Good evening, everybody. I realise I've got to keep turning to talk to you, and I apologise if I have my back to anyone. I'm Nick Gowing, and some of you I think will have been the extraordinary television debate that we did earlier with Aung San Suu Tzu and Government Minister, Sotane. This is nothing to do with it, but it shows how some things you simply can't predict in terms of the impact and how you might assess risks in a country like Myanmar. My job really, we are on the record. It's being webcast. My job is to try and make this, the productive, not our own accord, it'll be at 55 minutes I'm afraid because what Ansanthusi said has beamed around the world and I'm afraid I have to appear on satellite at the BBC just before six o'clock so my apologies, but that means that what we can do is, or I can expect from you is greater pressure and greater dynamism and greater momentum pushing to discover the current limits and current understandings of risk because the forum has been doing a lot of work on this, on resilient dynamism. Those of you who are at Davos will remember that. The global risks report 2013 defined risk resilience and I think it's important to underline to all of you that we are sitting in a region which after all was threatened by a very, very strong cyclone almost three weeks ago, which hit Bangladesh hard, not quite as hard as expected. We're in a country which in 2008 was devastated, particularly in the era of Wadi Delta, by a massive cyclone, Cyclone Nargis, where 140,000 people were killed. But of course, all of us and many in the humanitarian field were completely helpless. We couldn't get in, we couldn't report, we couldn't assess, and indeed the military and the police hunted down foreigners who were known to be inside the country, how this country has changed. But the threat and the risk of a cyclone was very real three weeks ago, although it did weaken as it hit Bangladesh and then hit the western coast of Burma. But of course, there was a risk here for the government because of the ethnic minorities. There was the challenge of what to do with certain of those who were, who are located in the region, which was going to be hit by the cyclone. And that created a major political problem for the government here in Nipidore. Do we move these people, in which case they'll think they're being relocated and they'll see this as a massive political act? Others of you will know more detail about that. But I'm very struck that we're sitting here not far from that location, a kind of risk that probably wasn't easy to calibrate in advance. We're talking about risks which are interconnected, which have a cascading effect, a highly unpredictable for the reasons I've just mentioned. And I think I'd like you to focus as much as you can on what success there has been so far, building strategies for strengthening resilience of organisational country, regional and global systems. I feel I've been to a lot of these discussions and there is a lot of theory and principle, but of course reality tends to end up with something quite significant in terms of recalibrating fine tuning or redirecting the scale of risk. And new things which come along for reasons which will become clear. Now, in this 55 minutes, there is a way that you can contribute as well. You can capture your ideas rather than putting up a hand and I can't see you behind me, but I will face you in a moment. There is another way which is if you've got a smartphone or a tablet or whatever device you have, but not a Blackberry necessarily because you can't do that with Twitter. There are two addresses. Here they are up on your screens. Either hashtag EA risks or EA risks at wef.ch. And if you don't like that idea, you can write something on a piece of paper or I will say, does anyone want to come in at this point? Let me give you an idea of the kind of things which have already come in from people outside who are not lucky enough to be here from Gorav Mogi from Calicut in India, asking is growing disagreement over Senkaku, the islands and I've got to be careful which name I use here, a concern for the region referred to of course in China as the Daeyu islands, the China-Japan dispute. Will the Democratic Republic of Korea, the DPRK North Korea witness a regime change in the near future? Luca Alfieri asks, how could the Arbinomics and the internationalisation of the Remmin B impact on the regional integration of the area? And Consuelo Perez-Sandy asking what are Asian governments doing to promote values in addition to economics as well as the implications of war in Syria on the East Asian economies. And I've been struck having been at the last three or four meetings of the Asia Development Bank, how risk is now a core assessment of economic potential and prosperity and they've published a lot on this. We're going to do brainstorming in a moment. You can introduce yourself if you haven't already. But Martin Parker, let me just ask you if I may, Chairman of Global Partnerships at Swiss Free, to highlight where you think things are at the moment from that table with the microphone. Thank you very much. Good evening ladies and gentlemen. I think Natcats has been introduced by Nick as a key topic for resilience and of course we're exposed in this region to earthquakes, typhoons, floods, droughts. And it's a problem because 2011 might have been very famous for what happened in New Zealand and Japan. But statistically although Mother Nature was quite kind to us in 2012, East Asia was still the hardest hit. 7,000 deaths, 80% of global economic losses. About 30 billion of losses here in the insurance industry only responded to the tune of 3 billion. Well below global averages on these types of events. So I think the resilience in the region to mortality, to property damage, the whole economic damage is not where it should be. The Bank of International Settlements has released a paper in the last six months or so which suggests