 Ambassador Hill, thank you very much for coming to the Australian National University today for the John G lecture. I wanted to start by asking you about the role of weapons of mass destruction. Despite the challenges in the Middle East, conflict in Eastern Europe, even problems and tension in Asia, we still don't seem to hear the word nuclear very much. Do weapons of mass destruction matter these days? Well I think they sure do and I think we've got a couple of issues that are very serious and you know one of the problems is they are so important and yet some of these issues that we're dealing with today, whether it's ISIS or Ukraine, are so urgent and often the urgent crowd out the important. But sooner or later I think these weapons of mass destruction, these programs that are being pursued vigorously frankly by the North Koreans and sadly by the Iranians as well, will have to grab the world's attention. So I think it's a good time to be talking about that but also be talking about how some of these issues are embedded in broader problems. You mentioned North Korea and we've seen them pushing steadily towards a nuclear capacity. We've seen chemical weapons used in Syria. Do you think these reflect a bit of a turn back on the global preventions and prohibitions against nuclear weapons? I think it is fair to say that the global governance with respect to WMD is really being challenged. It's being challenged definitely by the North Koreans who simply don't acknowledge it. In fact they too have chemical weapons stocks. It's been challenged by the by the Syrians but it's also being challenged by the Iranians. And I think all represent serious challenges and if those challenges are not met especially with respect to Iran you could see further spread of these weapons such that I think the global governance of them really begins to fall apart. One of the fears a lot of people have is terrorist groups getting weapons of mass destruction. Do you see that as an issue when looking at a threat such as ISIS? You know when you look at something like ISIS it is quite clear that they would do anything they feel they can get away with. Certainly that was the case of Al Qaeda. They killed 3,000 people in New York. They would have been happier for 30,000, 300,000, 30 million. So you do you are dealing with organizations that really have no scruples and therefore the potential that they could get a hold of weapons of mass destruction and have a capacity you know whether they get it from the internet or somewhere else I think is quite worrisome. Finally the John G Memorial Lecture is honoring a Australian diplomat who is heavily involved in the Australia group in chemical setting up the chemical weapons convention. What is there a role for middle-power countries to be involved in non-proliferation discussion? I think there's a very important role for middle-power countries. First of all many of them most of them do not have nuclear weapons themselves and they have a very important interest in making sure that others don't get a hold of them and also that the nuclear weapons states fulfill their own obligations to begin building down. So I think it's a very important role. It's also a role that I think is filled very credibly by middle-power countries. I mean they are not looking to keep their nuclear weapons and have others do away with theirs. They want to keep it a safer world so I think it's a very important role and I think Australia in particular has had an important role looking at issues of materials and purchases that are consistent with nuclear weapons proposals. These nuclear weapons programs these types of things and I think the legacy of John G is an extremely positive one not only to his family to himself and to Australia but also to the world. Well thank you very much. Thank you.