interference. but once that last little tether of accountability slips, one of the questions is who can grab onto that? ..

also what is the timeframe? i mentioned the context has something september 2015 but it has two-year terms after that. we actually might be talking till the 19th but from what you just said it's not automatically renewed. >> you always have that ability. so what about the idea of some sort of revocable trust? this is just something i'm posing which is should governments become involved? there is a release of this and did nongovernmental nonstakeholder the way we have

with the art internet architectural award and the i stars as the umbrella term but should something go wrong could there be government influence in the future that is pulled back. one of the questions i've had with the political panel i was working with friday on and many wonderful luminaries and i'm not sure how ended up with that panel. i'm the one that doesn't quite fit there but internet luminaries is just the accountability. when something goes wrong you know historically really nothing has gone wrong but normally i'm an optimist but i'm also half irish and i believe in murphy's law. when something goes wrong what is the rule of law? how is it resolves? what is the process? how do we resolve these conflicts if something goes wrong. so then in turkey the past couple of weeks are troubling.

turkey and correct me if i'm wrong, by the way we do have a hashtag just at hudson institute at hudson institute over twitter. sorry we didn't have the visual applaud. monday was my first time in front of the green wallpaper. we are literally. sometimes it's not easy being green but today we are. what can we learn from the turkey experience where there was a state created so what does that tell us about technical ability? so i have a lot of questions and others are asking a lot of questions. i think they are all legitimate questions and i want to congratulate larry for launching the process and making it transparent. we know that this would probably go on for a while. these complicated things tend to

take longer than we expect expected initially but i'm delighted that here at hudson institute we have the first crack outside of congress talking with you all for questions. >> let me turn first to mr. chehade and we have teed up several questions about just the governance itself and i'm sure you are hearing these questions all the time. please tell us the view of how this might play out. >> let me be clear on a few things regarding the announcement and then i will talk about i can. let there be no question that i can itself is not resting that process. we do not want to rush this process. we want to get it right. we have one chance to getting this right. the fact that there is talk of a

deadline, there is no deadline. the u.s. government has many years on this contract. we will move in a very calm and judicious way with the community through that process because we know that if we come back with the wrong proposal that does not fit with a clearly defined guidelines it will be dead on arrival, as it should need. in fact i would not bring the proposal to larry that does not meet these guidelines because it hurts icann and it hurts the internet and it doesn't serve anyone. i want to assure everyone that we are completely aligned with ntia on the importance of doing this in a very measured way. all we are doing now is starting a very good process of discussion. we couldn't even tell our community when we met them in singapore any framework. we agreed to literally as we are

sitting here spend hours having people come up and tell us their ideas. the genius is that it sorts itself out because everyone has a voice at the table. now we are just listening to people not on the substance of the proposal. we are just at the stage of saying how do we do at? how do we get organized? who meets and how often do we meet? how do we report on who we meet? what is the transparency measures so this is all about process. we can take our time. there's no rush. it is important also to note that along with the public consultation we started responding to ntia's request on the same way in singapore we started a second public consultation aimed squarely at how do we make sure i can -- icann itself as an organization

remains accountable through this transition and beyond this transition to its commitments because we need to make sure that neither icann on its own into changing its constitution and being something it is not today that does not adhere to the core principles we believe in or that there is an external force on icann to capture some of the mechanisms that make icann what it is. we are having that conversation as well. it is extremely important that frankly many of you here and many of the people watching us understand that we have a public process to assure everyone that icann will remain accountable. now what does that mean? it means that we ensure that anyone involved in the icann affairs has a clear mechanism to watch what they are doing so full transparency, to keep us

accountable for mechanisms may be like reviews, maybe external independent audits and mechanisms of redress that when people feel we are not making decisions according to our processes, that they have a mechanism to go get redress and repeals. these are important discussions we are having right now at icann and i feel that these discussions are very complementary to the discussion of responding to ntia's proposal and how we replace the current role in the stewardship of our functions. these two need to happen. they need to happen in parallel and they need to have a timeline that is similar because once the u.s. government does the right thing and we heard from ambassador, and the ambassador spoke very eloquently about the immediate value we are all ready getting is a global community and as a country.

so we need to continue these things that as this value increases as we strengthen our role as a global leader, we need to make sure that we managed these contracts together and we get to the result before the united states steps away from its unique involvement today. the fourth. i insist we will not let go of this important goal -- who rolled the u.s. has played before we are all comfortable that both the transition will happen smoothly without risk of capture or security of the internet and that i can be held accountable under every possible scenario. chairman walden spoke about stress tests and scenarios to icann. we will put together the whole framework of stress tests. we will study every possibility

that could come at us in the future and ensure that we strengthen our accountability mechanism. one last thing on this, a lot of people say the role of the united states has been symbolic. so what is ntia steps away from that rolled? symbolism is very important. yes it may be symbolic. ntia has no operational role it's true. we do our functions without their involvement operationally but symbolism to the world has allowed the model to survive and become very successful. so that's symbolism once we remove it has to be replaced with clear strength and clear safeguards and we will be at the forefront of making sure these are in place. >> i just need to jump in because i want to make it clear, we are not going anywhere near or far away as perhaps you were

thinking based on the discussion so far. all we have put into play here is that very specific role we play with the functions contract. in terms of what we actually do, all we do is serve as a check on the accuracy of changes to the root zone file meaning first all the policies developed at icann through its existing stakeholder processes, that may then lead to a change being administered by the organization. it comes to us, we look it over and again it's largely a clerical task, verify its accuracy and we sent it on to verisign that does the up dating all we have said we are going to do is we need to step out of that particular aspect of this at which point there is no longer a need for us to have a contract with icann to perform the functions. we are not going anywhere with respect to our role in it

ensuring the accountability and transparency of icann. we are not going anywhere with respect to our role to engage with other governments to the governmental advisory committee on the public policy aspects of icann operations so it's not as if we are closing up shop in saying we are done here. we are talking about something that is very narrow, very specific and is largely going to be i think addressed by the existing customers of the ianna functions in terms of whether there even needs to be a replacement for that particular function we perform. frankly maybe it could be done machine to machine and bill replacement for that aspect of this needs to be developed. what has happened though if i can reference this is that it has led to these questions being asked that have always been in existence about icann. they were in existence at the time it did the of commitments which is to who is icann accountable?

