 Ladies and gentlemen, you all are very, very welcome. My name is David Donohue. I have a connection with this house, but I also have a connection with our guest today, Filippo Grande, who is the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, as you all know. We're extremely honored and delighted that Filippo has found time to come to Ireland. And I gather from my colleagues that we've been putting him into great use. He has met the highest authorities in the land and will be meeting some more as well. And it really is a great honor for people that you've been able to come. There's lots to talk about and to hear about from you. So I would like, first of all, to invite Rory De Berker, who is the Director General of Irish Aid, to say a few introductory words. Rory. Thanks, David. I won't say much because I think we're going to hear some really interesting things in a minute. But by way of introduction, I was reflecting on the way down here that about 50 years ago, this island had the biggest single refugee movement in Europe after the Second World War, something that we forget about. And we were refugees on our own island. People came from the north and were accommodated in the south as what we call the Troubles, broke out. And we often talk when we talk about refugees of our famine and that movement in the 19th century. But within living memory, we were a refugee people on our own island. And that spirit, I think, is one which it's important to remember at a time when, according to the latest statistics, around 70 million people worldwide are refugees, also in large part as a result of conflict. And conflict and the failure of civil authorities to put in place the right kinds of structures was the driver of that refugee movement here. 50 years ago, a refugee movement which required our authorities here to respond in crisis mode. History will say whether the response was adequate or inadequate. The important thing is we were required to respond. And across the world, lots of governments, lots of people are being asked to respond to these unprecedented, in our era, movements of millions and millions of people. And that's why, as Irish aid, as the government of Ireland's Development Program, we, working with many of the organizations that are here in this room, work to help address some of the drivers of refugee movements and also to millerate some of the consequences of that. And in that, UNHCR is a critical partner for us as a development actor, but also a critical partner for us as a state, because they have an office here, too. And about how we can be a country which welcomes today's refugees and hopefully give people a new start. And in that context, we're going to hear from High Commissioner for Refugees, Philippa Grandi, who brings a lot of really important experience to this essential job that he does. Particularly, I think, his work in refugee and humanitarian roles in Ramallah, which is one of the places where refugees is a byword for 70 years at this point. Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and elsewhere. And he comes at a time when how we move forward to deal with refugees is on the international agenda. No doubt, Philippa will talk a little bit about that. We agreed last year a global compact for refugees and for migration. And David, I know, had a certain role in that. And that provides a framework, but there's much more to be done. And as Ireland, we want to play our part in that. But enough from me. I'll give you Philippa Grandi, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. Thanks, sorry. And thanks, David. And thank you very much for hosting me here at this institute. You mentioned very dramatic events of 50 years ago. Can I be very immodest and go to my little personal history? 50 years ago, exactly 50 years ago, I was sent by my school in Italy, Catholic school in Italy, to study English here in Dublin for a few weeks. I went to Catholic school, so I had to study English with Irish teachers. So I came here and spent a few weeks here in Dublin. This was exactly July 1969. And it's interesting. I was reflecting on this as I landed in Dublin yesterday. That first experience for me to learn English as a foreigner, have a foreign experience in a way was, you can say it's one of the starting point of my own international exposure and international experience. And it was because I started that and I took it seriously that I can communicate with you today. I didn't speak any English then. But it was interesting, because as a young boy in a Catholic school, like I said, the prevalent, I went to a school where English was taught not as a foreign language, but as a main language. It was a bilingual school, very new in Italy in those days. And like I said, the Irish component for obvious reasons was quite strong. And that imprint, I remember that Irish character of what we were taught, the perspectives that already at that young age we were taught, were quite significant. And over the years in my career, of course, working first with NGOs and then with the UN for now 32 years, I have been with Irish people a lot, with a lot of Irish colleagues in the United Nations. Some are here. My director of international protection, the most important department in UNHCR, Gronje O'Hara is here with me, Vicky Tenant is from Belfast. So this island has given me a lot of friends. But also, of course, Irish NGOs with whom Dominic is here, Irish NGOs with whom we have worked in many places. I have worked in many places, Concern, Goal, and many