Keep tuned for Robert Young starring in Father Knows Best, which follows this listening reminder. Tomorrow evening, you'll enjoy a host of entertaining radio shows when you keep your dial set to the NBC radio network. For songs, you'll hear delightful quarter-hour programs by both Dinah Shore and Frank Sinatra. For comedy, listen to Bob Hope, Phil Harris and Alice Faye, and Gertrude Berg's heartwarming program, The House of Glass. All of these and more are yours for the listening tomorrow night on the NBC radio network. So be sure to tune here for the most enjoyable, pleasure-filled evening. And now it's Robert Young in Father Knows Best on NBC. Now listen to Father Knows Best transcribed starring Robert Young as Father. Power is it with the folks in the White Frame House on Maple Street. Sit back and enjoy life with the Anderson. Kathy, Bud, Betty, Margaret and Jim as the head of this typical American household again sets out to prove that Father Knows Best. In a recent survey, it was revealed that industrial drawing and political science are two of the most popular subjects among boys, while the most popular subject among girls is boys. There are some, of course, who will dispute this, but Jim Anderson is not one of them. He performed his opinion one Friday afternoon when he came home early and retired to his den to prepare a speech for an insurance convention, like this. Well, if there's anything you need, dear, just call. Thanks, honey, but all I want is a little peace and quiet. Maybe some cookies? No, just quiet. They're oatmeal cookies. Your favorite. Margaret, I've got to write this speech, so... So you'd better get to work and stop all this chatting.  Well, get to work then. You're wasting time. Wasting time? Well, let's see now. Mr. Chairman, District Supervisor Spragerson and fellow insurance men... are fellow slaves. Yeah, I'll use that. Might as well get a laugh right off the bat.  And I would like to say... Betty, I'm writing a... Well, I've got to get this... Well, if you're sure it'll be real fast. Come on, Janie, he says okay. Hello, Mr. Anderson. I hear you're writing a speech. Well, I'm trying to. Oh, that's nice. Father, what would we look under to find out about the Magna Carta? Well, it's just a shot in the dark, but you might try looking under Magna Carta. Hey, that's an idea, isn't it? A keen. You must know quite a bit about English history, Mr. Anderson. Oh, sure, an old authority on it. That's what we're studying now. English history under Mr. Glover. He's cute, isn't he? Just darling. Have you found the Magna Carta yet? What would that be under, the M's? That's a pretty good guess. M, M, M, M... Betty, do you think Mr. Glover is cuter than Mr. Thomas? I don't have him. Oh, he's cute. Mr. Welker's cute. Just darling. Oh, say, do you know a boy named John Reaverts in your botany class? I sit right next to him. Oh, he's cute. Just darling. Oh, me? Have you heard of his brother, Albert? Oh, he is cute. Just darling. Girls, have you heard of Magna Carta? Oh, he's cute. Just darling. All right, all right. I've had all the darling talk I can stand. Now take the book in the other room and do your work out there. This'll just take a second, Father. M, M, M... Mills? Milton? Oh, do you know Milton Potter? He's not very cute. For goodness sakes.  Well, certainly we can, Father. We can think of dates and... Hey, that's something else we're supposed to find out about the Magna Carta. The date of it. Try 1076. All right, let's see. Page 1076. That's not the page number. That's the date. Oh, say, Betty, do you have a date for the dance tomorrow night? Do I? Larry Tribbley? Larry Tribbley? Oh, he's cute. Just darling. Oh, I give up. All you've done is waste my time and talk about boys. Now take the book, take it in the living room and leave me alone. I'll get it. Someday I'm going to have that thing disconnected. Hello? Oh, hello. She's going to blow a gasket. I'll be back. Hey, Milton, John, Albert, isn't he cute? Margaret.  Not quite. Want some fruit? No thanks. Hi, Dad, will you help me with some arithmetic problems? No, no, but I'm trying to write a speech. How much is two and a half bushels of apples times Mr. White the Grocer times three boys? I think you're a little mixed up there, bud. Besides, I've heard all I want to about boys. What's wrong with boys? Nothing, except girls. Margaret, have you listened to any of Betty's conversations lately? Well, I guess so. What are you getting in? She talks of nothing but boys. All teenage girls are like that. It's perfectly normal. Well, it's driving me crazy. I can tell you that. Girls drive me crazy, too.  You keep out of this, bud. You're supposed to be doing your arithmetic. I am, but I need help. Oh, you shouldn't have trouble with those problems. Well, it's not the problems I'm having trouble with. It's the answers. Well, I guess I'd better get back in the den and see if they're through hanging on the phone. Dad. That's another thing. Betty spends half her life on the phone talking to some boy. No, it's not quite half. Dad. What is it, bud? If it takes three boys working four-hour shifts to build a brick wall 20 feet long, how long will it take two boys working six-hour shifts to build the same wall? Why would they need to build the same wall? Gee, I never thought about that. Well, it's built. It's built. Maybe it fell down. Well, that's your whole problem right there. They just don't build walls like they used to. Yeah. Well, how long do you think it takes these two boys to... Bud, I told you I'd rather not hear that word right now. Besides, I've just got to get that speech done. Can you help me later? Yeah, maybe. Don't bother him now, bud. Daddy, would you read me a story? I can't now, kid. Maybe later. A cheaty story is called Through Monkey Land with the Jungle Boys. Boys? Oh, not you two, Kathy. Did I say something wrong, Daddy? No, kid. I'll see you later. Run along. Gee. Who said you had such cute blue eyes? Well, don't tell him I said it. Oh, me. Oh, stop it, Larry. Say. Betty, would you please hang up? Huh? Oh. Larry, I guess I'll have to hang up now. My father wants to use the phone. All right, Larry. Bye-bye. He said his eyes weren't blue. They're usually bloodshot. And that's why everything looks rosy to him. So cute on the phone. Just darling. Father, do you know him? I've never laid a bloodshot eye on him. Now, will you girls please, please leave me alone and let me get my work done? I'll bet you couldn't go 24 hours without mentioning the subject of boys if your life depended on it. Oh, why, that would be the easiest thing in the world, wouldn't it, Larry? I mean, Jamie. Easy. Who cares anything about boys? Betty, would you come out here a minute, please? Yes, Mother. Jamie, you start looking up about the Magna Carta. Okay, Betty. Look under the amps. Okay. What is it, Mother? There's a delivery man at the door from the Dolores Dress Shop with a COD package. Do you know anything about it? Well, yes, in a way. What do you mean, in a way? Well, I bought a dress there. Betty, you know you can't go around buying dresses whenever you feel like it. Well, I tried to phone you, but I didn't get any answer. And such a price, too. $49.95. Well, Mother, it's really a tremendous bargain for that. It's a terrifyingly darling formal. Oh, I just had to have one for the dance tomorrow night. You see, I have this perfectly marvelous date, and, well, I just simply had to have it. Why? I just simply had to. Oh, Betty. I can't have it. Can't I, Mother? I haven't got $49.95. Will you ask Father for it? No. This is your deal, not mine. I'd rather not have anything to do with it. Oh, gosh. I