how does one enforce their accountability commitments and so we are currently operating under the affirmation of commitments and it is important to the extent that our announcement is now going to lead to renewed action and energy and engagement of everyone to come back and refocus on those questions, that's a good thing but it is not what we have actually teed up in terms of the announcement made three weeks ago. so there has been something of a merging of these issues and questions almost metaphysical questions about icann and who is responsible that avoids an existing organization that had now come back to the surface is the result of our announcement. there are important questions that need to be discussed. we will participate in those discussions because we have a stake in the outcome of that but it is not something that somehow we have created some vacuum by virtue of our announcement is that's just not the case. all it has done his refocus

attention on questions that have always existed about the organization. >> if i may when he says we he is speaking obviously about the government and ntia but it should be clear to everyone it's much broader than that. every major american company is at icann at the table. cisco, verizon, at&t, facebook, google and the list goes on. they are all engaged. they have been engaged for years and they will remain engaged. arsonists have also cited, our center all bear the table. this is a true multi-stakeholder environment and once the role of ntia in the u.s. government and the state department is critically important and must remain. we trust that it will remain and should remain. we should also strengthen the presence of our own businesses

and their own institutions. i just appointed a full-time senior executive at icann focused solely on bringing more businesses to the table. we are very keen on ensuring that the voice of the private sector is there. >> ambassador sepulveda you have heard many of the concerns that have been expressed on capitol hill and in the media and elsewhere. how do you look at the concerns and are there some that fit in the category of you know this is not understanding or their samba it you are saying these are the core issues we need to be focused on going forward? >> i worked on capitol hill for a long time and whenever a decision like this is announced everybody assesses it and gives their first gut impression. from the first gut impression you have heard a number of

expressions of concern about some of the things that commissioner mcdowell talked about how do we avoid the worst-case scenario. it's a fair question and i think the underlying issue, he worked with mr. rubio and ms. mccaskill in the legislation and they were of the multi-stakeholder system. we are united with our colleagues across the aisle in ensuring that the preservation of freedom and the preservation of the multi-stakeholder system. and i think the first question that is asked is how are you going to keep icann from being taken over by government? the fact of the matter is icann is not the u.n.. icann is an organization that is structurally set up to not allow anyone stakeholder to take over the system. so governments can no more take over icann than google can take over icann or a single academic can take over icann. now if we need to look at the

structure to ensure that there are proper mechanisms in place and that's part of the process going on now so there are checks and balances and accountability, those are all perfectly valid questions and i think we will be working in briefing the hell regularly on how the process that icann convening in bringing the stakeholders together will answer those questions and ensure the proper protections are in place. ultimately i think at the end of the day we are all going to be in a place or we should be in a place where there will be a united american decision on what should be a pragmatic solution to the challenge. >> commissioner. bumping into the microphones. can we talk a little bit about process and is there a sense that people on capitol hill were

surprised by the announcement or is there a sense that as secretary strickland said this is really just sort of the first step and no final decision has been made and this is going to go on over at on over. mcafee or so this is an announcement of the process? what is your sense of how this is being perceived in terms of the process here? >> well because it's complex and nuanced and tendency especially the mainstream tests is to oversimplify it. so given the fact that secretary strickling and ambassador sub five and fadi have been saying it's going to be a long process a couple of years at least it sounds like, i think the more it's talked about and as more people key policymakers get educated on this they will start to understand.

i was encouraged by ambassador sepulveda's remarks that he preferred to have consensus at home before the plan is adopted and as soon as the administrations position was one of the questions i had that there are a lot of moving parts to all of this. but i think they are legitimate questions. i think the senate has a lot of terrific questions and i would love to drill down on what fadi was saying to mr. sepulveda about the structure of icann and how it can be controlled by the government or the company or an academic or any single entity. how does that work? what is the structure and who appoints the icann board and how does that look like going forward? if we could drill down on that what guarantees are there?

how does that work? how can it not be subsumed somehow or its functions abrogated by treaty on a majority vote? >> you need to understand what the icann board does because it's not a typical board in terms of setting policy. it's job is to acknowledge that consent policy has been developed by the stakeholder community so even in that regard what the board does is compare compared to say a corporate board but with that caveat i think you can go ahead and respond to the other part of your question. >> i acknowledge that the chairman of the board is here and sitting with us. doc or crocker, good to have you. >> dr. crocker was a guest here at the center just last year. it's good to see you again. this is an important question.

i have served many boards over the years. this is probably one of the toughest boards i have served on because it's not a typical board it's truly a community board. we have 16 board members and multiple, several additional liaison members who are nonvoting who participate in the discussion but they cannot vote. of the 60 ford man -- 16 board members 10 are elected through the community. for example one young lady was just elected to the board. it took a year almost for that process to happen for our community. she represents the community that has 160 user chapters of large structures and when all of this bubbles up at the top we end up with all of them picking one board member. it's very hard to capture. 160 chapters in 100 countries all over the world leading up to

that one board member and then you can draw that process for every board member in the business to select someone. there are non-profits and so on and so forth. then we have a an independent nominating committee that selects the other six board members. their last election for example was the executive director of the great business school in paris. so we look at the level in the quality of people that are coming and the processes by which they come. you end up with an extremely diverse board and the board that is elected through processes that have their -- into the community. it is important to note that all 133 governments at icann do not have a seat on the board. that is a voting seat and they will not buy the design of icann

however the chairperson they picked for their grouping called the governmental advisory committee which today happens to be the representative of canada, she sits on the board as an observer as a liaison. she cannot vote. it's important to appreciate that when you look at it or it like that and the structures of change and elections which we shouldn't get into in detail but it's all on our web site it becomes very difficult under any scenario for the board to be captured. finally it's important to note that we are a california corporation. we operate under u.s. laws. under california laws. our board is responsible to these laws and so as larry said our board does not make policy decisions. our board's job is to ensure that the processes were followed and the multi-stakeholder model is upheld in all the things we

are committed to. we have many bodies within icann that make policies and bring advice to the board that the decisions are made by the community. that is powerful by the way. i invite any of you here who haven't been to a icann meeting, it is far more fun than disneyland. you should come. it is remarkable. it really is a remarkable exercise. the next beauty is in june and the one after that is in los angeles. if you can do come but it's an exercise in the purest form of democracy. you should come and you should watch it. our meetings are open, free, inclusive and being around the world live in all the u.n. languages plus portuguese. it is incredible. we are about to announce icann so you can system wiki go to our web site and search for anything from any system.

