PENTAS AKHIR DAN MAJLIS PENUTUP PERTANDINGAN DEBAT ALAM SEKITAR KE 29 TAHUN 2023

Lower awareness and mobilize community members in activities of preserving and maintaining the surrounding environment. The function of RAS is to assist government agencies in identifying activities that pollute the environment. The objective of the deceased is to provide environmental awareness to all levels of society, instilling a sense of responsibility among the community to act and participate in safeguarding the shared environment. It provides the right channel for the community to make complaints or provide views regarding the environment to the relevant government agencies. The activities carried out include reporting or complaints about pollution incidents, programs to prevent and control pollution, and championing environmental education and awareness, as well as the beauty and quality of the environment. Imagine the world will become increasingly hot due to deforestation, burning of fossil fuels, and increased carbon dioxide, all of which contribute significantly to global warming. How will the 7 billion people in this world continue to live? Ask yourself. [Music] A Sustainable School, Environmental Award, is an effort to implement the national environmental policy, the first green strategy that focuses on environmental education and awareness through this program. Environmental education elements can be applied among teachers, students, and the local community. Furthermore, it is cultivated in daily practices. Five components are applied: curriculum management, greening, special environmental conservation. Environmental conservation is a shared responsibility. Every school member can cultivate sustainable environmental practices at all times at the school level. Ask yourselves, children, have you been responsible for protecting the environment? Water is the main source of water for our lives. Water conservation needs to be done to ensure water quality is safe for use. There are four types of water sources: groundwater, well water, river water. [Music] Industrial [Music] released from sewage, garbage, and river water quality. In conclusion, water will provide us with clues about river water quality. Love and care are very important to ensure our water sources are clean and safe to use. [Music] Clean water, the pulse of a prosperous life. [Music] Did you know that single-use plastic takes 400 to 1000 years to decompose and causes environmental pollution? As we can see, plastic is everywhere, in the sea, in the air, and in our surroundings. Plastic is one of the main causes of water pollution. Plastic discarded in our country's waters may be washed away to neighboring countries or vice versa. [Music] There are many options that can be used to eliminate the use of plastic. You can practice using reusable water bottles, reusable bags, and metal straws. Let's take this initiative together and bring about change in our lives by reducing the use of plastic. It is everyone's responsibility to save the earth for future generations. Do we realize that planting trees can save thousands of lives? Planting new trees can help absorb carbon dioxide from the air, which ultimately reduces the greenhouse effect. Green cover and forest areas are very important for well-being and quality of life, besides improving our country's ecosystem and biodiversity. Clean air is a priceless gift to the lives of humans and all beings in this universe. Fresh and clean areas are usually filled with flora. Flora releases oxygen into the air, allowing the body to get enough oxygen. Planting green plants not only provides a cool and comfortable environment but also functions to stabilize the surrounding temperature. Imagine if there were no more flora due to human greed. Will we still be able to breathe fresh air at that time? The choice is in our hands. Okay guys, hurry, hurry guys, let mom, mom, mom, die in our bodies, this disease in our bodies. [Music] [Music] [Music] Your vehicle is emitting smoke, there must be something wrong with your engine. Get it checked at the center. [Music] [Laughs] Burning causes air pollution like this. Wake up, save yourself. [Music] [Laughs] Try. [Music] Day and night, non-stop, together we protect the environment from air pollution. The environment is our shared responsibility. This world is the home of everyone. RAS environmental movement is a program to build awareness and mobilize community members in activities of preserving and maintaining the surrounding environment. The function of RAS is to assist government agencies in identifying activities that pollute the environment. The objective of the deceased is to provide environmental awareness to all levels of society, instilling a sense of responsibility among the community to act and participate in safeguarding the shared environment. It provides the right channel for the community to make complaints or provide views regarding the environment to the relevant government agencies. What activities does RAS carry out? The activities carried out include reporting or complaints about pollution incidents, programs to prevent and control pollution, and championing environmental education and awareness, as well as the beauty and quality of the environment. Imagine the world will become increasingly hot due to deforestation, burning of fossil fuels, and increased carbon dioxide, all of which contribute significantly to global warming. How will the 7 billion people in this world continue to live? Ask yourself. [Music] A Sustainable School, Environmental Award, is an effort to implement the national environmental policy, the first green strategy that focuses on environmental education and awareness. Through this program, environmental education elements can be applied among teachers, students, and the local community. Furthermore, it is cultivated in daily practices. Water is the main source of water for our lives. Water conservation needs to be done to ensure water quality is safe for use. There are four types of water sources: groundwater, well water, river water. [Music] Industrial [Music] released from sewage, garbage, and river water quality. In conclusion, water will provide us with clues about river water quality. Love and care are very important to ensure our water sources are clean and safe to use. [Music] Clean water, the pulse of a prosperous life. [Music] Did you know that single-use plastic takes 400 to 1000 years to decompose and causes environmental pollution? As we can see, plastic is everywhere, in the sea, in the air, and in our surroundings. Plastic