think I'd better tell the man to take the dress back. Oh, no, wait. I'll go ask Father, maybe. Well, you'd better hurry. We can't keep the man waiting. I'll hurry. Father. Yes? Um, how's your speech coming? Slow. That's nice. Father. Betty, can't you see I'm trying to work? Well, I just want to ask you one teeny-weeny little question. Can I hurry it up? Um, could I have just a slight advance in my weekly allowance? That's a poor habit to get into, Betty. Well, it'd just be a slight advance. Hmm, how much? Only $49.95. $49.94? My gosh. That'd take you into the middle of 1955. What do you need all that for? Well, I thought that just in case I might possibly have to buy a new dress for the dance tomorrow. New dress? What for? You've got a whole closet of stuff full of them now. Oh, but I have to wear a formal. And I haven't got a decent one. Betty, when are you going to learn that I'm not made of money? But, Father... Money does not grow on trees. I know that, Father, but you... Oh, Betty, you were wrong. Yes, and so was money. Uh, wait a minute. I'll make you a proposition. You remember you said it would be easy for you not to mention boys or to talk to boys for 24 hours? Yes. Okay. I'll just bet you $49.95 that you can't do it. But...but 24 hours will be tomorrow. Well, the dance isn't until tomorrow night. Let's see, it's 4.10 now. The bet will be up at 4.10 tomorrow afternoon. That'll give you time to buy a dress, won't it? Well, you see, Father... if you deal right there, take it or leave it. Maybe those 24 hours will give you time to think over the meaning of money, which comes under M. Father, stop throwing that up to me. Well, how about it? You want to take the bet? I'll take it if you include in it that you lose too if you mention money during the 24 hours. Well, fine. I can think of nothing I'd rather not mention than that. All right, then. The deal's on. Wait here, Janie. I'll be right back. Mother. Well, what happened? Tell the man to take the dress back. Well, that's a wise decision. But tell him to bring it back here tomorrow afternoon at exactly 4.10. What? Don't ask questions now. Just tell him. Will you have the money by then? You bet I will. But it's going to be the most miserable 24 hours I've ever spent. Act 2 of Father Knows Best after this word. Tomorrow evening you'll enjoy two of America's favorite comedy programs when you set your radio dial to NBC. There's laugh-filled entertainment on the Phil Harris and Alice Faye show, as Phil and Elliot Lewis decide to present their own interpretation of Shakespeare. You'll truly enjoy the mirth-filled Phil Harris and Alice Faye show tomorrow evening. The same night you can hear the Bob Hope show on NBC Radio. Tomorrow, Bob Hope will have Gordon McRae as his special guest, and the laughs will come thick and fast as Bob and Gordon each tries to win the honor of Man of the Year at their golf club. Remember it's the Bob Hope show and the Phil Harris and Alice Faye show. Hear them both tomorrow on the NBC Radio Network. And now back to Father Knows Best. There are two words currently taboo in the White Frame House on Maple Street. Money and boys. With a $49 formula at stake, Betty has managed with great difficulty to refrain from talking to or about boys for 23 of the 24 hours. Jim, on the other hand, has enjoyed avoiding the subject of money. Now, as the finish of the bet nears, the pressure is on, and no holds are barred. Like this. Jim? Yes, dear? The Eggman is here to collect. Guess how much we owe him. It's nice weather we're having now, isn't it? Jim, he's waiting at the back door. Sorry, you're in a field I'm not even discussing now. Oh, Jim, how much longer is this silly bet going to continue? Not long. I wish it was longer. I'm finding it rather pleasant. And economical. No piffle. Maybe I've got some money in my purse. I don't know why I didn't start this bet years ago. Father? Yes, Princess. What did Mother want? You know very well what she wanted, Miss Marty. Is that today's paper you've got there? Yes, I thought maybe you'd like to look at the financial page. Here. No, thanks. Not unless there's a crossword puzzle on it. I'm not interested in that other junk. What other junk? Never mind. Say there is a crossword puzzle here. Father, how much is our bet for now? I've forgotten. I think you remember all right. Say there's some tricky words in this puzzle. What is a floating marker moored in water as a guide to navigation? Those are called... Oh, no you don't. Daddy? Hey, it's less than an hour now. Only 43 minutes. Daddy? Yes, kitten? Ask him for some money, Kathy. I don't want any money. I just want somebody to read my new book to me. For two days now I've been carrying it around. Okay, okay. Hand it here. I'll read it. Yesterday you said you'd do it when you got your speech done. But you never did it. Well, the speech is all done now this noon and it went fine. And the banquet was a big success. How much did it cost? I'm busy reading right now, my dear. Yeah, it starts right there, Daddy. Page one. Yes. All right. Here we go. Wait a minute. I've got to make a phone call first. Let Betty start the book for you. Oh, heck. Here, Betty. Well, all right. I guess reading would be safer than talking to an unfair trickster like you. Hurry up, Betty. It starts right there, page one. I know where it starts. Through Monkey Land with the jungle boobs. That's boys, jungle boys. I know what it is. What did you say it was, Betty? I didn't say and I'm not going to.  Here, take your old book back. Wait a minute. Isn't anybody going to read to me? Yeah, I'll read it, Kathy. Well, let's get with it then. I'm getting tired of all this book passing. Okay. Through Monkey Land with the jungle boys. One beautiful spring day. You think a girl Betty's age would know a little word like boys, wouldn't you? Yes, you would. She's kind of dumb, isn't she? All right, Squeegee. Keep your opinions to yourself. Ah, turn blue. Through Monkey Land with the jungle boys. One beautiful... Aren't you going to stay in here this, Betty? No, I'm not. It's about your favorite subject. Come on, Daddy. Through Monkey Land with the jungle boys. You read that. Oh, yeah. One beautiful spring day, Neco, the elder jungle boy, was startled by a strange noise in the dense foliage along the river. Neco looked about tensely, wondering what the noise was. I wondered what that noise was, said Neco tensely. Suddenly, Neco heard a loud chattering above him. He looked up, then laughed and cried out, Hello there, you little baboon. Huh? Let's see you swing by your tail. Dad, it's me, your son. Hmm. Said Neco. Yes, I recognize you, bud. Did you want something? Go away. Dad is reading to me. Ah. Ah. Well, that's a nice exchange of dialogue. Dad, you just got to help me with these arithmetic problems. Haven't you got those yet? Well, I need a little help to get me started. Well, all right. Let's see the book. Oh, heck. The first ten, there. If Tom earns twice as much as Ned, who earns three times as much as Dick, how much money... Wait a minute. Did Betty put you up to this? No. Honest. She didn't, huh? You know, that is a good idea now that I think of it. Here, bud, take your book into Betty and ask her to help you with problem number three. Number three? Yeah. If there are 36 pupils in the schoolroom and there are twice as many girls as boys, how many boys are there? Is she any good at this subject? She's awfully interested in it. I know that.  