and icann is a transparent organization and we were rated as one of the most transparent organizations so there's a lot to see and to appreciate how the system works. and as i choked on a hill the other day i can hardly change the coffee brand in our cafeteria without somebody in the community saying this was not a bottom-up decision. it does happen. i have been reported multiple times. it's a tough community but it's a community that watches thousands of volunteers and watch his every step we make and ensures that everything is bottom-up and everybody has a voice. please come and experience it. it's quite impressive. >> i grew up in orlando so i can challenge the contention. [laughter] but i want to address a question

that mr. mcdowell race which is how to keep another treaty from abrogating were serving the icann's authority. countries have been proposing to take the numbering authority always from icann and what we have done as the united states is created and worked in alliance with europe and japan and canada all the typical democratic actors to ensure that doesn't happen. what our challenge is to grow the community of nations that realizes that we can trust in the underlying infrastructure of users firms and activists. the legitimacy of the underlying multi-stakeholder system is success. knowing can deny that success. the ultimate defenders of it is not our government. it's the users in the firms and the stakeholders themselves. when i go around the world when

we are invited around the world and we talk to young people creating businesses and starting innovative new firms and those are global in the internet those are just as passionate about the system than any of us here on this platform are. ultimately it's a winning message and i think those alliances will hold but those are two separate conversations. it would take an action of the united states -- united nations agreed to and the united states will not allow that. >> let me push back, little that. i want to drill down just a little bit. there was a treaty negotiation that ended up being a majority vote. the united states couldn't stop it and almost all of europe did that. >> let me stop you there for a second. it was a treaty negotiation on which regulations were being negotiated and there was a 55 to something else split.

that is not binding in the united states because we are not a signatory. the question of naming and numbering the operations of the internet is wholly different than an international telecommunications regulation treaty in part because the actors on the internet would have to recognize and respect the decision of the authorities and at the end of the day one of the things that we have done because that was an anomaly. the vote on the itr was an anomaly. we have recommitted ourselves and worked very hard to ensure that the organization itself understands the consensus-based processes and we have the commitment of the secretary-general of the existing one and we will fight for the future secretary-general to return to the consensus general. >> leading up to the wicket proposals for the itu and at the u.n. for the main function to be

subsumed by the itu or separate u.n. body specifically. i'm not making this up. it's in black-and-white and people can look it up. >> which defeated them all. >> had the momentum is going in the wrong way. the amendment is going the wrong way because we had a revolutionary change, a departure from consensus to majority vote and let me go back to the secretary-general the current one you are speaking of who is now recommitted to consensus who is also committed to consensus before it and it didn't happen. so commitments dyeenee secretary-general and he has a few months left in his term and then we have a new secretary-general likely to be from china ahead of the i.t.. these are all legitimate areas of concern. the direction the arrows are pointing in the wrong direction.

i just don't know if that's going to happen. >> let me respond. yes as long as they are in a world to want to usurp and use international law to achieve is the -- of the authoritarian legitimate concerns. the idea that brazil and almost all of the countries the 12 countries that are part of the 24 country multi-stakeholder committee that is putting brazil together of those a significant number voted for the itr's. the very participation in the brazil conference not just in a multi-stakeholder process by which to move forward but itself from the multi-stakeholder process shows the trend lines are moving in the other direction. the commitment of the african union to our announcement in favor of a multi-stakeholder system for icann shows that organization which was in support is moving in our

direction. ultimately i would say the trend lines are quite clear in our direction and that is a function of our commitment to both diplomacy and actions like the decision of the secretary of the state. >> i want to jump in here to too. i think the efforts and -- deserves the credit in terms of what has been doing for the last two years have really been i think the change in the developing world. i think in some small way our announcement on the ianna functions helps that mum on them as well but the fact is you are announcing brazil taking leadership in terms of expanding the holy stakeholder model. you are seeing the african union coalition say we support with the united states is proposing and we want to participate with other stakeholders to develop a transition proposal. so you are saying a much broader acceptance of this among the developing world that didn't really have a hard stake in the

debate with the authoritarian regimes and they are very small in number. they have no ability by themselves to affect the kind of change that people are worried about and writing editorials about. the key here is are we meeting the needs of the developing world? have we expressed to them and shown them the multi-stakeholder model can meet their needs? they want to grow a thriving internet in their countries. they want to share the economic growth and the innovation that has attached itself to this. they just don't have the same level of experience with this model as the united states and other countries in the developed world have. so it's a slow process but the efforts of the state department are immediately now showing the dividends that come from paying much more attention to the needs of these countries, understanding what it is that they're looking to do to bring the benefits of the ianna into their country and showing them how the multi-stakeholder model

can deliver those benefits to them. i do agree with danny the trendline is very much moving in our direction on that idea what the developing world. >> i think we are going to fundamentally disagree on the trend lines in a couple of other things but also with the definition and one thing we should explore further and i know where running out of time and we need to have time for the audience and the press as well. their governments out there that think that involves the state and the current secretary-general said to make the internet more democratic the government should have a stake in it so they are very powerful countries with lots of client states each have one vote at the itu which can achieve the goals they are looking for. these are legitimate questions to ask. i do disagree with the timelines >> if i can commissioner mike doll, --

commissioner mcdowell i think your concerns and the alarms you are raising should keep us on our toes. we should not think that we are necessarily have -- i was there with many of us here and the wicket people were looking for solutions on how to solve their issues, anti-government issues and we didn't have good answers. we kept saying all we know is they can be solved here. if we go back later this year for the next big conference and when they say where do we solve x we say not here. how about y. too? not here. that is not sustainable. i agree with you but what we have been doing and what you heard from ambassador sepulveda we have been energizing the process to show these governments that there is a way in place for them to solve internet governance issues

beyond icann. icann is one part of this but there's much more than icann can solve in a multi-stakeholder way. the target to us is not necessarily the countries that we know have their regimes in their agendas and we are not going to change these folks. let's all remember we had over 150 countries in the middle that were quite lost and they didn't know where to go. singapore voted with prussia to approve it. something is wrong with that picture. why did these governments vote that way many of them? because we didn't have good answers for them on where to go to solve multi-stakeholder issues. we have been working on that. the fact that the president of built -- brazil flipped completely in a position and went from a speech at the u.n. asking the united

nations to step in and address these issues within a month to announce a multi-stakeholder conference on internet governance and invite many of the middle countries in dubai south africa, ghana, south korea, all these countries in the middle that didn't know where to go. they are all part of this conference. we have a glimmer of a solution and we should support it. we shouldn't lower our guard because we don't know what could happen. the trend lines i agree are actually starting to turn their way. the announcement with tia which now i hope you see in that picture is actually helping with the trend. when we go to governance and tell them, the middle governments, and talking about the middle governance not necessary at the edges and we tell them come along for the multi-stakeholder ride no government control governance of

the internet and they say yes but one example you guys have of multi-stakeholder management ianna in icann you no government control but it doesn't quite work. you can't say no government control but our government should control so i think the decision of ntia is a remarkably strategic in that it actually tells the world we mean what we say. we mean no government control. of course we are going to put safeguards in to make sure we don't end up in the wrong place and i'm with you on that but strategically and globally i think the u.s. government is doing the world a huge service by making that move at this time and inviting and you heard the president of brazil. she said after the u.s. announcement that actually opens up the focus on them and a lot of their allies focusing this