is one of the main causes of water pollution. Plastic discarded in our country's waters may be washed away to neighboring countries or vice versa. [Music] There are many options that can be used to eliminate the use of plastic. You can practice using reusable water bottles, reusable bags, and metal straws. Let's take this initiative together and bring about change in our lives by reducing the use of plastic. It is everyone's responsibility to save the earth for future generations. Do we realize that planting trees can save thousands of lives? [Music] [Music] Bismillahirohmanirohim Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh. Greetings of independence and greetings of harmony. The resolve for unity fulfills hope. Not all bees are big bees on the jackfruit tree. Don't just bow down, be neat. Bismillah, the opening word of this auspicious gathering. The honorable Datuk one Abdul Latif Wan Jafar, Director General of Environment, Department of Environment. The esteemed Director of the Strategic Communications Division, Department of Environment. The esteemed Dr. Muhammad Fahmi Yusuf, Director of the Department of Environment, Johor State. The esteemed senior officers, officers, and representatives from government agencies and universities. The organizing committee and secretariat for the 29th Inter-Higher Learning Institution Environmental Debate Competition. Participants, and ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the final round of the 29th Inter-Higher Learning Institution Environmental Debate Competition. Ladies and gentlemen, let us all feel grateful to God Almighty, because with His permission, we can gather and assemble to witness this year's final round of the environmental debate competition between the National University of Malaysia and the University. Your presence today, on this beautiful morning, is hoped to bring useful benefits from the ideas and arguments that will be presented by the participants. Ladies and gentlemen, the debaters, the timekeepers, and the honorable representatives of the government and opposition, please enter the assembly hall. Ladies and gentlemen, excuse me, the assembly hall will be graced shortly. Please welcome the debaters, the timekeepers, and the honorable representatives of the government and opposition into the assembly hall. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Ladies and gentlemen, this year's final round of the environmental debate competition will be chaired by the honorable Mr. Muhammad Ismail bin Adnan and assisted by the timekeepers Ms. Nurul Izzati Syahrizan and Ms. Nurul Fatihah Mukhtarazi. For your information, our honorable chairman today is a presenter and news reader working at Wisma Berita, Angkasapuri Complex, Kuala Lumpur. Without further ado, I respectfully invite the honorable chairman to commence the final round of the 29th Inter-Higher Learning Institution Environmental Debate Competition. Please proceed. [Music] Alhamdulillah. Thank you, Mr. and Ms. Master of Ceremonies. Alhamdulillah, we are gathered this morning. To honor this assembly, I would like to recite a poem written by the 15th National Laureate, the honorable Datuk Rahman Syari, titled "Nature Has Spoken." In his writing, the National Laureate writes: Greetings of well-being, cleanliness. Greetings to the mind that controls. Greetings to attitude and diligence. Well-being, the trees arranged here, clean, placed here, love increases. Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and greetings of well-being. With the responsibility entrusted to me, I hereby open the final round of the environmental debate competition for the year 2023. Alhamdulillah, ladies and gentlemen, for the information of the esteemed members of the house, this session can be watched live through the official Facebook and YouTube channels of the Department of Environment, and can also be watched through the live link. I am Ismail Adnan, your honorable chairman, and with me are the Srikandis, the upholders of truth and time. I describe them as such. To my left is Nurul Fatihah binti Mukhtarazi, and also Nurul Izzati binti Muhammad Syarifan. So, try the bell a little. Government, opposition, please applaud. Alhamdulillah. Well, ladies and gentlemen, for the final round of the 29th Inter-Higher Learning Institution Environmental Debate Competition 2023, organized by the Ministry of Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change through the Department of Environment, in collaboration with the Ministry of Higher Education. The debating council of Universiti Malaysia, the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka at UPM, and Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, UTHM. Let's give them a round of applause. Ladies and gentlemen, well, ladies and gentlemen, for the final session of this 2023 edition, let us introduce the government representatives and the opposition representatives who will debate the motion and compete for the prize and the championship trophy. In front of me, I ask my friends and the honorable members to test the speakers that will be used, because we don't want any defects or issues during the competition. Ladies and gentlemen, the government representatives, I introduce to you from Universiti Sains Malaysia. Let's introduce the honorable Prime Minister, the honorable Nur Khazanah binti Harun. Assalamualaikum and greetings of Johor. Why does she say greetings of Johor? It's close to her birthplace in Johor, of course, and her hometown is Muar, Johor. Her words about the environment were whispered to me earlier: we must continue to cherish the environment for the benefit of today and the future. Her hobby is playing badminton. She will be the representative of USM later, God willing. God willing, we will meet on another court. And next, the honorable Deputy Prime Minister, Mr. Abdullah bin Udin. Greetings, we lead. Okay, concise, precise, and to the point. His words about the environment: we are God's messengers, given the mandate to care for nature. If not, your life will be bleak, a dark night. This person is poetic, friends. So we won't hear what, maybe those phases will be manifested in the debate later. Born in the fields, yes. Beneficial in the evening and the Minister, and so on. The first Minister, Mr. Muhammad Hafizzi bin Muhammad Hanafi. Give an example of planting. Assalamualaikum, greetings of love to our beloved Mother Nature. Why does he talk about nature? Because his words about the environment: nature is the mother, humans are the children. Don't be a disobedient child to your mother, lest her blessings vanish and turn to dust. Alhamdulillah, a good child. May the mother's prayers be answered for today's debate. God willing. Thank you to the honorable First Minister. The Deputy Minister, with his hobby of finding keys to be productive. This is Malay language, friends. But the Deputy Minister cannot be with us on this stage because of an urgent matter. He said it's an urgent matter in Sabah. So let's also give applause to the honorable Muhammad Firdaus Bin Kasami. And so on. Then, a woman is specially brought from Wangi, Selangor, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, the opposition representatives. Many supporters. Their voices are also clear and resounding in the hall today. The honorable Opposition Leader, Hafiz Hafizi bin Nur Atendi. Subhanallah. Assalamualaikum and greetings to all. His hobby is fishing. But I want to ask, fishing for votes or fishing for fish? Fishing for votes for victory this morning. First, Mr. Muhammad Iman bin Ashar. Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. Subhan, true voice. The environment is a shared responsibility. He is from Alur Gajah, Melaka. Next, the first opposition, also a native of Johor, from Kluang, the honorable Muhammad. Assalamualaikum and green greetings to you all. Green greetings, but why not wear green? We'll chat about this after the competition. And the reserve opposition has a ministry matter to attend to. Let's give applause to the honorable. His hobby is writing songs. Maybe he can replace the songs that will be sung by Datuk Zainal later. Convey the message to the honorable reserve opposition. There are many examples. Ladies and gentlemen, Allah bless you all. Well, for today's motion, we have chosen the motion: This house supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. So, the debaters are certainly already aware of the rules. Allow me to reiterate the rules and regulations. First, debaters and all members of the house are requested to maintain and observe their conduct. Debaters are requested to respect the allocated time. Seven minutes are allocated for the first speech. The first minute will be signaled at the first minute, marking the beginning of the allotted time. The bell will ring again, marking the end of the allotted time. 15 seconds are given for each allotted time. Any issues that touch upon religious and ethnic sensitivities, or personal attacks on specific individuals, are prohibited. Please adhere to these regulations. Any recordings are the sole property of the debate organizer and are for competition and academic purposes only. Are the government and opposition representatives ready? Government representatives from Universiti Sains Malaysia. Opposition representatives from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. You know, there are women. This house supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. Please proceed, honorable Prime Minister. Ladies and gentlemen, carrying the spirit of humanity, I come forward to propose the motion: This house supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. Before that, thank you to the honorable chairman, government representatives, opposition representatives, and esteemed members of the house. Assalamualaikum and greetings of debate. A drop of wool. You all. Well, as the first speaker for the government, I will define the motion for our debate today. Ladies and gentlemen, the first phrase is climate change. Climate change is the Earth's temperature caused by the release of greenhouse gases, which is increasing. This year alone, 50 billion tons of greenhouse gases are released from human activities such as burning fossil fuels, and so on. The result is that climate change has effects such as rising temperatures, melting ice, and so on, which can have an impact on the environment and humans. This issue leads to a major problem, namely climate refugees. According to the International Rescue Committee, with God's permission, honorable chairman, climate refugees are those who are forced to leave their country or region. Climate change, for example, in Bangladesh, 7.1 million of their citizens are affected by rising sea levels and are forced to move. Second, Algeria, 1500 citizens were forced to flee from forest fires caused by extreme heat. Ladies and gentlemen, the status of climate refugees today, according to the Institute for Economics and Peace, since last year, there have been an average of 21.5 million people forced to become climate refugees, and by 2050, it is projected that we will have as many as 1.2 billion climate refugees. Ladies and gentlemen, in responding to the issue of climate refugees, it leads us to the next phrase, humanitarian response. According to CR, humanitarian response refers to organized efforts to provide assistance and support to individuals, groups, or countries affected by conflicts and so on. The humanitarian needs are outlined: first, to alleviate suffering; second, to save lives; third, to assist affected populations; and fourth, to rebuild lives after a crisis. Therefore, based on these humanitarian needs, we must support the resettlement of climate refugees. Ladies and gentlemen, the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response, compared to previous models, is the selection and transfer of refugees from a country where they receive protection to a third country. In the context of today's debate, the resettlement we want to support is resettlement that recognizes climate refugees under international law as refugees who are entitled to protection, and second, this resettlement will be carried out in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol. Ladies and gentlemen, therefore, conceptually, to support the motion for debate, the government will assess the ability of climate refugee resettlement to fulfill humanitarian needs due to climate change. Ladies and gentlemen, our debate today is to assess the ability of climate refugee resettlement to fulfill humanitarian needs due to climate change. Ladies and gentlemen, the first and second arguments recognize the status of climate refugees and create planned climate migration. The third argument resolves national conflicts. The fourth argument upholds the principle of global solidarity. Ladies and gentlemen, in the first argument, as Prime Minister, recognizing the status of climate refugees. The status of climate refugees is excluded from the status of refugees under the 1951 Refugee Convention, meaning that people displaced across borders by climate-related phenomena generally do not receive refugee status in terms