And of course I believe the Company responded extraordinarily well to the challenges laid down by the pandemic flu concerns. That in itself generated significant sales for the Company, both through the supply of vaccine, other materials, and of course, Relenza, during the year. Altogether that has delivered for us, I believe, a very, very creditable performance.

Now you're right to highlight there are essentially, if you will, two kind of one-offs. One is the accounting gain on the transaction of creating our HIV joint venture with Pfizer. And it's almost netted off, if you will, by an increase in our legal costs associated with some old historic cases which we continue to work to closure but, from time to time, we have to increase our provisions to more accurately align with how we think they're ultimately, potentially going to settle out.

And those two things happened in the fourth quarter. And what we've tried to do in the results is be very clear, very transparent, highlight those two, if you will, one-off events. Hopefully people will then be able to see very clearly the very strong performance of the core business in what was always going to be a tough year. And actually, we've delivered sales growth for the first time now since 2007.

Now, if you ask me going forward, what do you think a reasonable run rate for legal might be, then I'd probably say, based on history, given that I can't predict accurately every year, I would say a reasonable estimate of somewhere in the £450m a year is probably a reasonable estimate based on what we've seen in the past. So it's unlikely that number is ever going to be zero. Can I promise it's never higher than that number? No, I can't. But a reasonable estimate around £450m.

So, for example, our consumer business in 2009 grew 7%. That's the fastest growth of any consumer company in the world. That's an incredible performance. But, our consumer business has a lower margin than our pharmaceutical business. A great example of where we're prepared to go for growth, even though we know it's slightly lower margin. That's one of the reasons why you see margins reduce at places like cost of goods because the mix is more consumer products, and less of the old and very high-margin pharma products, for example, from America, because they are being lost to generics.

So the real story is that you're seeing genericisations of high-margin pharma products, replaced with growth of new slightly lower margin products in areas like consumer healthcare, overall delivering more growth of sales, and importantly, more growth of profit. And that's exactly the strategy we're going forward in.

So you've seen that kind of mix. Now, again, where is this going in the future because there's a question of transition? And when does transition, if you will, stop and you start to see the new future? And as we're guiding today, my expectation for 2010 is that our overall operating margin will be broadly similar to the 2009 operating margin. So what that tells you is that we believe much of that transition is now behind us, not surprisingly because we're coming towards the end of the genericisation effect and we've clearly declared our hands where we want to see the growth come from.

This company has made the right moves over the last several years, and particularly in the last two to open up new sources of growth. And you're absolutely right. You should expect to see us continue to divert resources to where we can generate the absolute best return.

Now, our US pharmaceutical and European pharmaceutical businesses are huge businesses. They have tremendous opportunity in the future as our R&D pipeline delivers to them. And so, of course, we'll invest there. But where we see incremental growth opportunities in the key areas we've identified, this isn't anywhere, but in the key areas, emerging markets, Japan, consumer, vaccines, biopharmaceuticals - in those areas, we'll be looking for superior returns and if we can find them we'll invest behind it, whether that's organically or through acquisition.

Second, what you've seen over the last two years is a huge increase in our investment in innovation. So since I've taken over we've almost doubled the amount we spend on consumer innovation. That's investing in new formulations or new versions of the brands to keep our brands current and to keep them of interest to today's consumer.

The second or third area, I should say, that we've also focused on is really rebuild our advertising and promotion behind our brand. So if we want retailers to make sure our brands are stocked and that customers get the chance to see and try our brands, we have to support our brands. And what you've seen over the last few years is significant increase in the amount we spend on advertising and promotion. There's no doubt that that decision has underpinned our ability to grow market share during 2009, during the recession, and where we've been able to grow at around 7% when the marketplace we compete in is only growing around 2%. That's because of the investment we've made.

And then the final part is all about quality of message. And so I can tell you, we test every single ad we run in this company for a consumer business. And right now we're seeing about 83% of our ads receive upper quartile response from consumers. Why's that important? It means that that money we're spending is relevant to what consumers want to listen to. All of what I've just described reflects a professional, capable consumer skill set. That's why we're delivering the growth that we are.