countries at the government level should be putting in risk transfer, financial risk transfer solutions because in a 50-year study they've shown consistently that the GDP can recover within a five-year time span where pre-event financing transfers are done versus post-event cleaning up if you like through the government's resources can lead to a GDP recovery of 15 years or greater. Thanks, Nick. Thanks, Martin. Try and frame your thoughts at this moment into the risks and the way they're changing, particularly here in East Asia if you can. Let's go to Latvi Siddiqi who is managing director for Forex Asia Pacific at UBS Singapore. Hi Nick. For the finance and economic channel, the main source of risk comes from connectivity. If you think about the fact that all good intentions require funding, in the case of East Asia they need to come from cross-border funding because there's a savings gap. Ideally it comes with an involvement of markets and it goes into investments which enhances productive capacity. The risk here is that particularly on the backdrop of quantitative easing in the West that the growth in credit outpaces growth in nominal GDP and that results in potential bubbles and inflation. But this is a known risk and I think from the perspective of risk resilience I'm more interested in the unknown risks. What's our state of preparedness for those? So for example in the second half of 2011 when the Greek crisis really peaked I think no one realised that the Indian rupee would depreciate by 15% in less than a month. And I think for East Asia many of these risks will originate globally but will be exacerbated locally. And I think there's three things we need to do in order to enhance resilience to these shocks. Co-operate, educate, communicate. Co-operate amongst nations and the best example I can think of is what ASEAN has in the form of the Chiang Mai initiative. This is an arrangement, it's like a NATO style defence alliance against currency movements. They pool their assets, $200 million of reserves that can be deployed to lower the cost of funding. There's also cooperation within nations. If you look at the way Indonesia responded to the last Asian crisis versus Korea the strength of the social fabric within the country matters as to how resilient you are. Educate at two levels. Firstly when it comes to markets and politicians there's a Mars Venus thing going on, there's a knowledge gap which seems to compound problems at times. The other level of education is general awareness of financial literacy in the same way that NGOs raise awareness on maternity health issues and sanitation and so on. There's surprising amounts of, there's low levels of financial literacy, the fact that markets can go down as well as up in this part of the world. And thirdly communicate. We need to tell people the truth about fuel subsidies, what they actually cost, what the implications are. Communication enhances preparedness. It enhances the psyche and then finally markets do not ask for an absence of risk. All they ask for is that policy makers or official actors do not contribute to that risk. So we need to telegraph your likely responses in advance, be transparent, act consistently and that will help us, communication will help us in being resilient when the risk event happens. So cooperate, educate, communicate. Thank you very much indeed. Martin can I just come back to you? What's your sense of how senior executives, government ministers, civil servants, given the greater frequency of unpredictable events are really seized of the inevitability of all of this now? I believe they are seized of the inevitability but the call to action isn't really following as far as I can see. I think there's a lot of curiosity about those governments that have put some transfer mechanisms in place. There's a curiosity about how they've worked in the past and what they've been doing. But I'm afraid in the short lifestyle of the politicians it takes a lot of resolve and strong leadership to actually take those pre-event actions. And are you seeing systems embedded in some places? We can talk about the success of Bangladesh for example, even though it's a developing country, a poor developing country largely? Yes, there are. I think it depends on the exposures. In some of the major cities you might see 20% of GDP at risk of an earthquake. The resilience of the government to put a stabilisation reserve in place, put contingent funding in with the world banks could cover say 10% of that. But it's the other 10% that could be really, really painful and throw the government into raising debt, transferring other earmarked money for other good causes. You can see even tax raised on the individual citizens. So it's still an unsolved problem I think at this stage. Are you talking about mindset or denial, literally saying that's not going to happen to us? I think it's mindset. The denial is not true because they recognise it. The mindset is it's not going to happen to us. Fine, it's not going to happen. So can I give you all with a challenge for the next 15 minutes to try and define some of the challenges which you think are maybe not on the radar screen at the moment on risk? Whether they're societal, technological, economic, environmental, political, systemic, you try and define them. Does anyone want to enter the fray immediately before you even get into a quick discussion around the table? Anyone want to say you're getting it all wrong or act as a catalyst for pushing it further forward? I see no hands and I don't have any... Richard, you've tweeted already. Good government, Richard Boucher from the OECD, good government reduces risks, inequalities are vested and vested interests, increase risks in the short and long term and make it harder to deal with disasters. Richard will hear from you shortly. Can I give you 13 minutes then to try and help us define? And if you could, one of you on the table, if you could use one of the addresses just in 140 characters or in an email, just summarise, it's a very efficient way of harvesting what's on your minds at each table. 