 Okay, so that's the outline, just to answer some short questions on the resource case and then the key outcomes of that and then I'll cover Zambia's experience and whether Zambia is out of the woods. Yeah, resource case, as my colleagues have said, really refers to countries with abandoned treasure resources and the tendency for these countries not to grow as fast as their potential. It's mainly concentrated in a country with a high concentration of minerals and fossil fuels. In a number of cases, the resource case happens to be positive in terms of contributing to development, but in most cases it's negative. Yeah, what are the key outcomes for resource case? The main thing, especially in the context of today's discussion is the living volatility. When a country depends so much on natural resources, their fiscal status is very volatile. In terms of plenty, they have higher resources. In terms of difficulty, the living collapses and if there are no alternatives in terms of other sectors to replenish what is being lost, you find that there is a tendency for countries to go into high levels of borrowing and debt financing. The other issue is governance and corruption. When you have a high concentration of resources in one sector, there is a tendency for rent seeking. A lot of countries are going into that problem. There is also the issue of Dutch disease where there is a higher precession of the exchange rate, which damages other sectors, especially in the high culture. And also the distorted prices fell and captured the flight. The other important aspect, especially for Zambia, is the excessive debt which resource case can impose. Revenues, resources act as collateral for loan pushing. A lot of financiers will come to you to say, look, we have got copper, you have got oil, you can borrow, there is nothing wrong, you are going to pay. But you know, the resource may not be guaranteed. And also when a country falls into this type of trap, the credit downgrades caused by defaults reduces access to new capital by countries. The other issue of course is wars and conflict, armed conflict over resources, fights over jurisdiction. And conflict may also affect other sectors and it can also affect food security as with conflict you cannot have a product or agriculture. Now these are the few points that I wanted to put up in terms of theory. Now let me come straight away to Zambia's experience. Zambia had a strong start. The resource case in the initial at least 10 years was very positive. People say Zambia was born with a copper spoon. Mining taxes and surpluses plus some donor support from the old bank and other baraterals caused a very strong economy in the first 10 years. This guaranteed the middle income status for most of the population. Zambia also supported a large import subsidy strategy in which they invested in a large network of prostitutes. They were famed for everything, which delivered bread and motor vehicles. But this didn't last as expected. The challenges started especially after mid-1925. The other issue with Zambia's case was that there was a high concentration of investment in a few sectors, mainly targeting the mines to the neglect of other sectors in terms of putting up infrastructure for our culture for example. There wasn't much investment in feedarods, downs for irrigation because most of the financing was going towards the mines. This also included capacity in terms of human capacity, a lot of training for the mines but very much for the other sectors. Of course that is what we have talked about. There was a high appreciation of the currency. The initial expansion of a very dependent import subsidy sector, which could not be sustained when the irrigation collapsed. The oil bombs also suppressed and distorted exports from our sectors but also there was this massive urbanization. A lot of people left the urban areas because of course the copper belt where the mining was, all the jobs were there and all the subsidized food was there so nobody was left to mine. My own parents moved from the rural area to the urban areas when they were very young and it was common for everybody to do that. The elephant in the room for Zambia of course is the excessive debt. After the first boom we had a global recession in the mid-70s when incomes fell sharply and there were little alternatives of income for the country. The country did not adjust, but applied debt out of borrowing and sustained spending. Zambia was lucky that in 2005 they received a heap of debt relief. But now the space which was created was quickly swallowed by new debt in the 20s and going forward. This was because of the expectations of high revenues with new investors in the mines. There were large projections of revenues and also the private sector lenders came in to say, look we can give you your bonds, you can pay, there is no problem. This was what led to the excessive debt. There were also some government issues, the mines were very powerful, they influenced the government decisions, strong lobbies by both firms and the mining unions were very strong. The environmental measures were not rigorously enforced. Zambia has a lot of problems with environmental degradation. Some of the companies from the West are still in court in terms of the damage to rivers and other things. So that was also a part of the resource case. Now in terms of what measures can be implemented to kind of subvert the resource case. In terms of macroeconomics you can adopt flexibation rates to avoid overrations of currencies. Manage the inflows of boom revenues by establishing sovereign funds which can be built up during the years of the boom and utilized during the lean periods. You can also increase domestic savings with incentives for domestic social mobilization but then also cut the deficit by the government. The final thing really here is that we should cut the debt using the three errors. Structure, reschedule and reuse. Yesterday when I was at the airport I thought of another one, reform. So there are now four errors. And then transition and investment. They need to tax extractive sectors adequately for the sake of the future generations because mining resources are not infinite. They come from N so when you are extracting there should be enough transition to save for future generations. So this is also a smoothing consumption. And you know they should increase investment in education so that completiveness of other sectors can grow, away from mining. On governance it's important to have a strong rule of law, strengthen anti-corruption measures, strengthen monitoring of human rights and also increase monitoring of all levels of government and civil service for security. It's also important to give populations in extractive areas voice and the power to defend themselves to say look if a mining project is good for them they say no. If it's not good for them they say no, they say yes. And then if it's not good for them they say no. So this is one of the measures. So is Zambia out of the woods yet? Well mining still dominates the economy. We put up a graph here to show how Kopa has performed. Kopa is really an index for mining in Zambia but there are other new mean rows which are also coming up being developed including manganese, nickel and recently we are having a gold rush in several parts of the country. But you see that mining still accounts for around 40% of total revenues for the country and it constitutes 80% of total exports and also the linkages to other sectors and violation continues to be low. There have been recent discoveries of gold and other mean rows and also the new investment is still targeting some areas in the northwest. We look at what has happened to agriculture in terms of this. The area macro sector reforms increased output and exports but of course debt relief was also quite useful in achieving that. Agriculture has expanded significantly in the last 10-15 years but the share of GDP has continued to decline mainly out of the growth of services mining and some manufacturing. There are also new mean rows which continue to deplete resources for agriculture and I mentioned gold already in that context and with the new mean rows actually, most of which are precious metals, there is a potential conflict for mining which is not regulated under legal mining operations. So to answer your question whether zamia is out of the woods, we can say progress has made, yes but zamia is not yet out of the woods. Thank you.