I hope that's one of Betty's boyfriends. I thought Mommy said you were sick of Betty's boyfriends. Well, at times. You who? Anybody home? Oh, it's just Janie. Is that you, Janie? Come on in. Hi, Betty. Oh, hello, Mr. Henderson. Hello, Janie. Come on, let's go in the den, Janie. Okay. Better leave the door open so I can hear you. Don't cheat. How's it going? Just awful. Father cheats. He keeps trying to trap me and he won't fall into any of the traps I set for him. Oh, that's mean. I'm afraid it's going to end in a draw and then I won't get the money. The man's going to be here with the dress pretty soon. Gosh. Why'd you call me over? Can I help you? Oh, yes.  What things? Are you kidding? Boys? Certainly. And I want you to have it call Father. It? Can't you even say him? Well, I'm not taking a chance. I've got to have that dress. Now, you have it call Father and tell him it wants to buy a big insurance policy and be sure and tell him to ask Father to quote prices. Oh, I get it. And tell him to get real mad if Father refuses. Roger. Now, hurry up. There's not much time left. Come on. Okay, I'll hurry. Don't fail me. I'll see you later. Okay. I'm dying to see your new dress. Bye. Bye. New dress? You sound pretty confident. Why not? I'm going to win, aren't I? Well, that remains to be seen. Hey, sis, will you help me with some problems? Who, me? Number three. I suspect another trap here. Let me see that. Number three. If there are 36 pupils in a school room and there are twice as many girls as... Huh? And so, Neckle retreated slowly as the... as the angry panther glared down at him. Father. There was fire in the panther's eyes. Well, how about it, sis? What's the answer? Ask Father. He seems to know all the answers. Thank you.  Mom! As the black panther leapt from the limb with a lightning leap. Mom! Neckle jumped nimbly to one side. Yes, sir. With all the agility of the ring-tailed baboon which he had come to know and love in Monkey Land. Jim, what in the world are you doing? Huh? Oh, I'm reading a story to Kathy. Kathy? She's outside playing with Patty. She is? Well, what do you know about that? She was here when I started. Mom, will you help me with my arithmetic? Oh, I'm not very good at arithmetic. Get your father to help you or Betty. They won't help me. Well, I have a reason. If Ned runs two miles downhill in 47 minutes and Tom runs up the same hill... You shouldn't run uphill. It's not good for the heart. Well, that was Tom's idea, not mine. There's the phone, Father. You better get it. Why me? It's probably for you, probably that boy calling. What's his name? I haven't the least idea what you're talking about. I'll get it. Jerry, is it? Or, uh, Harry? I'm not talking. Hello?  I'd like to see it continue for quite a while. Yeah, just a minute. Hey, Betty, it's for you. For me? Some character by the name of Larry. Yeah, that's it. Larry, you better go talk to him, Betty. Tell it. I'll call it later. Huh? But can't you understand anything?  No, I don't have to. Betty says to tell it to call it later. I haven't got the slightest idea. Yeah, it does, don't it? What did it say? It hung up. Look, readers. Everything's ruined now. No, it isn't. Do you give up? What's all this it business? Mother, what time is it? Oh, it's about four o'clock. Well, I don't care what it's about. I've got to know exactly. I'll tell you, it's exactly three minutes after four. You've still got seven minutes to go. Do you give up? I don't know. I haven't got any reason to win the dress now. Oh, it's not that serious. Yes, it is. You heard what happened when little Goonface there got on the phone. I'll get it. Oh, no, you don't. I'm not going to take another chance. If you talk to him, you lose. I don't care. Hello? I knew she couldn't hold out.  This was all a misunderstanding. Well, I'm sorry she lost, but I'm glad it's over. Well, that was my brother, and he hardly ever knows what he's talking about. Hey, now wait a minute. Well, actually, it was all part of a silly bet in which I was going to win $59.95. $59, it was 49. Yes, but you lose, too. You're talking to Larry. No, I'm not. Janey, look. Well, here now, this isn't fair. You said on the phone you were glad he called back and... You better answer the door, Father. That'll be for you. For me? I'm not expecting anyone. No, but I am a man from the Dolores Dress Shop, and you'd better have $49.95 ready. Hey, well, what is this? You'd better go, dear. By George, there's some mighty unfair tactics being used around here. The Andersons will be back in just a moment. Monday means music on NBC, and next Monday evening, you'll enjoy such beautiful musical programs as The Railroad Hour, The Voice of Firestone, and The Telephone Hour. Anne Ayers will co-star with Gordon McRae next Monday, as The Railroad Hour presents Jerome Kerns, The Girl from Utah. On The Voice of Firestone, guest Lois Hunt will sing Three Loves Have I from Song of Norway, and Mimi's Farewell from Lobbo Aime. Guest of The Telephone Hour will be Marion Anderson, and among her solos next Monday evening will be Deep River and Every Time I Feel the Spirit. Remember for the finest musical entertainment, tuned to NBC on Monday evening for The Railroad Hour, The Voice of Firestone, and The Telephone Hour. And now, back to the Andersons. Well, the wager's over, and as you well knew from the start, the winner is Betty. She's now happily dancing with her date in her new 49-95 formal. What about the loser? Well, he's been in the den all evening behind closed doors, and the family's a little worried about him. Like this. Do you think we ought to go in there and ask him if he's all right? I don't know. I never in the world thought he'd take losing so hard. This isn't at all like him. Want me to peek through the keyhole? That's not polite, Kathy. Besides, I tried it. Wait, I know what to do. Kathy, you go in there and get him to read you your new book. I don't like that old monkey-land thing. That's kid stuff. Besides, I don't even know where it is. Let me go in. I've still got to ask him how many apples with Tom O' Ned if Dick Lone Tom six more than half of what Ned got some of. Oh. Shh, wait a minute. I think I hear him coming. Oh, hello. What's this, uh, meeting? No, we were just getting a little worried about you. Brooding in there all evening. Brooding? Who's brooding? I've been reading. By George, you just wouldn't believe some of the narrow escapes that Neco had. You just wouldn't believe it. Again next week, when we'll be back with Father Knows Best starring Robert Young as Jim Anderson. Father Knows Best is an NBC radio network production in cooperation with Cavalier Enterprises. In our cast were Ted Donaldson as Bud, Gene Vanderpile, Rhoda Williams, Helen Strom, and Mary Lee Rod. Father Knows Best, based on characters created by Ed James, is written by Paul West and Roswell Rogers, directed by Arthur Jacobson, and transcribed in Hollywood. Play Truth or Consequences on the NBC Radio Network.


I'm James Kelly, the Labour MSP for Glasgow. I'm seeking to introduce a bill to repeal the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act, an act which when it was introduced was opposed by every opposition party in the Scottish Parliament. It's unfair and it's been criticised by football fans and the judiciary alike. I'm seeking views and a consultation which will close on the 23rd of October.


I'm going to go at two wrong. Second shot. That's a shot. That's some 136 flagstick right in the middle of the green. Oh, for birdie at two. It's Dishambo. Here is Phil's second shot to the left at two. From a great block. Under yesterday declared that I have no chance. He's three under. There's some action for you, Paul. Well, how do you do? There's not many balls backing up today. I'm going to get a chance as you'll ever see here at 12. The slope goes towards the front.