of legal protection, rights, and assistance. Ladies and gentlemen, this analysis reflects the interpretation of human rights that should also be accepted by climate refugees. Ladies and gentlemen, therefore, to address this issue and answer the motion, we will express support for the resettlement of climate refugees through the proposed mechanism that we have stated. Ladies and gentlemen, to recognize them under international law and to gain support from countries that have ratified. Ladies and gentlemen, the impact today, according to the International Labor Organization, is the importance of resettlement from the employment sector. Refugees will have access to decent income and can live with dignity and be self-reliant, rather than depending on the host country. Ladies and gentlemen, in terms of humanitarianism and housing, ladies and gentlemen, refugees are also given the opportunity to return to their home country when the time comes. Finally, today, it becomes a humanitarian response because it allows climate refugees to live a dignified life and have access to the minimum basic necessities they deserve as refugees. Ladies and gentlemen, the second argument creates planned climate migration. Planned climate migration is a strategy and action by governments or international bodies to plan the legal movement of communities. Why is this important today? Because climate refugees today face the risk of being denied entry into the countries they are heading to for safety. For example, in the Bahamas in September 2014, climate refugees from the Bahamas who wanted to migrate to the United States were denied entry and were told to return to their home country. Ladies and gentlemen, this situation shows a picture of unplanned migration that brings negative impacts. To answer the motion, we propose resettlement so that we can allow large-scale entry and ensure their survival. Ladies and gentlemen, the burden of proof is on the opposition. Show our inability. Show the disadvantages of climate refugee resettlement, and these disadvantages cannot be resolved today. Ladies and gentlemen, please continue to oppose. Assalamualaikum. Waalaikumsalam Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. He also told me that he welcomed the proposal for the use of batik for civil servants. This is a proposal put forward by the honorable Minister of Environment and Climate Change so that we can all reduce the use of air conditioning. Thank you for that support. Well, next, for our second speaker, we will move on to what are the counter-arguments that will be answered and presented by the honorable Deputy Opposition Leader, Mr. Abdullah bin Udin. Please proceed. [Music] Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. I thought the heat would last until evening, but it rained in the afternoon. I thought the government's case would not be opposed, but the opposition failed to scrutinize it well. Upholding the principle for all of us, let's revisit the mistakes of the opposition's case when they had problems with the government's case. First of all, we need to examine the motion carefully, which is: This house supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. This means that at the first stage, if our action of resettlement fulfills the humanitarian needs of those facing issues, then we have succeeded in accepting the motion for debate. The issue is resolved at the first stage. So, based on the usage, why shouldn't we solve the climate change issue? It shouldn't arise because the debate asks us to assess whether climate refugee resettlement can save these people. Ladies and gentlemen, second, ladies and gentlemen, the issue of scrutiny. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, regarding willingness, I want to argue, ladies and gentlemen, because did you know that the top three recipient countries are Turkey, Iran, and Colombia? Ladies and gentlemen, they are constantly improving the provision of basic humanitarian facilities such as schools, hospitals, and roads under the guidance of UNHCR. This means they, the opposition, are merely assuming that these countries are incapable. Ladies and gentlemen, furthermore, they assess the issue of resettlement. First, it is illogical. When they argue that we will resettle in that country, first, it is illogical. If the home country is already burdened by climate change issues such as drought, floods, and so on, how can logic suggest we send them back to a place already devastated by climate change? Ladies and gentlemen, that's why our proposal is to resettle in countries that have ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention and are willing

Answering regarding humanitarian needs because you need the Navy first. The issue of humanitarian issues cannot be answered with original precision, and if we listen carefully to this argument of ineffectiveness, ladies and gentlemen, first, it does not answer the motion of debate and the argument. We will move again. Ladies and gentlemen, it will not be an issue when recipient countries will be able to and realize their readiness and so on. At that time, humanitarian issues cannot be raised in the debate hall. That is the summary on the opposition delegation's table. Do not open the door to wounds. If opened, fish will fall. Do not like to find fault. We will clash first, ladies and gentlemen, both behind Datuk. I still believe in assessing the resettlement, the ability to resettle climate refugees to protect humanitarian needs due to climate change. The second argument, ladies and gentlemen, is to resolve conflicts in countries in the article "Post-Colonialism and Migration from Climate Change" ongoing in Justin and Hope by NPJ Climate Action in 2023. Most countries that are forced to accept climate refugees often face social issues due to increasingly visible resource depletion, for example, living space, food sources, healthcare, and education. For instance, in 2022, the world was shocked by massive demonstrations by residents in Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia, who were protesting against the government for failing to control the increasing demand from 3 million Somali climate refugees since 2020, even though their basic resources, especially food, were increasingly scarce and the country was getting poorer. The basis is when the issue of resource depletion becomes more severe. How does resettlement contribute to resolving these conflicts? By restructuring the settlement pattern, moving all these refugees to places and countries that are ready with abundant resources, such