What's the main reason this question is being put to the delegates?

Hi.

Uh, thanks for the invitation.

I think, um, what is quite important to acknowledge, uh, is that over the last three years or something since we've been in the federal government, uh, it's been a mixed bag.

Uh, but I think it must be, uh, remembered that many things have been achieved.

But of course, on the back of that, there are also some, whether it's ideological shortfalls, governance shortfalls, uh, or even promises shortfalls, uh, things that has been put on the table as our agenda but hasn't been achieved, or it has been, uh, I would say not achieved soon enough.

And of course, on the flip side also, there are things that have been achieved far too quickly or far too, uh, swiftly, uh, to the discontent of, uh, especially some of the business community.

What needs to change in terms of this perception, then?

It's a public-private partnership between the Hong Kong government and businesses and investors to promote climate-friendly companies.

So last year, we positioned this building, InnoCenter, in Kowloon Tong to be our green tech hub.

We encourage the green tech companies to move here and we also organize different green tech related business matching activities in this building.

These hubs connect climate tech companies to one another, helping them attract customers, develop new products, and learn business best practices from each other.

Most of them are small companies, just startups.

So they don't have the economies of scale.

They need our help in order to promote their products, bring them to overseas to face the clients.

And even we have mentorship program to help them trying to design their products, custom made that so that they are better fit to the market.

And those issues don't go away no matter where we draw the line, but are certainly of interest, I think, to everyone in this room as something that needs to be solved.

I'd like to respond to the other side's comment about just the evolving role of, you know, what it means to have a, uh, indication being, like, an elective gestational carrier.

And I think that the just empowering patient autonomy and promoting access to care doesn't mean abdicating our roles as physicians and stewards.

I really appreciate the example from obstetrics th- that Anthony brought up at the Arrive Trial.

I think that in OBGYN, there are so many examples of instances where we as physicians have not been able to step up in our role as stewards and gatekeepers.

Like, all of us have trained in the era of external fetal monitoring, and this was a technology that evolved in response to logistical and market incentives and things that we didn't maybe adequately push up against.

And now we are all managing pregnancies with this technology and still debating today whether or not it really helps or maybe if pot- or even if it potentially harms our patients.

Because I don't think that these are necessarily very different situations, depending on the person's life experience, their-- what they are going through, and I think that you're simply ag-agreeing with us.