 I've called my talk today a cautionary tale, and it really has to do with a radical shift that happened in our practice with regard to housing that has taken place over the last five years or so. This is work that we've been involved in for the last 30 years or so, which ranges across a number of different scales, including these, which I discovered today are called half-built houses, but in South Africa we call core houses, and we built these well before Alejandro Aravena built theirs, so maybe we beat them to the draw. The project that we've been working on for the last 20 years is this project in Port Elizabeth, and it's a cautionary tale because when we started off, this is housing subsidized government subsidized housing. The house was 48 square meters, and its cost was about $5.5,000 equivalent. In 20 years, we've been waiting to build these houses for 20 years, the size of the house has dropped from 48 square meters to 32 square meters, and the price has tripled. It's just impossible in my country to build government-sponsored housing anymore. We have to look at alternative means. The greatest housing provision in our country is in the informal sector, and we've focused our attention over the last five years or so on that sector, and we look at doing the minimum we can with the maximum effect, and we see our role as an irritant role, something that's going to irritate and stimulate. This is a project, for example, that we've built just recently in a place I live in, outside Cape Town in Harpe, which is an informal settlement, but built very beautifully. The question that we looked at in this settlement was how to provide services in an informal settlement, and as we all know, if you try and do that, you lose between 40 and 45 percent of your housing stock, and it becomes prohibitively expensive to replace that housing stock. The idea we used was the idea of the electricity pole, which is, in fact, the least destructive way of providing services in informal settlements. That led to this idea of the energy tree, which we developed. We're building prototypes of it now, which creates a new ground plan above the surface of the settlement. It comes metagrad at one point. You have a new surface on which to grow things. You can collect water, and it also becomes an energy supply point where you can have recycled water and methane gas generation. It creates an entirely different kind of environment. Instead of planting trees, what we do is we build trees. The trees that we build are energy machines that can do all kinds of work. As I said before, I think that it can have some significant impact. This is the settlement that I'm talking about outside Cape Town, and that would be the impact of these energy trees simulating what would be effectively a tree planting exercise. In the process, we can reverse entirely the flows of energy in and out of that community. This is the prototype that we're building in Cape Town at the moment. The second project is the one that we did as part of the Urban Exchanger Program, which we did in collaboration with a very fine architect from Berlin, T.U. Berlin, Irana Hale, who is here today. It really had a look at this issue again in South Africa of how do we deal with the question of informal housing where our government has promised every single poor family in the country access to a free house, but the government is increasingly unable to meet that need. What we have in these settlements like this settlement here is a condition of what we call acute temperness. In other words, people live in shacks, and they're waiting for a government house. Sometimes they've waited for up to 25, 30 years. They're not going to get the government house, but they don't do anything about improving the house that they live in. So the idea that we developed in collaboration with an NGO and a local community is to build what we call the Tafel house. It's a table house. It's four legs with a concrete slab. The greatest difficulty that these people have is to extend upwards. So what we've done is we build the Tafel house. They then move their shack onto the first floor and build a permanent house on the ground floor. And in that way, I'm sorry about this, the settlement can develop in this kind of way. We went through a very extensive technical development of the process. I don't know what's going on. I put this in because I wanted to say to you just very quickly. I know I'm running out of time. We're architects. We're interested only in architecture. I'm not interested in developing clean water supply to poor people. I'm not interested in negotiating the rest of my life with communities over what they want. We treat everyone the same. Whether we're working for a government agency or a poor community, talk to them, find out what they need, and then try and find a way of dealing with it. We don't treat poor people any differently from the other people that we deal with in our everyday life as architects. A very inventive way of making a way of pouring concrete. But the proud householder at the bottom over there, she is now, unfortunately, I don't have any photographs, but she has now moved her house to the top and is busy building a permanent structure on the ground floor. These tarfall houses cost the equivalent of about $500, which is easily manageable if we can get a small bank stop. Thank you. Joe, that was a very strong statement. We do architecture. We don't do water supply systems and so on. Alejandro Arauvena had talked about synthesis, the fact that architects are, in a sense, trained to do something which other professionals aren't. So would you say that this synthesis still needs to remain within the realm of tectonics, building craft, or can it not extend into the social sphere as Julia and Rosanna were doing? Look, I mean, I'm interested in the discipline of architecture. And I think architecture has a very clear disciplinary identity. And I think we're always going to have people who are going to know the boundaries and try and extend those boundaries. But I think that in a way, as a discipline, we've lost a huge amount of energy over the last 20, 30 years by extending these boundaries to broadly. So I'm really interested in bringing those boundaries back to those things that we know that constitute the project of architecture. And that doesn't stop me from designing a little tarfall hersey, but we designed it exquisitely. And it's beautifully proportioned. And that is what I wanted to do. And it's provided an opportunity, obviously, for other people to extend their homes and so on. So it's a cautionary note. It's a sense for me to say, let's remind ourselves that we're architects. There are issues that have to be dealt with. Let's deal with those issues, but let's deal with them within the discipline that we know well and that we love. You wanted to respond? Debate. I think, I think I'm gonna respectfully disagree. And I think the thing is that kind of attitude, I think has delivered 2% of the global housing stock. And so I'm not too fast, actually, if my work is perceived as architecture or not. But I think that if we want to engage with the majority world, you know, the sort of term that was brought to the forefront yesterday, we have to extend the boundaries of the discipline. Because if and so that's on one level. And I think also the discipline is under threat anyway. I think the capitalist market has delivered that how architecture gets delivered is through these kind of design and build contracts, which actually the profession, I think is struggling to operate in. So I think from both sides, from a kind of top down and bottom up, the discipline as it stands, it either needs to, I mean, I don't know, I'll leave it at that. Can I just respond to that if I may? I think Julie, I agree with you. I think that you can do all those things that you're talking about as an architect. I don't see why that there's a built in contradiction or position. I think that you don't have to only build, design build houses for speculators. You can work in shack settlements like we are, you can work in a range of other areas. I'm just talking about keeping disciplinary knowledge at the forefront of all the actions that one takes. That's all.