 First, perhaps a brief disclaimer, I'm not an academic expert on MIKTA, but I had the great pleasure of attending the MIKTA First Academic Network Conference earlier this year. My research focuses on particularly two of the great powers in North East Asia, Japan and China. So, I must say I actually found MIKTA a very refreshing experience, bringing together countries who actually wanted to work together on many issues. I often deal with two countries that don't seem to want to talk together very much. The theme of the 2015 MIKTA Academic Network Conference was partnership in knowledge for better global governance. And this morning I want to spend a few moments discussing what can we do as academics and students to achieve that goal of better global governance. So let me reflect briefly on my experience attending the first academic network in Seoul last month. One of the key focal issues of the conference was the issue of climate change. This is obviously one of the key global governance challenges we face internationally, but it's also a particularly important focal point in the lead up to the Paris conference at the end of this year, as you've heard from some of the ambassadors this morning. What struck me in meeting with our fellow delegates in Seoul was the great diversity of our five MIKTA countries, particularly with respect to the issue of climate change. We represent both developed annex one countries and developing non annex one countries. We represent countries who are major energy importers and countries who are major energy exporters. We are diverse economies. We represent countries who are major manufacturing hubs, countries who are high tech producers, countries who are largely exporters of agriculture, countries that are on various ends of the development spectrum. We also have very diverse environmental or ecological profiles from Indonesia with its very large forest cover to Australia with its very high levels of aridity to countries with very extreme marine ecology to countries that are not particularly marine diverse. We are, of course, geographically and regionally diverse. Korea's most important neighbour perhaps is China, one of the world's largest polluters. Australia is in the region of the South Pacific and we share many of the concerns of our low lying island neighbours, so geographically and regionally we are diverse countries. We're also a group of countries that has a diverse history of engagement with the climate change issue. Mexico, the host of the Cancun negotiations and the Cartagena dialogue, South Korea, the leader of the global green growth initiative, to perhaps I think it's fair to say Indonesia and Australia who have been slower to act on climate change issues. And finally, we're countries with very diverse domestic political institutions and dynamics. So from this diversity, and this is an issue that has been reflected by a number of our speakers including our foreign minister this morning, I'd like to suggest to you that I think this diversity is in fact a key strength of the mixed countries, particularly when it comes to dealing with a pressing global governance challenge like climate change. I think if these five very diverse countries can come together who represent such a wide range of developed and developing world interests, energy importer and energy exporter interests, different regional multilateral organizational interests, different interests of environmental groups. If we as five countries who have this extreme diversity can come together and commit to a common position on aspects of the climate change problem, the world will take notice. It's a force-multiplying effect, as James mentioned earlier. I think if we can actually come together to solve key practical challenges, we can take that story back to our own regions to talk about the ways in which we as a very diverse group have actually come together on a difficult issue like climate change. I also think that as mixed countries this diversity means that among the five of us there is a lot that we can learn from each other. It is I think fair to say that for instance here in Australia, climate change has been a very divisive political issue. Climate change has influenced the rise and fall of the last two Labor Prime Ministers and the rise and fall of the last two federal opposition leaders and now Prime Minister Tony Abbott. It is a divisive political issue. And as Australians, I think we could learn from other mixed countries about the nature of their own domestic climate change debates. For instance, how do we as democracies with strong domestic interests that may constrain action on climate change and genuine popular fears about the economic costs of climate change action deal with this challenge? I would personally be very interested for instance and understand better how Korea, a major energy intensive country, has managed to achieve great global prominence on international climate change diplomacy with establishing the NUMMA registry as host of the Green Climate Fund as the founder of the Global Green Growth Initiative. How have Korea's leaders achieved this domestically? How has this debate played out? How have successive governments brought different interest groups along on the climate change issue? And what can we learn from this as a group? I think similar examples could be shared from each of our five countries. As scholars, we know that international action can be extremely important in pushing and catalyzing domestic action. So can we use international action between our mixta countries on an issue such as climate change to encourage domestic action? Could we envisage for instance a mixta joint statement on a global agreement ahead of the Paris Climate Change Conference? Behind all of this of course, though, I think the role of academics is to bring bold ideas to the table, to take risks, to put forward ideas that we as scholars have developed, to give our political leaders a greater set of menu of options, to put forward ideas that they themselves may find difficult to air. And to that end, I think an important academic contribution that the mixta academic network can make is to perhaps host conferences and academic exchanges on key issues related to climate change or other global governance issues. One such theme might be for instance the future of global energy supplies, where we as a diverse group of countries as energy importers and exporters as I mentioned, who have strong economic interests in securing the future of global energy supplies, could bring together our climate scientists, our energy scientists, our political scientists, to talk together about how we might achieve solutions to some of these very important global challenges. A theme such as this is a bold theme, it's purposely bold, because I think the value in academics is to put forward debates, critical discussion, ideas on these sorts of issues, critical leaders and expanded menu of options to consider as they undertake important international negotiations. As mixta countries, we represent a very diverse set of interests. Partnering together, I think, to debate, discuss and find new solutions to global challenges such as climate change can be of great value in achieving better global governance for all. I wish the mixta academic network every success in the future. Thank you.