 OK, good afternoon, everybody. We've been very, very fortunate with a timing point of view, and for many other reasons to have us to distinguish speaker here today, Sheldt-Lynes Solomon, who I will introduce. And then I would invite Jared Hegerty to address us from the Development Cooperation Unit of the Department of Foreign Affairs, who kindly supports the Institute in the Development Speaker Series and a public course in 2018. We very much thank them for their contribution and partnership. Before I do that, just to advise everybody to switch their phones to silent and encourage to squeeze the course of my E8, and the comments will be on the red corner in the Q&A with me on the chat. So Michelle Kynes Solomon is the Director of Global Compact for Migration at the Office of the Director General of the IOM and meets the organization's follow-up to the 2016 U.N. General Assembly Summit on addressing large movements of refugees from migrants and the development of a global compact for safe, orderly, and labor and migration. From 2014 to 2016, Ms. Kynes Solomon served as the Director of the Secretary of the Statement of Migration and Crisis Initiative based at the IOM. Prior to this, she was IOM's permanent observer to the United Nations. She previously served as the Director of the Migration Policy and Research Department of the IOM. And before we hear from Ms. Kynes Solomon, I would invite Jarek George-Henry Gershwin, who should say, to be a bait to mix up our pain and work. Thank you, George. Thank you. All right, well, thank you, everybody. I'll be very brief. So I'm very pleased to have this opportunity to introduce somebody who has become quite a big face over the last few years for those of us who work in the area of migration, and particularly for those of us who were involved in the process of the legacy of migration last week, and to the UN General Assembly today for the adoption of the General Contact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration. Now, as has been mentioned, Michelle has been with the IOM since 2000, has held a number of oppositions within the organization, principally relating to policy and research. Prior to joining the IOM, she spent 10 years in the U.S. State Department. And I think in some ways it's quite fitting that there's somebody coming to Dublin to speak to us about migration. It should be related to Boston. Symbolic position in Boston in terms of Ireland's intimate relationship with migration. So, as I say, I won't take up too much of your time, but I think it's worth reminding ourselves of just how much has happened in IOM over the past, let's say, two and a half years. If we go back to the summer of 2016, in the run-up to the submission on large movements of refugees and migrants in September, that was when the UN General Assembly voted a resolution which brought IOM closer into the UN family, making it a relational organization of the United Nations. And that, in a sense, the significance of that, I suppose, is that it not only brought IOM as an organization into the heart of the system, but also was a recognition of the need to bring migration as a subject into the heart of the system. And that's something that I think we'd all agree had taken far too long to have. So, it was important. That happened in mid-2016 in the run-up to the summit. Then we had the summit itself, which David Dunn, who, of course, had a certain amount of land to do with the summit. And there, the summit, of course, and the New York Declaration, which emerged from it, is what we gave worth to the process that has led us to the global compact for migration. And the role that IOM has played, IOM's contribution to that process in that kind of two-and-a-a-bit year period, I mean, it wasn't just that it was a technical role or a role providing support, or a role providing written papers, or a role. But, dare I say it, it was a moral role as well. And I think that's something that's very important, that there is a moral dimension to all of this, and that's something that we have to remember as all times. So, we've had these two years. We've had all of that. And then just this year, we've had the departure for a more than well-reserved retirement of Director General in its wake. We've had the arrival of the successor of Tony Viterino. We've also had this year, the establishment of the United Nations Network on Migration, with IOM again playing an active role in America. So, I think the least we can say is that IOM have been pretty busy. And I think that gives us more of a reason to appreciate the fact that Michelle has found the time to come to us today. As I said, I won't take any more of your time, but I'll pass the floor to you, Michelle. Thank you very much for being here. Thank you very much, George. Thank you very much for the chance to be here today. It's really a pleasure. And as was said, quite a fitting day to be here, because later today, when New York opens, the global compact for migration will be put to the General Assembly for adoption there. And even though it was adopted last week in Marrakesh, and we'll talk about that in a minute. So thank you so much for the chance to be here. I know it was hard to pin you down for a date, but this is the perfect one. So, and I'm feeling refreshed because I've just come from four days of yoga retreat in Tenerife, and the two actually regain some energy after what has been an extraordinarily busy and exciting period. So I'm fresh and really looking forward to having a discussion with all of you, and it's nice to see so many friends in this audience from different parts of my life in the migration world. So let me take us back a bit to how we got to where we are today, and then with a view toward looking forward, because this is quite a momentous day. And there are actually two Irishmen that I would like to pay particular tribute to in the course of this discussion. But I'm gonna take you back even further than that for just a moment. I mean, unlike refugees, where there has been an international legal framework of binding guide document in the form of the refugee convention that was adopted in 1951, in the migration area, there has not been that same level of consensus for a recognition that migration is actually a global phenomenon that requires cooperation amongst governments. And not surprisingly, you know why. I mean, migration is seen in many governments, has