Now rounding out our commissioner plenary presentations I have the honor of introducing commissioner Stephen Burns who began his service at the commission on November 5th 2014 with the term ending June 30 2019 mr. Burns serves as the 16th nrc chairman from January 1st 2015 until January 23rd 2017 now as a commissioner he continues to be engaged in the work of the agency and its safety and security mission This is his 28th regulatory information conference and his fourth as a commissioner Commissioner Burns has had a distinguished career within the nrc and internationally Immediately prior to rejoining the nrc commissioner Burns was the head of legal affairs of the nuclear energy agency at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris and he served there from 2012 until 2014 prior to assuming his post at the NEA Commissioner Burns served as a distinguished employee of the nrc for 33 years from 1978 through 2012 and he served in a variety of roles during his career including being appointed as the nrc's general counsel from May 2009 until April 2012 and also of note commissioner Burns served as the executive assistant to former nrc chairman Ken Carr and As the director of the office of commission appellate adjudication commissioner Burns received his JD degree in 1978 from George Washington University here in Washington DC and his bachelor of arts degree in 1975 from Colgate University in Hamilton, New York the title of the commissioner's presentation this morning is reformed and reforming Adapting the regulatory process to meet new challenges ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming commissioner Burns Well, thanks everyone. I was looking over here Apparently, this is the hot seat up here because there's a burn mark from an iron on the on the platform over here So I hope it's not coming for me Something like that. I appreciate Mike mentioning my educational background as someone reminded me today The Colgate women have made the frozen four in hockey and we're going all the way So the heck with Alabama. We're we're here for We're here for hockey anyway I've titled my remarks today reformed and reforming adapting the regulatory process to meet new challenges and the theme expands upon an article I recently wrote for the OECD nuclear law bulletin Which was specific to the licensing of advanced reactors and reflecting on the licensing process over the years How are in reflecting on what I'd speak to you all about today? I wanted to expand on that premise of my article to cover the topic more broadly. I first joined the NRC 40 years ago fresh out of law school in fact first I was in my official personnel file which is all electronic now and believe it or not. I found my NRC application now there may be something about cyber in there Why the heck do they still have an application? I made 40 years ago and typed by hand in in the file There's too much information out there But anyway, I found my law school transcript and my college transcript and you know There were some classes I did well in and there's one in law school I never forgave the professor for But in any event in any event It struck me over the course of my 40 years in this field that there is often a central conundrum in regulation And we continue to be challenged by that conundrum today Let me elaborate There's often broad agreement that the level of safety or security established by certain regulations License conditions or other legally binding instruments is in the judgment of technical experts to Conservative based on outdated information or it imposes an unnecessary regulatory burden The regulation says for perhaps that you need to have a 12 inch diameter widget But professional expertise and for the research tells us that an 8 inch diameter widget will be just fine What it what to do both the regulator and the regulated seem equally frustrated Asking themselves, why do we spend so much time trying to resolve issues of little safety significance? Part of the cause may be what some refer to as paralysis by analysis or process It is where we we may get so caught up in a following a particular way of doing things that we lose sight of the bigger picture Or we can't seem to reach the point of satisfaction in analyzing a problem and thus the process becomes paralyzing I've seen this over and over again across the course of my career without any Lasting solution proposed or implemented and if you're hoping that I would come here with one today Sorry This is again as some others my predecessor said this is a destination Not a journey not an actual a specific outcome that I can offer But I do intend to focus on this journey of nuclear regulation and not necessarily the destination And my intention is to give you perhaps a new lens through which to think about some of our current challenges I'll offer these three current examples where this tension is playing out Itself out as we speak as some others have mentioned already this morning digital instrumentation and control an accident tolerant fuels and the licensing framework for advanced reactors in my view They're these are concrete examples where we have struggled to find reasonable solutions in large part because we do feel inextricably tied to our regulatory structure and we have been slow to acknowledge at times some of the difficulties in Adapting that structure however and however in some respects I would argue that we are seeing some success in overcoming the dilemma But before I really get into it and certainly before I begin looking toward the future I'd like to tell you how a story about how past is prologue Back in November 1971 I was an 18 year old college freshman from Virginia at Colgate University getting used to academic life in upstate New York And if you remember your freshman year, you know there are a lot of adjustments to make and most students are focused on dealing with new teachers and new campus new friends and so I was But I was also determined to cast my vote in the first election for which I was eligible Right after the 26th amendment to the Constitution gave 18 year olds like me the right to vote And so I went to the university registrar's office to fill out my absentee ballot because I needed to have it Notarized by this Commonwealth of Virginia those days now I intended at that time to vote a straight Republican ticket to support that party's push under Governor Libwyn Holton to shed Virginia's legacy of segregation But I accidentally selected two candidates on my ballot for the House of Delegates for whom I did not intend to vote I Carefully crossed out those names and wrote in do not desire to vote for these two on the ballot All good all clear as far as I was concerned Unfortunately the Board of Elections thought otherwise and ruled that my ballot was defaced and it was rejected Which unbelievably enough led to a tie vote for that house seat? Sorry as An aside yes every vote does count So I give leave that lesson with you But in the case of a tie in verge according to Virginia law the winner is left to chance and Literally drawn from a hat well in this case a silver cup and by the way my candidate won in 1971 and the Washington Post recently we told the story So why why is it relevant now fast forward to? 2017 46 years after my voting snafu Virginia faced exactly the same unlikely predicament Involving a disputed ballot a tied race and the tie-breaking lucky draw to settle a state house race The Post retold the story for the same reason I'm recalling it now Because we often think of that what we're facing today in politics and academia in regulatory space is Completely novel something never seen before and it's just not true Here's an nrc Press release the headline from an nrc press release Nuclear regulatory commission direct staff to take experimental steps to improve licensing process I Didn't think I was funny, but anyway Mike Okay, nothing particularly surprising there, but no the press release is dated October 20th 1978 Two months after I began my career at the nrc And you hear something else that might sound familiar Both the New York Times or the Washington Post ran front-page stories President offers plan to reform federal agencies now which president president you asked It was John F. Kennedy and the story ran on April 4th 1961 And I'd note actually the headline that day was about the successful orbit of earth by cosmonaut Yuri Gurgarin Undoubtedly we could find similar stories under more recent presidents And you know from Reagan to Obama, but actually going back in the 1930s under Roosevelt Truman And Eisenhower and I don't mean to be dismissive of the underlying premise that regulatory reform and effectiveness Demand our attention it clearly does But certainly from a regulator's perspective neither the evolution of technology nor the Institution of major regulatory reform initiatives is new or novel Every administration in the modern era has engaged in some sort of regulatory reform initiative And while some of the technology and processes behind advanced reactors Accident-tolerant fuels or digital INC might be new or novel the challenge of appropriately regulating new technology technology is not The regulatory conundrum I mentioned at the outset man itself manifests itself in a number of ways prescriptive versus performance-based regulation Deterministic versus risk-informed thinking compliance base versus safety focus regulation Whatever you call it. They all share a similar characteristic The NRC has put in place a legally binding mechanism or an interpretation of such be it a regulation an order a License or guidance that contains a requirement or guideline that is challenged by some as being too conservative unnecessary or outdated and as such then it's argued unnecessary and Necessary hindrance to innovation improvement or progress the basic tension in these expressions underlies much of what I have in the past called Or referred to as the regulatory craft At the very at its very heart this tension underlies a fundamental notion of our form of government Which is based on law and not the whim of individuals as John Adams said a government of men a government of laws not men This conflict between the so-called rule of law versus the rule of man dates far back to the beginnings of democracy and Although many of us have heard or used those that expression the rule of law or the rule of man How those terms are precisely defined is somewhat difficult to come by and varies based on Context I would offer that the collective societal recognition of the supremacy of law Even those laws that we as individuals might not agree with is essential to our system of government The supremacy of law is based on society's acknowledgement that laws were enacted through an agreed upon legislative process Such as that defined in the US constitution through which the people of this nation have had some Opportunity usually through the political process to voice their views or have their influence on the other hand what at times is can be and Synthetical to the rule of law as the so-called rule of man in the context of our discussion today I'm referring to those situations in which individuals or groups reject laws for their own reasons or Alternative that alternatively the government entity responsible for implementing the laws arbitrarily chooses to ignore them When parts of society