 Jim Clapper, thank you very much for joining us at the Crawford Australia Leadership Forum and of course at the National Security College here where your Vice Chancellor has distinguished Professor. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions based on the talks you've given lately, one question on the future of intelligence to begin with. We had a session just now discussing what intelligence looks like in a, I think, a post-truth digitalising world. That's, I guess, a fancy way of talking about really the contemporary and future intelligence challenges for the United States and its allies. I'm wondering if you can share some thoughts about those challenges and how we're meeting them. Well, I think we have a couple of challenges that all of us, whether in the United States or here in Australia, will have to face. One is the huge volume of data that we have to pick from. When I began in intelligence over 50 years ago, we had the exact opposite where there was a dearth of data from which you could pick and choose to analyse. And now it's the opposite condition. So the challenge we have in the U.S. is coping with the volume and picking out the gems that you need. And then, of course, there's a proliferation of open source, some of which is valid and some of which isn't. And one of the useful services that an intelligence community, whether here in Australia or the United States can serve is helping discern which is which. In an era of fake news, social media trolls, etc., as the Russians employed against us to interfere with our election in 2016, it places a burden on governments and specifically intelligence communities to try to help the citizens to be more selective and be more judicious about what is valid and what isn't. And I think that is going to be a huge challenge. In other words, it all boils down to determining the fidelity of data. So the declassified assessment that was put out about the Russian interference in the U.S. election, do you see that as a model for one of the ways the intelligence community can try to manage that misinformation problem? I do. One of the main objectives of issuing an unclassified version of a highly classified report was to try to educate the public, to enlighten the public as to the practices of an adversary bent on undermining the very foundations of our political system. So I do think the intelligence community, in many respects, has to be an educator for the public. Another theme that's come up a lot during your visit here to Australia is the future of the alliance between Australia and the United States and really the U.S.-led alliance system worldwide, which has been such a pillar of stability for many, many years. I'd be interested in your thoughts on, again, the challenges, the opportunities ahead for the alliance. We have, I think, a false debate in this country sometimes that the future is either about accommodation with China or it's about essentially a Donald Trump version of the alliance. And I suspect the reality is a little bit more sophisticated than that. Well, it's my belief that the alliance, I'll just speak, the bilateral alliance between Australia and the United States rests on several very deep-seated pillars, if I could use that phrase, of which one is intelligence, one I'm very familiar with and have worked in and to help expand since about 1984 when the first time I came to Australia. And there are, of course, our very strong military relationship, our very strong economic partnerships. Those features, those pillars of the alliance, I believe, are permanent and should not be affected too much by whoever is sitting in the White House. And so I think it's a very strong alliance. I look forward to it flourishing in the future. And one of the reasons I wanted to come to Australia, in addition to being affiliated with Australian National University, is to do my small part to assure people here about the importance and the strength of that alliance. So what's your advice to those in the Australian system, the Australian society, in the Australian political class that recognize the value of the alliance, but also are really grappling with what Donald Trump means for the alliance? What is it apart from patience? Well, I hope people don't dwell on much of the rhetoric that you hear. I can understand why there's discomforture about it. But again, I believe that the strength of the alliance is more than what a particular president may or may not say about it. I will say, in defense of President Trump, that I was honored to attend the anniversary commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the Battle of Coral Sea in New York. And President Trump was there, and in my view, said and did all the right things to affirm the importance of the alliance between Australia and the United States. So the alliance is bigger than the president, and you're encouraging Australians to really bear with the situation. Exactly. That's exactly right. Jim Clapper, thank you very much for your time today. Thank you, Roy.