 I think I can confidently say that at the end of my remarks, I will be with Ambassador Panoff not being a candidate to be a roving ambassador for President Trump. Because I think President Trump has got off rather likely in this panel because his deep unsuitability to be US president is lack of the qualities of essential leadership of being able to empathize with those in sy'n dechrau, iawn a gweithio'r cyflawnau a L-Vegers i'r wych. Mae'r cyflwyntio'r cyflwyntio i'r cyflwyntio i ddim yn ei gael i'r ffordd. Yn cael ei gweithio'r cyflwyntio, ac yn dweud o'r ffordd o'r cyflwyntio, mae'r ddaeth o'r ystyried yn ymdogfyn o'r gweld. A myfwyl yn ysgrifennu i'w ddim i weld ymwyl yn ymddangos i ddweud yw'r dyfodol, but not a candidate. A president of the United States who is quicsotic, unreliable, and fundamentally unsuited to the job of being president of the free world. And that's a real danger. You ask what's wrong with the anglosphere. I think America and Britain were the two countries that most embraced globalization and the competition and the boosts that globalization gave our economies with positive macro effects, Ond we were slow to realise that the beneficiaries of that were relatively few and those who did not benefit were very large. So that fed into our political systems. The second factor I think is that American Britain have prided themselves on a two party political system based on the first past the post electoral process that we have. You have two parties, you have a French system of dual election, you end up with four basic parties. But when you have two parties and there are new populist forces emerging, they will emerge through those parties. And so the populist took over the US Republican party, almost took over the Democratic party in the US, have effectively taken over the British Labour Party. And to David Cameron's eternal shame and damnation, he adopted the populist policies in the British Conservative party and granted the referendum on the European Union. So that's why I think the Anglosphere has gone astray and the basic defensive mechanisms have not come into play. So anyway, we are where we are. Brexit is going to be a painful negotiation which will probably end up with an agreement, but it won't be very satisfactory. Juan was talking about the EU-Canada agreement as being very advanced. Well it's not as advanced as membership of the single market because it doesn't cover trade and services. But I think the UK will end up with something rather similar to the Canada agreement with the European Union. And there will be a period where our growth, instead of being greater than that of our G7 counterparts, will be lower than that of our G7 counterparts. It's possible it might come to a grinding halt if the present British government collapses, which is entirely possible. But it will take a change of government, I think, in order to change the course of this tragedy. Meanwhile on the wider stage we have, as I say, an unreliable and quixotic US president at a time when we have the strongest leader of China in modern history. And I think the Chinese see the Trump administration as a huge opportunity for them to accelerate the displacement of US power in the world. I think we will see the reaction of America's allies around the world, as Uber has said, of being one of having to look more to our own resources and to our own capacities to defend ourselves. Because that American security blanket is now conditional. It used to be unconditional. America's willingness to engage and resolve problems in the world, as we heard from the cuttery foreign minister yesterday, has just gone away. And so countries and regions are going to have to solve their own problems without America's help. And this is a great opportunity for China to step in, where China is now, in many ways, replacing America as the supporter, unupholder of public goods, like action against climate change, like free trade. And the United States has become a bit of a liability on some of these issues, which I'm deeply... I feel bad about. And I also feel bad that the United Kingdom quite often would step into America's place on these issues, is no longer able to do so because of our own political situation. I'm very glad that we have what are usually called grown-ups around President Trump to contain the damage that the president might do in the world. But I'm never very happy seconding diplomatic and political policy to generals. I have great admiration for generals on the battlefield, but less respect for them in terms of developing a diplomatic and political strategy. Because I think what we will find is that the generals around President Trump will see military solutions to problems which might otherwise be dealt with through political and diplomatic means. I think the chances of a conflict over North Korea are now considerably greater than before. And I know, Mr Roy, you're a great supporter of many aspects of the Trump administration. But I think the impact on South Korea could be quite devastating if the generals around President Trump end up going down the path and taking the president down the path of a military confrontation with North Korea. So that is one thing that we have to be aware of. What we're seeing in the Middle East is an encouragement to local leaders, Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia is a classic example, someone with a good vision for his country. But one without any experience or without the checks and balances within his own system to take wise decisions about how to achieve that vision. And we've seen in Yemen, we've seen in the conflict with Qatar, we've seen with the visionary but unrealistic goals that Mohammed bin Salman has said that the ability of the United States to shape and channel a very important ally will be greater. It's not just in the political and security fields either. I think we will see America being pushed back as the dominant power in the global economic system. The first thing we're likely to see is attempts by China and Russia and other countries to be able to clear trade deals without going through the dollar system. I think we will see an alternative clearing system for international transactions which don't involve the United States and which will depend upon yuan as the driving currency. And I think that will be a fundamental weakening of America's control and authority over the global economic system. And as we're seeing in Saudi Arabia with the discussion about the IPO of Aramco is looking a bit difficult for the Saudis to float this in London or New York. So we could well see this being replaced with a state sale to a Chinese entity. And the Chinese will seek in return I believe a stream of energy supply oil supplies priced in yuan rather than priced in dollars in order to create an alternative pricing mechanism for global commodities starting with the most important of all namely oil. So we will see challenges led by the Chinese but supported by others in the global system to push back American dominance in the world and they are likely to be successful. And we will see action by America's allies to look to their own resources and their own capabilities with some unwelcome and dangerous results as America's leadership role in the world gradually is replaced by a nationalist America first agenda.