Okay, ladies and gentlemen, good morning and you are very welcome here at this morning to our webcast which coincides with the publication of our first half results for 2014 for CRH. My name is Albert Manifold, I'm the Chief Executive of CRH and I'm joined in the stage here by our CFO, Maeve Carton.

Good morning everybody.

And together Maeve and I are going to take you through some detail of the first half results for 2014. We are also going to take you through our progress and our portfolio review, which we discussed with you earlier this year. Give you some sense of how we see the year panning out for our two major markets and indeed other markets around the world and in the end as usual, we will have plenty of time for questions and answers to go through some questions you may have in detail. So just looking at some of the key headlines for the first half of 2014, across our two major markets we saw contrasting weather patterns and we saw a modest uptick across both businesses although delivered at different times and quite uneven recovery particularly so in Europe. But, we are going to go into the detail that's going to go into the individual businesses. Very happy to see that we delivered earnings in line with guidance just a nudge ahead of guidance and good positive strong operational leverage coming through our businesses on the back of fairly modest top line growth, which really is a testament to the strength of the cost cutting and the restructuring that we did in the early part of the crisis and kept all the way through and morning to pose a dividend maintaining the half one dividend of $0.085 which maintains the strong dividend record we have in CRH fiscal back into 1983 it's incredible on both in dividend record which again is testament to the strength of the profits of our business, to the cash of our business and also to – we understand what are important to investors. Just looking at the big picture overview of the Group in total,…

Thanks Albert. It really is encouraging to see that performance five out of the six segments reporting improved margins against the backdrop that we've been talking about modest not even recovery across our various businesses. What I am going to do now is talk about the – how those individual segment performance pose together into the Group outturn overall for the first half of 2014. I am also going to say a few words about how our debt management and financial management process are put to work to create value for CRH. So the outturn for the first half of the year we've already seen sales up 4% accompanied by a 27% increase in EBITDA to €505 million a very significant improvement in operating leverage. The most encouraging part of that result for me is the organic performance line that you can see there. The organic for us means excluding impact of acquisition and excluding translations impact so the underlying businesses really delivering performance. Before we talk about that a quick word about the acquisitions impact, the geographic footprint of our operations with significant operations in northern tier states of the U.S. and in northern Europe, countries where the severe normal weather conditions in the winter time mean the construction activity doesn't really get started until quarter two means that the profitability of the Group is very skewed towards the second half of the year and that seasonal impact is reflected in that acquisitions impact that you can see there for the first half of the year. Cost savings have been a big focus of attention for management over the last number of years as we make our business as resilient and grind out some of those efficiencies that Albert was talking about. We're on track to deliver 2.6 billion…

Thanks Maeve. And just before we leave that slide, I think we glanced over these numbers very quickly. We talked about cash management in the CRH but just look at what's been achieved in the first half of this year. Anybody who runs the business knows and in raising activity levels that leads to an outflow of cash. And working capital for those businesses capital expenditure because the guys in the business will be saying please help fund the growth that we have done in the first half of the year. Actually, we reduced working capital by 13%, Maeve talked about all the boring work that's done by the credit – people, stock management people, that was not a boring results and look at capital expenditure, it's down to 67% depreciation and how we achieved, well, we have seen precipitous time at industry and we just made sure people used all the equipment that we paid from the past to it's fullest capability. There is a lot of equipment and plants lying around and we used that before we got to spend our money on company's business that's what we should do in managing a tied ship, and CRH is a tied ship. And then you look at the cash resources over €4 billion funds available to us hugely important to us, great flexibility and great strength in the balance sheet. And then finally look at approval line that Maeve referred to, the lowering cost of debt. And remember back to February, we talked about the returns that we generated and acquisitions we have done over the last three years. Over 95 deals over the last three years, we spent €1.6 billion on those deals and we generated returns in excess of 11% against that cost of debt. That's value…