13 minutes then please. Thank you. And I should say we've got around 500 people monitoring this. If you are out there and want to tweet or email, please do to the addresses. Hashtag eaRisks or eaRisks at wef.ch. Could I give you two more minutes please, two more minutes and if you've got an idea or a word of phrase, please could you put it on your smartphone to one of those addresses? Can I try and capture some of the ideas that are going around in plenary even if I'm stopping the conversations? Does anyone want to actually contribute with a voice to the kind of elements that you've identified on your table, whether you're a table leader or someone else, but something you're passionate about or feel is not being considered in this mix currently of risks? Anyone at all? Because otherwise I'm going to go to Rajiv Dimry. Rajiv, where are you? I've got to keep turning here. Rajiv Dimry, he's registered. Rajiv, are you in the room? Ah, Rajiv, yes, forgive me. Because you talk about lack of enforcement of good building codes, increasing losses in cases of natural disasters. Now, obviously after what happened in Bangladesh that's brought and it's happened in Cambodia, but what's on your mind there? A couple of things.  And invariably it comes out that there was lack of building code following because somebody overlooked it or other lack of sort of discipline by the government in enforcing those laws. So laws exist. I also came across a World Bank study which said that the natural disasters are actually man-made because of these lack of building codes that are enforced and that leads to a more loss than usual. And that's a risk because this being a region as you mentioned cyclones and earthquake prone and therefore enforcement of correct building codes would be one step in mitigating those risks. Because let me promote this thought or provoke it which is that what happened in Dhaka or in the suburb of Dhaka, any of you here has really highlighted what must be a much wider risk because of the kind of abuse of these regulations. I think there were four generators on an extended floor at the top. I don't know if it was insured but that is a blatant risk which is being taken. There are cases like that in India where hospitals catch fire because of the wrong… Can you all hear by the way? Can you turn up the microphone a little bit? So those things get reported in India as well and it invariably comes out where building codes, fire codes are not followed because somebody overlooks them. And that's what came in Dhaka was picked up by the global press when it happens in India every once in a while. Does anyone want to add to this about the obligations now on governments because it builds on what I think Richard you've talked about in your message which is about good government reduces risks. Now you're going to talk in a moment anyway but do you want to add to that about what you see, good government, how do you define that because what we're talking about is in a place like Bangladesh and that's obviously the most recent example is a kind of negligent, indifferent, blind eye turning government. Yeah we talked about it a little bit at our table and a lot of different things came up. Fairness, predictability, efficiency of government, the willingness to deal with problems up front and not wait until they fester it or wait until your successor has to deal with them. So there are a lot of factors that go into it but if you look around a lot of what we're talking about, the response to hurricanes, the flooding from run-offs after illegal logging, the way the factories are run. A lot of this is governance and not just government governance but corporate governance as well. What obligations do you think that now is creating in a very transparent environment where people can report this kind of stuff. The fact that governments are simply either too pressed or indifferent or actually actively ignoring. Well I think one thing is the people who ensure risks and deal with risks have to do a better job of sort of predicting the quality, the response based on the quality of governance and that's an intriguing prospect for all of us who are in the measurement business. But then the other thing is that citizens themselves have to look at these things and not accept it as inevitable and push for a better quality of governance in order to protect themselves. For those of you in the insurance business and Martin I know obviously I can come back to you but what about the whistleblowing, the importance of whistleblowing in all of this. In other words people who must realise that things are not as good as they should be of course concerned about their jobs but also concerned about what happens to them. Yeah I think it comes in with the enforcement aspects really. I think the systems don't necessarily encourage the transparency and the enforcement and the whistleblowing certainly isn't something that we hear of in a not so deeply experienced but we don't hear about it very often. Clearly corporations are doing this and providing hotlines for their teams or their staff to report things in. It's a question of governance but it doesn't necessarily permeate some of the risks that we're talking about. But are you faced, look I'm not in the insurance business or the risk business as such but are you faced with the reality that there can be regulations on the statute book which in theory mean things are going to be okay but actually the oversight is so woeful that it's almost meaningless. Yeah it has to be a risk and the recent building collapses would exacerbate that. I don't know of any insurance on those properties that we've discussed but yes I think there's not a naivety in the insurance industry that a regulation equals a practice. But it's events like this make us wonder