 I mean, we really only know about the irregular migration situation in North America and in Western and Northern Europe, and nowhere else in the world. And we have irregular immigrants in any country in the world, whether it's Russia, whether it's India, whether it's South Africa, whether it's Jordan, whether it's Malaysia, any country you can think of, we have irregular migrants, but we haven't got good or data at all. There was very obviously irregular migrants evade registration, authorities, border controls. The reason for that is that they are not permitted to migrate from one country to the others. So they do this by circumventing the law and hide away from the authorities. So we do not have data, other than apprehension data, at points where they are apprehended on irregular entry or in the country for staying without permission, for working without permission. So we have apprehension data, but not registration data. And they are invisible to the authorities, basically. We have heard about methods, we have tried methods in different countries, but none of this is particularly convincing or plausible because research tells us that irregular migrants use such a variety of strategies, including disguising themselves as perfectly legitimate residents of a certain country, in particular by using passports of citizens of that country that we simply cannot identify them easily. We cannot estimate them easily and we don't yet have methods distracting these type of populations from the registered population in the country. It seems to me that there is a huge potential in using this data for migration in general. I can't quite see how we can identify from this data those who are regular and those who are irregular. If I look at a Facebook analysis of Facebook users where people declare where they were born and where they are based at the moment, then this allows us to immediately see the migration. But nowhere this data is telling us whether people have been migrating regularly or irregularly. So I can't quite see how this can enhance our understanding of irregular migration and data. I believe we already have the data that we need in order to measure regular and safe migration, which is internationally comparable data on regular migration. That means visa issued to third country nationals, residence permits issued to third country nationals, work permit issues, and if we have this data and can identify the trend, whether that's increasing or decreasing, then it tells us whether globally we are moving towards more facilitation of migration. If however, we would see this decreasing, certain countries or regions issuing fewer visa to workers, students, family members, businessmen, then we could conclude that the facilitation of migration is actually decreasing, which very often leads to more irregular migration. The demand for migration isn't decreasing. The fewer legal migration channels we offer, the more irregular migration we've got. So if we look at the development of issuing of visa, then we can see to what extent migration is facilitated or sort of made difficult. Governments need to agree on one common definition for all the phenomena and for all the types of migration that we want to measure. Who is what? What is migration? How many months in what country is considered transit migration, temporary migration, permanent migration, in order to globally mainstream data that then becomes comparable? And at the moment, despite UN, IOM, ILO, UNHCR efforts, there is still enormous discrepancy. There is even more discrepancy when it comes to the point of technically conducting data and turning administrative data into statistical data. So on that basis, there is still a lot to be done.