Thanks Barry. Three questions there. About acquisition pipeline and margins component, maybe if I take the first and third one and maybe at the end pass the question on margins to – and pull through of leverage Maeve if you don't mind. The acquisition on the first half, when you compare them to previous years, there is nothing significant in that. And we have a strong capital discipline in CRH that's always been there, and we keep that rigor and the three years of acquisitions I referred to in February of this year and our results, which talked about the acquisitions we did in 2011, 2012, 2013, the results of those were delivered because we had rigor on acquisitions during that process. There is nothing significant there, it's just the ebb and flow of deals as such our pipeline is good across a wide range of businesses and just a question of being disciplined and being patient, we know this game very well, it has happened before and will happen again. So nothing significant and the pipeline is quite good. And I'm convinced that we have the balance sheet to support us, and we will utilize that balance sheet to create value going forward. With regard to Poland, I think we saw the first half of the year benefiting very strongly. Overall, the market was up about 20% in volumes at first half. But that level of volume increase is not sustainable, our own sense is, it's going to – again, you got much strong comparables in the second half of the year against 2013. But we do think the cement market will be up for the full year, we think the cement market will be about 15.2 million to 15.3 million tons in Poland this year, which would represent…

Yes. Thanks Albert. So yes, indeed a very strong operating leverage in the first half of the year, 25% on the sales increase of 4% that is largely delivered in the European operations, which had a year-on-year benefit, or a first half to first half benefit that was very strong this year. I think for the year as a whole, we would see margin improvement, that trend continuing across our businesses and hopefully some catch-up in the Americas products business, as Albert was talking about improving markets there. So I think it would probably be on real estate you think that the operating leverage of 25% that we saw in the first half of the year would be a sustainable ongoing level, the more sustainable level is probably more in the region 15% to 20%.

Okay. Next question. Back there?

Good morning. It's Will Morgan for Goldman Sachs. I have got three questions. The first one is, could you elaborate a little bit more about the acquisition environments obviously we are seeing historically low levels of financing costs which presumably is pushing up prices, I just wondered if you could talk about the pipeline that you see how attractively priced it is and specifically whether or not you are interested in any of the assets coming out of the Holcim and Lafarge merger? The second question relates to the CapEx spend which is obviously down quite dramatically I wondered maybe if you can give a bit of an elaboration on how you would see CapEx depreciation evolving as we move into the second half but also 2015 presumably that's got to step up from the kind of ratios we are seeing at the moment. And the third question just relates to pricing power, obviously in Europe pricing seems to be met down you are not really getting any major spread in the U.S., I would imagine U.S. pricing does improve from here but in Europe could you maybe comment a little bit more about where the sticking points are vis-à-vis pricing and when you can start to see some of that pricing power come through.

Thanks for the good morning. If I take again the first question on the acquisition environmental pricing and also the pricing, I will let Maeve begin with the second part and the Europe capital expenditure. The acquisition environment that we are seeing out there in pricing in particular, there is broadly no change over the last 12 to 18 months, I'm aware that there is a lot of money out there because there is a lot of money out there chasing many assets. And we don't see – and it's been there for quite some time. So we are not seeing a particular change in that environment. But I do know from my own experience that having unfortunately lived through a number of recessions that the period of most distress, the period of most opportunity is actually as you come out of recession that's because people will find there is a draw on cash now that's when things get tight for them and that's when things bite. And that's when you see opportunities for distress -- sales and distress purchases. The second part is, if I think we have been consistent will attain this, one of the reasons in the crisis while we back on our acquisition spend must because we have a little or no visibility every year that is climbing by 10% or 15%. But now at last we are seeing some stability and that gives you a little more confidence when you are looking at your models, when you are looking at your forecasts and that gives us confidence when we look forward with regard to acquisition spend. The other point you had is on pricing power, which is really key question – very important question and if I can start from the U.S. you specifically asked…

And in terms of capital expenditure, yes, we have seen significant disciplined being applied to the capital expenditure in the first half of the year. And as Albert was saying we – our focus has been to get our operations to use the efforts we have on the ground and make sure we are using those fully before we spend money on expanding the business. I would certainly see the ratio of the spend beginning to trend upwards, it's clearly not sustainable, it's continued spending at a level of 67% to deprecation over the long haul, so I would say – I still think for the year as a whole, the final outturn will likely be around last year's level or maybe slightly less by trending upwards closer to 80% to 100% of deprecation over the next year or two.