Now, over the last several years, we've really dedicated a specific focus in our R&D and particularly development organisation, to fix that. And what you're seeing now is wave after wave of major new products introduced into Japan. So what the Japanese story really is is an opportunity for us to introduce products which were introduced in American and Europe 10 years ago, to introduce today's products, and also to catch up on next-generation products. So we have, from the end of 2007 to the end of 2012, something like 40 products to launch, of which we've already launched about half. And that's what's driving this growth.

Now the other thing I would say, and I pay real credit to our team in Japan, we've also begun to make progress in opening up the vaccine market in Japan, both through partnerships with local Japanese companies and institutes, but also as signalled by the Japanese government's decision to acquire some of their pandemic vaccine from GSK. Again, the first time the Japanese government have made the decision to import flu vaccine to Japan.

All of that is what's really coming together to start to now demonstrate that this big marketplace can actually become a big business for GSK. And Japan is something I expect to see sustained growth from in the future.

The challenge is, notwithstanding having a good strategy, not withstanding having the kind of delivery we have, I believe we ought to be continuously looking for how we might improve the rate of return on the investment money that shareholders allow us to commit to R&D. And that's really what we've tried to focus on and so there are really two areas where I believe that that was possible.

One is, whether we could reduce the amount of cost absorbed by fixed infrastructure, really, if you will, the hangover of the creation of the modern R&D industry in the 1980s, lots of fixed buildings. Today everything's much more virtual, more partnership-orientated. We're still carrying a lot of that cost. And then secondly are there specific areas of research where, for whatever reason, we just no longer believe we have the same likelihood of success, or perhaps the cost of being successful makes it unattractive compared to others. And that's why we've made proposals today, subject to consultation, which really look at potentially reducing our investment in the neuroscience area, in areas such as pain and depression. And we believe that that makes sense, both in terms of the infrastructure piece, but also in terms of recognising that there are different probabilities of success between different areas, and we have to make choices. And the proposals we're making today really speak directly to that.

Now obviously I don't like to see anybody leave the organisation or there to be any job losses. But the reality is that, we do, from time to time, need to look at ways in which we can improve our probability of success. The proposals we're making today are exactly in that theme.

So we've been focused on how we can improve our R&D output and we believe today, that we have a late-stage pipeline which, if it delivers what we expect it to over the next 10, 15, 20 years of sales, is capable of delivering around an 11% rate of return. Not bad - much better than people would probably have believed, say, seven or eight years ago. So, an improvement.

But I don't think we need to stop there. I think what we ought to be saying is we're going to set ourselves an aspiration to do better than that. We want to continue to try and find ways to improve our rate of return. How? By making better decisions, by being more efficient, focusing on areas where we believe we have a higher probability of success and, of course, making them commercially successful in the marketplace.

And so, as a result, we set an aspiration to try and further improve that rate of return by about another 25% to somewhere around 14%. And that's really the roadmap we're beginning to lay out for ourselves to make sure that we stay focused on something which we believe is important to shareholders.

Now, as we go forward, that loss rate of genericisations will start to come down. You're aware that we have Valtrex to deal with this year. It's already started. We've already got two or three months behind us. So we're rapidly moving through this phase. The whole situation on Advair is very complex. It's more complex for people who are trying to attack GSK than it probably is for GSK. That's fine. We'll leave it at that. We're in a position where we're seeing our headwinds diminish, deteriorate, if you will, and our potential to grow those engines, new product flows, new diversified businesses, those are looking very strong. And I believe that that's going to really underpin our future and it's why I think the prospects look good for us.

We'll of course see a reduction as we go through the year of some of the negatives from generics which is an important dynamic. And then as we get to the end of the year and into 2011, I think we start to move to some very interesting opportunities, in particular products like Benlysta, the first new potential medicine for the treatment of lupus.

So as we go forward, I think you have every probability of seeing the Group active on all fronts. So whereas maybe last year you might say well the pharmaceutical business was a little bit, kind of, in defence because the US was under so much pressure, I think as we go into this year you'll see all of those same growth businesses be top priority, be priorities for us to see continue. But I think you'll start to see that pharma pipeline start to deliver more and more. You'll see the US business start to move forward, and that obviously lays tremendous foundations for the future.