historically, while of course it has existed from time immemorial, it is an issue that has always been seen as something that is so fundamentally national in its decision-making, that the question of which non-nationals to allow to enter a territory and to stay and under what conditions, whether temporary or permanent for work or for family or humanitarian reasons, has been seen as something that is really at the crux of what it means to be a sovereign independent state. And therefore, historically, there's been very much resistance to the idea of creating any kind of global governance framework that would somehow set global standards, global rules. Now, that's not to say that there aren't some, obviously, all of the human rights instruments apply as equally to migrants as they apply to other human beings, particularly human rights law. And there are even individual conventions that specifically address aspects of migration. Some of the best well-known are the 2000 Smuggling and Trafficking Protocols to the Transnational Organized Crime Convention. It was okay to persist to say, Smuggling and Trafficking are problematic expressions of migration or forms of migration and have a consensus around the law enforcement aspects. But it's been harder to gain consensus around other aspects of migration. And even though in 1990, the UN adopted the International Convention on the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their members of their families after about 10 grueling years of negotiations from 1980 to 1990, that convention, which took another 13 years to enter into force, is still not widely subscribed. And there's as yet not any major destination country of migrants that has accepted the Migrant Workers Convention. Really going again to that question about governments wishing to retain sovereignty on migration issues. But not surprisingly, as the world has become more global, more interdependent, more interconnected with transportation and communications revolutions where people are able to move to different places and actually envision migration being a part of one's life journey, maybe perhaps study abroad or even a temporary training ship in another country. Perhaps you marry someone from another country or build a family or perhaps want to return home. I mean, these are things that can now more readily be envisioned for more corners of the world. And that's of course, without thinking about the purely profound demographic disparities between countries and the projections that would be no surprise to you sitting here in Europe to talk about the negative growth rates in many European countries where there is simply not enough children being warned to ensure the stability of the population and the economy and growth. And at the same time, in other parts of the world and in particular in Africa, where growth rates are still falling, they are still nowhere near falling to a level where the number of people coming into the job markets will be able to find productive employment. I'm not suggesting that migration is the answer to all of these questions, but it is part of what needs to be considered. And those are some of the more underlying economic and social factors, but of course there's also increasing evidence of environmental degradation in many parts of the world exacerbated by climate change that are making certain parts of the world increasingly uninhabitable. Think about the small island developing states with sea level rise really threatening that their existence or parts of Africa or South Asia where there's deforestation and other negative environmental factors that are maybe impossible for pastoralists to continue to live productive lives. So the impact, I'm not saying migration is the only factor, but these things will continue to generate movement of people, not least of which also because the lack of ability to live safe and productive lives at home, either economically or in terms of rights and simply by stability for families. I say this because my point on that is that migration has been with us, it will continue to be with us, it will continue into the future. And really the question is, how will that be managed? And of course the principal answer to that is through national laws policies and practices, there's no question that migration cannot be effectively managed without cooperation between governments, within regions, across regions and really bringing in all the different stakeholders who play such a role in the migration process. It's not just governments of course, employers, recruiters, service organizations, charitable organizations, but of course the negative side, the smugglers and the traffickers who do so much of them in safe. So I'm taking it back again to where we were in this bit of a stalemate at the global level about governments not being ready to develop sort of a framework or binding rules on migration because concerns about sovereignty, but very much the emergence of an understanding that it was necessary to have cooperation on migration and some game rules. Then enter the picture in 2000, 2000, let me start there. So this was after the migrant workers convention and where that had been adopted in 1990, but not widely ratified. And still migration was increasing, not increasing enormously, and I think it's important to put this in perspective. Today, UN counts that there are 258 million international migrants. That represents a little over 3% of the global population. It's a slight increase percentage wise from historical patterns, but as a percentage of population, it's not huge. So it's really still quite tiny. I say that because I think oftentimes if you were to open the newspaper, you would believe that the world is awash in migrants seeking to enter countries illegally and losing lives or challenging economies or displaced workers. The reality is something much more limited and much more manageable. That's not to say that there are times and situations where migration is dangerous, dangerous for individuals and poses challenges for receiving countries, but it is not some massive invasion. And I think it's very important to keep perspective about what migration is. I wanna use Ireland as an example for a moment about part of why it is now possible to have a consensus around migration. Ireland's perfect example of a country that was historically a country of emigration