I would like to add because a lot of colleagues in CRH around the world will be listening to this. I would like to use the capital expenditure to have first before we get any new CapEx. This room a little worse. Forgive me, sorry. Just in the front here.

Thanks. Will Jones, Redburn. Three, if I could please. The first, could you comment more specifically around pricing in Americas products, I think at the start of the year, you talked about a couple of good user volume and this is a descent yes for the pricing, as weather pushed back by a year, any pricing gains, but rather comments there would be great. Americas is generally, the like-for-like in the last couple of months to the end of the first half, do you think that's indicative of the second half or kind of push from there just given weather capture and how you expecting all three divisions in Americas to be ahead in the second half as well as the region as a whole. And then the final one, just around Holland, there is some better days emerging from the confidence perspective and lead indicates on new housing, is that something the guys in the ground just starting to recognize talk about and if so when is the impact?

Okay. Just three questions there. With regards to specific to Americas products, well, I would expect on the back of the good fundamental volumes that are driving that market which is exposed to residential and non-residential. I mean residential in the U.S. in the last 12 months forecasted over 10% year-to-date it's about 7% driven by multifamily homes. So there is good momentum there. I think the non-residential market was up about 5% or so could be up to 10% originally particularly out west, so those two fundamentals given good volume growth and on the back of that the cement price increases coming through – those cost increases that allows you pass on pricing. I think the issue we have seen this year has been more to do with the specific weather related issue for the first four months. And if I can let that question fall into the next part of your question which was how those divisions will perform for the remainder of the year and talk about products specifically and go into materials and distribution. The products business again has shown a good uptick in its business since the first from May and June. June in particular was strong. July has continued in same vein as indeed is August. And materials business what we have seen in May, June, July is pretty much the same trend, we think it's going to continue if you remember our materials business produce about 2/3rds of its profitability during the key month of July, August, September. I mean we are halfway through that period now with good volume throughout. Our backlog is ahead of last year. Our margins those were ahead of last year. So all the indicators are pointing in the right direction, we have to continue that trend and…

Yes. Good morning, Yuri Serov, Morgan Stanley. Two or maybe three questions, well, first of all, on acquisitions, there was a question about your appetite for the assets from Lafarge and Holcim. I would like to press a little bit more on that. I'm not asking for specifics obviously you cannot give specifics but on the other hand in your portfolio review one of the conclusions that you came outwards was that you were thinking about de-prioritizing Europe and especially new built Europe as an investment destination mainly with the assets that Lafarge and Holcim are going to dispose off or actually in Europe expose to new built which is cement. What's your thoughts around that? Thanks. Secondly, U.S. infrastructure you are saying is still flat, on the other hand your asphalt volumes are up by 3%, obviously that's not fine, but that seems like they are reasonably decent performance coming out of a recession. So at what levels will you start sounding more positive from U.S. infrastructure and what are your expectations of how that's gong to develop into business. And just one quick question to clarify you are talking about disposals of 1.5 billion to 2 billion in the next few years, is the amount of money that you are planning to receive, I mean what do those numbers represent? Thanks.

Thanks Yuri. I thought I'd dodged Holcim and Lafarge question so far but thanks for bringing it. If I leave the disposals question for Maeve at the end, maybe I just address this specific question of Holcim and Lafarge. CRH have their own strategy for value creation. We are not reliant on anybody else producing any of the list of assets that they wish to dispose off. We set out our stall during the course of this year, our business is going to be focusing on returns for our shareholders, we got strategic platforms, we are not a cement business. We are a broad based building materials business, a diversified business with many geographies and we look to extract value across those businesses that service different markets in different geographies and cement is part of that. Whatever we do, it's up to CRH to decide what we do and it will all be about value. If you buy a business that's too expensive, you spend rest of your life paying for it. I know that you are better experienced. So if we can buy businesses from whoever they are, wherever they are at the right price and create returns for our shareholders, that's the key focus not any particular suite of assets that are for sale at the moment. And I don't think it helps anybody they are going to specific circumstances as such. We note the fact that produce list like anybody else they can see value there. We will enter into proposals and have discussions but more than I want to say. And specifically on the U.S. infrastructure and the fact that asphalt volumes are up about 3% in the first half of the year that's quite regional actually more than anything specific. At the end of the…

The divestment program earlier in the year and I think the portfolio review we talked about approximately 10% of the businesses which at the end of last year we wrote down to an expected value and that's obviously included in the total number approximately 800 million or so of the 1.5 billion to 2 billion is that 10% or so. And then the balance is really – the next 10% which we have been looking at more closely in the last number of months, we believe somewhere a little bit more than half of that is likely to – is for divestment. And so that's where we arrive at the 1.5 billion to 2 billion.