Good morning. Warm welcome to all of you to this issue briefing with the mayor of Kiev, Vitaly Klitschko. Mr. Klitschko, warm welcome to you. Thank you for joining us at this crucial time for your country and for your city. For many long weeks your military and your citizens were bravely defending your city against the Russian onslaught long weeks. Now in early April the Russian army was pushed away from the Kiev area. So first of all, how are you doing? How are the citizens of Kiev doing? What is life like in Kiev right now? Help us understand. First of all, good morning everybody. Sorry coming late because the GPRS doesn't accept the police which closes the streets. It was a little bit complicated coming to the sanction. Thank you for big interest for Ukraine, for Kiev, for the capital of Ukraine. It's very important. Yes, of course, right now in the World Economic Forum is the main question main question safety, safety for economy, safety for the world, safety for the peace, safety for human lives and many of these points depend from our homeland, from Ukraine. It's not secret right now. It's war. It's not special operation what old Russian propaganda is real war. It's one of the biggest war after this Second World War in Europe. Thousand and thousand people already died. Big part of them civilian. And also a lot of children. Right now in this moment is a huge battle of east of Ukraine. The Russian army attacked the Ukrainian forces and every minute died Ukrainian. Also, it's not secret the main priority to occupied whole country and the main target was and still the capital of Ukraine, the heart of the country. I'm very proud to be Ukrainian. I'm very proud to be the part of our society who tough and defend our homeland, our home city from Russians. It's everybody, everybody in the world all experts told and give to Kyiv couple of days the Ukrainian warriors stay and don't give the chance to Russian aggressors occupied our city. After that the whole world see the horrible images from our satellite city. Bordenko, Erpen, Gostomel, Buccia and everyone understand. It's not special operation. It's not the war. After this images what everyone saw everyone can say is genocide of Ukrainian population. Children, women, all people, civilians was killed. It's a difficult time. It's really difficult time right now to explain about that right now in the wars in Switzerland, sunshine, peaceful atmosphere. It's difficult to understand and to see, to feel the atmosphere of people who in one moment homeless. In one moment they doesn't have, they doesn't see the future. In one moment they someone doesn't have a friend's relatives. It's difficult to understand that and to explain the smell of bodies. It's a street. What happens right now is a huge tragedy. Trash is not just for Ukraine and tragedy for millions of people in Europe. And also I want to say it's a big tragedy for Russians. They not understand exactly right now what is mean tragedy, but slowly they understand it coming to everyone. Thank you to Ukrainian, tough Ukrainian soldier. They defend our hometown and the Russians moved. After that we have, we see destroyed infrastructure, destroyed logistics, destroyed life of the people and right now we try to do it, to bring that together, to bring back normal life. It's not easy task. In our hometown aggressors killed more than 100 people, 120, 120 people. More than 300 was injured. 60, 16 16 children was in critical condition in hospitals. Four children died. Destroyed all refinery around Kiev. Destroyed logistic centers which bring the food to our city. And right now main task for me as manager of the city to bring the services to everyone, to bring the normal life and main priority, I'm starting my speech, main priority for every Ukrainian, for every citizen of our hometown, safety. Every day we see many, many times, we listen many times serene. The warning we told to everyone, immediately we have to go in bunkers. I had this voice. The people, some people spent months on the ground. And today nobody have, not anyone have safety, any second, any minutes, their records can land in any buildings. By the way, general secretary to United Nations have a visit in Moscow in this moment when they have a discussion with president of Ukraine. One half kilometer away landed Russian ragas, killed the people. Human activity have rules. By the way, war have rules. We have feeling this war against Ukraine no rules. You ask me about right now, the station Kiev before the war, population in Kiev was 3.5 million citizens during the war majority women, children move to much more safety places and we have a minimum around 1 million citizens right now, the people coming back slowly coming back and 2.5 we calculate with cell phones, with operators 2.5 million people right now in Kiev not everyone coming but if someone ask me should I come or not I tell you personal responsibility we can't give you guarantee for your safety. It's public transportation work not so well like before it's not so many services but we give the best we have electricity, water food medical care, everything work in our hometown but atmosphere is still strange because twice 3 times a day, 4 times sometimes non-stop we listen this warming regarding alarm and everyone have to go to the bunkers I have a lot of stories today is 93rd day of the war 92 days 92 days of the war I have a feeling it's one long long day non-stop I have a lot of stories a lot of stories human stories if you want to listen a couple of them if you have time it will be interesting if not I can start to question answer by the way I touched some very important points Mr. Mayor as you said we will have some questions from from the audience as well for the important message that you just delivered two things from me as you said this is still a hot war your nation is fighting for its freedom help us understand because we are hearing of course that there is no heavy fighting in eastern Ukraine in particular what is your assessment of the situation on the front there if you can give us every one of you have to understand the reason of this war it's a very important point the reason of this war which Ukrainian people to build modern democratic society and to be the part of the European Union this vision not accept in Russia because someone who started the war have idea to rebuild the Russian Empire and Ukraine is very important puzzle in this picture my answer for that we was in the USSR we don't want back to USSR we see future of Ukraine as part of European family where main priority human rights press of freedom the democratic standards of life is every Ukrainian want to be the part of European family we Ukrainian actually European with our history with our mentality geographically we are European we have to build the standards of life Russian government don't accept that and want to rebuild Baltic countries Poland former Soviet and we have to not understand we have to understand it's from beginning we think they will be happy with annexation of Crimea and after that the next Lugansk right now they want to occupy Ukraine and I'm more than sure the planes not stopped in board of Poland they go so far as far we allow to go and we are Ukrainian right now is everyone have to understand it very well we defending not just our family and our children we defending you because we have the same values and we don't know how far planes have Russian government and that why I'm very appreciate for everyone who take your refugees very appreciate for everyone who support Ukraine politically economically support with defensive weapon defensive weapon because we defend our country because Ukraine was always peaceful country where live peaceful people we never was aggressive to anyone and thank you very much for support is very important for Ukraine is very important for Europe and this war is danger to everyone everyone in European continent everyone in the world thank you I'll open the floor to any we will have 2-3 questions so I think gentlemen over there yes you can introduce yourself my name is Mauricio Rodas I am the former mayor of Kito Ecuador how can your fellow mayors from around the world support you and support Keith self-government is base for every democratic country self-government is is fundament it's not secret the Russian aggressors first of all kidnapped the mayor of Ukrainian city leaders of opinion the managers of communities more than 30 was kidnapped 12 we don't know until today we don't know where is the 12 of mayors of the city one of them mayor of gastronomy was killed when he bring the medical aids and food to citizens was it's very important to challenge for everyone in the world some politician in the world think the war is somewhere far away from us it's biggest mistake to think the war somewhere in Ukraine this war can touch everyone in European continent not just in Europe touched everyone in the world one example Ukraine have five nuclear plans one of them in Zaporizhia and Ergodar was on the fire and the battle was exactly in the atom's station power plants stay exactly in the line of the battles if we receive the explosions of fire this will be much bigger than Chernobyl catastrophe it can touch everyone in the world they have huge impact impact to everyone I was I am very appreciate for mayor of many cities who calling me who make support and everyone ready to help to rebuild the city to invest his knowledge energy money to help Ukraine it's very important for us very important for us to feel your support but first of all right now we have to stop the war after that we have to rebuild all infrastructure which destroy the aggression thank you gentlemen over there very much Florian Schmidt journalist working for the news outlet online you were already saying that after the war you need to rebuild and reconstruct also Kiev we have learned that this reconstruction of the whole country might take few hundred billion dollars can you tell how much the reconstruction of Kiev alone would cost thanks for Ukrainian warriors who defend our hometown and everyone in the world know right now the names of our satellite city Buchia Kostomil Barodianka this city is totally destroyed it's 90% of the building destroyed and right now we as city help to them they was protection of our hometown if we doesn't have the city these battles and these horrible images will be from capital of Ukraine we help a lot right now to the city but in our hometown was destroyed more than 300 buildings 220 apartments buildings where the people are our main priority right now until the winter season to rebuild to make a reconstruction for this building and give the services to these people who is right now homeless we need for that around we calculate around 80 million euro and we actually right now starting to with reconstruction and very thankful for everyone who help us to take refugees and to help give with reconstruction it's many mirrors of the world told we are ready to support financially right now in Kyiv it's not so