be at the government or the public choose not to follow its law This is essentially a breach of the social contract posited by philosopher Jean-Jacques Hussot We as regulators go through complex legal processes involving significant public input to adopt regulations or to issue licenses Regulatory decisions can manifest themselves in the application of expert engineering or professional judgment or even simply common sense Requirements reflecting the regulations and our licenses are therefore in a sense the law of the land and Choosing to arbitrarily ignore them comes with consequences and at times we may come up against however, some rule or regulation that just doesn't make sense as Plato noted a failure by rule makers to acknowledge and take action when a rule has ceased to achieve its intended purpose is Quote like a stubborn stupid person who refuses to allow the slightest deviation from or questioning of his own rules Even if the situation has in fact changed and it turns out to be better for someone to Contravene those rules unquote In other words sometimes simply asserting that this is the way we've always done it is just not good enough and in fact It may be counterproductive to optimizing regulatory effectiveness and thus there's a natural tension Between the societal need for predictable rules and the need for flexibility to apply common sense or acknowledge new Information when needed. This is the heart of the regulatory conundrum that I speak of today The imperative addressing this conundrum increases during times when resources are limited and agencies are Facing increased political pressure to rationalize or Reese or reset their practices This can manifest itself in general government-wide reform efforts Initiated as I noted by almost every in administration in the modern era And there's also constant pressure on the regulator to be more risk-informed efficient predictable The NRC has been notably Proactive over the last few years when it comes to taking a hard look at itself Examples of course our project aim the reassessment of our budget requests and staffing levels reforms to the rulemaking process and the initiation of retrospective review of regulations in My view the NRC statutory mandate in the atomic energy act to provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection Gives the agency significant flexibility to adjust itself over time to account for the regulatory a conundrum I've discussed Reasonable assurance is not a static concept It should be fluid and adaptable to the current state of the art and science and technology and reflect the current security environment what was deemed necessary in 1954 is not necessarily the same as what's deemed necessary in 2018 Compliance with NRC's regulations for example has long been understood to ensure adequate protection But there are times when the regulations are deemed not enough or too much After the 2011 accident Fukushima Daiichi plant for instance the NRC determined that the level of protection for US nuclear power Plants was not sufficient and accordingly the NRC took action to increase those standards getting input from the public and from the industry Both expert judgment and common sense dictated that to be the case But in the acknowledgement and importance of the rule of law the changes were made to existing standards through established and transparent processes On the other hand the NRC at times must acknowledge when its existing Standards of safety may be higher than necessary to achieve adequate protection an Example is requirements for decommissioning of power reactors from a technical and safety perspective We understand that these facilities do not need to be regulated to the same standards as operating facilities They don't pose the same kinds of risks yet our rules is currently written don't really distinguish between the two And so recognizing this the NRC is granted exemptions under its regulations to adjust the level of regulation Necessary to achieve adequate protection at decommissioning facilities And we're also engaged as others have noted in a rulemaking to codify that judgment Again, we do so through a public formalized transparent process consistent with the rule of law Yet another example where the regulatory conundrum comes up is the inspection process you can imagine a situation I know for many we'll say it's not imaginary Which an NRC inspector makes a finding that a licensee is not in compliance with a regulation or a provision of its license Both the inspector and the licensee may agree In fact that compliance is is marginal or not or that the licensee isn't in compliance And they may even also agree that the non-compliance has marginal safety significance So what's the inspector to do ignore it ignore the issue? Not document her findings because in her expert judgment the issue is not safety significant In other words should that inspector apply her Personals discretion to decide unilaterally that the license provision makes no sense and doesn't need to be adhered to Some might say of course that this is just common sense and to initiate a Regulatory process to deal with a trivial issue is a waste of resources and time But again the license is law and if we have all truly have respect for the law Then out of out of principle should we allow this to occur? If the situation were different that licensee disagreed with the inspector on both the interpretation of the license and its safety Significance of the violation would we be comfortable in allowing the inspector to exercise her judgment? I would suggest that we would not So what's my point? Every day we confront this regulatory conundrum Be it in regulations licenses inspection findings regulatory interpretations issuance of exemptions But we have to be careful and making snap judgments based on particular facts or circumstances That either our regulations or regulatory interpretations are infallible or that bad requirements can simply be ignored The integrity of our system depends on principled adherence to the process Even when it makes little sense at times to someone that said the NRC There's a regulator can and should be flexible when it comes in finding ways to deal with the conundrum as Ralph Waldo Emerson Common commented a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds Adored by the little statesman and philosophers and divines wonderful quote So I said this tension challenged us every day and here again. I've come back to the examples I mentioned earlier we take digital instrumentation and control. We've had a good discussion of that. I think in the three my three predecessors up here on the stage and and it's really Probably the best example Currently that demonstrates the difficulty of overcoming Or adapting regulatory controls that don't appear to align with some of the technological advances And in this case the safety criteria do not readily address How a typical regulatory concerns manifest themselves in digital systems? And while we all agree that digital systems have the potential to improve safety and operational performance When compared to analog systems, we've been unable to overcome those hurdles of the existing process to license them Even as other industries with similar low-risk tolerances such as the defense and aerospace industries have succeeded And the irony is that in a legitimate effort to ensure that plants are safe The NRC may be imposing regulatory obstacles that prevent the implementation of safety improvements There's the conundrum The NRC and industry continue to be discussing these issues and in fact are meeting again this week I understand and the executive director mr. McCree has recently created the transformation team as he talked about To target this subject as one that we need to do work on Another example is the industry's pursuit of accident tolerant fuels several fuel vendors and coordination with the Department of Energy Have announced plans to develop and seek approval for various fuel designs and enhance that that enhance With enhance accident tolerance The first test bed for these efforts involve licensees that have reached agreements with fuel vendors to load lead test assemblies or their At their plants lead test assemblies are important first step in the licensing because they can provide data about the performance of new fuel In a reactor environment as well as provide materials for subsequent research and testing And even though lead test assemblies have been installed at many plants in the past the agency in the industry have been challenged Agree on the appropriate licensing path forward for those plants planning to load lead test assemblies in the near future This is a practical example of the tension between adherence to establish regulatory regime and allowing adaptation or flexibility to address new innovations Our past practice has been largely require approval of exemptions to our ECCS requirements and often license amendments before lead test assemblies could be loaded at an operating plant This is despite the fact that in most cases the safety significance of loading these test assemblies and these quantities is extremely low I would note however that upon closer examination of the existing requirements It does appear that exemptions and amendments may not always be required So I think it's fair to say that with both digital I and C and with accident tolerant fuels We've been struggling with the process Some of the agency appear to be reluctant to let go the existing requirements even even when some expert judgment Or perhaps even common sense dictates those regulations don't squarely address the exact problem Or may be too heavy-handed and it seems we struggle to be flexible and honestly acknowledge that level of risk Rather many are finding it easier to cling to what is known. What is proven and deterministic in? Contrast I would offer the third example our work on advanced reactors Despite some early criticism that the NRC has been slow to act and existing regulatory structure made it this Difficult for new entrance to get involved in the field I would argue that NRC has designed a strategy that is extremely flexible and forward-looking and Simplest turns the conundrum is represented by the fact that our current technical standards as others have mentioned this morning Applied a plant that are applicable to plant licensing have been largely drawn from experience with light water reactor technology It's been argued that these standards are overly conservative not risk-informed or simply an Inapplicable to some advanced technologies The appropriateness of current regulatory standards and the need to make changes to address advanced reactor technologies is an important issue and The one that may well warrant regulatory change in the future in the long term But at least in the near term case-by-case assessments of the particular relevance of generic standards and requirements to the technology being put forward In an application will be necessary Let me discuss some Examples however where the NRC has proactively tried to address the limitations in its framework Beginning in 2010 for example The staff began work on relooking at a number of policy licensing and technical issues that might warrant further commission engagement as the staff prepared For the review of SMR designs those issues included accident