Any further questions here from the floor?

Thanks. John Messenger from Redburn. Can I just come back to the drop through kind of answer earlier from Maeve just in terms of that 15% to 20% is what symbol going forward? Yes. Coming back to your point Albert, your pricing tends to follow 18 months, 2 years beyond the pick up in volume. When we think about that pricing down and picking up unless you are worried about cost inflation pressures which I guess will be understandable, but they will be a bit more labor pressure potentially there. But, surely that 15% to 20% if anything to 25% we saw in the first half is a good reason why that actually should continue and it will become more price driven rather than volume driven once things pick up a bit of junction. What is making you more cautious other than say that you are not caution on these kind of things? And then the second question is, just around acquisitions going forward, you laid out the four kind of platform drivers in terms of why you are good at doing them, but could you give us a little bit of flavor on – because clearly emerging markets want to be part of this. But, can you give us a bit of a commentary around China businesses, India, why you want to go because it looks to me as though these are going to be platforms start ups when you start to spend from here in terms of what you do. And not looking for geographic but from the point of view of the last few years CRH went off kind of going a little bit wider and also did deals that were clever in terms of shareholder equity positions and JVs. And JVs were also part of what CRH did originally, but are you now looking to make sure you buy things lock the stock in parallel, so you get full control of cash flows and that actually the experience of last few years the Denizlis, the Unilands and all the rest of them, those didn't prove great. Is that just because of the unique transactions or is that something going forward really buy businesses in totality rather than leaving shareholder and partners?

Okay. John thank you for that very detailed question, the last question maybe I will take that one first and pass again the follow-up question to Maeve on the drop down margins back to here. Just generally in our emerging markets strategy I want to be absolutely clear. CRH over the next number of years will increase it's expose to emerging markets. And we will do that because the nucleus of the world is different to the east. If you look at construction growth and the forecast for construction growth it is clearly going to be driven by India and China and Brazil and Indonesia for the next 25 years. And if we aspire to being a global leader at supplying building materials we must be in these markets. But being in those markets, what are we going to be in those markets for? We are going to be there to make money and make returns that's what CRH focuses on. Long-term I'm an emerging market bull, actually short-term I'm bit of a bear. I think they are going through period of readjustment. They saw strong growth for the last 8, 9 years on the back of a lot of cheap available finance flowing from the developed world into the developing world that has now changed. And what you are seeing is, countries such as India, where Prime Minister Modi has started down the road, you have seen it with Xi Jinping in China for the last couple of years where they are starting to make the fundamental adjustments to their society and economy that they should have been making for the last 10 years. And that adjustment is coming at a cost in terms of progress, development and economic growth. And you got issues such as overcapacity you got…

Okay. And if we come back on the margins it's obviously very gratifying to say that 25% operating was in the first half of the year. And that was delivered without any pricing increases. So we are obviously looking – we will be looking forward to the benefit of price increases over the next number of years. I think in indicating a sustainable level of drop through from increased sales and trying to be realistic taking into account the mix of our businesses and the other side of price increases for us is cost increases as well. So I think it's a mixture of the mix of our businesses and being realistic in terms of the overall deliverables. We are starting to expect to be able to deliver a good drop through from top line growth.

I think – and the follow-up, I think we are working in fairly benign cost environment at this particular time right now because that's not obviously going to be the case and we know that. So I think just factoring into those numbers we have to more careful. Sorry to say. Gregor, here in front.