others. Irish military with whom I have had Irish peacekeepers and other military with whom I've had important encounters. This list is very long. What I say is that what has always come to me and my colleagues from this strong Irish presence, both in my life, in my life, in our professional context, was a message, was a very strong message of solidarity, of generosity, and openness invariably. That makes me very happy to be back here in this capacity. This is my first visit to Ireland as High Commissioner for Refugees. And I think it is very significant to reflect on that openness and sense of solidarity, which comes so instinctive, I think, to the Irish people at a time, at a difficult time, where the narrative that seems to rise is the narrative of the me first, of the we first, of the our country first. You can just, you know, which many examples I can give you of that, or maybe a few, but significant ones. You know, I think it is important to remember that solidarity at an age where politics seems to be in so many places, identity politics, essentially. One of my predecessors told me recently, as High Commissioner told me recently, we live in an age of egoism, of renewed egoism. Egoism that is fueled by some politicians that builds on very real, and may I say, understandable, but not maybe often understood, fears and frustrations of many people around the world excluded from the big stream of globalization. And this egoism, spontaneous or not, affects very much policies, affects legislation, affects practices around the world, and affects directly millions of people, millions of people who bear with them a difference from the mainstream, either because they're simply foreigners, or because they are migrants or refugees, a very frequently stigmatized category in this context. And this happens, of course, at the time when war and violence combined with many other complex factors, poverty, inequality, bad governance, the climate emergency, the demographic gaps, but even epidemics, when all these phenomena contribute to generate these massive flows that Rory was talking about. We at UNHCR focus, obviously, as you well imagine, on refugees and displaced people. In other words, people that flee because of war, violence, persecution, discrimination in different forms. We stick to that definition. We expand the counting to those that are not refugees, but internally displaced people, people that are refugees in their own country. That's how we reach about 71 million. We stick to that definition for a very practical purpose, that if we abandon that definition, we lose the only strong legal framework that can protect, at least that those particular categories. But we have to admit, we have to admit that the challenges are even steeper than that. And let me briefly mention some of them. First of all, of those 70, 71 million, I would say easily 85% to 90% are people not, as is sometimes thought, in the rich countries. They are in poor countries, or they are sometimes, like in the Middle East or now in South America, in middle income countries. Most of the people displaced do not travel very far from their place of origin. They are either displaced in their own country, like I said, that's actually well over two-thirds of that figure, or if they cross borders and they become refugees, mostly they go as refugees in the country next door, either because they cannot afford or they cannot go further, or because, and that's the majority of cases, they actually want to wait till things get better and return to their homes. This is profoundly different from the narrative of invasion, taking advantage of the welfare of rich countries, long travels, that we hear so much about. The reality is different. That's where the problem is, and those are those patterns. But these are difficult statistics, nevertheless. 50% of the 70 million, easily 50% are children. And whilst it is true that people tend not to travel much when they are displaced, it is also true that human mobility is an opportunity for more now than it has ever been before in history. From the technological point of view, from the practical point of view, from the economic point of view, also from the point of view of criminal networks being highly organized and offering refugees and others the means to go to other countries if they're not happy if they wish to go elsewhere, along very dangerous routes, along if you think of what's happening or what's happening past years in the Bay of Bengal, in the Mediterranean, of course, towards Europe, in Mexico, along the routes that lead to the United States. Libya is perhaps the most topical example of these dangerous places where refugees and others on the move get stuck. So these are people that flee from terribly complicated and painful situations and find themselves stuck in other conflicts and having to face other abuses, because this is what is happening in many of these places. Now, of course, there are two considerations here that are fairly obvious, but I think are important to put forward. One is that this figure, 70, 71 million, has been now steadily rising for the past five or six years. And because these are people fleeing essentially war and violence, this figure is for sure the symptom, the easily readable symptom of a failure to resolve conflict. And I have been in this work, as I said, many decades, and I've seen all sorts of successes and failures in the political domain, but I have never seen such a consistent string of failed attempts or no attempts sometimes to