how much is out there which is not as well constructed as it should have been that we are on risk for. All right does anyone want to come in again on governance I'm trying to push things very quickly on a number of issues here but particularly how governments can be seized and sensitized much more openly to this issue whether it be on this or flood and disaster prevention. Anyone want to come in please yes microphone I think should be here just introduce yourself as well. Okay Alyssa Goldberg I'm the Canadian ambassador to the United Nations but spent most of my career in fact responding to natural disasters abroad. Two things that I would say in terms of roles for government obviously risk reduction and disaster response laws. I mean we've been talking about this now for about a decade governments are only now starting to implement it but the flip side to that is also the role and responsibility of the private sector. There was a new report that came out about three weeks ago the global assessment report which talked about the impact increasingly in urban areas. We know it's going to cost about a hundred billion dollars a year because disasters are increasingly having this concentrated impact on urban areas where the private sector is making significant investments whether it's IT infrastructure etc. So yeah it's about governments setting out the regulatory framework but it's also working in partnership with the private sector. What is mobilising governments are they doing it off their own back or are outside forces forcing them down this track now. I would say it's a combination of both when you've been through a major catastrophic event you certainly see the impact that it has. Sorry when governments themselves go through the catastrophic event they know what they have to face the next time and others are watching to see how they're responding. Japan was a major eye-opener for a number of countries in particular within the OECD. Japan's the best country capable of managing a disaster and it had major difficulties in responding to the Fukushima disaster. Christopher Fosec where are you from Jones Lang Lassalle particularly on infrastructure and the broader issues about what is being built and how good it is. Yeah I think I would say regulations obviously very important but the implementation around that regulations even more important. I think the risks and I put down three Nick one is country risk and market risk. The second one is excessive liquidity and the next one is the environmental impact risk. On the country and market risk Jones Lang Lassalle the company I work for we do an annual transparency index which covers the entire sort of globe and we try to evaluate the level of risk in the market within that country in that country itself and we've got various different sort of sub indices that we use but we look at performance measures such as indices and valuations. We look at market fundamentals such as data in that market. We look at governance and listed vehicles corporate governance as well as financial disclosure regulation and legal regulation of land and property registration debt regulation in the market which is a big part of real estate property transfer and ownership and then transaction process we look at the sort of sales and the leasing processes that helps our clients to at least evaluate the risk from a country and market risk when they're making real estate investments or occupying it. The environmental impact I think we've touched on some of those the regulation around building codes we touched on that a moment ago is very important. The urbanization that's going on in the developing the world at the moment is huge. You know we've got buildings going up every minute of the day. We've got millions of people moving into cities and buildings are being built. What's coming from that. Well we've got issues around building codes. We've also got issues. Well the issues mainly Nick are are these buildings safe. Do these buildings meet sort of global standards in sustainability. What sort of you know carbon footprint of these buildings. I've got what pollution is coming from these but the major user of energy around the world today is probably real estate. I think it's something like 40 percent of all global energy is used in real estate. So having efficient buildings hopefully will reduce the consumption of energy but also having efficient buildings buildings will limit the pollution and where do you put some of these buildings. You've got factories being built all over Asia at the moment. If you put them near populations you're going to have pollution for sure and how do you regulate how those factories are used. The final point on excessive liquidity is something that we've sort of seen in America as we know had excess liquidity in its housing market which was the start of the global financial crisis. The Q2 easing that we're seeing going around at the moment around the world is having impacts on Asia. Asia has strong economies but the liquidity the low cost of debt the availability of debt the money that is out there to be invested is going into real estate and we're seeing bubbles being created. And in response to that the China government the Hong Kong government and the Singapore government has felt it necessary to bring in regulations to try to cool down those markets. And I think quite rightly if you look back to what happened in America I think any government where they can see excessive liquidity in their real estate markets is justified in stepping in because you can't rely on self regulation for sure. There are three or four messages here about trust in leaders when you talk about regulation and obviously there's the explosion in urbanization which we all know about particularly in the developing world and the ambitions in a country like Myanmar. Do you fear that government simply won't be able to keep control of the quality and therefore that is increasing risk. Yeah I think it is a real issue I mean the pace of development how are you going to be able to regulate.  