big money but everyone have to understand it's not destroyed just our infrastructure the economy in our country also destroyed and also many people right now is jobless and many people right now have to survive and we in the same time we have to deliver the services the main priority save the life of every citizens in our hometown no thank you and we all know you have every month 5 billion dollars gap in terms of just keeping the country running huge effort and you are part of special session we had here also yesterday on the reconstruction and we have as you saw there are many many private sector leaders who are also very keen to help the construction we have time for one more question so to delay here in the front row you've asked before and then we'll wrap it up it's right here oh you have a mic you need mic no no it's here front row you were first Isabel Körner with RTL and NTV in Germany Chancellor Schultz will be speaking here today what do you want to hear him say we expect from Germany first of all I want to say for Germany a lot of critique a lot of opinion but we have to never forget that Germans was the biggest supporter of Ukraine in past time give to Ukraine and support Ukraine with billions of Euro it's very important to take support we're talking right now about defensive weapon and from beginning it was 5000 helms it's everything works so slow so slow and we have never forget we're talking with you we have discussion for a long time about most team too and actually take the right decision the German government take the right decision because we Ukrainian everyone hostage from engineering services of Russia gas and oil and they use that politically very much and also we need first decision with with weapons because I want to repeat one more time we defending not just our country and our families and our children we defending every one of you because we don't know how far go the plans of Russia they go so far we allowed to go and please don't forget the part of Germany was part of Soviet empire thank you very much and so many people tell it's enough support of Ukraine it will be never enough so long we have this biggest war after the second war biggest war in Europe it's our unity around Ukraine our support and our wish to stop the war just when stop this war we told we do it enough to save the lives of millions and to stop this disaster in our continent Mr. Mayor thank you so much for joining we're wrapping this up it's so important the international community remains united and its support for Ukraine thank you so much any you have any closing remarks closing remarks thank you very much for everyone deeply from every Ukrainian to story stories, life stories of children to story of children second week of the war a lot of people in train station was totally breaking full and some corner I visiting and checking the points always where the people was corner for the children and the children bring from Bucharest from this part war the real battle one child crying I come to him and told they asked about the parents I told don't worry mom come very soon to you and with the father I don't know with the father give five be tough and try to push him and stop his crying the women who follow him very take to me and tell listen this child actually don't know parents died he is alone right now we have a lot of examples this war touched everyone in Ukraine not just in Ukraine and we have to do it everything to stop the war the next story short story thank you for government of Riga this mayor of Riga send to twelve eleven eleven buses and told to every citizens of Riga bring the support to some products somebody bring the pampers, medical care some food small boy around five six years bring the glass with small money and tell it's this money I collect life long I don't know maybe fifty years inside maybe hundred years small less I want to give this money to children in Ukraine small boy and the mayor give me this glass with the money with big heart please support Ukraine we need your support and you support not just Ukraine you support yourself we need to support the peace in the world peace in Europe and don't forget we defend it right now not just our families in our countries in our hometown in this war can touched everyone please don't forget about that and I want to say thank you very much who do it everything to stop this senseless war thank you have a nice day and we still fighting still defending our country and I move drive back to Ukraine and main priority save Ukraine save the world save the peace in the world and please still around Ukraine support Ukraine is the key for freedom in the world thank you thank you


In other news now, the Federal High Court seating in a budget has nullified award at local government congresses of the All Progressive Congress, APC conducted for the purpose of nominating its candidate for the co-guestate governorship election built from November the 11th. In a judgment delivered by Justice James O'Mortosho held that said Congresses, which held on February 7th were not conducted in compliance with the provisions of both the Electoral Act 2022 and the APC's constitution. It therefore ordered the leadership of the party to conduct fresh award and LGA Congresses, which strict adherence to Section 84 of the Electoral Act 2022 and Article 13 of the APC constitution. The judgment followed the suit that was brought before the court by a group of members of the party led by one real one, O'Mortosho, Justice O'Mortosho held that there was merit in the case of the plaintiffs, even as he barred the independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, from recognizing any candidate of the party that he matched from any primary election conducted with a set unlawful list of delegates. The APC co-guestate ought to have conducted special award congresses to elect delegates that will virtually elect the party's candidates for the governorship election, but none was conducted at all at any word. And also this was a fact that our clients have through the court to see, look, there was nothing but they just so appropriately submitted and that the leadership set aside. And the co-guestate is, and even one that the list of impunity, political impunity, have gone forever and it's not been tolerated. And I advise the parties to go and conduct congresses prior to the nomination of the candidates. We were in court to strengthen democracy at the state level, trench rule of law and internal democracy. And we thank God that the party has seen the effect of the case from our own ends and has given a judgment that is favorable to every party. And we appreciate all the members of the party at the state level and the leaders who supported us in the course of this struggle. Where our case is not against an individual or anybody, but is to fight for the right thing to be done within the party and avoid some of the avoidable mistakes that cost us so much in other states such as Zanfora River state and of late even Nassarowa state. And we also thank the leadership of the party because the last time I met with the National Working Committee, presided over by the National Chairman, I thought we discussed as to what can be done to bring justice to the parties in the state. And we said, no, the only thing to be done is to do direct primaries. And if you must continue within direct primaries, then you must do delegate a lesson, congress that will show up, legitimate congress. And he assured me that he was going to ensure that we do direct primaries. Hello, hope you enjoyed the news. Please do subscribe to our YouTube channel and don't forget to hit the notification button so you get notified about fresh news updates.


Hi everyone, my name is Reta Trinkler. I'm the chairman and co-founder together with Mona Lisa of Mellonport and the Morrison advisor to the Web3 Foundation. So great, so let's start with formal verification. So formal verification is the act of proving or disproving an algorithm with respect to an intended underlying algorithm. So this algorithm is specified in a formal specification. So I'd like to ask all of you what makes a good specification? What makes a good specification? That's a good question. So I think theoretically the answer is that the specification accurately captures the intent of the developer who wrote it. Making sure that's the case is obviously very difficult, so I think a lot of that depends on sort of your tooling and the feedback that it provides when you're writing the specification, but in general I'd say a good specification accurately reflects the intent of the developer and also encodes sort of all of the assumptions that the smart contract makes very explicitly and very clearly so that if someone were to update the smart contract later or something they would all be very nicely in the same place. I just want to add a little bit more. I think a good specification should be easy to understand and should be easy for other to read and build test case later on. And it's great if it follows some standard as well. I think in general any specification is better than what most people do, which is no specification. So that's probably a good place to start. Ideally you'd write a specification and then argue over that for a few days at least and then write your tests and then begin coding. But a lot of people kind of do it maybe in the reverse order or something like that, or maybe they never even write a specification, so. If there is an answer, capture it, but maybe a good specification should put a contract in a bigger picture, what kind of game people can play on it, what would be the best strategy for rational players and so on. Yeah, if a specification fits into this crypt economic or economic, game theory, reasoning that something nice. But yeah, this depends on the application. Thanks. So what is your take on a specification kind of specified, abstractly with formal methods of mathematics versus a specification implemented, for example, in Haskell? So one is kind of like a reference implementation in Haskell and the other is just kind of abstract, purely theoretical. Well, I think that a reference implementation in Haskell is a perfectly fine specification, honestly. I think a lot of people when they think of a specification think of kind of just an English language document or something like that, but at least in our group we focus a lot on executable specifications. So I think a Haskell implementation, that's a whole hell of a lot better than no specification once again and at least you can test it, right? You can run tests against your specification even before you go to implementing the final thing. So that's already a huge advantage over an English language specification, for example, but certainly English language specifications are easier to write. So maybe start with that and then do the Haskell or something like that. Yeah, I totally agree with everything that was just said and I sort of want to add that you can have good or bad specifications in any format. So