bring peace to the, what, 50, 55 conflicts that are estimated to rage around the world, some of which are the ones provoking these refugee flows. I say this in the full knowledge that this country, this government, has made a bid to be part of the Security Council, that's where that debate becomes both decisive, fairly dramatic, and that's where if those attempts fail, the failure reverberates very widely around the world. I have the good or bad fortune, I don't know, to brief the Security Council quite frequently, is that good? No, it's very bad, it's a very bad sign. They ask me to brief the Security Council, but what strikes me is that whenever I bring a humanitarian issue to them, because that's what I do, a refugee issue to them, when I bring the elements and also the proposals for ways forward and solution, in the last couple of years, what I get back is a very discordant message, is a series of contradictory responses. This is the state of making and keeping the peace today, and so I saw the Tishak just a few minutes ago, and I'll see the foreign minister later, and my message to them is that I can't help much with that because we deal with the consequences of failed peace, but I do hope that Ireland, just as it is, just as it has exercised this voice of solidarity so well across the international community in the past decades, can bring, if it joins the Council, that voice where it is needed the most. The other thing that I wanted to say, and it is obvious perhaps, but it's worth saying, is that, yes, the people I'm referring to are refugees and displaced people, but they move along with a lot of other people that flee all the other causes that I have mentioned, and sometimes these causes are closely intertwined. If you take places like the Sahel, for example, in Africa, one of the most fragile places in the world, as we speak, the Sahel is crossed by crisis of very different types. Some are ethnic, some are political, some are climatic, some are social and economic, and some are, or rather, and all of them flow into population displacement of various natures. So we are in the presence of flows, we call them a bit euphemistically mixed flows, but flows of population that are more difficult to define and much more complicated to respond to. And this is what we observe in Europe with people coming from Libya and across the Mediterranean. This is what we observe in the United States with people coming from Central America or in Australia with people coming from Southeast Asia. This is what we see throughout South America with a difficult to categorize outflow of now more than four million Venezuelans fleeing what is not really a conflict, but it's not simply as it is somehow portrayed in economic crisis, but something in between. These are difficult flows to define and more important difficult flows to address. Now, I think that much as we need to be very worried about the state of the world seen from our perspective, I would be remiss if I didn't say that I think from where I sit, and not just because I had a good Catholic optimistic education, like I'm sure many of you, I, not just because of that, but I would be remiss if I didn't say that this is also in so many places and so powerfully an age of solidarity. And this I see everywhere, from the communities in Bangladesh that rushed to bring blankets and medicines and food to the Rohingyas in 2017 when they were fleeing Myanmar. They were the first out there to help. From countless acts of solidarity in African villages for people crossing the frontier next door. From what I saw in South American communities, the incredible solidarity of people who were saying, we've gone to Venezuela to work and sometimes to seek refuge for decades, it's our turn to help our brothers and sisters. This is not rhetoric. This is real. People are sharing houses, are sharing little resources very often. So there is a lot of solidarity. Also there in the global south and of course everywhere, everywhere else. And that solidarity I like to think, David correct me if I'm wrong because you've been involved in this even more than me, has found in the compact an institutional expression. This is what the global compact I was asked to tell you about that. The global compact is about, is really an attempt by states and the United Nations and others to formulate a new way to exercise solidarity collectively towards refugees and displaced people, but mostly refugees. And I say, I address myself to David because as was mentioned, he had a big role. He had a big role in facilitating the famous New York Declaration in 2016 that emerged from a summit on refugees and migrants. That declaration instructed my organization to help states prepare a refugee compact. There was a separate track through which a migration compact was also established. Now we have both instruments. The refugee compact in particular got a lot of support, 181 states. So the vast majority voted in favor of the compact. And the compact is an interesting instrument. It is really a new model to respond to refugee crisis. It focuses on host countries, those hosting the 85% of that population. It's not just about money, but it asks countries to improve policies, to improve resettlement, burden sharing in other ways. It's not just about humanitarian responses, but it brings in strongly and for the first time systematically, development actors like the World Bank, big bilateral development agencies, and even the private sector and private foundations. And it's really not just