances, NN Group intends to declare an interim dividend, which will be calculated at approximately 40% of the prior year's full year dividend, with the disclosure of its first half year results and to propose a final dividend at the Annual General Meeting of the shareholders. NN Group anticipate dividends either in cash after deduction of withholding tax, if applicable, or in ordinary shares at the election of the shareholder. Dividend paid in the form of ordinary shares will be delivered from NN Group's treasury shares. If and to the extent that treasury shares are not used for the payment of stock dividend, dividend paid in the form of ordinary shares will be issued at the expense of the share premium reserve. NN Group intends to neutralize the dilutive effect of the stock dividend through the repurchase of ordinary shares. NN Group also intends to execute a recurring annual share buyback of at least EUR 250 million. Additional excess capital is to be returned to shareholders, unless it can be used for value-creating opportunities. When proposing a dividend or announcing a buyback, NN Group will take into account, among other things, its capital position, leverage and liquidity positions, regulatory requirements and strategic considerations as well as the expected developments thereof. As I said, I'll now first move to the next agenda item before I give you the opportunity to ask questions or make remarks about our dividend policy. 4.C, proposal to pay out dividends, as I said, a voting item. So I refer to the proposal of the payout of the dividend, which has already been mentioned by David in his presentation, as well as was included in the convocation letter on Page 4. This proposal is now officially put to a vote. In short, it's proposed to pay a final dividend of EUR 1.79 per ordinary share. Together with the interim dividend of EUR 1 per ordinary share that was paid in September 2022, this will result in a total dividend over 2022 of EUR 2.79 per ordinary share. The key dates for the proposed dividends are shown on the slide.

And now I would like to give shareholders an opportunity to ask questions about either of the 2 agenda items. If you would please step to the microphone, state your name, I would appreciate it. Yes, I apologize for that, but just for the minutes and so everyone who's online also has an opportunity to hear your contribution.

[Interpreted] Thank you very much. My name is Dale Brunick. Thank you. And for some time now, I've been annoyed with share buyback programs. This is a way that lacks imagination, a way of spending extra money. So I would see it more as dividend. And also given the large number of questions today. I wonder, why don't you invest this money in additional projects to make this planet more sustainable. I think that would be more useful than this way of purchasing your own shares back at -- lacks imagination. Annemiek?

'22 was a special year in that regard because we have a dividend policy of a progressive dividend per share and then we have a recurring buyback ambition of the EUR 250 million. Last year, we actually bought back quite a bit more. and that was related to the proceeds of the sale of NN IP, which were roughly EUR 1.7 billion, of which we actually also spend quite some money on acquiring new businesses. We bought a business that is Heinenoord that has added to the distribution capabilities that we have in Non-life, which really strengthens our position there. And we've also bought MetLife in Poland and Greece. Average really adds to our business position and growth opportunities there. To the extent that we have excess capital, we always look how can we invest that organically in the company or inorganically to contribute to our strategic goals, be it financial, be it nonfinancial. To the extent we have excess above that, we do return it to the shareholders. And we try and find the best mix there. And some shareholders really hold us for the capital return that we generate and have a strong focus on that and others have a focus more on the contribution to the strategic targets that we have.

Yes, David, if you would.

Yes, maybe to add on that, your point on why don't you invest it. I mean, we obviously -- we're talking about a EUR 250 million share buyback. As we were discussing earlier, we invest a lot more in climate solutions. And we added another EUR 6 billion that we freed up to invest in climate solutions, which brings the total to more than EUR 11 billion. So they're not mutually exclusive or a stakeholder company so you need to take care of your shareholders and other stakeholders, but it doesn't stop us from investing in climate. And that's why we also announced the extra EUR 6 billion that we announced there.

Mr. Brunick, also from my side. Thank you for your question. I fully appreciate your position, and you stated it quite well. The fact is we have some shareholders who prefer returns in the form of buybacks and others who clearly prefer dividends, and we try to address the interest of the various shareholders.