I think one of the biggest challenges is corruption because you know vast vast amount of wealth is made in real estate and it's usually where when an economy first starts a country's first starts emerging and developing. The people that get rich the first of the ones that are involved in real estate and therefore if the government is responsible for handing out permits for regulating the construction of the industry then they are prone naturally and tempted to corruption. I think that's one of the big challenges. Well let's pick up on that with Ashfinn Dyle who's from the Rockefeller Foundation partly Ashfinn because right at the beginning your messages talked about. Let me see where are we cities and disasters most in Asia woefully unprepared to cope with growth disasters climate change. Yeah and it's echoes what my colleague on that table was just now saying about urbanization. This is something that we're very concerned with when we look about risk in Asia at the moment. I think we all know that you know the world past 50% urban population four or five years ago. What many people may not know is that it also counts for about 80% of the world's GDP and only about 2% of the land and that about 60% of global population growth is going to happen in Asia cities over the next 20 or 30 years. When we looked at all of the success stories on disaster management risk preparedness a lot of those come out of a rural context rightly so but we need to translate and apply those into an urban context and really very very urgently. I live in Bangkok and we went through the floods of late 2011 and are looking at the price that's being paid even today and when we talk about governance in relations to these challenges cities are sort of basically networks of different systems. We can't just have individual solutions we can't just have industrial estates building six meter flood retention walls around them because the water has to go somewhere. So we need coordinated approaches where we bring civil society we bring citizens we bring the business community and we bring government together in order to really address these massive new risks. Imagine a category five hurricane hitting a major coastal city in India and the concentration of people and assets in that place compared to if it moves 20 or kilometers north or south of that city governments by enlarge are not prepared they're not equipped and they're not empowered to actually address these challenges. So what we're doing is working with cities and trying to create demand from above to enable cities to be able to think beyond just tomorrow day after and start thinking about the next five 10 15. You're being gloomy but are you being really practically gloomy given the speed at which everything is happening and looking at the capacity the laws and everything in other words are you laying down a very clear marker here that this is something which is really not being adequately viewed when it comes to overall risk. It's difficult to sound I don't mean to sound gloomy but if you think about the practically gloomy practically gloomy perhaps and I think that's the right thing because the biggest opportunities for progress and development lie in our cities in the next 15 20 years. But this is something that we don't have enough attention being paid to it's a complex set of different problems that we need to deal with but absolutely we're not prepared we need to get prepared and we need to get prepared quickly. Is anyone here from the Asia Development Bank because I know that there was a big discussion about this obviously they're based in Manila where they have had an enormous amount of floods but again picking up what Richard said about about government and governance. Do you see this is a major deficit which could still make it problematic to address the speed at which this is now going to become a major challenge. Yes and actually we're working with the Asian Development Bank on precisely this issue we need to not just address the technical issues and the financing issues. We have to also look at how cities can be governed differently and be enabled to take decisions for themselves and there is debate there are debates happening and I think national governments are beginning to see that they can't even do this all on their own. We see that in the United States we're seeing it increasingly actually in Asia as well is that regional and local action is going to be essential to deal with what are regional and local problems. All right well let me pick up does anyone else want to pick up on urbanization. And it's almost the ghost in the room at the moment everyone's assuming greater urbanization India half the population will be in cities within the next 20 years probably anyone want to come in on that any reflections please microphone behind you. Hi I'm I'm harcing honey from India a quick point on urbanization and everything has been said about the growing rapid cities but I think I want to bring in two other dimensions in this. One is the issue of not just disaster planning but of natural resource planning. I mean I imagine a city like New Delhi or or Mumbai or whatever growing all across and moving and what happens to the water what happens to our sewage systems what happens to all our our natural resources of power. It's a constant treadmill how do you keep up with it and you say you want to put up another power plant what happens to the pollution from that and how close. So there's a whole bunch of stuff that needs to be done and which brings us back to planning I think we talked a little bit about about that on our table about urban planning and putting all this together. The second point which we did talk about on our table which also in a way relates to this is the growing inequalities in income and disparity. And then you you