about states. It's about what we call a whole of society approach involving people to help other people. And we have already applied the principles of the compacts in about 15 countries. We started actually right away after the New York Declaration, even before the compact was in place, we invented something called the comprehensive refugee framework. The name is rather UN and boring, but in fact, the concept is quite practical. We calculate just one piece of one figure. We calculate that through this comprehensive framework we've been able to mobilize six and a half billion dollars of additional resources, not humanitarian. Most of them developmental, education, employment, attention to the host community, focus on solutions and so forth. So it's a new paradigm that is emerging in very concrete terms from what the compact wants to do. And the compact, if you read it, it's a fairly short document written in as friendly a language we could obtain from the consensus of states. The compact I believe captures also the complexity of today's refugee movements, looks at the longer term, looks at the mixed causes of movement and focuses strongly. This was a very strong request from poorer host countries, looks at solutions for refugee flows. In December, we will have a global forum for the first time at ministerial level, convened not just by me, but by also a number of prominent leaders of countries that have been particularly active in this area. And at this forum, we will ask states, private sector, development organizations, financial institutions to tell us about what has happened, which is new in the last three years in terms of refugee responses and to make commitments looking forward. And I think that this will be very important to counter the narrative that nothing can be done, that the only way to address these flaws is to stop them by building walls or pushing bad people in the sea or making agreements with countries so that people cannot seek asylum where they believe that the degree of protection is higher. I want to conclude just to say that I started this talk by referring to my very limited Irish experience to the Irish experience also of my colleagues. But I do believe that also at the very practical level, and this is what I've been talking with, with the authorities about, quite a lot of work is being done in this country, which is very important. First of all, I am very grateful to Irish aid, but in general to the government of Ireland for the increase in financial support to refugee operations. We shouldn't dismiss this as a small thing. It's very important, this situation that I have described cost money, unfortunately. And I encourage Ireland to do more. I am pleased that the discussion on resettlement that we have brought also to the attention of the Tishak today is growing, resettlement of cases that are particularly in need of protection solutions that cannot be found in countries of first asylum in particular. I think that in this country, the discussion on how to receive people, how to treat people that seek asylum here, and how to integrate them is still somehow fraught with different elements. I've realized this even in my talks with the media today, but by and large, I can tell you in comparative terms, the discussion here is of a good quality and the level of support that is given, give and take things that can always be improved, and we all know which ones they are, but I think that the level is good. So I think that what Ireland expresses in its statements publicly is also translated in very practical measures, which I hope Ireland will bring to the global forum. And I told the Tishak earlier today that I'm very impressed by the commitments, for example, to increase progressively the ODA in terms of percentages of the national income. I think that these are really the concrete signals that the leadership should give. I praised him and I praised in particular the precedent for the effort that the leadership here has done to avoid politicizing this discussion, and because that politicization has been translated in other countries in very negative terms, in a narrative in which those same governments have become prisoners to. And I think that the fact that here, yes, there's been episodes of xenophobia, episodes of hostility, but by and large, the atmosphere continues to be positive is very important for Ireland, for Europe, and for the whole world. Thank you. Thank you very much, Filippo, for characteristically rich and wide-ranging perspective on the whole range of issues which are of deep concern to all of us. We have about 20 minutes left in which to have some contributions from the floor, questions to Filippo, comments. I would plead with everybody to keep the comments and contributions as short as possible so that the maximum number of people can intervene and we'll give it Filippo a chance to respond to them. Please. And if you would be good not just to introduce yourselves. Yeah, Rowan and Tynan, a filmmaker, co-founder of Esperance Productions and a member of the Institute. Thank you for a very interesting presentation. But first of all, I must thank Rory for reminding us that, well, I interpreted you, reminded us that refugees are very much like us because I've done a lot of work on Syria in the last few years and I tell you the one thing that has made Syria so chilling for me is that so many Syrians are just like us. As you were speaking, I remember of a cancer specialist, a young cancer specialist, brilliant young guy who, when the