 There's been some questions about Hong Kong today, so you can talk about both, I suppose. We should, Terry, answer part of that question raised by several people in the earlier session. So you can say a word about globalization if you like, or you can talk about Hong Kong, he being the one who is perhaps most qualified to address the issue of Hong Kong today. I'll stand up, just in case I might fall asleep. I had prepared something to address the theme of this session, which is China's or Chinese position on globalization. I'm throwing this away now because I heard a theory in its opening remarks mentioning Hong Kong a couple of times, and so did Eric just now. We have had four months of non-stop troubles in Hong Kong, and it's going on. As far as the violence is concerned, it's trending down. The number of rioters and peaceful demonstrators have been going down together. In this trending down motion, we might, if we are not careful or lucky, see some spikes in the degree of violence or the scale of casualties. The police and other authorities in Hong Kong have exercised a maximum restraint. And that's why I listened to you, and that's why we are not seeing the kind of casualties in the streets of Hong Kong as we have seen in other parts of the world. Democracy, Hong Kong is not a sovereign state. Hong Kong is part of China. So when we look at democracy or the process of democratization in Hong Kong, we shouldn't compare Hong Kong to a sovereign state. We should and could only compare democracy and democratization in Hong Kong to those in cities, Paris, London, New York, Tokyo, Washington, D.C. But Hong Kong is not an ordinary city because under the basic law, and under the terms of Hong Kong's return to China, and this was propagated in 1990. After five years of intensive and large-scale consultation in Hong Kong, also in the rest of the country, the basic law was propagated in 1990. Under the basic law, Hong Kong was given not just one country, two systems. It was given one country, two systems, comma, Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong, comma, with a high degree of autonomy. Not complete autonomy, but a high degree of autonomy. And this high degree of autonomy is well-defined in the basic law. And they are altogether 160 articles in the basic law, all in black and white, which has been practiced for 22 years now. So when we talk about one country, two system, or when we talk about democracy, these are no longer abstract concepts for Hong Kong. They are part of our constitutional and legal arrangements. Now China, if I have to make a guess, could straightaway say to the people in Hong Kong that you could have your way of electing your chief executive, the head of Hong Kong government, if the result of the election is to produce a chief executive that has the same degree of autonomy and the same scale of authority as the mayors of London, Washington, D.C., Tokyo, New York, Paris. But speaking as a former chief executive, I can tell you, and you can look at basic law, and the basic law is available in both languages, English and Chinese. It's on the website, you can do it now. The chief executive of Hong Kong is given a much higher degree of authority, and through the exercise of this high degree of, it's given a high degree of authority, and through the exercise of this high degree of authority, Hong Kong attains its high degree of autonomy. Local democratic processes do not produce mayors of chief executives in the case of Hong Kong that has this high degree of authority. And local cities do not have this high degree of autonomy. So where does the additional authority come from? It comes from a top-down process. So it's not entirely bottom-up, meaning a delegation of authority by the electorate to this elected person. In addition to this process, which we have in Hong Kong, the central authorities in Beijing, through the appointment of the chief executive, devolve certain power that normally belongs to central governments, to the chief executive, and therefore Hong Kong as a whole. And therefore in our electoral system, and it's in the basic law again, we have so far the election committee elections, a election committee of 1200 drawn from different sectors of the Hong Kong community. And at the end of the election process, the person has to be appointed by the central government. And this appointment is neither ceremonial nor nominal. And it's a real authority to appoint, meaning the central government in law can appoint or not appoint the elected candidate. So that's democracy in Hong Kong. The basic law also says that universal suffrage election is the ultimate goal in the democratic development of Hong Kong. But a universally elected chief executive candidate still has to be appointed by the central government. And to change from the present system of election by election committee to universal suffrage election, it is in the NX1 to the basic law. Again, you could look it up. The approval of the standing committee of the National People's Congress of the country, not Hong Kong, of the country in Beijing is required. So these are the constitutional and legal arrangements. As I said, if the chief executive in a democratic society representing people of Hong Kong as the, if like a mayor of Hong Kong has only that kind of power, Beijing would have said to universal suffrage straight away. And I could look at the flip side of the question. Now, would cities in other democratic countries, including those in the west, have this kind of high degree of autonomy just through the election of the local mayor by the local electorate without the central government or the federal government having any power and say in the process? Question mark. So these are the manifestations of the principle of one country, two systems that have already been enshrined in the basic law. And it's a legal document. The five demands of the protesters and the rioters in Hong Kong include universal suffrage in Hong Kong. And to them, universal suffrage is not universal suffrage according to the basic law. They want Hong Kong to do it by themselves without the involvement of Beijing. So we are stuck. When our chief executive actually went through a process, a so-called constitutional reform process in 2014 that led to Occupy Central. In the end, the whole movement died down. Beijing actually offered the opportunity of the election of the chief executive by universal suffrage. But some of the young students in certain quarters of the Hong Kong community will not have it because they did not like what's written in the basic law. And they wanted open nomination of the chief executive candidates. So it's a complex, complicated issue, technical. But I thought I should seize on this opportunity. And I'm sure you have your concerns about the future of Hong Kong. We do, too. But we have to go by the basic law. Hong Kong is a law-based, rule-based society. We have to go through a rule of law. Again, one country, two systems, high degree of autonomy. Hong Kong people ruling Hong Kong. Democracy in Hong Kong is no longer an abstract notion. It's all in the constitutional arrangements. Thank you.