With that, I'd like to close Agenda Item 4B and 4C and move to the next agenda item. Items 5A and 5B will also be combined. Let me first introduce them. 5A is a proposal to release the members of the Executive Board from liability for their respective duties performed during the financial year 2022. Proposal 5B is a proposal to release the members of the Supervisory Board from their liability for their respective duties performed during the financial year 2022. Both of these items, separate items, are voting items. Once again, I'd like to refer to the convocation letter, Page 4, where these items were explained. And I'd like to open the floor to any questions, either of the 2 items. I see there are no questions. So then I'd like to close this item and move to the next agenda item. Item 6 is the intended reappointment of David Knibbe as a member of the Executive Board. This is a discussion item. I refer to the proposal as was included in the convocation letter on Pages 4 and 5. Here, I think our explanation is absolutely warranted. The term of employment of David Knibbe as a member of the Executive Board ends -- I should say, the current term of appointment of David Knibbe as a member of the Executive Board ends as of the close of today's meeting. As announced on the 16th of February 2023, the Supervisory Board gives notice of its intention to reappoint David Knibbe as a member of the Executive Board from the close of this meeting for a term of 4 years, which will end at the close of the Annual General Meeting in 2027. The Supervisory Board also has the intention to designate David again as CEO and as a result, as Chair of the Executive Board for the same term. With the reappointment of David, his membership and position as Chair of the Management Board of the company also continues for the same term. The Supervisory Board intends to reappoint Dave Knibbe because of his deep understanding of and experience with the company's businesses, the sector and the markets in which the company operates, as well as the professional manner in which he fulfills his membership and Chairperson of the Executive Board. His intended reappointment also serves continuity purposes. David Knibbe is a dynamic customer-focused and values-driven business leader with a strong commitment to the company's role in society. Under his leadership, the company has made good progress on the execution of its strategy, while reporting a strong commercial and financial performance. This has created a solid foundation for long-term growth and sustainable value creation for all of our stakeholders. The intended reappointment of Dave Knibbe is in accordance with the profile of the Executive Board and Management Board of the company. The Central Workers' Council of the company has informed the Supervisory Board that it supports the intended reappointment of David Knibbe. Thank you for that. More information can be found in the communication letter on Page 5. So with that, I'd like to open this item up for questions.

For the record, I think that was Dale Brunick. And the question was whether or not the CEO could say something about his own motivation.

No, absolutely. So we were talking about it in the beginning section. We set a high ambition for this company to be an industry leader on customer engagement, talented people and our role in society. And there was an ambition for 5 to 10 years. We're not even 4 years in there. I think some of you have pointed out that we're clearly not there yet. So I think on all fronts, we've made progress, but we're not there yet. So I'm very motivated to see how a listed company and financial even can deliver value for all stakeholders by actually actively steering on customers on people in our -- in a positive role in society and that translates then also into financial results and not the other way around. But that is a long road, and I think we made good progress, but I certainly don't think we're done. So for the coming period, I would expect that we will -- that focus, we will continue. And new things will come. Already AI you brought up. I think there's a lot of new things also happening that enable us to speed up some of these developments to strengthen some -- to further strengthen the company. So as long as they're still -- you still see a lot of opportunities to make progress, then I'm happy to stay. So I hope for support for that. And I'm personally very much looking forward to the next 4 years.

Thank you, David. Before I move on to the next item, I'd also just like to take the opportunity to express for my own appreciation for David, making himself available to serve for another term as CEO of the NN Group. His leadership has been impressive. And just as you heard in his answer here, always placing a strong focus on delivering value to all of our stakeholders, while ensuring the NN Group maintains its strong position. So David, thank you for your dedication, for your commitment. And for your willingness to continue, I think on behalf of the Supervisory Board and on behalf of stakeholders, we're looking forward to it. Thank you.

I'll close that item, and I'll move to the next item, Item 7, which is a voting item. This is a proposal to amend the level of the fixed annual fee for the members of the Supervisory Board. I'd like to ask Helene Vletter-van Dort, Chair of the Remuneration Committee of the NN Group Supervisory Board to give an explanation of this item.