source terms site suitability emergency planning security and safe safeguards requirements and the application of defense in depth and I think we're making progress on those issues in 2013 the NRC and DOE initiated a joint effort to address the licensing framework for advanced non-lightwater reactor technologies that ultimately led to the 2017 issuance of a draft reg guide addressing the general design criteria and in late 2018 the NRC issued the vision and strategy Statement and develop implementation action plans to address actions to achieve its objectives We've also looked for experience with stage approaches to licensing from other agencies Federal Aviation Administration the Food and Drug Administration use them and in the international community our Canadian colleagues to the north and those in the United Kingdom with the Vendor design review or the general design approval process in the UK The staff also recently issued its regulatory Roadmap review roadmap in December 2017 and it illustrates how a stage approach can align with the current licensing process So to sum up, what does this all mean? I purposely use the title in my title of my law bulletin article the phrase Reformed and reforming and although that phrase is generally used in an ecclesiastical context and for those of us who mark the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation, you'll know what I'm talking about The phrase underscores my view of the historic and ongoing approach that the NRC has taken to meet challenges put before it We continue to examine ourselves our Processes our approaches to adapt them when necessary and to reflect in good faith on experience Gained and then reform yet again when needed to meet new challenges in Order to come up with practical and implement Implementable solutions to our current challenges We must first and foremost acknowledge the reality that we live within a system of laws and those laws have meaning and those laws include statutes regulations Licenses we can take we can't take shortcuts simply for the sake of expediency or because the rules or the processes of changing them seem inconvenient at the moment a Principled and consistent acknowledgement of the rule of law is essential To the integrity of our system But then again our rules should not be viewed as infallible unbending or or unchangeable Rules that don't serve their purpose or that are because of advancements in technology or operating experience During deemed to be overly conservative can and should be changed and we should make realistic Acknowledgements of risk and always keep in mind our mandate of reasonable assurance of adequate protection The notion of being risk-informed can apply equally to our processes as well I mentioned at the outset the processitis or paralysis by analysis And it seems that sometimes we can get stuck on processes and not solutions So adjusting our standards or processes to keep up with the times cannot move at a glacial place When I started the agency 40 years ago rule makings took on average about two years Now it's about four years, and I remember Commissioner Ed McGaffigan complaining about that two years When he was here Blind adherence to process simply for its own sake does not advance nuclear safety and does not reflect well on the NRC as an effective and efficient regulator and at times that it can also cause us to lose sight of the forest for the trees No doubt the trees are important They make up the forest after all but the forest like nuclear safety is the bigger picture and we cannot lose our focus on it And to do this we must be honest with ourselves and be able to assess if our processes are fully furthering the mission of safety And security and we must be willing to reassess The reformation of the NRC is not a destination. It is a journey as some others have Reference earlier today. We'll never be able to say mission accomplished and trying to reach some of these Ideals nor should we much like the technology we regulate we as the regulator should be constantly evolved and reforming So I'll leave you with a quote from Thomas Jefferson If you've ever visit visited the Jefferson Memorial along the tidal base, and I'm sure you've seen passages from Jefferson's writing inscribed on the walls and a quote on the southeast portico seems apropos Quote I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions Jefferson writes but laws and institutions must go hand-in-hand with the progress of the human mind as that becomes more Develop more enlightened as new discoveries are made new truths discovered and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times we might as well require a man to still wear the coat Which fit him when a boy as a civilized society remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors Jefferson's words align with my view of why the NRC must continue to examine itself its processes and approaches to adapt them when necessary and To reflect in good faith on experience gain and then reform yet again when needed to meet new challenges Propalente reformata Semper reformanda the agency is reformed and is always being reformed Thank you for your attention today. I'll be happy to answer your question So thank you commissioner. That was a bit similar to fully confident, but never fully satisfied So a common theme in all three of our presentations this morning. So appreciate the perspectives As you might well imagine we got some questions related to your comments on rule of law How does NRC ensure that its statutory mandate to protect with reasonable assurance is interpreted appropriately and consistently throughout NRC headquarters in the regional offices and a related question How does NRC management ensure NRC is not regulating to an absolute assurance standard? Well, I I think there are roles across the agency From the commission itself down to the individual employee within the agency that takes that on that takes that on I mean part of our role. I think as commissioners is we provide the general Oversight we are in a sense in our system of governance. We are in effect the political accountability For assuring that and it's or assure consistency and again now, you know a draw on You know my again my background as a lawyer and particularly as an American lawyer You know versed in the common law we we as I think commissioners View and I think Chairman Savinica alluded to this we view What our predecessors have done before us as very important and influence Influencing how we we come Come to that so at that that's at the highest level at a management level Certainly with it was senior management and I experienced this in terms of both general counsel, but it's also, you know first line supervisor Again, it's knowing that agency experience Working through it Communicating that to new employees. I think this was a theme for example my speech last year about you know We come out of school. I come out of law school or somebody Chairman comes out of engineering school and if you come directly in the NRC You don't know how necessarily to be a regulator You've got to be versed in the things that are within the scope of our Responsibility and then be trained and learned and learn how those things accomplish. I think I take For example some of the issues the EDO has done in the last couple years One of the things Issues that has come up is the question of about sort of the fidelity of our application of the back fit And I think to the EDO's credit and the credit of other senior staff management instituting better training Looking for the consistency issues across the board though. Those are some of the efforts So there there there comes it's a it's a wonderful question because there's we could probably talk for hours in terms of You know what what the role of? Everyone in the agency is and I missed the other one. What's the other one absolute assurance? Well, I think this goes to again I'd stand by the answer. I just gave is that's that's the role of supervision. That's Not only the supervisor You know again looking back on my own experience in the agency when when you become more versed As an employee when you're a more senior counsel within the general counsel's office If you're a more senior project manager, you're there and part. I think what you do You need to do and I think our employees are encouraged to do is pass that knowledge that experience that shaping onto New folk, but there there's a lot of I think accountability across the agency in that area Okay, similar question. You said adequate protection is fluid over time Does this mean that a plant's licensing basis is also fluid that it is something that? Evolves and is subject to subsequent reinterpretation well the licensing basis My answer is this you have a licensing basic the way it is fluid over time Is if that basis has changed and that may mean for example? If you have a plan that is licensed in say 1980 there are things that have been added to that licensing basis since 1980 it might be post TMI For 1980 plan it might be post TMI requirements. It might be the maintenance rule and you know 1990 if after the 2001 terrorist attacks where the security profile is post Fukushima. So my view is not that So much that the the licensing basis is Totally fluid and what it's whatever we want it to be in terms of what was adapted or adopted at a part of time but there is a discipline I think in the process for Backfitting for the addition of new requirements and those are the things where the licensing basis accrues New aspects to it, but it's not sort of saying well the licensing basis of 19a. It's whatever I want it to be today Okay, thank you This commenter found your comments regarding the rule of law as a refreshing reminder So in light of that, what are your thoughts on the government refusing to implement the nuclear waste policy act? It seems that it's an excellent example of the rule of man Superceding the rule of law this person was really listening to your okay. I Don't think that's what Plato had in mind But you know seriously This is Yeah, I'm not gonna dive waited into the the nuclear race policy act debate But this is one where the political process, you know, God bless it Has a lot of tension in it The you know the fact of the matter is I I could look at where things are with that process and say that's exactly It's what the rule of law or the absence of Pushing law has taken us You know we we know in this agency and then you know, there are some out there who Will put my name on or blame me for it in terms of when the agency Basically stepped down From from review, but we had the mandamus. There's the rule of law court tells the agency We had certain amount of funding left You know modest as it was he said you need to go and spend every last time That's that's part of the rule of law But beyond that I Am within the rule of law because I don't have any other Appropriations I don't have a willing applicant Or I haven't had a willing applicant Up in the time and so that political process needs to work itself out Okay, thank you The agency's received our first application for subsequent license renewal If nrc acts positively on that request for another 20 years Will that greatly increase the risk of nuclear accidents? And what is nrc doing to ensure safety for the subsequent license period? Well, I I don't see it as substantially