Thank you very much.

Of course, what we really all want to know is what Stan is going to do next. At the press conference he gave on the day he announced his intention to retire he was asked if he might go to the World Bank, and he replied "I'll cross that street when I come to it". Well I'm sure wherever he goes he will be appreciated. I'd like to talk a bit about some of the qualities that make Stan special, and then about the implications for the Fund of his leaving.

I guess the first thing that comes to my mind when I think of Stan is his qualities of leadership. As we have seen recently, a crisis is characterized by confusion, uncertainty about information, conflicting views on what must be done, and what must be done first. In all of the crises in which Stan has been involved, he has been able to bring order out of chaos. His characteristic question: "what is the policy, do we have a policy?" has focused minds and brought discipline to the process of solving problems. He has applied this skill to many storms and crises, and he has weathered them all and helped the Fund and the countries we serve to weather them.

Stan has always led by example: by a remarkable ability to attend to details while keeping the big picture firmly in mind, by his integrity and compassion, and by his hard work. Indeed, maybe he has worked too hard. I hear that staff on mission with him have often scrambled to get seats on airplanes away from Stan, not because they didn't like him, but because they too embarrassed to just get some sleep or read their Ken Follett novel while he sat next to them devouring document after document.

When I was talking with staff the second quality that was most mentioned, and that has been referred to constantly in others' tributes to him, is integrity. At a basic level it's not too hard to have integrity in one's work. But at a deeper level, there can be all kinds of temptations to take easy ways out, and Stan has always resisted these. Many briefs and memos and staff reports flow smoothly and pleasantly because they do not ask the difficult questions. Stan has consistently made staff ask and answer those questions, which is why his comments and his meetings almost always added something to the process and to the outcome. Many staff commented on Stan's diplomatic skills in dealing with the Board. I would suggest that integrity is also at the root of this. Directors know that he will never brush their legitimate concerns under the carpet, even when it would be easy to ignore and paper over differences, and they trust him.

The third quality, and perhaps the most important, is compassion. We in the Fund are a cynical bunch, used to decoding statements and discarding nonsense, possibly because we hear quite a bit of it, and sometimes speak or write it ourselves. But ultimately we're in this business because we care, and in Stan we see a kindred spirit, who will use every resource that he honestly can to help people and to do what is right. There's a revealing quote from Stan made during a conference on Macroeconomics and Poverty Reduction last year. After explaining the intellectual basis for the Fund's involvement in the war on poverty, and also the political arguments for it, he said: "One could also argue for involvement on the grounds that it is the moral thing to do, but people seem to be more comfortable with arguments grounded in realpolitik than in morality." Stan has always been comfortable talking about morality, and applying it in his work. He has always cared for the people he serves.

There has always been a special relationship between Stan and the staff. He has helped to ensure that we were rewarded for our work, and that we had the tools necessary to do it right. He has encouraged junior staff, through inclusion in meetings, brown bag lunches, insisting on contributors being identified. He has helped staff when they have been in trouble, most notably in the case of Mr. Hong, who was imprisoned while on a mission to China, and who is now, thanks to the efforts of many but not least through Stan's unsung efforts, a free man. The staff will lose a great friend in Stan.

What will the Fund be like without him? Not quite the same, that's for sure. But we will go on. We welcome Anne Krueger among us as Stan's successor. The Fund will also go on because its more than one man, however great. Over the years that Stan has been with us many people, many thousands of people, have contributed to making the Fund what it is, and he couldn't have done what he did without them. Some of these people are leaving too, and they also deserve our thanks and praise. I can't thank everyone individually, but I would like to take this opportunity on behalf of the staff to thank a few people, a representative sample if you like, who have helped make the Fund what it is, and who have either left already or won't be here for much longer.

I'd like to thank Michael Mussa and Jack Boorman. Michael Mussa's irreverence has delighted many of us for years, and you have to admire a man who could even make the WEO funny. Jack Boorman shares many of the same qualities as Stan, coolness under pressure, a dry and often hidden sense of humor, integrity and compassion. We'll miss you Jack.

I'd like to thank Blair Rourke, whose retirement party would have taken place September 11. Blair served the Fund for nearly 20 years, and with characteristic generosity he donated his party funds to charities after September 11. Thank you Blair.

Finally, thanks to a group of people, the Administrative Officers—the AOs—many of whom are leaving the Fund as part of a reorganization. I wish I could thank them all individually. It's been one of the greatest pleasures of my time on the SAC to work on behalf of this extraordinary group of women to make sure, with HRD and Mr. Sugisaki, that those AOs who were leaving got a fair separation package. But I was also struck by how much the Fund will lose when these women leave, how much they know, how much they care, how much they have done to keep the Fund working through their careers. Thanks to all of them.

There are many more departures that I haven't mentioned. Staff who have served this institution for most of their working lives, and whose contribution has been quiet but crucial. But the Fund is more than individual staff members. The Fund is more than the Managing Director, who we are coming to know and like, and whose simple, direct style is very reassuring in this time of crisis. The Fund is more than the Executive Board, which does a remarkable job and balances the conflicting tasks of representing their authorities to the Fund and the Fund to their authorities.

The Fund is all of these: staff, management and Board and individually we try, and collectively we achieve a great deal.

For the last seven years we have had among us a terrific leader, a man of integrity and compassion, and a firm friend: Stanley Fischer. I'll conclude by asking him to come up and accept this small token of our affection and regard, a statement of appreciation with, on the back, the signatures of many, many staff. Stan, we'll miss you. Thank you, from all of us.