Let me put the microphone on. That would be helpful. I would indeed like to provide some context and background in relation to the proposed amendment, which was included in the convocation letter on Page 5. The remuneration policy for the members of the Supervisory Board, including the remuneration for the individual Supervisory Board members was last adopted by the General Meeting with effect from the first of January 2020. The policy determines that the level of the fixed annual fee for the Chair, the Vice Chair and members of the Supervisory Board and its committees is aimed at -- is aimed to be below the market median level for comparable positions in relevant markets. After reviewing the current remuneration for the members of the Supervisory Board and taking into account the results of the benchmark analysis that were performed by Willis Towers Watson, which is an independent external provider. The Supervisory Board proposes to amend the fixed annual fees, to bring the fees closer to the market level while still remaining below the market median. When considering the proposed amendment of the fixed annual fee level, Supervisory Board consulted again, various stakeholders, including shareholders, a shareholder representative body a proxy adviser, employees and regulators. And I would like to once again thank all of these stakeholders for their time and willingness to provide their views and perspectives. Now taking into account the results of the benchmarks as well as the views and perspectives of those stakeholders, the following amendments to the fixed annual fee level are proposed. I'm going to read this. For Supervisory Board Chair, the Vice Chair and members an increase of the fees with EUR 6,000 per year. For the Chair of a committee, an increase of the fees with EUR 3,000 and for a member of a committee, an increase of the fee with EUR 1,500, so EUR 1,500. In line with statutory requirements, the Central Works Council of NN Group was requested to give advice in relation to the proposed amendment and we greatly appreciate the involvement of the members of the Central Works Council and thank them for taking the time to engage with us in a conversation, which is aimed at a solid understanding of the proposal. The Central Works Council has issued a positive advice regarding the proposed amendment of the fixed annual fee levels. A full review of the content of the remuneration policy for Supervisory Board members will be conducted later this year, after which the policy will be submitted to the general meeting for adoption at the Annual General Meeting next year, so in 2024. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain the proposed amendment, and I hand it over to you again, Dave.

Thank you, Helene. Any questions on this item? If not, I will close this item and move to the next agenda item. So now I'd like to refer to items 8Ai, 8Aii, 8B, 9 and 10, which I will combine in my explanation. These remain separate items for separate voting. We also have the opportunity to ask questions about any of these items after my explanation. So I need to read this. Apologies. I have to get it right. So Item 8.A.i is a proposal to designate the Executive Board as the competent body to resolve to issue ordinary shares and to grant rights to subscribe for ordinary shares. Item 8.A.ii is a proposal to designate the Executive Board as the competent body to resolve to limit or exclude preemptive rights of existing shareholders when issuing ordinary shares and granting rights to subscribe for ordinary shares pursuant to agenda item 8.A.i. 8.B is a proposal to designate the Executive Board as the competent body to resolve to issue ordinary shares and to grant rights to subscribe ordinary shares by way of a rights issue. Item 9 is a proposal to authorize the Executive Board to acquire ordinary shares in the company's share capital. And finally, Item 10 is a proposal to reduce the issued share capital by cancellation of ordinary shares -- sorry, proposal to reduce the issued share capital by cancellation of ordinary shares held by the company. Again, each of these is a voting item. I'd like to refer to our convocation letter, to specifically Pages 6 and 7. You've seen these items before, a very standard on our agenda. They've been submitted to you in these forms in previous years. Given the extensive explanation to these agenda items as included in the convocation letter, I'll assume there's no need for further explanation upfront or repeat this explanation. I'd like to now open the floor for questions regarding Items 8 to 10. I see there are no questions. I'd like to close these agenda items. Note there with Item 10, which was the last voting item on the agenda. In a few moments, we will close the voting. I'm going to pause for just a second. So if you not already cast your votes, please do so now. [Voting]

With that, we have -- I'm sorry. I see a question.

Thank you. Please state your name...

[Interpreted] Just one question because I believe the meeting has almost come to a close. My name is Luca. Ladies and gentlemen, I am a member of Milieudefensie. When I was a small boy, I knew Nationale-Nederlanden because it was a sponsor of the Dutch National team, Edgar Davids. We know the picture of him in front of the office in Rotterdam. And I remember 2002 the Dutch squad unfortunately, couldn't -- didn't qualify for the World Cup in Japan and Korea. And the slogan at the time was next time, we'll be part of it, we'll be back. So a couple of years ago, I started to study business plans of large companies, including insurance companies, and that's how I found out that Nationale-Nederlande is on the list of the most 30 most polluting companies in the Netherlands, which is why my question is, since we haven't yet heard a clear yes or no. will Nationale-Nederlande comply with the Paris Agreement? Will NN, in 2030, at the very least, reduce its carbon emissions by 45% and in 2030 in all Scopes 1, 2 and 3? I hope to hear a clear yes. Otherwise, next time, the colleagues of Milieudefensie will simply attend the next AGM again.