increasing The the probability of accidents. I think the staff Has done The you know has been doing its homework in terms of looking at what is it In terms of a subsequent license renewal, what is important for the focus of the agent of the agency There's research that's been done. Some of it's sponsored by the department of energy We you know incorporate those research results and a focus on it. So What I think where we've come to this is not Again some arbitrary decision. Okay. Oh, yeah, we're ready to go This is really a matter of where we have looked at a process We have looked at what the technical we think are the significant technical issues are ready to move on that We'll continue to be informed By other experience and by other You know research. I think there's some other research that's out there. You may know better than I Mike But and we'll continue to be informed by that But I think we've prepared ourselves to move new move forward in that area Okay, this question uh tracks to your uh experience in international nuclear law The convention on physical protection and nuclear material cppnm addresses international transport of nuclear material The 2016 amendments to that convention extended its application to domestic transport of nuclear material What is nrc doing to address this amendment? I you know, I I think I'd have to defer to Some of the staff. I don't know immediately and I will be first confess. I am not a cppnm expert I think we have uh through our post 9 11 security requirements imposed additional requirements which bring us generally into into compliance with the 2016 amendments, but yeah But maybe you know, maybe we can discuss it further. Yeah And this this comment comes on the topic of culture Transformation at the nrc The commenter recognizes that real transformation as the edo's remarked Requires a change in in culture or a change in paradigm Since it's difficult to change culture with the same leadership that Implemented the current paradigm What is nrc doing to ensure that leadership is strong and effective in leading the cultural transformation? This will be your last question So I don't get the movie question. Uh, okay. Anyway, um I've already up to a dozen of those. I'm not avoiding. I'm not avoiding this one. So yes I mean the the difficulty always is that things on transformation Reformation whatever it says you got folks who've been steeped in it And steeped in the culture steeped in processes And in some respects I hope I hope that's so Because you need the informant you need to be have informed judgment That can look at where you've been what you need is leaders that are open to That kind of change or understanding that I you know, I may not You know, I look back on that experience And that we really could have come through that better And that's what I referred to where I think and again using this phrase reform to reforming I actually think and over the course of my 40 years associated with the nrc or or or at nea Looking back at the nrc I think that's where we we have been as an agency because I can think of those things About you know the the r.o.p. I can remember, you know, jim taylor the former edo And it was you know a lot of respect for but you know, he was throwing crockery in his office So to speak because and I don't blame I might have a couple shards left I ducked when it but but jim was frustrated over things like the millstone event and the main yankee event It says why can't we get ahead of this? You know, we tried in terms of evolving with the salt program for assessment in the 19 Excuse me in the 19 in the 1980s, but it just wasn't doing it. So it's those types of things Yes, I've been involved with this process, but I'm I'm honest enough to to face You know facing in the mirror and say something has got to move And I think that's what it is and some of these folks like like vick have been bill dean some some others You know We're involved as some of this this came about so that You know, yes, I also agree having sort of fresh perspectives having people come in new Folks come in who are outside of the club if you will that's a good thing too um, but all of you know, we all have I think as as leaders or as effective leaders Asking ourselves, where is the the Where is the opportunity to change? What is it the old thing about the the roman emperors riding into on the chariots into Into rome or whatever and you always had the person there all his vanity all his vanity whispering her in the air Well, we kind of need that too. I'm sorry. We're not going to hire some of that. We have a limited fte, but Um, but the it's the notion that's the notion is that that's the notion in the back of your head asking yourself those types of questions Very good commissioner. Thank you very much and then ask for the movie


everyone for coming and we apologize for the delay in getting started but we know that you're all excited to be here I'd like to welcome you to CSIS good afternoon my name is Janet Fleischman I'm a senior associate with the CSIS Global Health Policy Center it's our great pleasure and honor to have Dr. Dlamini Zuma here with us today as many of you know Dr. Dlamini Zuma is the chairperson of the African Union Commission since her election in July 2012 she is the first woman to lead the AU or its predecessor the OAU so it is particularly exciting that she is here to talk with us today about the issues of women the women's development and empowerment in Africa she has had a very impressive career as a medical student at the University of Natal in the 1970s she became an active underground member of the ANC and then the deputy president of the South African Students Organization she fled into exile in 1976 and completed her medical studies at the University of Bristol in the UK after the historic 1994 elections in South Africa Dr. Dlamini Zuma was appointed by President Nelson Mandela to be Minister of Health and then in 1999 by President Tabo and Becky to be Foreign Minister and then in 2009 she was appointed to be Minister of Home Affairs this has been a very important time under her tenure at during her tenure at the AU some of the most urgent issues that the world has been confronting have been taking place from the mobilization of more than 800 medical workers from across Africa to respond to the Ebola crisis to peacekeeping missions including in Somalia and Darfur to the new African Centers for Disease Response and Prevention the MOU of which was just signed today with Secretary John Kerry and then the excitement around the AU's plans for development for the next 50 years the agenda 2063 which I'm sure we'll hear more about today but especially noteworthy is the AU theme for 2015 which is women's empowerment and development this demonstrates that the chairperson has succeeded in putting women's empowerment at the forefront of Africa's political agenda recognizing that women's empowerment and development is not only critical for its own in its own right but it is essential for the development of the continent. Chairperson Lamini Zuma has often spoken of her desire to retire the hand hoe to the Museum of History and as she steps forward as a champion of women's empowerment and development we can see that she's also referring to retiring the discriminatory attitudes and abuses faced by millions of women and girls in Africa. These issues have never been more challenging or more important tomorrow marks one year since the abduction of the school girls in Nigeria starkly underscoring that the health education and empowerment of women and girls in Africa is essential for peace and development on the continent and that promoting gender equality and advancing the status of women and girls around the world remains one of the greatest unmet challenges of our time one that is vital to achieving the foreign policy objectives of the United States as well as of the African Union. So I present to you Dr. Lamini Zuma. Thank you very much and I'm so honored as deemed ladies and gentlemen to address this forum about an issue that is so critical for human development and for building a just world. Twenty years ago we meant from all over the world from all walks of life gathered in Beijing and adopted a platform of action to accelerate gender equality everywhere. This year we celebrate two decades of that event. Women across the world are taking stock of what has happened during that 20 years. There is no question that we have made some progress on women's rights as human rights, access to basic services women's legal position and rights and reproductive health and many other areas. But across the world also following Beijing women and progressive men have mobilized and organized amended constitutions and introduced laws in order to take the platform of action forward. We have pushed to increase women's representation in boardrooms, in parliament, in cabinets, professions, security forces, judiciary and management through advocacy. We have pushed quotas and legislation towards gender equality. A number of countries for the first time in history have women heads of state, prime ministers and Nigeria has just appointed the first woman governor. There is great awareness of girls and women's rights and protection against domestic and sexual violence as well as violence in conflicts. However, despite all these advances, the pace of change has been too slow. Globalization has seen greater inequality and feminization of poverty. As we all know, more than 70% of the poor are women. And although women make up half, more than half the population of the world, and maybe I may add and produce the other half, we are still less than a god of the world's legislative. Women's unpaid domestic work and community labor still remain unrecognized in accounts of GDPs and an equal pay for equal work is still painfully elusive in some countries. I don't know about here. The gender gap index estimates that if we continue on the same pace, it will take us at least 80 years to have equality. But I'm quite sure we all agree that we cannot wait for 80 years. So it means that we must accelerate the pace. Whilst we celebrate the achievements, but we must really focus our discussion on how we can speed up change. It is for this reason that Africa's own development aspirations have necessitated that we declare this year as the year of women's empowerment and development. And this was very important because we just adopted our agenda 2063, which is our 50-year framework for development for Africa. And we want to transform and integrate Africa so that in the shortest possible time we can have shared prosperity, we can have peace and have a people-centered Africa that plays its role in the world. And so we decided that we don't want 10, 20 years down the line to say, but what about women in this agenda? We wanted to ensure that women are part of this agenda from day one. And then key to this empowerment of women and girls, we're making sure that their rights are central in the implementation of agenda 2063, from education to health to participation in infrastructure development, in manufacturing, in mining. As we develop our blue and green economies, we must make sure that women are part of that. In addition, it's very important that women have access to energy and clean water. Now it may not make sense, too much sense to some of you, because