peaceful uprising started, had to make a decision, he said, would eat cider with the dictator, I would eat cider with the people. And that decision cost him a lot, as he said. He was brutally tortured, but thankfully, he is now in the UK and will make a huge contribution to the NHS, though he very much wants to make a contribution to Syria. So my question to you is, and I know it's a very challenging question, but how do refugees from Syria get back to Syria? I mean, the only solution to that crisis is for the people of Syria to go home, which is what they want to do. They cannot do that because a brutal dictatorship remains in power. And my big problem in that regard, and I'm glad I have the opportunity to ask you this question, because this question has been troubling me greatly since I saw the Human Rights Watch report the work by Dr. Annie Sparrow in Foreign Affairs, is why is the UN funding the Assad regime since 2012? When that agreement was signed, handing over control of humanitarian aid, this has made us all in this room complicit in those crimes against humanity. And really there is now, I have so much documentary evidence, there's so much research to establish that, that we can no longer dodge that question. Imagine, our taxes are making us complicit. And finally, Mr. Chairman, I know you want to share the opportunity to ask a question, I must say Rukban, for example, Rukban, a classic example, that camp, where the Assad regime won't let the aid we've paid for into that camp. At the moment when they retake territory, they won't allow enough aid into the areas they retake, they give that aid to their own people. In other words, they're using this aid to maintain a brutal system. And as Amnesty has described, Sennaya prison, a human slaughterhouse, that is still in existence. And the UN is making that possible, allowing them to fund that brutality through humanitarian aid. Can we dodge that moral question any longer? Thank you very much for the opportunity to ask that question. Thanks, Ron. Any other questions? Dominic, please. Dominic, I'm sorry. Thanks, David. Thank you for leaving. And I'm very struck by the comments you made. And I know you were at the conference in Belfast on conflict and hunger. And I think your message resonated extremely strongly there because it was at a time when, I think, even the Good Friday Agreement at that point was shaky. So the reminder, I think, to us as people of the importance of that message going out, resonates just domestically as it does internationally. I think I was struck by the egosome comment and the consequences of that and how we tackle that and the challenges that certainly you face in relation to the decisions that have made at the Security Council. And clearly, the fact that three of the five permanent members are probably the biggest earners in relation to the arms trade does pose certain contradictions within that. But I guess my question is more around the massive needs that we face in the 130 million, including the 71 million displaced, the resources which are inadequate for the current case load. But more importantly, I suppose, is now the solutions that have been sought are very blunt. It sanctions its counterterrorism and its militarization. So this surge of diplomacy, I think, that the Secretary General has called for hasn't really been picked up by member states. And it would seem that the humanitarian, the ability for humanitarian organizations, UN and NGOs to operate in those kind of spaces, whether it's Libya, Mali, or in Syria, is not part of the sanctions counterterrorism consequences. So the consequences of those, whether it's intended or unintended, are potentially devastating in terms of access, security, and the ability to deliver. Do you think within that kind of securitization agenda that the future of humanitarian principles will be retained, or is that a very large fight that we have to continue pushing forward? Antonia, I take one more, and then, yes, please. My name is Rosessie, and I am the member of the Institute. Oh, sorry. Did you get my name? Okay. What I want to ask about is the, you know, when you were saying the EU paying the foreign governments, like African governments, to stop the refugees from coming here, I don't even want to ask, I just want to make a comment that how can that be allowed? Because African people, most refugees, for example, I'm from Zimbabwe, and I'm here because of the economic sanctions in Zimbabwe. There are lots of things which are happening. For example, Venezuela and Zimbabwe, sometimes I look at that situation and see the similarities into those situations. And then the EU is paying the very people who oppress us. African children are here drowning at sea because they are not protected by their own governments. Africa is not a poor country. They can afford to take care of their citizens. For example, there is something which is forgotten, what has happened in Africa, or what is happening. Africa has been devastated by AIDS. Lots of people have lost their parents. All these young men which we see on young boats, they were taken care by single parents. And then when those parents die, they are grandmothers, look after them. And when the grandmothers die, those children, they have no one, no support, nothing. And then these governments are being paid. I'm from Zimbabwe, and Zimbabwe, are very dedicated to education. But there is no support system for all these orphans which were devastated by AIDS. So these are the issues which I think they should be