where people left to seek opportunities overseas, came to my hometown, Boston, Massachusetts. Very happy to have grown up with lots of Irish descendants. And it was seen as a way to create opportunities to live safe and productive lives. Well, look at where Ireland is today. Ireland is now a major country of destination, but also sometimes a country of transit. So with Mexico, so with Morocco, so with so many countries that historically had one perspective about migration, worried more about the placement of their people overseas and the rights that they would have overseas. Today, we need to be thinking about not only that, but also people coming through their territories or coming to their territories. And what that means is more governments and more countries are a bit in the same boat, that they need to have comprehensive migration policies that address all of those different perspectives by being countries of origin, transit and destination simultaneously, albeit to different degrees. So seeing themselves in the same boat and seeing that migration is not going to stop, it will continue, and seeing that there are aspects of migration that are enormously positive, not only for individuals in terms of life opportunities, but also for their families and the communities that they come to by bringing innovation, labor skills, cultural richness, diversity, things that can be very vibrant, very positive, and contributing back to their home countries. The most obvious example is remittances that are sent home, and you probably have heard some of the official statistics where remittances exceed official development existence by orders of magnitude. Now of course remittances are private funds and they go to individual families, but they provide an absolute lifeline for many families. They literally put food on the table, allow children to go to school, allow education, health care, and really create positive outcomes in countries of origin. Now, but that virtuous cycle doesn't happen automatically. It really requires that migration be managed and that migration be safe and regular and orderly. Those words that we'll come back to in just a moment. In the early 2000s, then-Pretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, did a review of where the UN was sort of 50 years on from its creation. And he said two things of particular relevance to this discussion here today, that there were some functions of the UN that were outdated by then, some of the trustee shifts with respect to the end of colonization and independence movements, and that there were a couple of issues with the UN had not in its formative stages really taken on these issues, but these were going to be defining global issues of our time. And one was climate change and the second was migration. And as George said, there had not been a home for migration in the United Nations system. Well, UN has been in existence since 1951. We were actually created at the same time as the UN High Commission for Refugees. And in fact, we were originally the same organization. For one year, we were the international refugee organization collectively. And then that went out of business and then we were created as two separate institutions in Belgium, actually. Happy to see the Belgian ambassador here. We were split at that point and IOM was more focused on managing the social economic and development aspects of migration and very much from an operational perspective, whereas UN High Commission for the Protection of the Rights of Refugees. Of course, both organizations in both fields of work have evolved enormously over time. But Kofi Annan's words were really quite instructive, that it was time for the UN to start thinking about how to better equip itself to handle some of these very challenging major issues going forward. It took quite a few more years until 2006, when the UN decided to hold its first high-level dialogue on international migration and development. And this is where the first Irishman comes in. Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Peter Sutherland to be his very first special representative on international migration. And he chose Peter for very good reasons. Peter goes well-known here, I'm sure. Former Attorney-General of Ireland, European Commissioner for International Trade. He founded the World Trade Organization as its Director-General, and came from a business background and affiliation with Goldman Sachs, Bertrand Petroly and many others, that gave him credibility in particular with the countries that he historically been reticent to bring migration into the UN, mainly the major developed, Western developed countries who didn't want to see any kind of interference with their sovereignty on these issues. And Peter led that first high-level dialogue to successful conclusion that it wasn't so momentous in what was said, it was more the fact of it, that it was possible to finally have a high-level discussion on migration energy in the UN and to have an outcome. But the outcome was something fairly unusual and creative. Peter created what is still in existence, the global form for migration and development, which as a state led annual summit outside of the UN framework, outside of sort of the bureaucratic confines and led by individual states. The first state was Belgium actually that hosted in 2007. And every year since then, a different government has hosted the global forum, leading up to two weeks ago in Marrakech, Morocco hosted the global forum, actually immediately before this conference to adopt the global compact. That was done deliberately because governments were not yet ready to bring migration into the UN. That was 2013 and the second high-level dialogue and the same kind of discussion, but a little closer to the UN and its confines. And then of course, 2015 and 2016, where the large movements, first of Syrian refugees across the Mediterranean, but then so many others, with ultimately about a million people coming to Europe in a very short period of time with tremendous loss of life and suffering. And you'll probably all remember that tragic photo of Ilan Kurdi, who the Syrian child who drowned on the shores of the Med, and really a cult of conscience on the part of the international community. And this is where the second Irishman comes in. So Peter Sutherland really felt that it was necessary for the UN to stand up and do something