conference on the multi-stakeholder -- multi-stakeholder road. i'm heading to são paulo. i was invited to be the cochair of the conference and we will make sure it heads in the right direction for all of us that these are all good trends and we should support them. our company should support them very i keep calling for our companies. we are all talking about the u.s. government but we need the private sector involved. we need our civil society involved. all of the good people that believe in open internet. that's the moment. that's the moment. >> this conversation has been so enlightening and i'm hesitant to switch it off for a minute. secretary sub 60 you have further reactions to this conversation about how you see

this playing out? >> well i associate totally with danny and fadi in terms of where i think this is headed. the positive trends that are emerging and the importance of ringing a focus to these larger questions of internet governance and not getting totally caught up in the immediate issues of icann and the ianna functions. it's a small piece of the larger debate that i'm glad we are getting into today. certainly from our perspective, we are quite cognizant as danny is of defining the role of governance in this space. at icann itself there has been an issue about the effectiveness of the governmental advisory committee. now it does operate by consensus and i think that's very important. i think it's also important contrary to some positions i have seen expressed recently

that governments have a seat at the table at icann to be able to provide input. if you were to say that the walls up and say government is not welcome, governments can't have them put all that does is fueled their desired to take this to an intergovernmental organization so it's been important and certainly the work we have done on accountability and transparency going back to 2010 we paid a lot of attention to making sure governments have the discipline to provide consensus advice and to clearly articulate what they were providing consensus advice and at the same time we were hard on the lord in terms of making sure having received consensus advice that the board would take it seriously as they are required to do under the bylaws. i think think that is the major improvement in the operation of icann over the last two or three years and i think it again has improve the credibility and the

legitimacy of icann in the eyes of governments around the world because they can see that they can come to the meetings, they can express their views and they can work with other governments to provide consensus input into the process. i think that's important. it's a feature of this we are going to have to continue to look at. it will be important that governments subscribe to the final outcome of this planning process and will need to be involved in that so those who would say governments have no role participating in the process i think are just wrong. again that is a much different question than saying the government should be given the control of this in the end. that we are all opposed to but i think one way and again this goes to rob's comment about how nuanced and complex this is, you have to understand governments need to be part of the process and that actually increases the chances that they don't demand to be the solution at the end of the day. >> secretary strickling he began

by describing -- we started a process and we will see how this plays out in the default position as we renew the contracts if things don't move in the right direction. how will the administration decide whether we have reached the right point to move forward with the transition and what are the internal processes within the administration to make that decision and what is your sense in what you are hearing from congress about how involved they will ultimately be in that process? >> there is a real thirst on capitol hill and i think it not elements of the community to know what's going on and to be kept apprised of that. we certainly understand that and we will do whatever we can to make sure that not just our legislators but all parts of the

government are kept informed of this is the process proceeds. i think that's a key aspect of this. at the this. at the end of the day nothing happens unless and until we get a consensus community proposal presented to us. and at that point it will have to be one that meets the conditions that we have laid out in terms of the announcement we made three weeks ago. the specifics of what process might be employed at that point in time haven't been worked out. i think it's pretty mature to think about that but nothing happens unless and until there is a consensus, community-based proposal that addresses and satisfies the conditions that we laid out. >> we have just a few minutes left. i'm going to open it up to the floor for some questions. we have a microphone that will be circulating. a couple of microphones. i would like the speaker to

please identify themselves and i guess we have a question right over here. please identify yourself for our audience. >> good afternoon. philip corwin. the question for ceo chehade but i welcome comments from many of the other panels. three weeks from today will be the day after the conclusion of the conference. whatever transition point discussions take place in the icann community there will be other discussions broader intergovernmental issues. my question is i think perhaps more important than the ntia announcement is the statement last october of which you are a signatory in the participants of the meeting called for the globalization of icann and iana functions in the membership for all stakeholders including all governments participate on equal footing. that is kind of a fundamental

change. up until now icann has been private sector leadership governments in this advisory subordinate role. if governments to come equal stakeholders to questions, wouldn't that imply that some changes within icann becomes more than advisory? perhaps the nonvoting becomes a voting member of the board and maybe this is all fine but how do we guard against the natural tendency of governments not to want to be equal stakeholders but to want to be in charge of things? >> clearly the natural instinct of government is to want to be in charge. that is not lost on any of us. i met with the vice president of a big country in latin america who said to listen via internet is very powerful. we like power so we are going to control it. i think he was the most plainspoken one of all.

he spoke about in a way that i think goes through the minds of many governments. we are very aware of what governments would like to do but in that statement that you just said it's very important to look at the choice of words. we use the word participate. not make policy. in other words we need to make sure everyone can participate. to the participatory nature of the multi-stakeholder process where everybody needs to be equal. no one should feel i can participate because i'm a government or i can't participate because i'm from africa or i can't participate because i don't speak english but participation is to be unequal footing. it doesn't mean that every opinion will be adopted in every idea will be taken up. the participatory nature of icann must remain completely open. governments are welcome to have an equal seat of the government to participate. but then the structures icann that defined what roles people

play in how the board is structured these are bylaws and they are very well defined and as you know phil this is not something simple that something simple the weekend madeleine. there are very high test said we will stress those things and it may require us to put suspenders into the bylaws to make sure we do not find ourselves -- and film is an important point because in a recent meeting we had in singapore and very you were there with us, you heard the chinese gap representative make a proposal that maybe the governmental advisory committee should become -- and he asked me the question publicly and clearly that was counter so i invited him to participate like everybody else in the policy process but the advisory committee had an advisory role. these are important things.