start looking at social issues which has political ramifications. I just thought I'd make a couple of observations on that because Richard can I come back to you. One of the points you made at the beginning maybe you can just pick up on any threads from your table when you wrote about. You did partly address this earlier but inequalities and vested interests are increasing risks in the short term. I hope on that last point. Yeah maybe I should say a couple of things here. Sorry. We talked about the risk of disappointed expectations. The idea that everybody's going to get a good job in a foreign factory because the investments coming and then it takes a while to get there and the laws aren't there and the infrastructure is not there. And it takes longer and I think the accentuation of that disappointment comes from the inequalities. But it's one thing to say you know the truck hasn't arrived for me yet. My kids got a job yet but to see somebody else you know is getting more than their share and that I'm not getting my share. I think that's where really gets raw and that's where you start getting the risks of you know riots and revolutions start happening in society. It's not just disappointment but the unfairness in the disappointment and so that that was one of the things we talked about at the table. I can go into the others now or later. One of the factors cited what happens if Ozion doesn't make a schedule for economic community. What's that going to say to investors? What's that going to do for jobs? What's that going to say to people in the region? And you get back to this question of our vested interests, national interests going to override the sort of community interests. And that's still an open political question. We all hope for the best. We're working for the best but we all recognize that vested interests in political systems can often put blocks in the way of this kind of process. And the other thing that came up in our discussion we talked about bubbles but then we talked about the risks that bubbles would actually be dealt with, that bubbles would get popped. So you look at the nervousness in the United States right now over the withdrawal of quantitative easing and that's sending a bit of turmoil into people's minds and again the questions of how China is going to deal with housing bubbles, those become uncertainties. And so again and again we came back to sort of clear long term strategies. Clear long term strategies for building governance, for dealing with inequalities, for meeting expectations and for maybe not creating but also for dealing with some of the bubbles and problems that do occur. You were talking there about riots, there's one anonymous message here that misinformation to crowds could lead to riots. That's one of the suggestions and several other people have mentioned bubbles as well which can be positive and negative. Rashid Calicoff, where are you? Behind me. Rashid, you're from Ocha, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. We discussed a little bit here around the table the issues that you raised and others raised and I would like to say three things basically. Everybody was talking about political risks. That are naturally about this country but also about the region and I think it was a feeling of everybody that international community has to express its solidarity, its support and its generosity. As it happened in this country in 2008 when Nargis hit Myanmar it was probably game changing event. And the same thing has to happen or similar thing has to happen that international community has to show its generosity and support to the efforts of the reform in this country and in the wider region. Second thing, it was mentioned here already the role of the government and it was very important that government plays crucial role in managing expectations of the affected people. And they know exactly what will happen and it's not only the responsibility of the government, it's also the responsibility of the civil society, of the private sector, of the business community to bring back to normal life and people would know what will happen. And the third thing I would like to say is that construction codes, it was mentioned here, I think we have to make sure that human lives are not lost because earthquakes and floods, earthquakes do not kill people. People are killed by falling buildings or infrastructure. So it has to be happened in such a way and we saw it in many instances like one example that comes to my mind is Haiti and Chile. Earthquakes happened in this probably in two months between two earthquakes and Chile earthquake was much bigger and stronger than Haiti earthquakes but we have much much less lives lost in Chile. And the last thing I would like to mention is that it's important, very important to build the resilience of the communities as we saw recently. People would know when natural disaster comes and I would like to say that international community has to recognize that security threat and the risks that is coming from natural disasters as similar as to other risks that are coming from organized crime, narcotic drugs trafficking and the pandemic diseases. And it has terrorism. It has to invest in that the same way as it is investing in the fighting against these diseases. Just before you sit down, what are you learning or seeing of the ability of communities to learn from each other? In other words, Bangladesh is a good example, cheap, asymmetrically cheap capability. You have warning systems which are literally on bicycles or on tricycles or whatever. They're going around but they're warning people. It doesn't cost a lot of money. In other words, are you seeing a learning around the communities which are vulnerable or not? It was mentioned a bit earlier by Ambassador of Canada that this institutional and legal framework started to be introduced in this part of the world, maybe last 7, 8 years. Does it lead a legal framework