more, that it was unconscionable that something like that would happen and that there would not be a collective call to action. And he called on his good friend, then Ambassador David Donahue in New York, who was president of the General Assembly at that time. Oh, sorry, no, sorry. I didn't mean that. Well, pointed as the co-facilitator to lead the preparations of the New York summit for the large movements of refugees and migrants, that as George said, ended in 2016 in September with the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants. That was an extraordinary, impressive effort. And that New York Declaration is a very fine example of a tremendous international commitment in the first instance to saving lives, regardless of whether someone is a refugee, a migrant, but really a commitment to saving lives. And then beyond that, to really try to work in a more concerted way to do better both on refugee issues and at the time UNHCR was primarily concerned about protracted refugee situations that were not receiving the attention that they needed. Countries like Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey around Syria that were hosting millions of Syrian refugees and not receiving adequate support. But of course, others can host millions of Somalis, other parts of the world, where there were long-term protracted refugee crises. And at the same time, a recognition that the instruments that had been created at the end of the Second World War and refugees didn't fully anticipate the range of human mobility that we see in the world today and were not necessarily adequate to address the full range of migratory movements. And very interestingly, at that time, and David I'm sure can share his stories from that, I'll look forward to hearing your insights. There was a hope to actually adopt a global compact for responsibility sharing for refugees in 2016 and at the same time to kick off a process to develop a global compact for safe, ordinary and regular migration, something that would take more time. There were two pushbacks, one by some governments who resisted the idea of responsibility sharing for refugees. They were not ready to accept any commitments in that regard. And secondly, and those were the developed countries for the hosting states, but secondly and really interestingly, African governments who said no global compact on refugees until we also have a global compact for migration. And we insist that the two be developed and adopted in the same time period. So that kicked off this two year period of development of the two global compacts. I forgot to mention one very important in the beginning development. And that of course is the 2030 agenda for sustainable development that was agreed in 2015 to replace the Millennium Development Goals. And there, I mean you probably have heard the mantra, leave no one behind. This is about creating a sustainable development that's not just about addressing the needs of the billion poorest, which of course remain a major priority, but also looking at sustainability of the planet and looking at differences including inequalities not only between countries, but within countries. So a development agenda that's not just about donors providing assistance to poor developing countries, but really looking at development opportunities for all persons regardless of where they live and responsibilities on them. And the reason I mention this in the migration context is whereas the Millennium Development Goals said nothing about migration, the sustainable development goals did. And you'll hear a phrase from that that is very relevant today. So target 10.7 on migration, which is not a goal. There was no goal set to have a certain amount of great migration. No, nothing saying migration is good, bad, et cetera. But there was a recognition that migration does contribute to inclusive growth and sustainable development. And, and this is the important part, 10.7, that there was need for planned and well-managed migration policies so that migration could become safe, regular and orderly. That became the task of the Global Compact in 2016 following the New York Declaration to then develop that Global Compact for safe, regular and orderly migration. So over the last two years, there has been a very active, inclusive process on the migration side led by states, on the refugee side led by the High Commissioner for Refugees. On the migration side, then the decision was to look not just at the large movements of migrants or the, or the irregular migration, but to really look at migration in its totality, as the then co-facilitators talked about a 360 degree approach to migration that looked at how migration occurs, whether it's drivers, whether it's structural factors, what do we need in order to be better managed in terms of migration at the national level and equally importantly in terms of cooperation. And ultimately, we have now a Global Compact for safe, orderly and regular migration that articulates some fundamental principles about being people-centered because ultimately we're talking about human beings and they have to be at the center and that all migrants, regardless of their status, are entitled to the protection of their rights, their human rights at all times. And also equally recognizes that other important principle that had been assembled in the block for so long, that national governments retain sovereign discretion with respect to determining national migration policies, that nothing about this Global Compact contravenes that idea, that principle. And then the third component is that of course states have to work together. There's just no way to address migration and to create those virtuous cycles without cooperation. So the Compact has a series of principles. It sets out 23 objectives for managing migration and it also sets out the beginnings of a mechanism for implementation and follow-up and review. The implementation component is first and foremost a course of responsibility of governments to decide how they take back this non-binding, non-legally-binding framework and how they use it in their national laws and policies, developing national plans of action to review what they can learn, what they can develop from the Compact and translate it into their own national context. At the same time, as George alluded to, the Secretary General, now the Secretary General, Antonio Gutierrez, decided