taken into consideration. And we talk about roots causes. Why can't we address the roots causes in an honest manner? For example, when you look at Congo, kids, they are soldiers. Children were carrying guns. Who's producing those guns? Which are carried by children in Africa and in other places? Who owns those guns which are in Africa? Because most of them, they are not even produced in Africa. And then we're talking about roots causes which should be addressed. Let us start by being honest. We give Filippo a chance to respond to those first few questions. Filippo. I can do from here, no? Yeah, absolutely. First of all, let me say that thank you for your initial reminder that refugees are people like us. Because I think this is, I wanted to speak a bit about that myself, but then the time is short. And this is very important. I always also, perhaps there are people like us who have gone through experiences that we have not gone through. So there is a difference. And I think that to me, what describes a refugee most is the difficult choice that he or she has to make. This is not something that... You see, there is an easy assumption, not here in this room, I'm sure. But I think it's important that people that are moving are driven by interest or greed. Maybe there is also an interest in having a better life. I think this is perfectly legitimate. But mostly refugees are people that make a choice against their wishes. And I think that the difficulty of that choice, which is really often about leaving everything behind, is more about being a refugee. And I think that what is behind is more than anything that can be described. And it is a very extreme human experience, but the human experience nevertheless. That's why I... Sorry, I didn't mention, but I want to mention it now. I appreciate so much that in Ireland, like in a few other countries, what is growing is a new approach to resettlement not only through the government but through communities, hopefully if it spreads, and it is spreading in the UK, Canada has had it for a long time, now here and in other countries, New Zealand, etc. If it spreads, it can help depoliticize this whole argument of refugees and put it back in the human domain which is where it should be. Leaving aside its political dimensions which will continue to exist. On your second point, I think it is a very complex discussion. First of all, we have some issues with that Human Rights Watch report of incorrect reporting, but we are dealing with that. We respect very much what Human Rights Watch does in many parts of the world. We work with them. But I think there is a bit of conflation between different type of assistance that have been brought in Syria, in government controlled areas, that's what you're talking about for the past few years. Most of what we do at least is going through our own channels, not through government channels. However, yes, of course, we have worked there in areas controlled by the government, like we work everywhere with the people that are in control of a certain area. The choice there is either not to work in those areas, or to work with authorities whose policies we may or may not like. It's not for me to express any judgment there. It's simply that. And this, believe me, sir, these are not easy choices. I have people in Libya dealing with militias. You know what those militias are doing. I have people in Libya that in order to access refugees and migrants in those awful detention centers have to make deals with those militias. So every day the question is whether we continue or not continue. And I think that there it's always somehow a calculation of whether by being there the balance is still in favor of what we can do to help these people or the balance is the opposite. That we're there, we do compromises that we don't like and we cannot help enough people. Then it's a time to pull back. But believe me, since I was a young field officer, a very young volunteer working in Thailand in the 80s and I had to bring help to a group of civilians that were held hostage by the Khmer Rouge. You know what the Khmer Rouge did. They did the genocide. They were at that time refugees because they had been kicked out by the Vietnamese. I had to go. I was in my 20s. I had to go and bring food. When I was there, I said to myself, what am I doing here? Because half of this food will go to these people. So these are the most difficult dilemmas. It is unfair that political failure pushes these dilemmas to the humanitarians who then have to make life and death decisions that are very difficult. That's the first point I wanted to make. The second point that I wanted to make is that or the other point I wanted to make is the complex issue of the return of Syrians. It's not as simple as that. You said yourself, Syrians want to return. This is still what we get from most of them. Maybe 75-80% according to our statistics. Most of them don't want to return right away. But then, we are a little bit more granular there. So why don't you want to return? The reasons are many. Some of them have political reasons. There's no doubt about that. I think you're referring to them. But some others have more material reasons. They have no school to send their children to. They have no livelihoods in their places of origin. And then there is a big discussion out there as you know about whether there should be reconstruction in Syria or not and the position of many donor government is that there shouldn't be because the political process has not been