>> could i add one thing? i think some of the concern is the idea that when you think about government stakeholders there are government stakeholders and in their private stakeholders and they are two separate stakeholders which would give each one and up tremendous amount of power. that is not how the stakeholder system works. government is one stakeholder but there are many others. within government each government has equal footing and governments do not act in coalition in that sense. so i think it's important to understand the structure in order to understand the relative risk. and just to emphasize the subtwelve the mental advisory committee that has been mentioned many times here is a consensus-based body that can only produce advice. that's all they can do. in consensus yukia 133 countries to build consensus. it's not easy.

when they do agree on anything it takes an enormous test for them to even come back with the advice that they have all agreed on and that is a good thing. we should keep it this way. see a question on this side over here. the gentleman in the checked shirt. >> thank you. peter with u.s. news. mr. chehade i'm a little concerned. you talked about icann being a los angeles-based corporation governed under u.s. law or another of the numbers of stories in the international press and part of a long-term objective is to move to geneva severing the connection and to put that to rest now would be helpful but my larger concerns have to do with the fact that when you are in brazil and the president of brazil seems to be taking a position in a way to try to organize the nonaligned stakeholders the way the chinese tried to organize the nonaligned

nations during the cold war of the 60s. as a bloc that would develop animal control the internet. her position is that the united states has lost the right with benign small governance oversight it maintains because of what happened with the nsa. you certainly appeared in what i read in the international press to have agreed with that decision so that this is actually punishment for the nsa misbehaving, not some kind of international step towards global governance and then also what gives me concerns is that you just brought in the icann in the senior position, not on the board but administratively. this fellow that shut off the internet in egypt as they were busy trying to tell the world what they were trying to do to depose an authoritarian regime and replace it with a democratic government. i would suggest that none of this secures in the minds of

those of us who our tax dollars help pay for the construction of the internet and gave it to the world, the freedom of openness, freedom of access, the ideas of freedom of speech that inculcate the u.s. constitution and the values of this country continue to carry the day at icann and continue to make the internet work. without freedom of access and freedom of speech the internet doesn't work. it doesn't work for commerce and it doesn't work for a nation. >> you have three questions. let answer them first with a statement. no one has worked harder to keeping the internet to remaining open and no one has built more companies on this panel and in this place than me. my children work on the internet. i work on the internet and for years i have raised over $100 million to build companies in this country to support an open internet so let me start with that.

second, i did not say that i'm moving icann to geneva. this is speculation because we opened an office in geneva. we opened an office in many places in singapore so people conflate things because they like to but if you can find statement where he said i'm moving to geneva i would like to hear. you can't change the coffee in the cafeteria. i can't even make that decision. i can't even change the copies of the board will have to make the decision and the board can't make the decision without the community agreeing. do you think the community will agree to move thousands of contracts we have today that are working marvelously in california to another place? why would we do that? so let's stop the speculation on this. i have no plans to move to icann to geneva. we have an office in geneva and that's the end of it. on your second question please acknowledge what the president of brazil did in the major flip

on the day i visited because the day i visited her she had made a major speech at the u.n. in which indeed as you said she was proposing that the u.n. is the place where she will get back to solve the problem. i engage with the present and a very diplomatic discussion and i told her fine, i acknowledge your frustration. any of us acknowledge her frustration. what is the solution? how do you plan to solve this issue? and quite frankly she looked at me and she said i don't know. i said so why did you go to the u.n.? where else do you want me to go? i said you forged the path forward. what are you take a leadership? why don't you set up a conference based on the multi-stakeholder model that brazil has use for many years and on the spot she made a decision, she said at the conference and that they she tweeted three times that she's

now going to support the multi-stakeholder approach of anti-governance. that's a huge change in a position that we should welcome from the president of a country like you said that has the ability to build a huge coalition and she did. one important but critical note she picked 11 countries in the sponsoring of that conference. out of the 11 she picked 10 middle countries what i call little economies in middle countries germany, france, ghane 11th country? the united states of america. that is the sign that she was not telling the world walk away from the u.s.. she selected the united states and i'm very glad ambassador sepulveda accepted her invitation and now is the u.s.

is a high-level running the conference and your third is about my colleague. he was hired at the same time i was almost. he used to be the minister of telecommunications. a member of the internet society one that brought new internet to africa single-handedly been anyone about point. he is for an opera and 10 -- open internet. one day the real story of what happened when the internet was shut in egypt will come out. you can ask my team and they are ready to speak the story. they are saying it's not my place and i don't want to put myself on a pedestal but i will tell you this because i was very upset when this kept coming up.

he put his life on the line that day. his family's life on the line that day and he slept on the floor in his office for three days while the smart village in cairo was sent out by people who had escaped the prisons, the muslim brothers refusing to leave until they allowed him to turn it back on. one day they will recognize him as a hero of the internet. >> you with that stories about heroes and the internet. i wish we could continue longer but i promise we have a lunch at 12:30. please join me in a round of applause. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

..

>> and the networks to the retailer, you're going to see a big change in the space over the next 12 months starting with that watershed moment. >> watch our entire interview with former governor this sunday at 10:00 a.m. and again at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> whether it is an award for a good journalism, as a politician and a clear interest in wanting to make judgments on that.

but an award for public service for possibly the greatest the trail of our national secrets of all time strikes me as quite bizarre. and i do think that there is a real danger for patting itself on the back without fully understanding the consequences for the dangers that we face in a very dangerous world. so i think there is a dangerous to connect there. as for regarding the newspaper, my view was we devise an individual gave the names of operatives of side of u.k. jurisdiction that would be in breach of the 2000 terrorism act with the united kingdom. if that would apply to me as an individual, one not to a newspaper? >> this weekend on c-span former british defense secretary on edward snowden, government surveillance programs and privacy issues. saturday morning at 10:00 eastern.

and on book tv from texas the san antonio book festival including authors and panels on the stories that shapes san antonio and the nsa, big brother and democracy saturday starting at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. and on american history tv do with the nsa is national cryptology museum and learn about the making and breaking of secret codes and their role in u.s. history. sunday at six and 10:00 p.m. on c-span three. >> the chicago council on global affairs earlier this year as to the discussion with the founder and director of a school in india talking about innovative strategies for improving education in india, including the design for -- "design for change" program launched in 2009. the initiative has spread over 35 countries and aims to empower children to create change in the world. this is an hour.

[applause] >> maybe we should, has been done much of. more interesting lives. thank you so much. it's been amazing. it has been cold. but i've had the warmest reception. they've been the most charming hosts. it has warmed my heart. i don't need a coat. i've had a great that has been created. and going to go back richer, not just with the, but with memories and french ships and so much. again, thank you so much. it is an honor. so as a fellow i would like to share with you my stories for the next 20 minutes, and i'm

hoping by the end of the 20 minutes you will thank them were the. so the story of riverside approach "design for change" was not about an educator or social activist wanted to change the world. quite the contrary. everything changed when i became a mother. so let me introduce you to my son. he was all of six years of age when in a single stroke a teacher remove choice from his vocabulary. his crime community had chosen to write his version of the essay the cow. he went to school thinking and can and returned home believing a can't. that got me thinking about choice. we make choices every day from choosing tea over coffee or putting a man on the moon, our choice is define who we become. and yet it is this word that we

remove from our children's vocabulary. not for one day, not for one month, not even for a year. we tell them they have no choice but to listen to what we have to tell the. and then we wonder why our children don't become empathetic, responsible and creative citizens. so. day easy solution would have been to change the schools, but i did have a problem to school, i have a problem with the system, and this is when my design background kicked in. they asked me to respond. design started asking what is front and saying what's wrong. otherwise we will end of solving the wrong problem. and on behalf of the design thinking process of the fact you are not helpless, changes possible, and you can drive it.

