 We've had quite a fascinating series of presentations and vignettes. My colleagues will be delighted to learn that I'm not going to give a presentation of the sort that I thought I might at one stage. But I did want to share one slide with you, because I think it encapsulates very elegantly. You can even read the next slide. It encapsulates very elegantly why this is important. Those of us in universities, with the perhaps exception of some of our journal budgets notwithstanding, those of us in universities by and large have access to scholarly content. We can access most of the journal literature and our reach is pretty well covered. There are people in the knowledge industries, in government, in professional practice to have some access to the products of research in universities, but not everyone. And the public at large have very limited access to the products of research if that research is kept behind the paywall imposed by commercial publishers. We have a great opportunity in universities to open up our research outputs and make that available to the world at large, to speed up discovery, to accelerate transfers from research into industry, and to contribute to informing citizens more broadly about the ways in which research findings can improve the economic, social and health well-being of our society. And if nothing else, if we can get that message across. And if we can build upon the examples of good practice we've heard about today, then we are well positioned to make that leap. Some of the practical things that we can offer here from the university libraries, we've heard about research showcase as a vehicle into which copies of publications can be placed and these can then be discoverable through Google searches. They can be preserved in perpetuity without fear that your hard disk will burn out or that somehow your publications will be lost. We've heard about the charges that authors have to pay to publish in open access journals. And we have a fund that can help to offset some of the costs of those publication charges and you can find more information about that on our website. We have this week purely coincidentally not as much a celebration of open access week as it might have been. We've taken out or taken a subscription with peerJ, which is a new open access start-up where authors pay for an annual or a lifetime membership and then don't pay article publication charges directly and that has been activated and we will be making information about that available on our website. We are working with publishers like the Royal Society of Chemistry to provide some open access vouchers to offset or cover entirely the costs of publication and we are engaged this week in discussions with the ACM about ways in which we can make open access publishing in their journals more affordable. That's particularly significant because this university is the largest academic source of content in ACM journals and if we can get that one right, that hopefully will act as a springboard for greater activity in the future. To help build upon all of that, there are numerous points of assistance in the library. As I've mentioned the website, I point to Denise Troll-Covie who deserves great thanks for organising today's event but Denise can point you in the right direction for many things. Steve Vantyle, who's sitting there particularly helpful for those working in areas around data management and open data, Steve has our recently whatever appointed inaugurated Data Services Librarian and your liaison librarians across all disciplines. Very important points of contact when you've got questions. We do have a few minutes to deal with any questions that you may have for any of our speakers so that we can pick them up on the streaming transmission, ask your questions and I'll repeat them and I'll repeat the answer rather than getting too intimate with the microphone. Can I share a tidbit so you have at the bottom of that figure there with consumers in society and I think that they often get sort of lost in the discussion about open access and the benefits. I have a good friend who's an environmental science reporter for public radio here in town and he asked me just two days ago at a party why he can't get access to scientific papers. It prevents him from sort of being effective as a reporter and I think that sort of points straight to that consumers in society have been figuring this out. Thanks, Steve. Another equivalent anecdote which has led to a potential transformation of open access internationally is that the former Minister for Science in the UK, David Willits, was writing a book, just something he was doing alongside being Minister for Science and he found that he couldn't get access to the papers that he needed to help write his book. Despite the fact that he as Minister was responsible for hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayer money funding that research and as a result he said we've got to change things and now the research councils in the UK have mandated that all publications arising from the research they fund must be made available through open access and they have put tens of millions of pounds into covering the costs. We will see in the next few weeks a transformation in this country. We heard early about the NIH and their practice in recent years to encourage open access and the point has announced earlier this year that by around about now federal research funders who pay more than $100 million a year in research grants must put in place mandates through which publications and data arising from federally funded research must be made available through open access and that is going to transform practice on this campus and on campuses around the country. One minute. Any final questions? This is a comment. We have been speaking from the point of view of the authors and the point of view of a reader, I'd like to speak up for exercise of editorial oversight or editorial guidance. There's an enormous amount of stuff that gets published. I need all the help I can in filtering out which is worth reading and which is not. Peer review helps with this. Editing helps with this. But another thing that might help with this is publishing less. So I'm not entirely opposed to fees for publication. If they will help us judiciously get lots of publications under control and get authors like us to be more careful about what we publish so that the nuggets get published but not a whole lot else. And I am entirely aware that this interacts with re-equipments and promotion circulations. I have a slide. It wasn't in that deck but one that I use occasionally which simply looks at the growth in the number of articles over the last 20 years. And whilst we hope that quality has grown disproportionately there is still a large amount of stuff out there that is noise in the system. And one of the things we as a community need to reflect upon is what are the hallmarks for promotions, for tenure, for appointments. So that's a point well made. One final point. I just want to add a comment on that. Another side of that is if you're publishing you should be reviewing. I know as an editor it's so hard to find people who will review papers and help to identify the good ones. I would say if you're not reviewing about three or so papers for everyone you're publishing you're creating a serious burden on the system. That's maybe another way. Take that for everyone you're submitting. Yeah. Thank you all very much. Again thanks to Denise for all the arrangements for today. Thanks to our speakers, thanks to our audience. I hope that we've had an audience listening to the streaming presentation. I'm getting a nod from the back so at least one person is out there watching us. Thank you all. Enjoy the rest of the day.