satisfactory yet. But that means that there are people out there many displaced people have returned to their homes. Hundreds of thousands. And these people are left without the basics. We totally appreciate the big discussion on aid or not in Syria because of the reasons that you mentioned. But we believe that where there is a humanitarian imperative, we need to look at that and meet that first and foremost. Just to quickly to the other point Dominic's question about securitization versus humanity. This is a big one. We're worried about that but we do quite a lot of work. Within the UN itself people tend to see the UN quite monolithic. The UN is a big sprawling organization with many components including a counter-terrorism or anti-terrorist component. And I think that we and a few other humanitarian components of the UN UNICEF and OSHA and others and of course the Human Rights Office play a role there to mitigate some of the more political trends. And I think that that dialogue is healthy. And I think that what the Secretary General of course he comes from being 10 years in my position. So what the Secretary General wants is try to bring together the difference trends no matter how divisive they can be and try to have way forwards that take into account all they mention. Will we get it perfect? No. But will we get at least in what we recommend as UN? This is not what states necessarily will do but we try to chart a way forward that preserves that space because we know that of course we all agree that terrorism is awful and needs to be combated and eliminated if possible but we also need that we know that if the focus is exclusively on the security response we will not solve the problem. Now this is the big debate we have with the United States and Central America and this is not just the Trump administration, the Obama administration as well. The response there was very much a security response. Equate Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador with the security means to counter the gangs. What has this done? The gangs continue and actually have intensified their action and most of the people flee because of that. There was very little investment in livelihoods in equality projects in gender, in other aspects, software perhaps that could have addressed some of the problems where the gangs on which the gangs prosper. So there again, we see it very much. And the same in Europe I told the Minister of Justice and the Minister of State that was with me in a meeting of the EU recently all the emphasis is on control. If you put all the emphasis on control you may satisfy your public opinion for the next six months but you won't solve the problem after six months. It will be much worse. We need to look beyond that. And finally, I think the points that you raised, you raised many different points. I would never promote the notion that any donor government, EU or otherwise, pays people to prevent them from seeking safety. That would be contrary to my core mandate as high commissioner refugees. But there is a fine line between that and investing in countries which are fragile and you actually advocated for that to prevent people from unnecessarily moving because they seek opportunities elsewhere or they seek freedom elsewhere. So there is a very fine line of what you do to prevent those flows. You should not prevent anybody from seeking safety if he or she is in danger. That's for sure. But if people move in 2014-15 some of the people that moved from the Middle East, from Lebanon, from Syria itself, from Turkey moved for a variety of reasons. But essentially in my opinion, two. One was that they started despairing of a political solution in Syria and second, they saw that humanitarian assistance the traditional one was declining and there was nothing else in host countries. So they said we need to get opportunities in Europe and elsewhere. And we've learned a lot of lessons there and one of the lessons is that there needs to be more in, first of all, there needs to be better peacekeeping, peacemaking sorry, that I've spoken about. But also even when peacemaking is still happening in the countries hosting refugees, the type of investments have to change. This is what that's what you're talking about essentially and that's what the compact wants to do at least for refugee responses. Yes please. I just wanted to say you might just give you a name but it's just the anniversary of Srebrenica today and the 11th of July. My t-shirt is about images of young men from Syrians in Lebanon being rounded up and sent back which have been breaking on social media and their houses are being destroyed and the resettlement of European countries of course is scandalous from Lebanon but it doesn't justify sending people back a non-refoulement principle being essentially broken. But today we have to reflect on the failure to protect people in the same way as Srebrenica wasn't protected. Three million people in Idlib are being slaughtered and I think we can't be ambiguous about the dangers of returning to Assad. It's a highly dangerous place for returnees and the Human Rights Watch report I think it is incumbent on the Irish government and Irish aid to bring over Human Rights Watch and question them on this very important report which they did. I think it can't be dismissed. I think it has to be seriously looked at because for example your partnership with Syria Trust, I think seven million have been paid in the Human Rights Watch report that said seven million between, 7.7 million through