you take those things for granted. But in Africa, many women still have to walk for long distances to get clean water, to get water not necessarily clean, and to look for fuel, firewood, so energy, access to energy and water are not just a developmental issue, but they are a very central gender issue because women, once they have access to these things, they are able to have time for more productive work. And of course, also access to sanitation and improving family health, freeze women so that they can have time to study or to get employment. And Africa, during this year, women is focusing on agriculture. And why agriculture? Because 70% of women in Africa are working in agriculture. So it's a very critical area if we're talking about women. And of course, as she has said, when we were gathering views in order to put Agenda 2063 together, the women farmers said to us, one of the things they want is that their home must be punished to the agricultural museum. It breaks their back. It makes them look 60 when they are 40. And it just adds very little productivity anyway, adds very little productivity. So they want better technology. They want land rights. They want access to capital and extension services, infrastructure, storage. So we have then decided that we have put this in Agenda 2063, but we have put it in the first 10 years of Agenda 2063. Because we think if concretely we can say in the next 10 years, no woman should be using a home so that after 10 years we can indeed put it in the museum. So we are looking at practical ways. What are the technologies? Things like small tillers and so on that we can help women. And also looking at irrigation so that they can, we can transform agriculture, make it more productive for them. But also what we found is that young people don't want to go to agriculture. But you can blame them. What young people is going to want to go and be using that home? But if you're using better technology, we might attract them into agriculture because it's not sustainable that we don't have young people in agriculture. So it's also going to help in that way. We're also emphasizing in Agenda 2063 that we must invest in our people in health, in education, of both boys and girls. And we must begin to shift the focus to science, technology, engineering and maths. Because those are the areas that are going to be important in economies going forward. And also in developing Africa, whether we're talking infrastructure, whether we're talking energy, we will need those skills. But we want to emphasize that those skills are not only for boys, but both boys and girls. We also feel that women and young people are going to be the real drivers of our development. And if we live out women, then I don't think we can achieve Agenda 2063. It's as simple as all that. We are also advocating that we must increase the number of women in parliaments and in cabinets. And that's very important because that's where laws are made. That's where policies that impact on them, on their children, on their families are made. So a critical mess of women is necessary. And we think 30% should be a start. Of course, we want to move to 50%. But I must say in Africa, only 14 countries have 30 or more percent of women in parliament. But proudly, the leader in the world is in Africa. Rwanda is leading the world with 63% of parliamentarians being women. So we think it can be done. If Rwanda can get up to 63%, 63.8%. Why can't others get to 30% as a start? So it has to be done. Women and children suffer the most when there is instability or war. And therefore, it's very important for us to also look at peace and stability and security on the continent. And of course, we know that if there is war, the girls lose their schooling. As we have seen, some of them have lost their childhood. They've been taken. We don't know what's happening to them. And of course, women lose their Amiga assets that they have.  And so peace and security is very important for the well-being of women and girls. And for women's continued empowerment. But they must also be there when peace is negotiated. They must be part of prevention, conflict prevention. And I think we also want to raise the issue of human trafficking because it tends to be, again, women and children tend to be the most that are trafficked. And I don't even know why we call it human trafficking because it's just slavery all over again as far as I'm concerned. It's just modern day slavery and we need to fight and really stop it. And we need to work all across the world. And so in our view, empowering women actually means that more development, accelerated development, social and cultural development, empowerment to families and communities. It makes social and economic sense to have women. And I think if we empower women, men will also benefit, families will benefit. And there probably will be more peace and more equity in the world. And indeed a better world will be created. So the more women I empower, the better the world will be. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you so much for those remarks. This is a wonderful opportunity for us to delve a little deeper into some of the issues that this presents for the African Union, for the member states and for women and girls and men and boys across the continent. So maybe to begin, since you spoke about the agenda 2063 and this theme for this year about women's empowerment and development, can you tell us in practical terms, what does that mean for the AU itself and for its member states? It meant the year for women and the empowerment of women in general. Well, for the AU it means that our policies must clearly be, our policies must clearly be very gender sensitive. We must ensure that in everything we do, let me just use an example. Africa has neglected its blue economy. We have three times the oceanic spaces as we have land space, but we have not really benefited from that. So we are, we have decided that one of the things we must do within Agenda 2063 is to develop our blue economy, explore our oceanic spaces and what we have encouraged women right from the beginning to be part of that. About a month ago, or even less, there was a first meeting of women and the blue economy hosted by Angola because we don't want them to be left out, we want them to be part of the initial discussions. Secondly, we have started a campaign about the handheld home. So we are looking at replacing it, particularly with tillers, which are manageable for small farmers. And we think that, and they are not that expensive compared to tractors, where appropriate tractors, but on the whole we are looking at tillers and we have started this campaign and we have, we want our member states to buy them. We also are raising funds for them so that because Agenda 2063 is, we want it to be practical. We, in June this, this year at our summit, were going to be discussing this theme of women's empowerment, but we are going to bring an agenda index and we are going to read out who in various areas in business, in women in the economy, women in civil service, in the civil service, in many areas and we are going to look at how each country is doing and this index will be updated every year so that we are able to praise those who are doing well and maybe encourage those who are not doing so well to be like the others who may be doing well. So in a practical sense we want to, we want to do that. We are also, so that will also assist us to look at if we're talking maternal mortality. These countries are doing well. What is it that they are doing better than the others so that we can share experience. If we are looking at women in decision-making, what is it that Rwanda and the other 14 countries have done better and how have they managed it? Have they used quotas? What have they used? For instance, we were in, I was in Namibia not so long ago on the 21st of March and Namibia had taken a decision to have Swapo and the ruling party to have 50-50 in their list but they had not quite gotten to implementing it but the president before he left he decided it has to be implemented and people were saying but how are you going to get this 50-50. But he came with a very simple plan that worked. He said okay when, because they have proportional representation so he said okay when we elect people who will go to parliament will elect from two lists instead of one. One list will be women, the other list will be men and we'll get 42 from each side and that's it. And that's what they did and suddenly they realized it's not so difficult. So I'm just saying we're looking at real practical things in each area of what to do to advance in education particularly young women who are encouraging them to get into science and technology. So they are practical things that we are doing. For member states the way we we've gone about agenda 2063 we started by consulting with ordinary citizens and then we the first draft came from ideas of ordinary citizens and that's the draft that we then gave to governments but now what the governments are going to be doing is to look at their own plans and make sure that they are in line with agenda 2063 because that's the only way it can really be implemented. It should not be seen as a document that is sitting on its on one side and countries are going the other way. So each country and some countries have already asked if we can assist to make sure that they put it in their national plans. So those are some of the practical things that we are doing. You talked about the practical things that can be done but there are also things that will be requiring resources and I wonder if there'll be resources available from the AU itself from the member states even from development partners or private sector that might get involved in supporting any of these efforts. Yes one of the things that we have been working on and in January was adopted was how to look at domestic resource mobilization first for the AU because up to now a lot of the funds for the AU have been coming from outside. We are not saying that those funds shouldn't come from outside but we're saying more should be mobilized from inside. So we're looking at alternate sources of funding so that countries can get more resources besides what they have from their fiscal. So a whole range of areas were looked at and there was there was an agreement that for instance all our operational costs should be borne by member states. Programs 75% should be borne by us and peace and security 25% should be Africans. 