otherwise we always end up blaming somebody your something for everything that we cannot do and become by standards. and we believe i turn that over to my child will. and we don't leave everything to chance rather than by design believing that we can become empowered young citizens of the world. some my response, designing and education model that would empower children to say i can instead of i can't. in 2001 my school riverside was born. for the last 18 years the curriculum, in his bid designed using a simple 4-step process. feel, imagine, doom, and share. what i would like to ask you to look at is how in but the, ethics, engagement, and elevation are embedded in each of the steps. so when designed the equipment and the tools and the curriculum

to give our children to start valuing doing goodbye. excited about problem-solving, design thinking, scientific inquiry as well as recognizing the words you have to change of would like to show you -- i hope i could take all of you to riverside and show you how amazing they are. i'm going to show you much of korea's a story of what happens when he blurred the boundaries between school and life. my tenth graders designed something for the blue chip company. a product of value but added value to live. so. ♪

[inaudible] and we all were excited by this. we did know. [inaudible] ♪ [inaudible] ♪ >> the fact that you made yourself actual solution.

excellent presentation. well-balanced because you included the cost of everything. [inaudible] ♪ ♪ >> promotion, marketing. [inaudible] >> you can use it for any social

call of action. ♪ ♪ >> the second story is a snapshot of being good and have that drives the difference school. this is the story of 25 students . engaging with the differently able buddies who were hearing impaired. and then they realize that their bodies needed hearing aids. in one of helpless. it realized that they could raise the money to get the hearing aids. this is their story.

>> what was the video about? [inaudible] [inaudible] ♪ [inaudible]

♪ you. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible]

in autumn. [inaudible] [inaudible] ♪ zero. >> this approach is demonstrating that when killed -- children to good. what about math, science, english. the most recent results,

children are all performing that top-10 schools in india in math, science, and english. so it is not either or. the final video that i will share with you is really the graduating project. it is called in same for two reasons. one, it is an acronym. it is the time that they're going to graduate into a world. they need to be able to cleanse their inner self in this process the timing. this particular experience happens nearly a month before they finally exit examinations. chavis in grade 12, the child does not see the light of day. to get a child out at that time and to tell the children they have to have perspective, and for three days they spend there time meditating, reflecting and

taking bribes. personal transformation. ♪ [inaudible conversations] >> jump fences experience. >> more extern know. a very internal experience. ♪

♪ ♪ [inaudible] an auto. >> they do it for a living.

>> overcome. [inaudible] >> because even today, we should be. ♪ got minimum -- [inaudible]

♪ >> get the memory back with them to basically remind them of always having perspective. never again say, oh, my god, i'm so tired or look at me, i do so much work. it's about perspective. >> the painting. you know, there is something that you have of this world around you. so that's what this is about. >> it's not about that. it's about your heart. >> this is a pretty important milestone. our children will become citizens of this country and of this world.

>> every child will graduate, of course, with the certificate. and get in math, science. but the two things that we want to get everything into, they will graduate. we have taken it beyond the school. 370 children. and all this work for 370 children to make had to go beyond and touched. so look at this. in an ideal world every society has to take care of its children and childhood. but most societies will have more morals, 250 tv channels. so we cannot try to figure this sense of what if a city could

designed for and nurture a child it. we realize that once you nurture children in nature the city. so in 2007 the protagonist, initiated. this was a dialogue that we did with the municipality, the citizens, and we have the best design and the best business minds. my god, the city has not benefited from the best minds. how do we all come together and collaborate? so what i'm going to share with you is three little snapshots. i children are often told not to play. we will not. we have services by multiplexes and malls that close down the doors. have you get the child to believe the city is not segregated and / this concept of

some have and some don't can account you open up the hearts of the doors of the citizens? street smart, the busy street and make a play and for children. a for someone to the police. sir, i need this. no, madam. no street. no. i want to. madam, corner street, back street. no, sir. main street. the reason why i kept insisting on the main street, the fact that it had to be. for one day, one day in the month can up the city's slow down and recognize that our children are important? that they have to be seen and heard and recognized as being creative and powerful and wonderful. so that really -- he looked at me skeptically. around our independent state. fifteenth of august, a public holiday. there will be no traffic.

it became such a big hit recognize it. so wonderful. now five or six years down the city takes the story to the world. i had a symposium in beijing. there were telling everybody. the first child from the city in the world. so there's a little snapshot. ♪ >> and it has now gone beyond. >> the parents come in and become storytellers. artists come in and do creative work shops. ♪

>> the best multiplex and given popcorn and cinema. [inaudible] ♪

♪ [inaudible] >> i have not seen an initiative riches so unusual and so caring about the city. ♪ >> now that we knew that the city was opening a we had to take the same. so in 2009 we created the world's largest design thinking challenge, detectives i'm thinking to everybody and to tell children that if the mindset is i can then i will. north and it's a show you a little snapshot. restarted in 2009 and where it

yesterday. how can they make any change happen? ♪ >> how to read and write. >> then designs have changed. it helps dis all of us that you don't have to be rich and strong and powerful. all these children want is help from the heart. >> so on august 15th again, independence day 2009 we empowered 100,000 children to say i can. that simply exploded the reach of "design for change." from going from being an idea it traveled around the world. >> i can and you can.

together we can. >> and the winner is a design based on a school competition program designed to enable children to express their ideas for a better world. please welcome. [applause] >> and we can't deal with ideas that a too complicated. so many ideas ourself congratulatory rather than

constructive. wonderful constructive gift to schools. now i've learned many other countries around the world. so "design for change." >> of very interesting level of participation. to see that it's not something that is being talked about in our schools. and "design for change" has actually started strengthening design and to the schools without their realizing it. >> it starts with the priority to my research with that invitation. today, your voice, your imagination. right now matters. >> "design for change" would like to give a big hug to the rockefeller foundation for honoring these young heroes. every job the says i can. thank you. [applause]

>> thank you. so today "design for change" is in over 35 countries. from reducing the weight of schoolbags to tackling valise to preserving tribal culture her children are making it with the power of ideas. one stores are going to share with you cannot large in terms of number, but it is significant in terms of what it did to that community and the child. a tiny story from a village in india. system faugh. ♪ ♪

[inaudible conversations] [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] ♪

[speaking in native tongue] ♪ [speaking in native tongue] will live in one. [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue]

been done. >> publishing. comic books that are children did not have road models. they would be their role models. we got these wonderful stories through publishing, comex to my story books, movies. basically telling our children, who are you waiting for?

you have to find the ghandi knew. this year for the very first time, the very first designed to like it every child to be able to take this particular mindset which is optimistic, human- interest, and collaborative. they are not helpless. change is possible, and they can drive it. piloting this particular book to see how it works, genetic, across geography and demographic. it is a mind-set that empowers every other human. you want to be a better surgeon, engineer, actors, designers at the core of they're thinking. and celebrate all of these. had we make sure to check every year we run what is called a beaded change conference. in india everybody takes a holiday. imagine the program. we decided that we are going to every imagined on these birthday, just like we celebrate valentine's day and everyone knows what has to be done.

children will be making the world a better place. this is how that looks. ♪ >> hidden about that. what they care about. if they care, then have. ♪ >> i am still struggling to believe that i can make a difference in this world. when they were 11 years old. how is the journey changing you?