as Turkey, Colombia, Ajidita, and Yes. Finally, resource conflicts that cause access to basic rights can be resolved without leaving negative impacts, but rather providing a win-win situation between climate refugees and the original residents of the area. This is a picture of response where first, it saves refugees and helps the refugee population. Ultimately, humanitarian needs are successfully addressed. The 4th argument upholds the principle of global solidarity in the article "Protecting Celana from Fujis: The Case for Global Protocol" by Frank Birman and Inggris. At a time when climate refugees are not recognized as refugees, global participation is difficult to unite. This is because if the globe cannot accept and care for these climate refugees and provide adequate protection, then by creating a resettlement mechanism, the countries of the world can contribute together to efforts to protect humanitarian needs by starting to accept these climate refugees, just like other refugees. Ladies and gentlemen, the impact of the model we spread is that global responsibility must be upheld. 149 countries have ratified this convention. Even countries that are willing and allow climate refugees to inhabit their land can see the potential to increase humanitarian value. This is supported by the world diplomat Saidah Muna Taslim, who stated that this solidarity will not make any country close its eyes to the issue of humanitarian response. In the end, on the government delegation's table, first, we have presented four arguments. The government's offer answers the motion of debate, which is to respond to humanitarian response that we need to answer first before we touch on the issue of climate change. And I need to remind the house that the opposition delegation has not denied our case. Second, they have not shown the disadvantages of resettlement. And third, ladies and gentlemen, their problems, they have not shown that these problems cannot be solved. Therefore, we request to propose. Assalamualaikum. Waalaikumsalam Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. So it is the opposition's task to solve the problems posed by the government representative, Prime Minister Abdullah bin Udin. He said he likes to drink coffee with Scroll beras terbayo digradasi, although sometimes when the teeth are not tasty, but whatever, just accept it, because it is our duty to protect the environment. Thank you to the honorable Deputy Minister. Next, we move to the honorable opposition, Iman bin Azhar, for his argument, please. The question I want to leave on the table is, if humanitarianism is what they desire, why resettlement as presented by the government? Because the question is, how long can the world last? And the first points raised by the Prime Minister in the debate hall, the peak of climate change brought is the emission of carbon gases and also excessive greenhouse gas emissions. Suddenly, the Deputy Prime Minister rises and says this is not something we need to discuss. However, the facts you yourself brought indicate that by 2050, one billion people will be affected and will become climate refugees. Ladies and gentlemen, in what way can only three countries you presented be willing to accept climate refugees and accommodate one billion people? Ladies and gentlemen, in fact, they have also failed to answer whether or not, through the 1951 Refugee Convention, they are able to ratify and recognize climate refugees. Because the struggle to recognize climate refugees has begun since 1985, and no country in the world wants to recognize climate refugees, seeing the manipulation of origin countries to shift their responsibilities to their countries. Ladies and gentlemen, and disappointed with the government's delegation today, they are like wanting to put a temporary mechanism to control the current climate situation. Ladies and gentlemen, and what will happen in 10, 20, or 30 years if we do not implement a long-term mechanism? What is the meaning of support from the opposition delegation? And lastly, I showed you in the first and third arguments of the government delegation regarding the problem of resettlement. Ladies and gentlemen, do you know that in the UNSA resettlement process action report by the World Refugee Research Center, it was found that the world is experiencing failure in managing the current refugee numbers recognized by the Refugee Convention? Ladies and gentlemen, do you know that the number of current refugees who have not been resettled is 51.1 million people? Ladies and gentlemen, so if you add the number of climate refugees, how effective and certain will they be to get resettlement? Investigations by MPC found many factors that hinder UNHCR in resettling refugees, including in Uganda, where UNHCR failed to accommodate 8 million refugees. International court investigations have shown the existence of corruption and scarcity by this body. Ladies and gentlemen, who do not use world funds to ensure resettlement can be carried out sustainably and effectively. Moreover, a study by the World Action Research Center on the problem of protection of UNHCR and human rights has shown that if the solution for climate refugees launched is only resettlement, more rights will be violated. Ladies and gentlemen, due to the failure of protection, it will also cause these refugees to push each other in humanitarian responsibility. Finally, is this a form of humanitarian response? The opposition, the fourth argument on the delegation's table, that countries accept climate refugees, continues to oppose. Many climate refugee countries have depicted the issue of climate refugees being ignored by countries. Affected without any preparation. When they fail to manage disasters in the earlier phase, even though the data to manage disasters or climate events has been received earlier. Ladies and gentlemen, because through investigations from the same report, they have shifted this liability to other countries, even though they have the capacity to manage this matter in the first phase. It is like the proverb "enau in the bushes, letting go of the shoots." For example, in southern Uganda, two islands are projected to sink within 15 years. However, Uganda tries to blame and order its citizens to demand rights for refugees in New Zealand, even though this manipulation occurs if they are able to provide early mitigation. Ladies and gentlemen, their status as refugees under the convention. Second, today, if they are protected under this convention, agree or not, this is a form of humanitarian response. The government has