 The great value about diversity is it brings to a problem solutions that you as an individual haven't thought of and so you can only leverage the different views and ideas, the perspectives of a wide range of people if you're open to that. Bringing diverse groups together with competing agendas and different perspectives means that there's got to be some compromise and you really got to have an open mind as to how you can work through that and look for what the best outcome is and that sometimes may not be your outcome. In many instances people were working across purposes, there was a very limited understanding of how the UN operates in response, very little respect at times about what governments expectations and needs might be and often the civilian or NGO side simply saw the military as a problem that needed to be managed rather than a potential capability that could support that, the efforts. I would say over the last ten years and looking at the recent sort of response we've had in Banuatu and in the Nepal earthquake it is much more of a hand in glove approach and there's much more respect of where people come from. So there's a lot of diplomacy involved, it's not just a technical thing about oh how many people need water or shelter, it's a very important diplomatic process. If you don't go through those initial stages of conflict analysis and setting the objectives and doing the diplomatic work to generate the consensus around them then it's just chaos on the ground. The international aid response is proscribed frequently by what it is that we've been asked to do, not necessarily what on the ground is required, in some ways you could argue that we're supply driven not demand driven. That's why the point of coordination is so important. The military should be seen as an asset of ultimate civilian political objectives. How you use that asset depends upon the relationship which exists between the civil and the military component. The military is often the tip of the spear right when the international community goes in. They're the first responders but the problem is that most countries really need policing. They don't necessarily need a robust military and in fact a robust military ultimately can be a threat to the government in the long term. Leaders of police components in peace operations need to think in terms of their local counterparts ultimately and currently being in charge of their own destiny. You can only do so much from the outside, the rest has to come from internal sources. NGOs play an enormously important role, often have a long history with the communities in the country which others are working and bring in an enormous amount of knowledge of capability and so on to the table at the same time. Sometimes the coordination issue of who's doing what where and the same organizations are going to the same village to fund the same things that can become very confusing and sometimes counterproductive. So there's enormous need to be very sensitive to this and find imaginative ways of finding the right ways to bring more coherence where appropriate and collaboration where appropriate. For corporate actors in an affected country where a lot of their employees are victims it's always going to be an incentive, an understandable need to contribute. From the public standpoint there always has to be a clear communication to private actors that there cannot be any presumption of privileged access. Particularly in a crisis situation and particularly in disaster recovery and relief I think you should use everything available to you and yeah that means that you'll have to put some safeguards into place and you'll have to be aware that there are equities that people have. The more that the country can help will take the lead on designing the policy framework, the priorities, the short-term actions and then the medium long-term recovery and response and make sure that they can own it, they can articulate it to the people in their country and have the legal responsibility to and then find the means of partnership. There's no case that I've come across where that wouldn't be a good idea. Once you have a whole-of-the-government approach to things you get much, much better outcomes because you're able to call on all of the different skills that are arrayed before you and with all those skill sets you have all of the competencies and capabilities that you need to deal with any given set of circumstances.