 a discussion paper which will be posted on our website very soon, so Mr. Paula, wait a few more days and then you will enjoy our conclusions. But our conclusions are along the line for what I've been saying since long time, how the inability causes you. You promised, or at least you announced a discussion paper on this subject at the IRA conference in Barcelona in May 2008 and I've been searching for it, well several times at the website but I could not find it. Instead of this you continue to make speeches, to make reference to this subject and you you have written about it in your blog but I must say that that is very unsatisfactory and also incorrect in the number of points. So my question really is where is this discussion paper? We have periodically produced a discussion paper from a number of countries. We worked on the paper in Melbourne, we worked on a paper in Australia, we worked on a paper in Sweden. In some cases what we did decided went from and was published the Swedish paper, in other cases it was actually washed and it remained and internal document never found. Not to induce the audience to believe that we are running away from what is just the stuff, as they may be, I don't fear them. I invite you all to look and some of you were present yesterday to look at the recording of yesterday elaborate 12 minutes answer to this question. It is not really correct to claim that did not answer the question. I put a blog on the 23rd of June when the first time the question was this. This is following a study tour to Amsterdam. Please look at it and you will find the answer. There were no sources, there were no references where he gets his data. The cannabis prevalence rates are the same as in the European Union. Match higher than worldwide, match higher than worldwide. I think that the numbers, I could give them to you, they are all listed here. The numbers you have quoted are not correct. I think the most important finding about the Netherlands is that at the end of the day the Dutch do not have a high prevalence of cannabis use. When you do a European league table they are right in the middle. The argument that opening up something like coffee shops leads to either much wider use and much more extended use. The second one is really quite interesting. Neither of those is true. I would have thought that having the drive available in a benign setting like coffee shops would lead more 30 year olds to be using as compared to the other regime and there is no evidence of that. We have country-wide numbers and then we have Amsterdam for example. Namely the numbers of prevalence rates in the cities where the coffee shops are available. The numbers in Amsterdam, prevalence, or maybe let us say the past months which is the most reliable chronological time table one could use are much much higher. 2, 2.6, almost three times greater than the rest of the country. So Amsterdam is off the charts, which is not the case in the big cities where you could have Vienna if you wish or London if you wish or Washington when you arrive in the same city. Amsterdam is not really a big city but it's a very cosmopolitan city. We have two universities, we have many artists, we have tourists from all over the world. It's not strange that the use of drugs is higher there than in the countryside. There is one serious research about cannabis use in Amsterdam, that is the comparison of Amsterdam and San Francisco by Craig Rainerman and Peter Cohen. And there it is shown that the use in Amsterdam is lower than in San Francisco which is a very similar city, same size, also intellectual and a harbor city. So those are two cities that you can compare and there Amsterdam comes out much lower. That government is spending a lot of money, the highest percentage in Europe is 0.7% and it's putting a lot of that money in education, it's putting a lot of that money in health, it's putting a lot of that money in law enforcement and so forth. It's true, a lot of money is spent on prevention but other countries do that also. We are producing a discussion paper which will be posted on our website very soon. In other cases it was actually quashed, it remained an internal document. He announced a discussion paper on it and that is what we need, a written report with sources and references and there. That is the only way to make a serious discussion possible.