 Let me start by saying that I'm delighted to be with you today, but I'm very sorry that I'm not with you in person. I'm in fact going to New York in the next couple of days, but simply couldn't be there today. I'm delighted to have this opportunity because I think we're at a crucial moment in the development of a process relating to migration, which really needs to be pursued by the global community, a global community which comprises the United Nations and its various arms and its various parts, and IOM. I think let me start by saying that we're fortunate today in having in Bill Swing somebody who to me epitomizes all that is best in the whole area of multilateral responses to a crisis of enormous proportions. I need hardly go through with you the dimensions of that crisis, nor need I identify in advance some of the deficiencies in the structures that enable us or should assist us in the institutional responses that we need to this crisis. It is a crisis that is born out of terrible events, particularly in Syria, but elsewhere also, which have driven a flood of refugees across the Mediterranean and indeed in other parts of the world, like the Andaman Sea. And it's a crisis which demands a global response, which has not always been forthcoming. On the other hand, opportunities often arise historically as a result of crises, not always, and we can't be complacent about the crises that we're suffering today in respect of migration, driving the type of change that is necessary. But a crisis can be an opportunity, and if there is a moral response to the appalling affront to the rights of man that is available for us to see daily on our screens as people take to the seas in dangerous conditions to escape persecution, then this is one of those occasions. We have to make choices as a global community, and member states of the International Organization of Migration and of the UN more generally, have to deliver not merely financial resources, but also commitments to resettle or relocate migrants who are leaving their countries in dreadful circumstances. We also have to recognize that the issue of migration is a complex one. It doesn't just relate to refugees. The broad constituency, often described as economic migrants, also have rights. They have rights in the context of human rights more generally, but also they have a right to concern of the global community and can be driven by events just as destructive and dangerous as those which drive refugees. On the positive side, last year the inclusion of migration in the sustainable development goals and in the 2030 agenda for those goals was a triumph. When I think of where we started from, we can recognize that much has been achieved. In the past, migration was not recognized as a powerful tool and force for development. Now it is. I think attitudes have changed in this context. Over three long years of advocacy, we made an indisputable case. Many of us in particular IOM played a role in this for the inclusion of migrants and migration in the SDGs. We succeeded. Now we have an inclusive, ambitious SDG agenda. This agenda promises not to leave migrants or refugees behind and it recognizes the benefits that migration can bring both to those migrants, the broad constituency of migrants and to the societies from which they come and to which they go. Migration, therefore, is an important factor for inclusive, sustainable growth. At the same time, it highlights that forced displacement threatens to erode development goals and gains. The potential of migration is now part of an agenda and we have to ensure that that agenda is complied with. Member states have agreed and taken on commitments to facilitate safe, orderly and regular migration and also to promote decent work for migrants, including migrant women. And for an example, to reduce the costs of remittances, which we all know can make a substantial difference to the overall receipts of development support in countries of origin. In addition, in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the pledge of states to reduce recruitment costs, promote social security, portability, something that many states do not allow currently, to improve skills recognition and promote access to financial services for migrants is now part of an agenda that has to be actionable and delivering on these commitments will meaningfully improve the lives of millions of migrant workers. Words are cheap. Action is now demanded. We're still at the level of rhetoric. We don't know how this will translate into widespread change. The situation on the ground remains dire. We have today over 60 million men, women and children who are displaced, 20 million of whom are refugees, tens of millions more migrants are victims of human traffickers, smugglers and rapacious employers and exploitative recruiters more generally. The sum total of their suffering is vast. Something has to be done about it. The need for the international community to adopt a coherent, clear and defined agenda and in its approach to migration is obvious and it's also morally imperative. Nonetheless, the failure of states to act is blatantly clear in the devastating images of migrants that we can see in our television screens almost nightly, tales of destitution with bodies lying on beaches in the Mediterranean, in the deserts of the Sahel or in South Central America. For far too long, governments have taught that safeguarding their sovereignty means going it alone. It doesn't. We live in an interdependent world where moral responsibility does not seeks at one's borders. As we've seen in the Mediterranean, an approach of this kind, even if it weren't morally wrong, is self-defeating. It leads to paper-thin sovereignty. The reality is it doesn't work, apart from being morally repulsive to simply close one's borders and forget the rights of refugees or those escaping from a vulnerable situation in societies around the world. Rather than burden shifting, we need to put into practice the global public good of responsibility sharing. I've said many times that proximity doesn't define responsibility, yet 60% of all refugees are hosted by just 10 countries. 86% incidentally are hosted by developing countries. We have been championing a greater role for the UN in addressing the current crisis. The UN, I think, is now set to host a series of conferences that may be of considerable importance. Earlier this month, we had the International Community Conference in regard to raising money for the Syrian crisis, and over 10 billion was pledged. We began a paradigm shift. The international community now must move on, whereby we'd have to deal with issues relating to and for an example, resettlement. We need more in terms of commitments in this area. Then we have the World Humanitarian Summit, following the meeting on the 30th of March in Geneva, which should get greater commitments in regard to resettlement. The World Humanitarian Summit in May will try to create long-term blueprints for many new approaches. Humanitarian admission should also incidentally be part of what happens on the 30th of March, including areas like student visas, family reunification, and so on. Then in September, on the 19th of September, the Secretary General will host a high-level meeting in the General Assembly. I hope this will lead to a sharing of responsibility, which is palpable and clear, and part of the global responsibility to address large-scale movements of refugees and migrants. Together, these various efforts and these various conferences should generate commitments to greater global responsibility sharing and safer pathways for refugees and other forced migrants. They should also enhance the UN's capacity on migration, including a commitment, I hope, to work towards the inclusion of IOM in the UN family. We really need this. It also should allow us to strengthen capacities of national migration and asylum systems and bring in new actors, including from the private sector. All of this would demonstrate real progress towards a key commitment that governments agreed last year with the SDGs. It will take bold political leadership, facing down many of the xenophobic and indeed racist responses that are to be found in various parts of the world to the current crisis. It's time, therefore, for political leaders to rise above the type of debate which in many countries has paralyzed constructive engagement with a very difficult crisis, a crisis that challenges our generation as earlier generations have been challenged by other horrible events. Thank you for listening to me.