>> the joy that i get. >> how are you going to take this and spread it back to the rest of the school's? not just the program, our community. but when every does, and each other. >> some of the challenges you face. >> right now development. we're trying to raise money for that. >> one thing you learn about yourself. >> if you just yourself you can do anything that you want to. >> do everything i can. >> i did not think that the project would bring me some much happiness. >> the project has actually made me more constant. [applause] >> it's a celebration of youth, a celebration of the environment

no matter what language is speaks. the idea is basically what connects them. we have workshops. we have conferences, talks to my children coming and doing performances. it's a fabulous time. today's of great energy. ♪ >> this means all the children and teachers i educated. [inaudible] ♪

>> so affecting children and over 200,000 schools. i would like to leave you with this one thought, developing a bathetic responsible children does not happen by chance. athens by design. and maybe that is why riverside is a story we are sharing and hopefully one worthy. thank you very much. [applause] [applause] >> thank you so much. congratulations, again to be reelected go out to the audience for questions. please raise your arm and wait for the microphone and make sure your question is a question. maybe i will kick it off. and no you have had a lot of this is this week. meeting with people from golden

apple. could you tell us a little bit about anything in chicago that you may be able to implement in "design for change" ? >> i mean, i feel -- it is so ready. there is some much potential. i am just wanting to be it will to forge more partnerships. you know, educate parents. if we can just release here from our hearts and be able to be a lot more ambitious and audacious for our children this is possible. i think chicago is really, really ready for it. i am excited. we have already has some wonderful conversations of some of the schools. it's time for change. yeah? >> obviously not all people welcome change. if you are afraid of change,

obstacles that you encountered by people who maybe don't want to see change. >> yap. i think the schools say, you want us to teach the quadratic equation or do this. that's the concept. so the resistance comes from the fact we have to finish a curriculum. we have no time. we have no time to make our children empowered. so that, i find, is the mindset. the other mindset have typically heard of, is the government's job. what can one person do. that's the way it will always be. so i keep thinking, if only we could start with the what if rather than a what is wrong mentality. that's why i believe that designed thinking has to become mandatory in education.

it has to go back to the human human-centered framework. that is why the resistance again nothing changes. least of a lot of problems. just go back to the human- centered approach, i believe it is natural that we will respond with positivity and possibilities rather than responding out of frustration and being, you know, overwhelmed by the magnitude of a problem. human-centered approach. >> this is just incredible. i really -- lots of words. and, question. exactly. it is clear why the children are open to this. but how do you convince the

teachers? that this is to find that this can work and that this is so important for the kids. >> can i convince you? [laughter] yap. i don't know. i just -- what i am hopeful because of seeing what happens when we started in 2009. we got 700 stories changed. this year we reached 10,000. we want to go deeper. we got 1500 stories of change. so i am -- that is showing me there is a need to my gap. people are feeling it, recognizing that children have to be empathetic leaders. and there is an opening to the concept that doing good is important. because still now the spotlight in education is always who is

the smartest, tallest, strongest. no one was spotlighting he was sympathetic are concerned. we're not saying you have to remove being the strongest. it's not either or. if we can spot light as much as your spelling bee champion someone who is sympathetic we have a good story going. and again, the approach is clearly showing that academically you will do better when you do good. in this year we're trying to collect more significant data. the research we are doing with the design thinking book and now we are going to be tracking the social emotional with academic scores may be the last bit of resistance will melt away. >> share in the front row please . >> yours is a very interesting presentation. however, and chicago we have so many problems with our children

in public schools. very often a child is not even able to make it to school because he or she is shot by some dabbling. see you have problems with gangs in any of these other places? is there anything you can do? these are young people also. but we have a specific problem in our city. i wonder how you would deal with that or make your ideas circumvented the problem. >> actually, probably not shot because of gains but they died because of poverty and hunger. it's an equal problem. 300 million children a good school in india, roughly the population of the united states. from that 89 in the graduate, 70 percent have an employable skills. so we have done something significantly wrong. we are producing a staggering number of graduates who believe

they can't get a job will make a life. we are killing them anyway. so whether it's the perspective of actually being shot or being killed because of the fact that we don't empower them, it is true. the numbers are just so staggering. so if anything works in nba can work anywhere in the world. solutions. so there are different chunks and pieces and solutions being created. it's an exciting time for the moment. half of the last five years there have been interesting initiatives that have come up specifically for certain pieces of the puzzle. each of these initiatives are now showing significant gain. these initiatives and can be replicated. so whether the riverside model can be replicated, yes, certainly. whether designed -- "design for change" can be something that everyone can do, absolutely.

whether this particular problem can be solved by -- do we have a solution for this particular problem? maybe not at the moment. our children are dying from many things. i think it is a similar problem. >> right here in the front row. >> thank you very much. it was very inspiring to hear what you've done. i am curious about how you started your first class. you obviously saw what was happening to your own son, but to convince other parents of your vision, that sometimes can be hard. it is easier to sign on five or six years later when they have seen the results. i am wondering. are your schools what we call private schools or subsidized by the government? how are they paid for? >> to answer your first question, i did not have to convince because i don't think people actually bought into the

vision. i got 25 when i started. basically at one student. that think they came, maybe it children to get into any other school, so they came to mind. clothes buyer for one of two years. i push them off. so it didn't matter to me. so i had 27 believers, nonbelievers. it didn't matter. today because of what we have done we get people who believe in the philosophy, but it didn't matter to me whether they believed. i just needed to start, to be able to share this particular concept and possibility that this can happen. and it happened with this molly group of people. you know, it could not speak a single word. he came to me from the school

the the 75% in english. he sat for six months quiet. today he writes poetry in makes presentations. that is to answer the first question. we do not get subsidies from the government. the student population is reversed. we have another 40 of 50 percent of our children who are on financial aid, and then we have the rest to cannot pay the full tuition but also support and sponsor my children who come with zero money. >> yap. in the front row. >> thank you. you have told us this week that -- well, we have seen the creativity, the spark another delight in the children, the imagination which is really