25% for peace and security because really peace and security is the responsibility of the security council but we do want to have some resources so that we can act quickly because we know that the security council takes long and sometimes they say there is no peace to keep so they can't come. For instance if I were to use an example of Central African Republic, 2013 December the world was saying there's going to be genocide in Central African Republic but the security council didn't come. It was the AU that puts a force together to go and stabilize the situation and then 2014 September 15th the security council said yeah now there's peace we can come so they came and took over because there was peace to keep so now we want to have this 25% of our budget for peace and security so that we can move quickly because it's our people who die if the conflict rages on and we are very proud that in Africa even though we have conflict but none of them are raging on like the conflicts we see in other parts because we tend to work together to try and at least control it not to go get out of hand and then once we negotiate and do that but we try and make sure that not so many people continue to die for years than years as we have seen elsewhere so we are looking at all that we are also looking at kebbing the illicit flows of resources that leave the continent there was a study done that showed that 50 billion US dollars every year leave the continent but what was interesting was that 60% of that is corporate 32% is organized crime and 88% is corruption within so though we were all chasing corruption which we should still chase but it's only 8% the 60% is from corporate and we now have to work and then show that over time we are able to stamp that outflow Maybe you could take a moment to talk but also I mean we will continue getting resources from outside for those who want to assist and we also of course the private sector and so on but we also want to to have a bit of control over our destiny. Could you take a moment to tell us a little bit of your own experience that brought you to be so passionate about these issues of women's development women's empowerment in Africa? I think if you are passionate about human beings you cannot be passionate about issues of women because issues of women impact on children they impact on families but I think it was within the African National Congress which is the part the political party that I belong to it's not a political party it's a movement it was the movement that fought for freedom and I they had a section that dealt with women the women's league so I think as a young woman I saw and I had a lot of interest in what they were doing because I was a woman and all the things they were talking about were things that I was experiencing as a woman so I would say it was within the ANC that I really got passionate about women's issues and they gave us space to be passionate about it. Maybe you could speak I know there's lots of questions in the audience and I have plenty of questions I wish I had time to ask but maybe you could speak about some of the big challenges to moving this agenda forward and the risks for Africa if this agenda is not implemented. Well the challenges are many and of course the first challenge is really the resources and as I say we are trying our best to deal with them the second one is human resources because if we don't develop our own capacity to implement then who is going to implement so that's the second challenge and it's a risk but it's something that we have prioritized that the skilling of our young people is going to be critical of course we are hoping also that some of the skilled people of African descent and the diaspora can also come and help but that's a big challenge that we're looking at already we have a team that's looking at what capacities are going to be necessary so that and we are beginning to look at how we can increase those capacities including using technology and so on. Of course the third risk is also a piece and of course the issue of terrorism that we see it's a it's a big challenge and the risk but as I say we are trying our best to do something about it but we also know that our population is the youngest in the world we are a young continent and we are going to continue being a young continent into 2050 we are going to still be the youngest continent and so it means we have plenty of the precious resource that is needed if we invest in it that would be how we can get the agenda forward but the big risk if we don't the young people are not going to sit and starve or look at the rest of the world developing they are going to actually be reckless and so it's it's very important that we we do achieve the agenda 2063 for so that indeed our people especially the young people can have a jobs can create jobs can be innovative can develop to their full potential and of course if we don't achieve agenda 2063 it means we won't have enough food to feed ourselves and that's a big risk so I don't think we have their choice but to achieve it and empowering it and empower women obviously they are going to be there more than 50% of the population so if we don't empower them it means we'll be working at half capacity so critical for the development and the future of Africa well let's take a few questions I'm gonna ask that you take maybe three at a time I'm gonna ask that you identify yourself and ask one question and then we'll be coming around with the microphone so you can identify yourself so let's start let's start over here with the first one thank you very much my name is Sophia Paul from South Sudan I'm very pleased to to be part of this symposium you know what has happened in my country you have talked about peace and security as a topic I'm a survivor and I witnessed of what has happened in my country I took to upon myself to really advocate and work very hard for peace to be a reality in my country as a woman and as an icon in African continent and a leader we have been looking at you as a motivating factor for us women from Africa of late there was a report a leak report about the root causes of the conflict somehow that report seems not to be the right one we the victims we want to know what has happened in my country thank you very much now we're gonna go to the other side over here hi my name is Jackie O'Neill and the director of the Institute for Inclusive Security and we focus on women's inclusion and peace negotiations around the world so I want to thank you for elevating this topic and speaking about it here in DC and at CSIS you were the first head of the African Union to appoint a special envoy for women peace and security I'm wondering if you could talk a little bit about where women peace and security fits in agenda 2063 I learned just this morning that I think the 50th country in the world to develop a national action plan is Mali and I'm wondering if in your experience national action plans on women peace and security are important for member states to have and if you've noticed any difference in the conduct of countries that have them versus some that don't thank you and we'll take one more question and then we'll give madam chairperson a chance to respond over here hello my name is Carolyn Tackett thank you so much for joining us today and with the public international on policy group I just sort of on the same note as these first two questions I'd like to ask what do you see as sort of the best practices and maybe opportunities for the African Union and other members of the international community to support women on the ground who are actively trying to involve themselves in these peace negotiations and conflict prevention processes what now how can how can we support those women who are taking on those initiatives thank you okay so three questions related to peace and security okay starting with South Sudan we commissioned any inquiry and led by former president of Assange and he and his team and in the team we included our special envoy on gender and women in conflict but we also included other women the report was completed and was given to us as the commission we had been asked by peace and security to to commission this so we gave back the report to them at the summit in January and at the time as you may know the two parties that been meeting in Arusha trying to reunite and they had reached certain agreements and now they were taking those agreements into the peace negotiations and at the time it looked to the negotiators as though they are just about to clinch a deal and so the chair of EGAT felt that and supported by others that the report must come after they've just finished that part of negotiations and so the report is there the peace and security will discuss it probably definitely in July they may discuss it even in June at the summit but they may discuss it even earlier but it's ready it's there and none of us want impunity so yes negotiations yes reconciliation but also accountability and then the the special envoy and the role of women I think women are very important maybe I'll just talk about my own experience when in the 90s there was a lot of violence in South Africa political violence especially in the province where I come from in Guazubuna town and at a point in time women we decided as women from both parties to come together and to say for us this is enough from both sides and I think those discussions between the IFP women and the ANC and them pushing their sides to stop the violence to come to an agreement I think it assisted a lot because once the IFP women themselves felt that they want peace they don't want any more of this violence we were able to work with them because sometimes we forget as women that there is a lot in common amongst us besides that we are in different political parties but there's a lot that we can do together as women irrespective from any other any party but even when the Constitution was being drawn we came together and formed women's coalition from different parties from civil society from religious and said these are the things as women that we want in the Constitution irrespective of where we come from so I think the role of women sometimes is underestimated and we ourselves underestimate the role we can play and I think and that's why we felt that it's important to have a special envoy that's looking specifically because she's able to go and meet women and women are able to tell her things sometimes that they are unable to tell to men and she's able to organize them and share experiences with them and bring some from different countries and so on so we think that it's a very important and of course action plans are important as long as women are the integral part of drawing them and as long as they are implemented and of course there is a lot of things we can you can do to help the women on the ground first just sharing experience with them discussing with them also giving them some resources usually it's not even a lot that they need to organize themselves and so I think there is a lot that can be done and those who are in conflict some of them have even lost all their possession so small things can also assist them and the children to go to school so there's a whole range of things that can be done from starting from just sharing experience to having workshops with them or just discussions with them to assisting them concretely and and also it's important for women even post-conflict to be able to get engaged in income generating activities and businesses even if they are small to start with not that they should be small forever because also economic some degree of economic independence is very important to to the women in these situations why don't we take another round of questions maybe we'll hear from some of the men this time thank you very much madam Sherman my name is Garang being a quote ambassador of the Republic of South Sudan madam share person let me congratulate you again for gaining the country the confidence of the continent being appointed as the share person of AU I know how difficult it was because I was there as part of the delegation of the Republic of South Sudan and how many rounds did you compete