that it was fully timed with IOM's entry into the UN in 2016 to really restructure how the UN addresses migration and to really take it on in a central way. And he decided to create a new UN network on migration and to put IOM at the center of it as its coordinator and secretary. Now of course that does not take away in any respect the mandates and the important roles of other entities in the UN on migration, not at all. In fact it's now a network of 38 entities in the UN system with an executive committee of eight that have the most relevant mandates. So for example, the International Labor Office which obviously is responsible for labor standards including as it applies to migrant workers or the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights which is the custodian of all the human rights instruments and of course thinking about how they apply to migrants very happy to see on the stage here with us today the various committees and the treaty body mechanisms to review these, these are all important parts. But the idea is to try to have a more effective way to leverage the full capacities of the UN system to support member states and to protect the rights of migrants. The last part of the compact is really about review. And so even though it's not a legally binding document it is very much intended to stay alive. And I think the model here is much like the sustainable development agenda, not legally binding but put in place a mechanism for review both at the regional level and the global level to ensure that not in the sense of a universal periodic review from the Human Rights Council but more in terms of voluntary reporting really an assessment of where governments are, where communities are in terms of being able to work on the issues that are applied in the compact and take them forward and where there are challenges and where perhaps there needs to be more guidance. So we're at the point that last week in Marrakech right after the Global Forum for Migration and Development we had the Intergovernmental Conference to adopt the compact. The compact was actually negotiated over the course of six months following almost a year of informal and inclusive consultations. Those negotiations ended in July so the text was finalized in July but it was only brought forward for adduction last Monday in Marrakech at a summit in which depending on count 165, 164 governments participated including 15 or so at the head of state and government level. And it was particularly notable to have Charles Michel from Belgium who participated and made an incredible statement about moral leadership and courage in these very challenging political times. Angela Merkel and many governments from other parts of the world at a most senior level to express their commitment in adopting this global compact. It was also particularly poignant that that happened on December 10th which is also International Human Rights Day and was the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And there was a dedicated ceremony there with three former current high commissioners for human rights including Mary Robinson talking about the significance of the adoption of the global compact at a time of recognizing the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration and this compact being part of the way to give effect to the human rights instruments and the human rights framework as it applies to migrants as human beings very much deserving in protection of their human rights. Let me just say one more word about some of the things you may have read in the press or heard about. So we knew a year ago that the United States chose not to be part of the global compact. The US pulled down even before there was a text on the table and decided not to participate. This is on the record but I'll say it anyway. Nobody was terribly unhappy about that. I think at this particular moment having a obstructive government and the negotiations of a government of that sort would not have been helpful. They were the only government that who did not participate. So when the unit was formed in July, you had 192 of the 193 member states of the UN having been part of it. A few days later, the government of Hungary decided to withdraw largely for domestic political reasons. In the intervening months from July to last week, we saw the rise of a lot of misinformation, a lot of politicking around the global compact and many far right parties, particularly in Europe, using this global compact as in a way to fight what they saw as globalism, multilateralism in contrast to national sovereignty and as an interference in the sovereign for argument of both states. A lot of this was about domestic politics. Ultimately resulted in several governments deciding not to participate. We're not exactly sure how many. We will know later today for sure, but we believe that there were 164 to 165 countries who signed on in Marrakesh. Now, of course, nobody had to sign anything. It's a non-binding framework, but there were that many who participated and participated in the adoption. The reason to say, well, today is today, what was adopted in Marrakesh is actually going to the General Assembly for discussion for endorsement, affirmation or recognition. And today, we already know that there has been a call for a vote by the United States and we know that there will be several other governments that choose to vote no about the compact. The compact is still adopted and the compact will pass the General Assembly today. It will pass not with 193 or even 192, but with something short of that. But it will pass by an overwhelming majority of member states throughout the world. And it's that perspective that I want to leave you with that we finally have in the migration area, not a bonding treaty, not new legal norms, but actually a very important framework for cooperation and for the development of migration policy. And as George said, we now have migration with its home in the United Nations structure, both with IUM and the UN, but also this review forum that will be take place in the General Assembly every four years, four years also at a regional level. And it is a recognition that this is one of the issues of our time that will require continued attention, continued cooperation. So thank you very much for your attention and I really look forward to your questions and your comments. Thank you. Thank you.