absolutely while it's nice to have a specification be testable and clear and readable, you can have really, really good Haskell language specifications or you can have pretty bad Haskell specifications. And I've even seen English language specifications that are not entirely bad. So sort of goes more to the expertise of whoever's implementing it, I think. Great. So like, could you maybe share a bit about what is like new and unique about formally verifying smart contracts blockchains kind of compared to, you know, safety, critical hardware verification and what are the corresponding opportunities of it? And what is new and unique about formally verifying smart contracts or blockchains compared to like, for example, verifying hardware and what are the opportunities of it? Well, I guess smart contract has a new sort of like romantic, right? So we have the concept of like transaction at the concept of gas and solar token and ether, which, you know, doesn't exist in, you know, existing system like, you know, critical hardware or software system. So when you like formally verify it, I think you need to define new property that you want to verify that only exists in, you know, smart contract and also Ethereum. There's definitely some really nice things about smart contracts. They are bounded in terms of their execution time. They're generally very small, simple programs, at least compared to something you'd see in a safety critical system, a car or an airplane or something like that. And they directly handle large quantities of money. So actually, I'm really excited. I think that I said this last year, and I still strongly believe it, that as a space, we have an opportunity to set standards for how software is developed even beyond blockchains and smart contracts. Because I think the users of smart contracts and blockchains have a much stronger understanding and demand for this kind of technology than the users of a car or something like that. So Ethereum virtual machine has no non-determined behaviors, no non-defined behaviors, because that means consensus folks. So this possibility of different clients following different folks is a huge problem. But it's really a blessing for us on top of the virtual machine, because that means the specification is really always deterministic. That's a huge improvement of proving anything over Intel chips or ARM chips. Yeah, you're right. Pretty much agreeing with what people said. And the non-determinism makes it easy. The bounded gas makes it kind of nice, although sometimes it's hard to reason about exactly how much gas a contract will use. And basically, you know, what's making the most driving force behind this is the amount of money being at stake, essentially, as opposed to just normal programs in other settings. It may move over, because it goes really, it goes to make it really hard for me to understand the question. Yeah, it's kind of interesting how people care a little bit more about money than their lives, right? You have someone lose their 50,000 endowed tokens and they're clamoring for formal verification. But then Toyota has an issue in their ECUs that kills 20 people and Toyota customers could not care less about the software in their car. So I just think that's kind of an interesting observation on humanity. It is kind of interesting, yeah. Great, so could you maybe talk a bit about the limitations and challenges of formal verification and maybe also introduce the project that you're involved with and how your project kind of tries to make things easier or better? Well, so my background, interactive theorem proving is not user friendly. So take class of computer science students of 30 people, maybe a couple of them are willing to use interactive theorem proofers. Maybe only one of them can finish verifying a program of like 20, 30 lines in the months or so. So it's kind of challenging. Actually verifying software using these interactive theorem proofers is so challenging that I don't see much, I don't see many successful applications. But for the reasons described before, I believe in a theorem it might still make sense. I guess it's really hard to formally prove existing smart contract, especially the complicated one. Because first of all you need to represent them in some mathematical model that you can easily prove some property later on. But it's really hard to convert or transfer or interpret the program into the new language or the new model because of the compatibility issues. And also sometimes you cannot even explore all the possible outcomes or properties of the program. And most of the formal verification tool requires strong background and human involved. And most of the project and companies do not have these people. So really we need some sort of user-friendly developer tool so that you can just run the tool with some existing smart contract and it will produce other helpful output for the developers. Yeah, so I work on sort of a number of projects in the correctness space. One of them is I'm advising this sort of heavier weight formal verification project called KVM. I'll let Everett describe that since he's actually the lead. But to speak to the broader point I think there's like a very wide range of correctness techniques that we have here both formal, informal, and semi-formal. And another one of the projects I'm on, HYDRA, is sort of a lighter weight approach to this where you abandon full formal guarantees for sort of low cost and easy startup. Which I think is a very valuable thing to a lot of companies who aren't going to be able to, as Lloyd said, hire the right people or have the right expertise. At the end of the day, formal verification is still super expensive. It's still hard to do and it still doesn't give you perfect guarantees. So it's understandable why for a lot of people, especially now that the tools are not totally mature, the business case sort of isn't there. So I think we need to develop a range of techniques and ask ourselves what are really our high assurance contracts here to use our full-fledged techniques and how can we get the other ones to a better level of security with like the lower hanging fruit techniques? Yeah, I think I agree pretty much with what Phil's saying here. And actually it makes me really happy that I see so many people just emphasizing the importance of testing and of writing specifications because just those two steps alone force you to first clarify in your head what is it I'm trying to do, which so many people don't even do. They just sit down and start kind of plonking away at code. And then second to kind of concretize that by writing some tests and then say like is what I did actually implementing these tests. So the tests kind of serve as a semi-specification if you will or a concretization of the specification. Regarding the KVM project that Phil mentioned, I think it helps with the entire, there's the entire range of verification that you can go through, right? You can start at testing and you can move up to some sort of runtime verification or runtime model checking up to model checking, which is where you explore the whole state space of a program and then up to theorem proving where you use more advanced techniques to prove that a program is behaving correctly and K gives you tools for all of those things actually. So I think KVM can be a useful tool in that space. It doesn't have quite a nice user interface unfortunately, so it suffers from that, but I think it can help a lot in all those areas. Thanks. So it seems like a common theme seems to be it's like too complicated. So how can we make tools and or how can we develop approaches that are more accessible to the end user? I think in the end it's not reasonable to expect the end users or users to read logical formulas or maybe K configurations that are more accessible, but it's hard. So at the end what we want is a tool that can synthesize an adversary based on the unproven goals where this scenario can happen and it can play it on web browser.  That would make the problem much more easier to understand. So I guess usability is always a hard problem, right? And that's also one of the motivations that why we build O&T, the smart contract analyzer based on symbolic execution. So the idea here is that users do not need to understand how O&T works. They only need to paste the smart contract into O&T or into the web browser and they click analyze and we can just show all the possible vulnerabilities that O&T can figure out. Yeah. I personally think demand sort of breeds progress in this direction and we're sitting in a room of some extremely smart and talented people and we've seen some projects that really push the envelope in a number of spaces. And while the tools are hard to use and there certainly could be improvements made there, nothing here is sort of magic or anything like that. So I think sufficiently motivated developers who are incentivized by the market to develop these tools is really what we need to push the envelope here. Another thing that I think is really helpful and I'd like to especially congratulate Melonport for taking this approach, is to take these things out of academia and into industry and use them on real contracts with real developers who are working on the ground in Solidity. I think just that step could do a lot for usability and academics are not really the greatest at writing super usable systems sometimes. So more broad participation would definitely help. Yeah, third thing that you just said he seconds it. But yeah, definitely the approach that Melonport is taking seems to be the correct one, just make the tools usable and make them have check for some specific properties automatically. Certainly all of the verification tools can be instantiated to do those sorts of things but it takes effort and takes developer time and it takes people who know the tools to do that instantiation. And that's not gonna happen overnight. So these lighter weight methods like Phil's Hydra stuff that's really gonna be the stop gap until we can have better tooling for all these high assurance tools. Thanks very much. So the last question from me and then opening up to the audience is essentially a shout out from you guys. So what would you like to see kind of from different ecosystem players? So from the users, the developers, the investors, the project leads and the researchers to make formal verification mainstream. In the current ecosystem, I think it's still the user's responsibility to make sure that they understand the contract they are interacting with. Some people are like proposing markets for audits and so on, but these are not working yet. So actually I have to repeat Martin, I mean it's hard to say this but you have to read the byte code, learn the EVM in order to make sure that you are interacting with a reasonable thing. It's hard to say this but it's something like that currently. And then yes, something like audit market with the reputation system or something like that very gradually it may improve the situation