Couple of questions, the first one on the Ukraine, can you just give us the actual pro forma sales and EBITDA obviously since the Lafarge asset coming in which hasn't – last year wasn't in the numbers. So it make the pro forma number from the prior years, we just got a feel but your comment on being flat on that is an organic or whether that basically -- the acquisition offsets the underlying decline. The second is on U.S. infrastructure, this is highway bill which is expiring shortly, just wanted to get what your guys in the ground are thinking in terms of what we should be expecting for multiyear solution perhaps as except to 2015 event. And then finally on the portfolio review and divestments and this maybe a bit controversial, but clearly you sort of described CRH as a asset manager of building materials companies. Is it not a case in that basis that you actually sell assets when they're performing extremely well which is always a very difficult thing to do as supposed to looking at it, I mean clearly, I guess looking from the margin profile of the business that you got to identify they're clearly sub par some of them perhaps structural that is obviously also very well performing businesses within the CRH and if somebody pays you a stupid price wouldn't you be disposing of it?

Again, may be I'll take the second and third questions Gregor with regards to the specifics on the U.S. infrastructure and also in terms of your comment on the portfolio and divestments, maybe you can fill in the detail of Ukraine. I don't have great insight, I'm going to share with you this morning with regard to what's going to happen in 2015 with long-term funding in the U.S. and we as part of associations are consistently working with politicians to set out for them what we believe is a very compelling case to increase spending with regard to infrastructure spend on the United States. Everybody we speak to agrees with us, nobody has any suggestion as to how we're going to do it because it's tied up U.S. politics which is very, very difficult. So I don't have any insight, other than to say that this constant roll forward is not sustainable because with price increases coming through, of course, you're getting net-net a slower and lower spend on actual infrastructure. And the key is that so much of the spent now has been focused just on repairing the infrastructure that's there. Remember that's 30 million people come to this country every 10 years, where is the houses, the schools, the roads, the hospitals that these people are going to live and work in, who is building those? That's why you are seeing the states make those changes that are necessary and the federal government as it always does eventually will step up to the place. And what we're doing is trying to catch the federal government as part of other members of the association to do that. But with regard to 2015, we've just got the Highway Trust Fund funding; they will begin transport in for next year.…

The operating profit last year was in the region of €18 million, so there is a – I think – as we said earlier our expectation for the full year this year even though we're well ahead in the first half of the year is for the overall profits likely to be the same as last year in spite of the benefit of Mykolaiv coming in.

EBITDA.

EBITDA, in the region of 30 million.

I don't know, any other questions going forward today. Okay, well, there you go. Just in the front.

So just a couple from me, if I could please. On the net debt, I think last year the inflow is about 1.2 billion half to full year. Are you thinking a similar profile this time around or say probably slightly high profits obviously lower CapEx but any thoughts around year end net debt please. And then just the depreciation charge I think dropped 20 million first half on first half is that going to happen again in the second and because you're spending less than depreciation this year should we expect the depreciation drops again in 2015? Thanks.

If I deal with the depreciation first, the charge for – the first half of the year I was talking about 20 million part of that is the non-depreciation of those assets which were impaired at the end of last year that was about 275 million if the impairment charge related to plant and equipment last year, so having written those down the depreciation charge reduces. And then there is also some exchange impacts also with the U.S. dollar primarily U.S. dollar denomination depreciation cost is a little bit less than the first half. So both of those effects will flow through into the second half of the year and so we would expect the full year depreciation charge to be somewhere in region of twice the first half number. In relation to net debt and the movements that seasonal effect that I talked about in terms of the cash flow to the half year with the build up of net debt to the half year as we build up to gear up for the level of activity that traditionally reverse us significantly in the second half of the year and as usually a swing of somewhere between 0.5 billion, 600, 700 million of inflows in relation to operating cash in the second half of the period. So we would expect the net debt absent of further acquisitions and absent of any major divestments which are obviously harder to factor into it to be lower than last year.

Thanks Maeve. And just consent of time and there are people on the telephone on the wire as well. And may be we could take our first call from the telephone please.

Thank you. Our first question comes from Yassine Touahri [Exane BNP Paribas]. Please go ahead sir.