failed to show how your support will guarantee that towards COP 28 Dubai, climate refugees can be accommodated in your refugee commission, which is illogical and biased for us to bring into the debate hall. Ladies and gentlemen, in another aspect, show another argument. The fifth argument, the development effort for resettlement in affected countries. The crisis in the Welping Project, which presented a report on the world's potential to adapt to climate change at COP 27 Egypt, has opened a new perspective to the world that if it is able to unite the world by 2030, it will witness mass displacement due to data and effective adaptation to climate change. It can ensure the development of colonized areas. When the area experienced massive floods in 2022, it caused 1,211 hectares to be uninhabitable. Ladies and gentlemen, however, the United States took steps earlier, not by providing resettlement, but by developing the affected areas to be reoccupied. Ladies and gentlemen, so this is the humanitarian situation that is more deeply fought for by the opposition delegation. The sixth argument, the final argument, is an alternative to humanitarian response. In fact, we take inspiration from the country of Tuvalu, which is projected to sink completely by 2050. However, they have implemented strategies to ensure the defense and rebuilding of the country in facing this matter. Ladies and gentlemen, this means that the real humanitarian response to facing climate change is also to ensure that as citizens, they engage in early mitigation, not by moving and resettling. That is what forms the basis of development. We will not support resettlement as a humanitarian response. Please continue to oppose. Assalamualaikum. Waalaikumsalam Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. Once again, a round of applause for the honorable Muhammad Iman bin Azhar, Deputy Opposition Leader. And he said he has three vehicles, calling him "Abang" (brother), not the other "Abang." Okay, good. Ladies and gentlemen, once again, it is reminded that this motion, as indicated by the house, needs to be read in full, which is that this house supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. Therefore, it is requested that my friends present their arguments and debates more attractively. God willing, after this. So, without further ado, we invite the first speaker from the government delegation, Universiti Malaysia, the honorable Muhammad Hafizi bin Muhammad Hanafi, please. Check your voice, check your voice. Honorable house, it is true what people say, quality is more important than quantity. That's why be loyal to one, don't look for the second. Because if we look at their speeches, the fifth and sixth arguments talk about the same thing, about mitigation only. Meaning, it's lively, but it's just a patch of facts, it doesn't mean anything for our final environmental debate today. Thank you, honorable house. The government delegation, the opposition, and the citizens of this house support the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. So, the government delegation moves to uphold this motion. We assess the status of climate refugees. They are not recognized as refugees like in war, etc. Therefore, the government delegation proposes that we recognize them so that ultimately protection can be given to them. Second, we want to build resettlement. The mistake when debating is not just talking, but listening, then we can refute. Because our proposal is not to send them back to their home countries, but 149 countries have signed the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol, proving they can accept refugees as long as there is agreement. That's why we prove to you how today we can create managed migration. We can ensure their needs are met. Ultimately, this motion does not demand us to solve the issue of climate change, because we understand that this issue takes a long time. But when we have humanity, will we take a response? This response, we say, we resettle them. That is a misunderstanding of the motion. Because they are like turtles in a boat, pretending not to know. Ladies and gentlemen, that is the first problem. The second problem today is that their bait is long, only a span, so they cannot fathom the deep ocean. Because it turns out they say, oh, Argentina cannot accept refugees. Wrong. Because Argentina was the first country to recognize climate refugees, accepting them from Mexico and so on. Maybe later you can add to your reading. The same goes for me. That is the second problem. The third problem is that three countries cannot solve 5 billion 2 million, and so on. That's why we have 149 countries. We place them in suitable areas. Because you need to understand that in this case, Japan, for example, is experiencing a low birth rate and a high aging rate. They need people. Ultimately, Japan is willing to accept them as long as they can contribute to the country. A win-win situation, humanity is preserved, Japan also benefits. That is the first problem with the opposition delegation. Overall, when they deviate from the motion of debate, it's as if we are not debating with them. Please, just look at the humanitarian response of the government. It is when we can resettle, but we ignore the crisis to the physical environment, to pollution. Because when we resettle, we can reduce density in the current place, so we reduce carbon emissions and so on. And at the same time, we also take care of humanitarian issues. Because we can build more sustainable settlements in new areas. Therefore, the second chance given to them is not to betray our beloved Mother Earth. We see the problem of the first and sixth arguments. Sayyidah earlier, the first argument, the mechanism does not solve the problem. Because it is said that by 2050, there will be one billion two hundred million climate refugees. This is your problem. Because when we move them, we can move them to a more threatened settlement. These settlements will provide them with basic needs. Ultimately, they can also access education as stipulated in Convention 51, which grants 11 rights to these refugees. The first argument is refuted. The second argument, you say it is not a sustainable approach. This is what is sustainable. Because ultimately, when we try to resettle, we reduce density in the current place. Ultimately, this will help them. And if this is not a long-term approach, what else is there? Because the opposition cannot just ask, you need to be better by providing suggestions. The fourth argument regarding countries not agreeing. Not agreeing