or can it be self-help? I think it's a legal framework. It has to be obligation in my view. And as it is saying in many languages that it's easier to raise money for the coffin than for medicine. Because when you're raising money for a coffin, everybody becomes emotional. And this is the response. When you're raising money for medicine, you'll need a coffin anyway but a bit later. And it's much more difficult to raise money for this. Thank you. Anyone else, please? Nick, thanks for mentioning Bangladesh so many times. As someone from Bangladesh, I thought it was good, positive and negative. It's vivid and it's just across the bay. Great, great. Look, I started off by saying that all good intentions require funding. And there is a price for risk mitigation. It's not free. And the optimum point is not zero risk. And that price is both financial and political. So before the act, as you just mentioned, buying the coffin may be wasteful if no one dies. But after the act, once it's happened, particularly in such a dramatic way, the political price is no longer low. It becomes politically expedient for people to act. And I think for us, then, as civil society or citizens, that's the time when we need to keep the pressure on because that's the pressure that'll cause change. But before the fact, it's not an easy thing to do precisely because it costs money, money that could go towards hungry people that also exist in these countries. Could I ask any of you in the actuarial business, is social media beginning to change the perception of risk? Because people are identifying it even in an anonymous way early in the cycle when a risk has not yet been seen. But they may be seeing it at a very local level. I'm just conscious in my business the impact of social media. It's also having an impact in Myanmar because of what's being exposed in the ethnic conflicts here in ways which probably are highlighting risks for those who might be investing in Myanmar because it now is becoming more visible what's being recorded on mobile phones. No. OK. Will I put that into the mix?  Because I have to say, most of what has been sent in on the tweet stream has already been covered, particularly price bubbles and also the issue of what happens with ASEAN, the ASEAN economic community being delayed. There's one from Evo Menzinga that underestimated risks in Asia, air pollution, waste, cyber risks, impacting operating systems of power plants, aeroplanes, pandemics like bird flu, civil unrest, migrant workers, long fuse risks like obesity. He's clearly happy in terms of his perception of the world. And that was not a tweet. That was much longer. There it is. Is that it? No. That's Ludwig. But so there are a lot of other things listed here, many of which I've heard before. But I'm just struck if we if we open the vein at all it is about this risk of regulation and particularly new urbanization. Martin, can I just come back to you? Is this something which you're aware of at SwissRee as something which is maturing or something on which a lot more work needs to be done? I'd almost take the question is rhetorical. I think a lot more needs to be done. It's hard. I guess in all our comments today, particularly mine, I guess we've generalized it quite a high level. So it does vary from place to place. But I would say I'm very much on the lots more needs to be done. Who needs to do it? I mean, you can assess the risks. But who needs to do this work? I think the stakeholders are multitudinous. I mean, if you go to a government, you might meet somebody who has an agency that looks after a particular set of risks, but they don't have the authority to or a budget to make a decision to do anything with those risks going forward. And you then go to the Minister of Finance who controls the budgets, who don't have the same view of the risks. So within governments, you get multiple stakeholders. And I think the private sector has to do a lot, whether you're in the telecommunications industry, the insurance industry, the building industries. There's so much that all stakeholders have to contribute to. I've overlooked many important bodies I know, but it's just an example there of three or four areas that would need to collaborate. We all need to point in the right direction. I think many, many people know what needs to be done, but it doesn't necessarily surface to the priorities today to protect the issues and the risks that may not manifest in the next week, two weeks, one year, two years. There's one, I think it's a tweet from G Bodwa, I think outside, because not registered here, after what happened in the Gulf of Mexico and given what's happening with offshore oil and energy exploration in this region, the underestimated risks for Southeast Asia. Does anyone want to comment on that about energy risks and what's happening? We haven't mentioned the islands, but perhaps that's a good idea that we haven't gone into the island problems. Do you want to? No. He does want to speak. Okay. Emma, I have a slightly pressing engagement. I do apologise. I hope none of you are feeling short changed. Is that all right? Yeah. I can't summarise it because all of you will take away your own takeaways, but it does seem to me as someone who has to report on these kind of things on a daily basis. I'm still amazed and surprised at some of the things that happen. As developing countries develop and as developed countries have infrastructure that gets old, like on that bridge from Seattle, there are risks everywhere and I sometimes wonder whether the public is fully aware of the risks, whether in a new nation or an old nation, which is rusting. Can I leave it there? Yes. Let me just highlight that there is risk work being done by the forum. This is part of a continuing process in many of the regional summits which will then be reviewed again. Can I thank you very much indeed and I hope I haven't short changed you, but Alas, a satellite dish awaits me.