I'm going to answer this, and then we're going to move to actually the following parts of the agenda. We've had this question before. I appreciate that we all have an interest in this. I'll ask David to give a short response, and then we'll move forward. Thank you, David.

Yes. No, indeed, we've had this question before. And in terms of answering. I have nothing to add to my answer that I gave a few times now. We've been very clear on the targets around the 45% to 25% in the scope that, that pertains. And also, we've been clear that we plan to extend that scope in the coming period. whether that is your full value chain or not, I suspect it is not, but let's see that is more up to your judgment than ours. We've been very clear on what is in scope, what is not in scope and what you can expect in the coming period for us to do. And yes, indeed, on the sponsoring, I still every now and then regret that we're not a sponsor of the national team anymore, but I didn't realize the slogan was, we'll see you -- we'll be there next time because we didn't because in 2006, we also didn't qualify. So yes, anyway, the -- that was it.

Thank you, Mr. Luca. I'd just like to state that we'd be happy to see you here next year to continue our discussion. I'd like to note now that we have closed the voting, and we will share the voting results with you just before the close of this meeting. So thank you all very much for voting. I'll now move to Item 11, which is any other business before the close. I'd like to ask the shareholders if there are other matters that you would like to raise or questions you'd like to raise. Seeing none, we'll now move to the voting results. I hope meanwhile, that, that is possible. So we'll wait for them to show up on the screen. You see here on the screen the results from voting items 3 through item 7. Just looking at the results, I can see that all of these items have been approved by the shareholders with a significant majority. So thank you for that. When I move to the next slide, where you'll be able to see the voting results of the proposals 8 through 10. And here also I see for each of the proposals, the shareholders have approved them with a significant majority. So once again, thank you very much for that. This means that all items have been adopted. All voting items have been adopted by the general meeting, and I'd like to acknowledge and thank you for your support. So as we move to close the meeting, I also would like to take a moment to acknowledge that this is also the last meeting where Helene Vletter will be sitting here with us as Vice Chair and member of the Supervisory Board of the NN Group. Helene, since your appointment to the Board in 2015, you've been an invaluable asset to the team and part of the team, bringing your dedication, expertise and insight to the table. We're grateful, incredibly grateful for all the hard work and effort you put in, and we'd like to express that thanks in any ways -- we can't express it enough. As Chair of the Remuneration Committee and a member of the Nomination and Corporate Governance Committee, you've been a driving force behind our efforts to maintain the highest standards of governance and transparency. So on behalf of the entire Supervisory Board at NN Group, and I know the entire NN Group. I'd like to express my deepest appreciation to you for your outstanding service. Thank you. We wish you all the best in your future endeavors, and thank you again for everything you've done in NN. Thank you. Before I close the meeting, there are a few other announcements I'd like to make. Pauline van der Meer Mohr, member of the Supervisory Board, will succeed Helene as Vice Chair of the Supervisory Board. As of the close of this meeting, the Supervisory Board will consist of 7 members. The Supervisory Board has decided to lower the number of its members to 7. This means that currently, there are no vacancies to be filled. Also, the Supervisory Board has decided to combine the Remuneration Committee and the Nomination and Corporate Governance Committee into a Nomination, Remuneration and Governance Committee as of the close of this meeting. This committee will be chaired by Pauline van der Meer Mohr. And lastly, I'd like to inform you that as of the close of this meeting, Hans Schoen, currently Chair of the Audit Committee, will be succeeded in this role by Rob Lelieveld, while Hans will continue to be a member of the Audit Committee. is in line with our Supervisory Board succession plan. Last closing announcements. The draft minutes of this meeting will be published on the company's website within 3 months. And the final voting results will be posted on the company's website within a few days. [Portions of this transcript that are marked [Interpreted] were spoken by an interpreter present on the live call.]