quite something. you told us that in wycherley thousands of schools in india that teacher teaches, the children listen, and a spot back what they heard, but there is no creativity. we were told that you are one of 20 that were selected to meet with president obama when he was in india. somebody like steve. -- likes you. >> he was wanting to know why did that and why i said that. >> is the creativity the spark that happens in your schools, however pick do, recognizing, is there hope for that? >> well, they picked me because,

the 20 who were selected were people who are already doing work with businesses, establishments in the u.s. the business partnership meet. the 20, for instance, stanford, harvard, we work with some of the best minds. there were looking at how much more can do and how much we can learn to share with each other. he told me. [laughter] >> thanks. right over here. >> speaking the language of a fellow design thinker. you are speaking the language. the have touched on the number of the key principles of design thinking. you have talked about -- by wonder if you could talk about

the idea of rapid prototyping. >> perfect the product. have to keep going back. for me, that is critical. that is part and parcel. my kids are learning that. when the first idea is generated them refine the product. so prototyping is critical. i love it. i think it is fabulous. it puts a value in whenever you are doing. repeatedly going back to the user. not to understand the product but to understand the user. as critical.

that's what we've done in education. our children are telling us they don't learn through textbooks. we have pictures now. color. you have to love it. they want to put there all body in a learning experience. so we are now going back. products and telling them you have to learn it. i put so much time into it. >> thank you. right here, please. cinnamon in a plaid shirt. >> i teach service learning and an alternative school, all the service learning. we are still putting our heads with the administration about the standardized testing now we have to do. they study for the standardized testing. it kind of agrees with what you said, you need time to do it. what are some clues you can give me. amelie give her something new. >> i think the problem is often

what schools tend to think that is so intangible. i can't give you the kind of gray the you're now 50 percent more confident or 30 percent more empathetic. what happens is if i can to make it visible it becomes, you know, sort of something that i can leave. i do believe, and i think this is what is important, to make a tangible and the work that i do. i would like the question, the design thinking book. i think that can be very useful. it actually puts specific skills to do what you're asking them to do rather than leaving it as a thinking, feeling process. be a cartographer and matthew world. and in that exercise, so much skill the you are teaching which eventually the core curriculum is happening clearly.

make a specific. is showing fantastic results. >> great. next question. >> gerry goldstein in the back row. >> you mentioned -- you started with one school. you mentioned 30,000 children in india. can you talk a little bit more about the scaling mechanisms that you use. i always believe that the toughest problem in improving public education is scaling small projects up to the scale that it has to get to to be effective. >> 2004, people would walk in and say, i want to do that. and that's one recognize the process. we just got him madly into that,

typed up everything that we did, but it down, the processes have to become independence of the back and take a process and replicated anywhere else. none of franchising model. you don't have to do what i do. the whole point of our process, this is why it is important. how you do it, your context of your cultural setting is important for that particular process. we have done that. document everything and we have done. this year we are excited to say that with my technology partner we are putting what we call the outcome and a box, the icahn box which is going to have everything to be able to give any school that wants to try to the will to use the process. until then, until the technology is used what we have been doing is teacher training, lot of teacher training, able to work -- reach out to over 6,000

teachers. riverside processes are now in 11 other schools. we started small. tear at the right place much larger communities and technologies. i will share with you will return. >> next question. >> right here. [inaudible question] >> have you get that passion? he said is a gap right now. teaching is training the trainers. that will be a critical piece. >> we have had some measure of success with the teacher training institutes that there. so redundant and steffi at the moment. what happens is very difficult,

bureaucracy, the state teacher training institutes. what we have tried to do is partner with the independent teacher training institutes. a lovely organization called stir education which actually does a lot of the work. specifically introducing the design thinking model. i believe it every teacher can go through that it will be remarkable. we have done it with some measure with the government in my state. last year we trained two and half thousand teachers. and through satellite we trained 50,000. this year we want to do it as a more continuous process rather than a one-off. we really want to do consistent planning for that. >> did you have a question? >> thank you. congratulations. do you start with the grandchildren? is there a process that has to

take place with children past a certain age? >> brega in the garden. so we come in at two and a half. pretty much we can mess them up our own way. [laughter] >> and graduates, i would think they would be incredible and messages for you. what are they doing? >> they are fabulous. seventeen of them graduated last year. my first batch. to win a broad and went to the best destitutes. and they are all top in each of the colleges. the one thing, they got back because we had a little bit of the -- one rather very deeply unfortunate institute -- incident that happened. one of my boys passed away. the whole batch came back, rallied around. that passion was so visible.

the parents recognize that they were not alone. i think the big mark of my graduating class was understanding that they were not leaving. they're going to go along on that journey and keep the memory alive. the parents were so moved by the way that they have responded. i'm telling you, god forbid my son had died, the most the school probably would have done is have an announcement. that's it. no one would have cared. the life was just wonderful, he lived fully. the school responded. the kids just came back. subsequently these children rallied round, got a cake sent to the parents, they had a festival. they all came down specifically. the new the party would be the most tough. the parents were stunned. my god, the human face, we

didn't know it was possible. so the success, i think fantastic fathers and great husbands, you know. i think that is going to be really, really great. and i think that is wonderful. >> third row, please. >> height. >> hi. my name is molly. i come from india. i understand what you're talking about. sending my son to a school like yours somewhere in america. it is nice to hear your story. there are two things that i want to ask you. in india we have a tendency of hanging on. change the world and change everything differently. so out of the desperation has my first question. how are you going to infiltrate something you are doing in riverside to the rest of the incredibly impoverished people

that are all over, you know, like to know and actually, the social differences by just looking at this video. your school seems to harbor a higher socio-economic kids, although you have some middle-class and lower middle class, like somebody who would, you know, the different because of economic reasons. that is one thing. how can we change across india, you know, these impoverished kids? the second thing is, you know, i do believe we have some strength in india, that eastern philosophy and our culture. how are you going to and to great and be loud about expanding the values of our culture to the western world? >> and then i become queen. [laughter] i don't think this is the platform for me to be able to

answer. i would love to sit with you over a cup of chai and it will take this on. it's a long story. so we can take this on afterwards. yes? it's a very india specific question. >> unfortunately, i think that's all we have time for. karen will be -- kiran sethi will be speaking tomorrow night. combating violence and how there are different ways of doing it around the world. it should be very interesting. tomorrow evening. ladies and gentlemen, please join me in thanking kiran sethi for her wonderful presentation. [applause] and, of course, and thinking pat and mike for their incredible vision and generosity in supporting this program for the seventh year. thank you, pat and mike. [applause] ..