with the man to beat him at last so I'm happy for you I have a question and a comment the first question the question is that you talk about the empowerment women in the area of agriculture and we know that in Africa and elsewhere there's the issue of access to land for women how do you address this issue with our embedded traditions that men are the owners of the land so access to the land women the comment I want to make is to regard of what my sister Sophia said there I think when I came here didn't expect that this is going to be a campaign for the rebels and the government and I know sister Sophia she was a member of parliament and I was a member of parliament this current parliament appointed by the president to be a member of the parliament and she should be appreciative to the president that appointed her to be a member of parliament and her city still there vacant I was elected member of parliament and then given this assignment to come and say I don't think that she's a survivor because she left from Juba Airport with her child in her hand boarded a plane to Nairobi if the government wanted to kill her the government could have snatched her from the airport and kill her how can you say that you are a survivor when you left through the past through the airport so stop telling lies I just want to respond to the thank you excellency thank you very much I was going to bring up my name is Nia I was actually coming with a young graduate student born in Africa who's here but the schedule changed so she asked me to ask a question that are you going to be the Mrs Clinton of South Africa and set an example for them I think I think in the interest of time because we started late and I I fear that we're gonna have to wrap up fairly soon maybe I'll let you answer those two questions and then we'll see maybe someone can tell us if we have an extra time for another round why don't we just take all of them and I answer do we all right another round all right let's do one from the youth hello my name is Simon Adegi I want to represent is the button I want to really address the situation of the fact that the African Union is not aware of a shift in popular culture especially with the African youth and as regards to agriculture I've been to 21 African countries in the research work having to work with young Africans and majority are interested in agriculture and having to speak about the part that the ambassador mentioned with land we know that the African culture that majority of the land belong to a family or ends up being to their head of the family or the son and women tend to not have the opportunity to have anything to do with that what policy is the African Union creating for land accessible for women just like in Poland and in the UK they have provision for people interested in agriculture not only for the rich because it seems like agriculture is now for the rich and the grants are being handed over to the wealthy so what exactly is the African Union doing as regards to that and also would like to see a situation where as regards to shifting cultural popular culture for the African Union to play more with technology social media and music and which are the real big factors of a winners especially in Africa thank you okay we'll take one last question and then we'll allow madam chairperson to wrap up good afternoon ladies and gentlemen my name is Rosemary Segero thank you madam chair for coming again it was nice seeing you at the African summit you and your wonderful speech at the African summit my executive summary to the president Obama at the African summit was peace and security agriculture and women empowerment women cannot be empowered when we have conflicts violence and people who suffer more are women and young girls when they are abused how do we empower them to what we want to 20 60 or even 10 years how do we empower them when they are being abused especially in TRC Congo where now young people are being children are being sexually assaulted this is what you need to boot because we believe in you we value you and with your leadership you have really empowered us and more information madam chair lady is here how do we partner with you this is my letter to you as a civil society I was born and raised in Kenya in the rural area we need to get the women in the rural area people in the rural area communities in the rural area be empowered we want to partner with you this is my letter I'll give you today when you leave it all the time we take pictures but this time is a letter I'm gonna use the prerogative of the chair to ask one last question that you can add in because you were the minister of health you are a medical doctor and the issues of women's health both maternal mortality which you alluded to but also access to family planning access to information and services maybe in your final comments you can address the interest of the African Union and the importance of the member states to move forward in that area as well okay thank you very much access to land yes it's true that land in Africa it's very difficult in terms of traditional ways and we may intend not to have access to land but as I said earlier that we are going to have this index and there are countries which have put legislation that gives women rights to land I will just in the interest of time I'll just quote one Ethiopia where I live now as the chair has got a lot now where both men and women have access to land if the land belongs to the men it also belongs to his wife and if they divorce or separate for whatever reason they have to take half the land and and also if the men dies the land remains with the woman whereas in the past the land only belong to the men if he decided it doesn't want this woman anymore the woman is out of the land and other women comes and if he dies the family uncle or somebody takes over the land so there they have a law that now gives women the rights to land and so in this index would be specifying which countries have done what and asking them to share with the others how they've gone about it so that they the others can also do the same so we are aware of that but it's not it's not all not is lost because there are countries that have put laws in place and we will be encouraging the others and of course we are also going to be meeting with financial institutions because it's also very well to have land but if you have no access to finance and you are already discussing with private sector but we are going to be discussing specifically with financial institutions because both for women and youth they they have difficulties in accessing finance for their businesses or for agriculture and so we hope that that will also encourage young people because they say once they see their age and their looks the bankers just say I know you don't need to young you don't have experience so we want to address that social media yes we do use social media in in the EU of course we can use it more and we do try and follow the trends we also got young people who are at the EU some of them are working but some of them are intense so it's not an organization of old people and then on the question of women women being abused of course that's why we even have this envoy special envoy and who are working hard we are talking we are advocating so we can partner with you we have no problem because it's our view that we need to advocate and to get women not to be suffering from abuse but to be doing productive work for themselves and for their families and children and so we will take the letter happily and see what what's in it and women's health yes in fact we fought very hard to get women's health as part of Beijing but also the WSW well sustainable development conference and in the EU our protocols are also very much into women's health now it's a matter of implementation and well there are lots of countries actually that have put programs of family planning of reproductive rights and so on so we are making progress there but we would like to make faster progress well maybe in the in the in South Africa it's likely different from here here you can just stand and declare yourself a candidate in South Africa it's a bit different I'll talk about the ruling party because that's the one I know best in the ruling party you don't just declare yourself it's the branches of the ruling party that say we nominating this one and then it goes up until the national and if it's national you you go through then so I can't answer that question because I'm not the one who has to declare any final thoughts closing remarks well it's just to to say that I just hope that it's not only and the letter that I will get that for cooperation but we need to would like to network and to with women here and in Africa and so we we hope that indeed we can link and and have networks we have as the commissioner for trades maybe you should stand in the EU that's our commissioner for trade and industry we are ten commissioners five for women five for men and we're trying to get there the the officials also are trying to get more and more women so that it is indeed balanced and reflects the demography of the content well we thank you so much for sharing your insights and your time with us we look forward to continuing the the work to work together and to see what you will be accomplishing in the years ahead and that we can work together on these issues of women's empowerment and development in Africa so please join me in thanking


What's going on, everyone? Sam here with late sports cards, ripping 22, Panini prism football hobby, four box break, number 26, pick your team style, gonna read off a list of our names on our teams, Ashley W. Bengels, Austin K. Chargers, Bernie S. Panthers, Titans, Brandon A. Cardinals, Kurt S. Ravens, Dean I. Lyons, Derek L. Seahawks, Francisco A. Broncos, Garrett C. Texans, Harper B. Jaggs, Hilton T. Packers, Jason P. with the Patriots, Jeffrey H. Jets, Jesus T. with the Niners, Falcons, Cheeps, Josh T. Eagles, Joshua B. Raiders, Kyle S. Vikings, Mark S. Buccaneers, Michael S. Dolphins, Nick M. with the Saints, Reed S. Bills, Ryan P. with the Commanders, Ryan B. Bears, Ryan D. with the Cowboys, Sean W. Colts, Shaquilla B. with the Steelers, Todd T. Rams and T. Uchida with the Browns and the Giants. Good luck, everybody. Let's get into it. No Matt Ryan's listed today. Now, Mergent, Desmarier. Nice. Blue Wave, Drake, London. Got London on the track for the Falcons to 199. K Von Tibido and Tremac Ride. Me and Donnie to assist. Finding Matt Ryan. Prison Parallels. Silver, Quentin Ellison. Patrick Sertan to 199. No, 149. Treson Abner and Garrett Wilson. James Williams, Emergent. Purple Ice, Stalen Petrie to 249 for the Texans. Wante Taylor and Malcolm Rodriguez. Silver, Daryl Green. There's a George Kittle. That's awesome. Going to the Niners. Titan U. Gratz on that, San Fran. Jalen Waddle to 175. Evan Neal and Pierre Strong Jr. Hey, Pierre, you want to come out here? Yo, Pierre, you want to come out here? That's pretty good, actually. I've listened to him a lot. Fair. Jerome Ford. Silver Rookie. We got Orange Wave, Deuce McAllister. Going to the Saints to 60. That's pretty cool. So, in there, New Orleans. Drake, London Rookie and Ike McWannan. There's Silver, Justin Herbert. Throwback for the Chargers. Green Scope, Jonathan Allen for the Commanders to 75. Isaiah Spiller and Logan Hall. Arborx, Kyler Murray. CMC to 199. Roger McCreary and Trayvon Walker. Aaron Rodgers. Matt Stafford to 175 for the Rams. Calvin Austin, Jack Jones. Laramie Tunsel, Purple Ice to 225 for the Texans. Drake Jackson and Skyler Thompson. RPA, I think we do. Silver Grady Jarrett. It's going to be Garrett Wilson. 