today because we do not recognize climate refugees in the context of UNHCR. When we recognize them, we will provide assistance to them, so we will take on a greater responsibility to these countries, as has been done by New Zealand, which has taken refugees from the Caribbean region and so on. Ultimately, we uphold humanitarian values. The fifth and sixth arguments, they talk about refugee mitigation. Apparently, they accuse us. This is like slapping water into a bowl and getting splashed in the face. We do not want to send them back to their home countries. Apparently, they want these refugees to be temporarily resettled. If their place is submerged, they don't need to go to the water's edge so they can live again. That cannot be. Ultimately, when we always look for others' faults, we forget to look at ourselves. This proves that their alternative cannot be used. Because they are actually bringing the same thing. Therefore, the government's case still stands. Because the weaknesses of resettling climate refugees have never been denied. Because we show you that we can recognize climate refugees. Second, we can create managed climate migration. Third, we can resolve current country conflicts. And fourth, we can uphold the principle of global solidarity. There is a reason why we are wearing gray today. Because this is the final stage for our environment. Let this gray color remain the color of our clothing, not the color of smoke or the confusion designed by climate change. Because we don't want them to continue to suffocate and suffer. Thank you. Love for our beloved Mother Earth. Waalaikumsalam Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. If the government side says gray, perhaps the opposition side will say black and red later. But thank you to the honorable person who mentioned the turtle and the water siphon. This is actually related to his pet turtle, whose nature will pollute the aquarium water, so it needs to be siphoned and the water changed twice a day. This was shared by him earlier. So, let's move on to the first speaker from the opposition, the National University of Malaysia, the honorable Muhammad Badrun Naim bin Muhammad Basri, please. Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh. As the third speaker on the opposition delegation's table, I am quite upset and disappointed at this final stage of the 29th environmental debate. The government delegation seems to be like a burnt stick, prioritizing the latter. The government delegation is seen as a delegation that fails to grasp the motion properly in the debate hall. Honorable, let's look at the concept of time presented by the Prime Minister in the debate hall. In the first point, regarding humanitarian response, the government delegation has outlined several elements for us to evaluate an action as a humanitarian response. This is the government delegation. They want to tell us how the resettlement of climate refugees is a humanitarian response when we can solve the issue of global temperature decrease, ice melting, and carbon pollution. Honorable, but did we hear throughout the government delegation's speech that by simply moving climate refugees, we can lower the global temperature? This has never been told. This is the government delegation. Honorable, therefore, we need to understand that resettlement only moves from one place to other countries to bear these climate refugees. Honorable, how do we ensure today that global carbon emissions have less impact to solve the problem? In fact, the emergence of climate refugees in the world, honorable, is the problem. Therefore, on this matter, I think the government delegation fails to grasp the phrase "humanitarian response." Doubt about humanitarian response in today's debate hall. I think today they want to deceive through international legal obligations, how we want to justify an action as a humanitarian action or a responsibility that countries are forced to follow. Honorable, but in Indonesia, it is directly abandoned by the government delegation. Honorable, what is debated in the debate hall today, we need to understand, but humanitarian response, honorable, is something that needs to be debated properly. Due to this failure, our debate hall becomes chaotic. Honorable, the second problem, which is the problem of resettlement. Honorable, the government's explanation and definition only refer to how resettlement is through international law. First, the nature of this convention is that it cannot be forced. Honorable, and after so long since 1985, no country has agreed to move refugees to recognize climate refugees as a form of refugee. Honorable, so how can the government delegation ensure the compliance of countries that ratify the Refugee Convention to accept climate refugees? Honorable, because we need to understand the validity of the convention, it cannot be forced. Honorable, and we fully understand that not all countries that ratify this convention have the capacity to accommodate the many climate refugees in the world. Honorable, therefore, how do you guarantee that their humanitarian issues are preserved? Ultimately, these refugees will become beggars and live without dignity in transit countries, as is happening with current refugee issues in our country. Honorable, so to avoid this, honorable, is resettlement the answer? No. Honorable, second, this resettlement action, honorable, has never answered the projected number of climate refugees by 2030, which is one billion two hundred million people. Honorable, because with only resettlement, until when will we take the approach of accepting and moving them? Honorable, the availability in Turkey, presented by the government delegation, is that Turkey is ready to accept climate refugees. I doubt this fact. Because in Turkey, honorable, the refugees they accept are mostly war refugees. Honorable, it is not suitable to be discussed in today's debate hall. Honorable, the government's debate has never shown us how resettlement of climate refugees can answer the issue of humanitarian response to climate change. Honorable, when the peak is through the increase in sea temperature, the increase in global temperature, there is no point in solving it by simply moving and accepting these climate refugees. Honorable, finally, it cannot answer the issue that has been debated and presented by the government delegation, which is the issue of one billion two hundred million climate refugees that cannot be answered in the debate hall. Honorable, before moving on one by one, if not resettled, for 218 years, what will we do with