but yeah, now due diligence is required for all parties I believe. So I see there are sort of being two pushes that need to happen. One of them is bottom up. The users need to really start demanding that if there are techniques available to ensure the correctness of their contracts, they're either used or a good justification is provided for why they're not used. We certainly have a few tools right now, we've seen presentations today about quite a few of them. So users really need to start being more selective about where they put their money and while sure it's tempting to sort of buy into every single ICO and flip it for 2x or whatever, that's not the kind of space that sort of incentivizes and fosters rigorous proper software development. And so I think users and investors need to become more selective and developers need to sort of enable them to do that by really going through the processes in a way that's serious and in a way that they put in a concerted effort to get the maximum assurance out of their contracts. Thanks. Yeah, kind of echoing what you each said a little bit. No amount of money is a substitute for just understanding, right? So at some point you just have to read and understand the bytecode and understand how EVM works and understand how Solidity compiles to EVM or whatever tool it is, whatever high level programming language you're using, how it compiles to EVM and what the implications for security are in that setting. And the people doing security audits, they understand this really well and they, like they were saying earlier, they just read the code and read it again and read it again and read it again. There's no substitute for just putting time and effort into high assurance software. Well, I guess, you know, in order to make formal verification popular, I think we need to adopt this first, right?  Thanks. So anyone from the audience would like to ask some questions? Yes. Maybe it's better if people with questions should come to the front. That's probably a good idea for the next person. So from an artist standpoint, how would you like to see people who provide smart contract audits either contributing to your projects or using your projects? I assume it's sort of maybe one or the other, but maybe there's both for us right now. Does that make sense? Yeah. I do do some smart contract audits and I would say ideally the role of these kinds of tools in the long run would be to sort of put most of that business right now out of business to an extent, like at least that's my personal goal with it. In all my audits, I always make recommendations to the team about which tools are state of the art and what they should be running on their contracts. Certainly, auditors can run these tools on the contracts as well, but at the end of the day, my personal opinion is that it's the responsibility of the team and the team to sort of seek help when they're not able to do something like this, especially because most teams would not be willing to sort of pay the hourly for an auditor to run, securify on their code or whatever when they could do the same thing themselves. So I think the role of auditors to answer your question is to sort of inform the team about what's available and what they think could be useful for the contract and then it's absolutely the team's responsibility to follow up on that and put the time in. Yeah, often I think the hardest part is just the spin up time, right? So you have some new tool that you're trying to bring into your tool chain and then maybe it takes a week or something to get it fully integrated and get it to be seamless, but once you have that spin up time taken care of, then you can kind of begin to make incremental progress. So what I would like to see is people taking the case semantics and making extensions of it. So we have already several extensions. One is a small gas analysis tool that's not very featureful or very complete or sound. It just kind of gives a rough estimate, but it'd be nice to kind of tighten the screws on that. And then there's another tool called EVM Prime, which is just a small extension of the EVM semantics to a higher level language. And if people wanted to hack on that, that'd be really cool. I'm answering specifically for KVM because that's the project I'm working on. But there's all sorts of other analysis tools you can write directly in K itself as an extension of language. And the hard part is the spin up time on K, of course. But there's no avoiding that with a project like that. Yeah. Just a button just for one second. It would be really nice also if these auditors and these teams sort of complained a lot more about the tools. One, one, one. Yeah. So for most of the research focused around either tokens or crowdsets, which are relatively smaller size. And also it's quite similar. But as more companies start delivering the product, which they promise to do based on the funding, the size is going to be a lot bigger and the product will be quite diverse. What would be the challenge when it comes to verifying these actual product rather than talking in the crowd cells? Please quick answer because we need to work. Sorry, the question was what are the challenges for these teams that are using these tools mostly? It's better without the mic, actually, I think. Yeah, so yeah, that's a great question. So the question was about most of the verification right now is tokens or crowd sales because that's sort of what everyone's doing and it's all the same. But what about when we get more complicated contracts? I personally think people are always going to push the envelope and do things that are more complicated than we actually can verify. And I think that's really cool to sort of feedback in. But the more complicated, the more experimental your contract is, the more time you're going to have to take and the more you're going to have to consult experts who really know how to write new specifications and not just reuse those same old building blocks in the old ones. I think auditing or finding bugs in the contracts is a bad game to play because you have to beat the best attackers in the world. So going forward, if you try more and more complicated stuff, you will need much stronger usable tools. Otherwise, the game is not fair. You have to find all holes. And a very good attacker should find only one hole, critical vulnerability. So it's a very, very skewed game. So maybe a good tooling or maybe a good game like Hydra is necessary. But I think we are kind of ready to take the challenge. Great. Thanks very much. That concludes the panel. I'd like to thank all the panelists. It's a huge honor to share the stage with some of the best researchers in the field. Thanks very much.


Well, first I have to thank Mark. I had no idea how complicated this could be. So this highly concentrated group, maybe didn't prioritize as much as we were supposed to, but I think you'll see that we came to what I think were a handful of actionable items. We took this sort of paradigm as our way forward, which is when you think about education and workforce, there are different sort of layers that you need to consider. The genomics professionals, that could be physicians, counselors, nurses, laboratory geneticists, informaticists, you can go on and on. So we had to, in the short time, we had packaged it into a single category. Other healthcare providers, physicians, nurses, and so on. And then the public. We actually toyed with adding policymakers, administrators, insurance executives as a fourth layer. And we just didn't have the time to get into that, but it may well be one that should be revisited. So then we tried to define what were the priorities, what were the opportunities, and what were the actions in each area. So this is what we came to for the professional genomics workforce. The priorities, first of all, were to be sure that we had an adequate workforce. And there was a little debate among members of the group exactly how many such people you need. One view of it is that there'll never be enough geneticists to do all the genetics and genomics, and therefore you need to train everybody else to do it. Another perception is, well, if it's that important, you should train more people to be prepared to do it. And I personally think the truth lies somewhere in between those two. But that was an issue. And then the point was made that the discipline is not recognized equally in all parts of the world. So in some countries there is a very well-defined training path for a geneticist, others not. Then there's the issue of the generalist geneticist versus the specialist. So for example, do you need a group of people who are expert in cancer genetics, and you need a group of people who can interpret a genome sequence wherever it happens to take you, which means you need to be capable of responding across many different specialties. And to what extent does a professional geneticist serve to interpret the cancer genome versus an oncologist, and what kind of training does it take to do it? And it comes to the idea that there could be various sort of paradigms for what constitutes a genetic professional. Point was made that in some countries it might not be sort of culturally acceptable for a genetic counselor to provide information because people expect to hear from a physician when it comes to medical information. In other countries, the culture is such that people are more accustomed to absorbing medical information from non-physicians. So those were deemed the priorities in terms of what we thought were opportunities to actually compare and catalog what are the training paradigms that exist for geneticists in different parts of the world, where this may not be so well-defined to identify what might be viewed as models and best practices and to disseminate them to areas that may not be as far along the curve in terms of training. There have been some workforce surveys, I'll come back to that point. Actually, the word survey is a bad choice of term, workforce studies, which is a formal sort of discipline to create those. And some places have done that, probably not updated to the genomic era really, but still it's been done in some places and probably not in others. And to summarize what those are, realize that there may be new paradigms for providing services, telemedicine in the broad sense of electronic means of collecting and then disseminating genomic information to end users. And then there was the point of defining what the certification pathway would be for somebody who would be providing lab services, again, customized to the culture of the individual country in terms of what the sort of authorities are for permitting particular activities to happen in a medical context. So we kind of parsed all this into a set of next steps. The first of collecting data on the professional workforce and training paradigms in different countries. So who has a formal training pathway in medical genetics, whether it's for the lab or for the clinic, who does not and what do those