53 of 99. And there we go, Jets. Congrats, Jeffrey. There you go, buddy. Nice one coming your way on the Garrett Wilson.  And a Brock Purdy behind it. And a Jameson Williams. Good little pack there. What's up, Jeremy? How you doing, buddy? Got a gold coming up now. For some break, Jalen Waddle. Ooh, Niners, come on. No way. Now. Debo Samuel, still pretty awesome now. Congrats on that, San Fran, 10 of 10 on the Debo. David Bell and Jaquan Brissker. Silver, Brilliance, Justin Herbert. Orange, Justin Tucker to 249, Ravens. Jahan Dotson. And Derek Stingley. Nice domorous choice, so I didn't know that. For some break, Kyle Pitts. Daniel Bellinger, Red Waves to 199. Delish Jones, Josh Pascal. Silver, Tyler Higby. Orange, Wave, Kyle Pitts, second year to 60 for the Falcons. DeCoby Durant and Bailey Zappi, emergent, Aiden Hutchinson. Purple, Louis C, nice color match there to 125 for the Vikings. David Ajabo and Jerome Ford. Stupid, but kind of pissed I didn't think of it before. Chris Godwin. Nice. Anquan Bolden, 29 of 149. Going to the Cardinals. I don't want to say Ravens so bad. Flashback Auto. Nice one there, Arizona. I'd say unlikely. Brian Robinson. Silver, Sam Williams, rookie. Travis Landry, Purple Ice to 225. Matt Corral and K. Dotton. Micropartisan type. Green Scope, Austin Eckler to 75. Nice one there for the Chargers. Kade York and Jalen Naylor, where do you think he ends up? Eckler? Yeah. I mean, that's tough. Silver, Drake London. Orange, Travis Kelsey to 249. Who has the money to spend on a run of a bird? I could see Chicago potentially. Chicago? Imagine. Silver, Micaheid. Matt Corral, Silver, Rookie Auto for the Panthers. Yeah, be a good fit there. Mechi and Kway Walker. He's like the perfect running that for Justin Fields. I feel like, because they just signed Dontha Foreman to George Pickens. This Anquan Bolden, Purple should be a color match, but now he's in a Cardinals jersey. George Carl Aftis and Danny Graham. That's what I'm saying, Randy. That's what I'm saying. I feel like that'd be a good fit there. Fields gets his check-down guy, like one of the best check-down guys in the league. Nick Mangold, Red Wave to 149 for the Jets. Johnny Woods and Brissol Rookie. Fireworks Lamar, Silver. Blue Wave, Michael Gallop to 199. Kair Elam and Skymore. You would need to trade for him for it. I don't think he'd cost a ton, though. Silver Jahan Dotson. Red Wave, Danny Dimes to 149 for the Giants. Alec Pierce and Andrew Booth. Because I feel like if a team's willing to take on that amount of salary for running back, I think the cost isn't going to be that much. That's what we thought with the Jets and the Packers. True. Rodgers and the Packers won't. Kings ransom for it, I'm sure. Yeah. Blue Ice. Fireworks Jahan Dotson to 99. Red Wave, K-Doton for the Bucks to 149. Elam and Skymore. Silver Davis Mills. Red Wave, Luke Keekley to 149. David Ajabo and Jerome Ford. That'd be pretty solid. Eckler and ETN. Jacksonville would be a cool place for him. That would be a little scary. Dude. That would make them a serious contender. Anthony Munoz. Bangles to 25. I mean, AFC's tough. Keerson Booth. That's why I don't understand why Rodgers wants to play for the Jets. I really don't get it. The NSC's pretty weak. It's not. It's like the Eagles, the Niners, and maybe the Vikings and the Cowboys. Silver Malcolm Rodriguez. Antonio Gates to 249. Snoop Connor and Malik Willis. It's like no offense, but nobody in the NFC South is going to win the NFC. I took so much offense to that. I know. I understand. We're a crappy division. I get it. Marriota, Silver, Devonta, Smith. Mark Castano to 149. Sensational signatures. Nice one there for the Jets, McRal, and K-Dot. I mean, it won't be us that's coming out of the division this year, I don't think. Yeah, probably not. I don't know who's going to come out of the division. That is Justin Jefferson, Silver Throwback. It's obviously a strong purple light. Someone's going to limp to seven and nine and make it, or eight and nine and make it. Forrest Camo. That is Crystal Lave, Prison Break. We have Chiefs. Dante Hall. That's one there. The Human Joystick, 10 of 15. I've been telling everybody that's my nickname around here. Kyle Hamilton, Nicoby Dean. Human Joystick. Human Joystick. That's enjoyable. Hype Jamar Chase. Zach Wilson, Hyper to 175. Theron Davis Price, Devonta White. That's nice. Sorry, guys. Toss and Nox. Desmond Ritter, nice one there on the Silver Rookie Auto. Starter potentially for Atlanta. Grats on that, Falcons. Kyle Phillips and Wandaille Robinson. Stain glass. Boom. Just did not expect that. Holy cow. Congrats to Mark S in Tampa. Let's go, man. Literally came out of nowhere right there. Let's go. Let's go. Congrats on that one. Mark. There you go, buddy. Got that mag for you. Damian Pierce. Lou Waved, 199. Kade York. Jalen Naylor. I know. Silver Eli Mitchell. Andre Johnson to 99. George Pickens. Silver Garrett Wilson, Emergent. Blue Waved, Trey Lance to 199. John Matchy. Kway Walker. One second, guys. Blue Waved, Jalen Petrie to 199. Sam Howell Rookin, Daniel Bellinger. Brilliant, Matt Stafford. Kavon Thibodeau to 175 for the Giants. Hyper, Tariq Wollin and Carson Strong. Silver Devonta White, Rookie. Purple AJ Dillon to 125. Damian Pierce, Rookie. Axel. Silver Reggie Wayne. Blue Ice, Alex Highsmith for the Steelers to 99. Jake Ferguson and Samir White. Silver Jalen, Red Waved, Damian Harris for the Patriots to 149. Eric Azucano, Sam Willings. Green Scope Auto. Silver Jamal Adams, that is Brian Aracpo for the Commanders. That's awesome, dude. Such a legend from Texas to Washington, Tennessee. Love me some Brian Aracpo. Romeo Dobbs. It's Geico commercial legend, Brian Aracpo. A Rackpode, is that even a word? It's Desmond Ritter. Curtis Samuel for the Commanders to 175, Hyper. Kenneth Walker Rookie, Command Johnson. New recruits, Garrett Wilson. Matt Judon to 175. Troy Anderson and Isaiah Pacheco. Probably, Stiles Goddard to 225. What's going on on chop? Oh, there we go. Devon Lloyd, it was just like continuously refreshing. That was weird. Redemption. It's actually a couple big names as redemptions in this. Silver JK all day. We've got redemption. It's going to be George Pickens, rookie autographs, Frism, Green Scope to 75. There we go. Pittsburgh. Congrats. Very nice. Congrats, Steelers. Milos Jones, Josh Pascal. Silver Malik Willis, Emergent. Blue Wave, Shannon Sharp to 199. Takobi Durant, Bailey Zappy. Last pack. Do a quick recap as well. Silver CMC. I do not believe my eyes. Yeah. Orange Fletcher Cox to 249. A non-tampa shirt. Fadarian Mathis and Ty Chandler, right? We knew you were going to be so happy. Didn't get too far though for our shirts. Right. George Pickens, Steelers. George Kittle, Matt Corral, Desmond Ritter, Anquan Bolden, Mark Asano, Brian Araquo, Garrett Wilson, RPI, and Stane Glass, Tom Brady. Very nice. That'll do it for the break. Thank you guys again for the fill. Next up got nothing. We're all done.


Hi, my name is Jeff Bunning and I'm a PhD researcher here at the Research School of Earth Sciences at the ANU. Most of the time I'm studying a really primitive group of meteorites called the chondrites from the very early solar system. And part of the way that we know that they're from the birth of the solar system is by radioisotope dating. And that's what we're going to be looking at today. And radioisotope dating are a set of techniques that can tell us about things from as far back as the beginning of the solar system, all the way up to archaeological dig sites today. To start with, to understand radioisotopes, we're going to need to know what an isotope is, let alone a radio one. An isotope is a version of the same element. There are multiple versions of them of slightly different masses. They all have the same number of protons. So with carbon, for example, we've got carbon-12 and carbon-13. Both of them have six protons. Carbon-12 though has six, well, carbon-12 has six neutrons while carbon-13 has seven neutrons. And that's similar throughout the periodic table. Now as a little aside, the word isotope comes from the Greek iso meaning the same and topos meaning place. So if you look at a periodic table, the isotopes all occupy the same space. You can't distinguish them using that table, which is why we have a whole special table called the chart of nuclides to be able to plot all of the isotopes of all the different elements against each other. We're not going to go into that today, but it's a very cool, very pretty looking plot. So we said that different isotopes have different numbers of neutrons in their nuclei. But you can't just start throwing in any number of neutrons or taking out any number of neutrons. If you start doing that, the nuclei start to become unstable. I imagine there's these big wobbly balls and they start to kind of like shake and shake themselves apart as the forces that bind themselves together either start pushing things out or become too weak to actually hold the entire thing together. And those types of isotopes, those ones that are unable to stay together are what we call radioisotopes or radioactive isotopes. They're unstable. And when they break apart or eject something, that's what we call decay. Now for any given radioisotope, how long it takes each nucleus to decay is random. But if we have a whole population of them, millions and millions of them, the time that it takes for half of that radioactive isotope to decay is really, really predictable. And that's what allows us to be able to calculate time with how much of it is left from a starting point. And the time that those half lives can take can vary from tiny minuscule fractions of a second to billions of years. And that allows us to build up a series of what we call chronometers if you want to, a series of clocks that work on different time scales. So this predictable decay is what allows us to date things, to get calculated radioisotope date by measuring the amount of unstable isotope we have in the object, often a crystal, compared to the amount of what we call the daughter isotope, the one that's at the end of the decay chain. And we measure the relative abundances of those. And by comparing those with some other similar decay chains and similar daughter isotopes, we can build up a isochron line. And that's something that we can, that is what gives us our age. Now radioisotopes are far more important than just clocks for a bunch of humans to figure out their place in the universe. Radioisotopes inside the earth are what keep it hot inside. And that is what drives the dynamism of the earth, our plate tectonics, volcanoes, things that are really important for life itself. But as well, one of the most important aspects of that is that it keeps the interior hot for the core. If our molten core were to cool, we would lose our magnetic field and we would lose the shield that protects us from the full brunt of solar and cosmic radiation and would wipe out life on earth as we know it. So radioisotopes are much more than just clocks. They are something that keeps this planet alive.