Yes, good morning. So the first question, first on organic growth. So you discussed about organic growth in the first four months of the year in the U.S. and also in Europe could give us a figure for EMEA margin, I think you told us it was flat to slightly down in Europe, could you quantify? And what was it in the U.S. and also a question about the flow through. I am not sure I understand the 25% of flow through that you are discussing in H1 part and I think my calculation are wrong, but when I do the increase in EBITDA in H1 divided by the increase in sales, I cannot see the flow through of 34%, so if you could explain how you come to your 25% portfolio that would be very helpful. And that would be my two questions.

Okay. May be I'll answer the first question, partly answer the second question and then let Maeve give her comments on it. With regard to the organic growth, what we have said in May and June and continuing in June and July, we see the European business flat to minus 1% that specifically would be a range across all our businesses maybe recovering back a little bit better now during the month of July and August so that's broadly flat. I think it will really be September, October and we see delivery of those months because May, July and August are difficult months in Europe to call construction a lot of people are in vacation. Activity levels actually drop down to seasonal lows so it's hard to get a run through. But our sense in looking at our order books; our sense in talking to our customers is that it will be broadly flat for the remainder of the year against what was a very good finish to 2013. In the United States, the indications that we showed in our presentation this morning of the good growth we have seen both in May and June and we're saying confirm to you that's continuing now on July and in even August, we see that continuing because all the indicators tell us that they are in terms of our order books and indeed the margins in those order books. And before I pass the question on leverage and flow through over to Maeve, I suppose the one point I would make and that is that when you see what high fixed cost business is that normally have a high contribution per unit coming through. You see more volume coming through those businesses, obviously they're the once with the higher flow through as you call the higher operational leverage coming through. So it's very specific to the business, so we get a very different operational leverage coming through with our distribution businesses as we do with our heavy side aggregates businesses and concrete business and cement businesses and that's the big thing. But with regard to the actual specific you dealt already Maeve, maybe just to help people --

And just to follow-on on Albert's point there. In the first half of the year, the significant part that the flow through came in our Europe business and in particularly in our Europe materials businesses with our margins almost double in the first half of the year. So that fixed point being very obvious there. The 25% Yassine that we were talking about is the organic improvement. So it's an improvement of 99 million in organic EBITDA and that means excluding exchange impacts and also excluding the impacts of acquisitions and also the excluding the impact of oneself restructuring cost which can distort the numbers a little bit, so it's the underlying improvement in operating profits just approximately €99 million on the equivalent underlying increase in sales which is just under 400 million. So that gives you the 25% that we've been talking about. Those numbers are on Slide 12 of that presentation if you'd like to look through them.

Thanks Maeve. Can we take another call please?

We will now take our next question from Robert Eason [Goodbody Stockbrokers]. Please go ahead.

Hi, good morning. I am Robert Eason from Goodbody. I have just a few questions. If I can put you a bit more in the working capital after the strong performance in the first half can we expect there to be actually a working capital inflow for the full year. The working capital volume from the second half, is there something that you're doing structurally behind the scenes on working capital to improve the metrics on that front and if so can you just give us a bit more flavor on that? Just on the financial charge, can you just give us a bit of guidance what we should expect for the full year for the financial charge and just in relation to your asphalt operations in the U.S. can you just give us a bit more detail on bitumen costs and your winter storage and as a result your expectations for that input cost in terms of a year-on-year change?

Maeve, if you take the first two and I come back on the second.

Yes, okay. If I talk about the working capital first Robert the – last year we had an inflow in working capital of 118 million, I think that is reflected some good efforts by CRH and obviously, what we had at the first half of the year was a reduction in the seasonal outflow. So a strong performance as I was saying – as I was chatting through the presentation that is not delivered by any magic formula that's delivered by really hard work right across our 3600 locations where we just focus on the basics of running the business – of managing working capital well and that starts with credit control – its about you have to pay attention to inventory values and managing inventory well. One of the things that have been really gratifying right through the last number of years is that with that focus on the detail and the fundamentals of managing our business as well, we have seen no deterioration in our working capital statistics. So we have not seen any significant increase in the level of bad debt experienced and also we have seen things – the things we measure everyday like day sales outstanding days payable outstanding stock turnover. We've actually seen improvements in both the receivables and payables side of that equation and we found it harder to move the needle on inventory, but having said that our inventory metrics did not reduce either during that period. So we think that's really a testament to that good day-to-day management. So I have no magic bullet to talk to about that but just a good basic on this regard financial management at its best. I think for the year as a whole the outturn at the end of the year, it's one of the things that we find hardest to predict for the Group as a whole. It's very sensitive to trading in the last month or six weeks of the year. So last year you remember we had a very good finish to the year particularly in Europe and that meant activity was strong in the – just in those last few weeks. Depending on how things work – at the end of the year that will have an impact on the final outturn. In reality though I'll be very happy if we're reporting a small outflow in working capital for the year as a whole because that will be in the activity has picked up and this trend that we're seeing is continuing even stronger. So I can't predict the exact answer, but I think, I don't think the number will be a big figure in the cash flow for the year as a whole, which means I am confidently expecting a significant inflow from working capital in the second half of the year.