pathways look like? And then to conduct formal workforce studies, you know, in many disciplines, they can tell you to three decimal places how many surgeons you need per capita in a given population. And there are places that have looked at that question in genetics, but it needs to be done probably in this genomic era now, because I don't think too many of them have been updated for that. To share competencies, because competencies are a way to cut across the different specific training paradigms, because you could say, well, what does somebody need to know how to do? And then you can decide what kind of somebody that is. It might be a physician in one culture and it might be a genetic counselor in another, but to define the things that have to happen, I'll mention that the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics has done this in the US to define the competencies for the physician medical geneticist that was published in genetics and medicine a couple of years ago and now has surfaced as what are called milestones that are used to judge the medical genetics training programs. So things have come a fair distance. And then finally, to develop some kind of genomics academy because the problem that many of us are beginning to realize is that, I think at least that medical geneticists know more than most providers about interpretation of genomic information. They at least have the idea that not all mutations are pathogenic, a kind of basic notion that may not be in currency among all health providers, but that being said, most were trained in the single gene paradigm and the paradigm is obviously shifted and so again, ACMG is looking at setting up a genomics academy to try to bring those professionals up to the next level and this may be something that would have currency outside the US as well. Now as to other health providers, I think all of us would agree that however many geneticists there ever are, you need to change the competency and also the attitudes of health providers who are not professional geneticists because they certainly would be in a position sometimes to recognize patients who may benefit from testing or from other kind of genomic interventions to support individuals in whom these have been done and maybe even sometimes to initiate and interpret things. And at the least, they have to have as much knowledge and literacy as their patients do and a recognition of where this can contribute to care. So the priorities here, first of all were to define what exactly are the competencies expected of health providers who are not professional geneticists and as Terry pointed out, a working group has actually defined these competencies for the generalist physician if there's such a thing as a generalist physician and it was intended that that would serve as a foundation then to do this for various kinds of medical specialists. So that in some ways, I don't know that we can say done exactly but we've taken a pretty significant step towards doing it. And then I guess the other point of this was that there may be things that are unrealistic to ever expect physicians to actually be able to do without a lot of point of care handholding. So the notion of point of care decision tools becomes important, something that came up in the last group. So some opportunities, examine curricula at all different levels, medical school, residency, postgraduate, whatever, to determine where genetics competency training can be accommodated, realizing there are very different training paradigms. For example, in the US where there's usually a four year undergraduate experience and then a four year medical school experience, you can expect matriculating students to come in with a certain competency maybe in basic science at least. Whereas in a system where you come out of high school directly into medical school for six years, those expectations would presumably be different. Then to define what genomic competencies a matriculating and a graduating medical student should have. Now some efforts been made along this line, again in the US through the WAMC, HHMI competencies in basic sciences for the physician. That kind of effort though would need to be customized to particular educational paradigms in different countries. And then we kind of stuck in here a point that really could be another layer which was to advocate for policies that encourage implementation of genomic medicine services. This really comes to the point of talking with the policy makers and others who are defining reimbursements, the idea being that just about nothing will happen if nobody is willing to pay for it. So next steps that could be imagined, one would be to deploy novel educational approaches. One of the things this addresses is the notion that some places are better equipped than others to incorporate genomics into a curriculum wherever it might be. That is a medical school, pre-medical or post-graduate or residency. But if we were to develop tools that could be customized to the local environment but then used in this way, the idea for example of online courses that could be accessible anywhere in the world and customized perhaps to the particular needs of a given region, but using materials produced by people who have a lot of experience and in places where this is already up and running could be a valuable resource to help bring those up to speed who are not in that kind of situation. But then also it was recognized that some of the materials you develop in one area just may be not suitable for use in another. We could imagine that you could create a case that reflects a disease that is very common in one part of the world and never seen in another part of the world. Meanwhile, missing a medical condition that is very important in some areas that I, for example, would never think of. So one way around this is to develop templates and sort of paradigms for how you create case-based learning materials and then try to train people in different regions to actually deploy those but modify them so that they're relevant to the population at large. Then it really comes down to somewhat the third point which is to use that workforce that might exist in various places to help educate other physicians. An example is trying to develop courses that can be given at professional subspecialty society meetings, for example. So the third layer that we considered is that of the public and the priorities here are for people to be, in general, better informed and more literate and it's really very similar to the issues faced by their physicians. I guess you could argue their physicians should know at least as much about genomic medicine as their patients do and their patients, meanwhile, should be equipped to make wise personal decisions once presented with genomic information. So a lot of the issues are similar to ones already discussed to adapt products that may exist to different cultures, to extend it across as broad as possible a sort of array from undergraduate or even secondary and even primary school on up and also to engage lay support organizations, patient advocacy groups, for example, in educational activities that would be public facing. So among the next steps that were identified was to provide a clearing house for already existing educational approaches that have been used for the general public and then to showcase the application of novel kinds of approaches, developing apps, for example. Some of what we saw this morning would be an example of novel kinds of things that could be adapted to other environments. Then be sure that materials that are generated are customized to the culture of the target audience that needs a lot of local input. So this can't be just all centrally directed. One thought was to extend DNA day to be, I guess it's really meant to be international educational event. I think it probably already is to a degree, but certainly capitalizing on the attention that one can draw to that particular day would be an opportunity. So we didn't try to, we didn't employ the principles of democracy here. And so we haven't voted on priorities and I would argue we've probably put more on the table than is gonna be digestible. And so we can leave it to the group later to decide which of these to put the highest priority to. But anyway, this is what our group came up with in the short time we had. Thanks Bruce. I guess let's ask the audience about things that the group may not have considered as anything obviously missing from this framework. That would be a resounding no. And so learning from the experience of the last one just shows that we are adaptable. I don't think we're gonna take a vote in the, but I would ask if you as the leader of this group were to give us a sense of what we're doing. Of where should we start? Because this is a very broad aspirational set of initiatives. Where would the focal point, and I'm not saying that in any of these things that we're taking anything off the table, it's just we need a starting point and I'd like your guidance as to where the starting point might be. All right, so now you're asking me personally not speaking for the group. Well, or at least translate what I thought. I think there's a synthesis there I hope. I would have put the kind of stars on a couple of things. One is trying to define the workforce needs, I think would be a very important area. And I know there's a formal process for doing that. It's been done, as I said, I think it probably needs to be done on a wider scale, but if you don't have data on what the needs are, it's a little hard to advocate for change. So I personally think that trying to define the workforce needs would be a high priority. And the second priority, I guess in my mind, would be to take existing or encourage the development of new educational tools that can be disseminated as widely as possible, so as to empower groups and people that may not have direct access to things so that you can make their work easier. Is that okay with other members of the group? I assume that's... Are committee okay with that? I miss anything that should be added? Okay. And those, sorry, those existing and new... The existing and new educational tools were for the public or for anybody? Well, in principle, anything. I guess if I had a point to where the greatest priority is, well, arguably, it would be the general kind of non-professional physician. You can get different perspectives on that, but if you have a group of geneticists and nobody calls them, you're gonna have a not terribly effective approach. Truth is, it's very hard to dissect out, these are three intertwined things. If the public isn't interested, it's not gonna happen. If the general medical profession doesn't believe in it, it's not gonna happen. And if there's nobody who knows how to do it, it's not gonna happen. So therefore, I think you need to be looking at all three. Thanks, Bruce. The next is Evidence Generation. Is it hiding or a round of applause for that? Thank you. Not for lack of appreciation. Thank you.