 Thank you very much, Dave, and thank you all very much for coming along today. Thank you very much to the Global Network for coming here to Oxford. Some of us, and I'm looking around at a number of familiar faces, have been going up to Crown quite frequently for the Keep Space for Peace Week activities there. I know I've learned a lot. I've sometimes been able to come and speak. Particularly, I'm seeing a number of faces from Korea. I had deliberately chosen to wear the scarf that I wore with Sogi and a thousand women and a few supportive men, but it was built as a women's march. As we know, that means we wanted the women to take the lead on this. Walking across the major unification bridge into the DMZ, and then while we were there, there was that petulant letter from Trump that said, you've been rude to me, so I'm going to pull out. We went quite strongly into the messaging saying, this is not about two vain men. This is about the needs, the wants, the desires and the power of the Korean people to bring about peace, to bring about this honour, of their entire peninsula. That's the hope that we have to hold. But it is a hope that recognises that sometimes two men, vain or not and problematic or not and some are and so on, are often needed to sign the treaties. That's why I wanted to show this because many, many, many of us were down in Greenham Common, either living there or coming a lot. The first picture is of a group of us who danced on top of the nuclear weapons silo. This other side is the same silo, but it's now, I took this photo a few years ago, but it's basically since we not only got rid of the weapons and to do that, it required that Gorbachev and Reagan met in Reykjavik and talked about disarmament, gauge and agreement. And then a treaty was drawn up, like we hope a peace treaty will be drawn up for Korea. And they signed it, but we had made it happen. We, civil society, had made it happen. So it's only, so we have to be strategic in picking off particular weapons and particular activities and that is what I can did in a very strategic and tactical way, decided that we were going to get a ban on nuclear weapons, not because we thought that was the only thing to do and everything else would fall into place, not at all, but because it was achievable in a different way on the arms control and nonproliferation agenda and the incremental agenda that had led to us bashing our heads against the brick wall of, and here's the second one, the obstacle of the value attached to weapons, nuclear weapons, space weapons, the latest weapons, cyber weapons now, the value attached to those things, weapons for security, for defence, call it deterrents maybe, and the comforting feeling that that then is imparted to people that somehow, however scary the world might be, we've got the magic pill, we've got the magic weapon, you call it a deterrent. We're fond of talking about military industrial complex, let's make it a bit bigger, military industrial bureaucratic academic, there are circles within circles connected in who have made careers and all profits and livings out of creating enemy images and then selling people all over the world the military answer to those things, so we have to tackle that, but we can't just tackle it by saying if the military industrial complex or its capitalism, it is of course one of those things, but we then have to look at the weak points, the choke points, the points where we can actually make a difference and that's the image of the kind of change that we need, so that was the kind of strategy, an image that we tried to mobilise in getting this treaty, the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons, so it's a banned treaty, what it actually does is the UN negotiated it, our job as ICANN was actually to get no nuclear countries to understand that the nuclear weapons that only nine countries actually have, the UK being one of them, would through their radioactive fallout but also through the dust clouds that could be used on cities, cities of the targets, that they would send a cloud circulating around the atmosphere and that this would be like an entwunment of the earth in a cloud of dust, the dust made up of all of the cities, but that dust would cause rapid freezing, cooling, but also it would completely disrupt the climate, global cooling, I think we called it nuclear winter in the 80s, we thought it would take a lot of bombs, the US and the Soviet bombs, if there was a more in the 80s. Now the climate scientists have looked again at this action, it would take less than 1% of the 15,000 nuclear weapons still in a distance if used on a handful of cities. It would cause this nuclear winter and that would cause famine, unimaginable famine and the famine would hit the most vulnerable first. So I was going to places like Africa talking to members of the parliaments in different countries, in Asia and Latin America and saying you're in nuclear weapons resonance, but your people will still starve, they will still die of hunger, they will still die because a handful of nuclear weapons got used by one or more of these nine countries. So it's your responsibility and your right to ban them and through banning them we then collectively start working for their total elimination instead of the previous way that the international structure of treaties was set up, which actually gave value and status to the country that have nuclear weapons. So that's what this treaty does and it clearly highlights the use, the threat of use, the deployment, like trying and going out on the nuclear submarines from Faslane, transporting, like the nuclear warhead convoys going up and down in this country from Burfield up to Coorgport. It bans the manufacture of production nuclear weapons and it also bans assisting, inducing and encouraging anyone whatsoever, not just any other state, but anyone whatsoever and this is binding on companies and individuals, the so-called non-state actors. It's binding on states who sign but it also becomes binding on individuals and once this treaty enters into force it will then become part of international law and in so doing it will mean that anyone using or preparing to use, committing any of these braver acts with the intention of using, of having, possessing, of keeping, of modernising or enhancing nuclear weapons could be taken to the haig on a charge of crimes against humanity. That's the case with chemical and biological weapons already. It isn't the case with nuclear yet and the reason why we didn't succeed back then in making any use or threat of use of nuclear weapons into a crime against humanity was because we were told that the existing legal situation of the treaties actually allowed or licenced certain countries to have nuclear weapons as long as they promised to get rid of them. This treaty takes that licence if ever that licence existed and many of us argue we never did but nevertheless this treaty makes it unequivocal. So this is what I counted. So yes, if you look narrowly at what we did it was a very narrow strategic focus. We set out to get the non-nuclear countries to take the lead on banning nuclear weapons. So this is the kind of way in which we have to think if we also now want to tackle the increasing militarisation space the increasing moves towards weaponising. So I just put this together we need to tackle some of these kinds I don't know if you can read this deterrence is one of the big problems for us. So we have to think about what it is that they are saying they need to be doing in space that we are looking at and saying does not need to be done or is not a good answer you know that button user if war is the answer then it's the wrong question. Now here's a tool that can be useful and I brought it along and I'm taking it out of its case to you and it's the Nobel Peace Prize because I can got the Nobel Peace Prize last year for the treaty but it wasn't about one organisation or a few people we chose a young woman one of our staffers and a hebachia who had been 13 years old in Hiroshima when that bomb destroyed her school at her city centre. We put those of the two that represented for us why and how we had got the treaty this is yours as much as it's mine as much as it's ICANN's and we can use this to help to inspire others in all of the issues where militarising and nuclearising our lives our homes our resources our fields our roads our seas in which people are resisting because as you visit and by the time you get there in your resistance the Nobel Peace Prize almost doesn't matter and that's also why I'm sending it round because nobody does it for the Nobel Peace Prize except perhaps Trump but we're doing it because it's necessary we're doing it because we want to change the world we're doing it because we want the world to be there for children, grandchildren, the next generations people we've never met and never will meet that's why we're doing it but if a little piece around your medal can help us show people that what we as ordinary citizens ordinary people can do can inspire governments to go to the UN to defyde the US and Russia and France and China and these countries that think that they rule the world they even hold a press conference outside the UN General Assembly which is great for us actually because the media went along and listened to them and then turned to us and said are you surprised to find a government staking out outside their own UN General Assembly rather than being inside the room and negotiating when a nuclear war or at least the use of a nuclear weapon could be one tantrum and one of these vain leaders away we don't have deterrence we don't have peace we will make change by change by change that could save the world and save our lives and if we do it together we can have a hell of a lot of fun and that's where I'm going to leave it