And the finance charge.

And the finance change. It was approximately 150 million for the first half of the year I'd expect that to be slightly lower in the second half of the year, so a number for the year as a whole slightly below last year is 300 million so somewhere in the 290, 295 million for the year as a whole.

Thanks Maeve. And specifically Robert with regard to your question on asphalt volumes and pricing cost and the deep margin, as we've said earlier the 3% volume increase we've seen in the first half of the year was very strong. I don't think it will be maintained at that level. I think there is some possibility we will see volumes up this year and last year on the back of growing residential, non-residential and specifically on the fact that we're seeing a little bit of more stays spending coming through the support of that business but we'll see how the year pans out. With regard to our winter-fill program and just to remind people who are listening in and in the room. We store at the end of the winter season about 860,000 tons of bitumen in our winter storage which was a pearl necklace all across the north of America. This is very expense for us to do, it costs $600 a ton to do that. It’s just a touch below last year as costs and we think that, what we have in the tanks and give about the rack prices at this moment in time the marketplace will support our asphalt margins this year. So I hope that's clear for you Robert.

Yes. Sorry, can I just have one follow up question, just in relation to Slide 25 where you outlined your equity accounts -- investments can you give us the full year EBITDA figure for 2013?

I'm going to give -- I think it was around 160 million for 2013. I'll check that Robert and come back to you if I am wrong with that. The operating – the PAT number for equity account and the numbers at the end of last year excluding impairment is 61 million. I think it's around 160 million mark of EBITDA.

Thank you.

I think one more question. I got some question from the Web, I want to get to I it. I'm just going with the tight time today. May be I can take one more question from the telephone please.

We'll now take our next question from Gerard Moore, Investec. Please go ahead.

Hi, good morning. I just got one quick question and that relates to the Americas materials business and more specifically the paving business within there. So wondering if you can give us an indication of how significant was the improvement in the margin in that business and where would you – where were the margins being at compared to normalized level what this business should be achieving? Thanks.

We saw a good up tick in the overall activity levels in our construction business, but margin slightly -- only slightly ahead of last year and we're not back to where we are. We're back about 70% to where they were pre-crisis but up tick in last year in terms of construction margins in the U.S. on our paving business.

Thank you.

Okay. Just considering our time here and what I am going to do is, we had a number of questions coming from the Web and some which – among which I failed to answer Barry Dixon from Davy asked me a question on this, sort of outlook for Poland, one on the which I have been asked update on quality infrastructure spending and where that is given last year? And with regard to that we have any of the growth issue we're seeing in Poland is largely coming through in the back of better residential spend. The EU funding that's in place now from 2013 to 2020 commits about €17.6 billion of EU funds which will have to be matched with 50-50 by the Polish government out in particular projects -- infrastructure projects. They have been very slow to get those tenders awarded. There is a lot of tenders out there in this current year we estimate our current -- and we're running to almost about €1 billion will -- work actually will take place. So the significant amount of work that's still out there and I should say because of the rough sea and the red tape and because of funding constraints that Poland had but no longer has they actually left with 25% of funding from the previous trends behind them. So we think it bodes well, I think its getting better, I think we've learned some of the lessons from the last bidding more out there. So a lot of tenders that are out there that seems to be a lot more sensible and we think it bodes well that could be more 2015 than 2014. Also asked to comment on the capacity in India and the fact that in recent times, there was some publicity in…