the Syria Trust which works hand in love with Assad between 2012 and 2016. They are very serious and your partnership with the Ministry of Interior, very serious allegations which I would like Irish aid to question. Thank you very much. We have time just for one more intervention that I have to allow Filippo time to wrap up but he is really under great time pressure at this stage. Perhaps one more. Yes. Hi, I'm Nora from Plan International but most importantly I'm Nora from Lebanon and that's what I want to focus on. I'm just following up on what my colleague just said about this enforcement by the Lebanese there was a decree by the Lebanese military and the government that Syrians should abolish the houses that they constructed themselves in the informal informal camps in Lebanon because the government did not sign the 1929 convention on refugees and they don't think they have the responsibility to even host Syrian refugees so there are 1.2 million Syrian refugees in Lebanon and now most of them who are in the north are being forced to demolish their houses so and there has been a lot of NGO kind of feedback and response and this is not humanitarian and this is not acceptable especially that those refugees they do not have anywhere to they don't have the means they don't have anywhere else in Lebanon to be settled in or anywhere in the region so my question is also referring to the Human Rights Watch report there has also been laws in Syria that are being made by the government that are also enforcing and that are also banning civilians from returning to their homes and also enforcing demolishing some of their houses without any proper procedure or any proper action or any other suggestion on where they can reside so I just would like to know your stance on that. This is an issue that we are aware of we've been aware of well before the Human Rights Watch report and during my last visit to Lebanon of course I've raised with various ministers with various components of the government the fact that until refugees need to stay in Lebanon because they cannot go back it is important to continue to support them I think it's a bit unfair to say that all houses are being demolished no it's not all houses but there's been instances actually it's a minority and but there's been instances which we have systematically raised and in cases where there was a reason for this demolition we try to work with the government on alternative solution you know it's easy to say don't do it but you also have to offer some alternatives to that the government of Lebanon surely like many other refugee hosting government is not party to the 1951 convention neither is Bangladesh nor is Thailand countries that have done a lot for refugees more than others that are party to the convention by the way but nevertheless since 2011 the government of Lebanon you know sometimes under protest and expressing its displeasure about the situation has nevertheless hosted hundreds of thousands of Syrians hundreds of thousands now where they hosted in the best possible condition I don't know difficult sometimes we've tried to help the government of Lebanon the international community has tried has it been enough surely not for a country of three four million people hosting 1.2 as you said million plus not to mention the Palestinians that have been there since 1949 it's a big burden for a country which other country would have a fourth of its population as refugees on its territory for such a long period of time I'm not trying to justify destructions or mistreatment of people no and believe me more than you imagine we raise this and we try to address some of the situations but we also have to continuously remind international community you know I appreciate the reminders you're putting out let's also remind international community that Lebanon needs support and as the situation evolves and it will evolve in Syria in the next few years for those people and they will continue to be many that will continue to seek and need protection outside Syria that support has to stay cannot be declined there was a big upsurge of that support for host countries in 2016 the famous London conference many pledges many have been fulfilled many have not that drive to help the host countries has to continue even if some people will go back voluntarily and please don't get me wrong I of course non-reform is one of our key principles and we're never in favor we can never support involuntary return but if return happens let me say it again if return happens if people and we have had some people coming to our offices I was in Jordan 10 days ago people coming to our offices not many but in number saying I want to go back but only if you help us go back we have to help these people go back this is not reform up this is voluntary return to ideal conditions maybe not but it is voluntary return it happens in many parts of the world it's a difficult one and this is a moment in which we have to move along different tracks and it's going to be difficult for some time thank you very much for people can we just thank you for our appreciation thank you very much for coming to Ireland for coming to the institute for giving us a fantastic presentation on the challenges that UNHCR is facing and indeed on fielding these very very interesting and thought-provoking questions just now I know that you have to go and see the tarnished assignment called me if colleagues are good enough to allow the high commissioner to leave first and we look forward to you