them? Therefore, you need to be prepared. Now, in solving climate change issues, we need to look at a long-term action to solve these issues. Honorable, we need to provide availability. The current situation shows unavailability. How do we want to ensure that the issue of humanitarian response to climate change can be solved? Honorable, the government delegation's first argument, recognizing the status of climate refugees for so long. Honorable, why today are climate refugees and climate refugees not accepted? Because, honorable, if we refer to COP 27, their focus is not on resettlement, but on solving and reducing climate refugee issues through early mitigation to reduce the impact of global temperature rise. The second argument talks about managed climate migration. This argument has already been refuted by the government delegation with facts showing that 58 million current refugees are in transit countries. Honorable, whose humanitarian issues cannot be preserved. Honorable, the third and fourth arguments are just talking about the same thing and do not answer the motion's demands. Compared to the opposition delegation, we show you the ineffectiveness of resettlement in facing climate change. Six arguments. We explain how, in the end, resettlement is not a sustainable step. And second, the problem of refugee issues by UNHCR symbolizes that we cannot support the resettlement of climate refugees. Please reject the motion. Assalamualaikum. Waalaikumsalam Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. Before we move on, a reminder to avoid thirst, drink 8 glasses or two liters of water. Insyaallah, it can maintain vocal momentum. Okay, ladies and gentlemen, you may have heard the substantive speeches from the government and opposition sides. Next, we will move to the open debate session. It is requested that the government and opposition delegations be ready for this open debate session. This session will last for 12 minutes, and each speaker will be given a maximum of 90 seconds to answer or refute the statements from the opposing side. If all parties are ready, my dear friends, the caretakers of the mosque are ready. We will start with the government delegation. Open debate session, 12 minutes, starting now. Ladies and gentlemen, the summary of this package on the opposition delegation's table. First, they have slandered us, stating things we have never said. Ladies and gentlemen, first of all, I want to emphasize on your delegation's table, we have never stated that these refugees will be sent back to their original places. We said they will be sent to countries that are willing. Ladies and gentlemen, we welcome these refugees for the sake of their humanitarian principles. And the fact about one billion people. First of all, it is a projection, meaning if we act today by resettling, it means that today it will not be solved, but it will only provide a reduction. Regarding the issue of readiness, do you know? According to the Institute of Economics and Peace, ladies and gentlemen, the fund receives consistent funding of 4 to 500 every year, and this becomes a strong projection of capacity. Ladies and gentlemen, in 2019, it received 9.4 million. In 2022, 10.7 million. Do you know the contributors are the European Union, developed countries, and Turkey itself, which unite their readiness and today state they want to provide a lot of funding? Abdullah in the debate hall, first, he said one billion, one billion people. This is a projection, yes, a projection. But the change to reduce or prevent this projection from happening lies in climate change, not resettlement. Ladies and gentlemen, how can merely managing resettlement ensure this? Resettlement only adds to the number of climate refugees. Ladies and gentlemen, new factors can be opened. The Datu Abdullah report, "The Differences of Responsibility of 66," published on September 23, 2020, states that several countries have issued measures as a form of sustainable mitigation against climate change. Ladies and gentlemen, this is not resettlement, but first, the process of widespread coral reef planting in the waters as an alternative place for areas that will be submerged by 2050. Second, mapping at-risk areas. And third, sharing technological expertise in preserving the life of the earth and also affected countries. Ladies and gentlemen, this means we have the potential to do early mitigation to prevent the projection of one billion people from being affected. Please answer. Apparently, their concern is only about one billion two hundred million. As usual, when asked about the current situation, it is not answered. Apparently, for the current situation, let it wait for death to come. We are concerned about the future, not solving the problem. Therefore, along with the current situation and the future, we resettle them. At the same time, efforts to control climate change never stop. We continue with carbon trading and so on. Meaning, resettlement will complement our ecosystem in controlling climate change. We look at the fact of country readiness according to the New Zealand article, "Skmed Revisi Bisa Program." With the permission of the honorable house, New Zealand is the first country to pioneer the resettlement of climate refugees in the Pacific Islands, which are increasingly sinking. This is done by providing visas to refugees. This is done out of humanitarian spirit that needs to be fulfilled. For example, saving the island of Kiribati, which is sinking, with this they can provide opportunities for these refugee residents to get housing, income, protection for refugees, and so on. Ultimately, when countries begin to be ready, even though we have not changed the status of climate refugees, it means that when we change that matter, it will be spread more widely, answering the humanitarian response. Ladies and gentlemen, meaning now there is no problem, we can do this. Honorable, I am disappointed with the government delegation because they accuse us of not taking care of refugees' welfare. It is not that we do not want to take care of them, but if you want to add the burden of managing refugees by including climate refugees, it will only add to the burden and the time. Honorable, because today, honorable, the issue of refugee resettlement is now a major problem for UNHCR management. Ladies and gentlemen, I provide new facts based on the Human Watch Refuge report in 2022, with the permission of the honorable house, there are 23 million refugees in transit countries that have not ratified the convention, which is 22% of Rohingya refugees and 3,700 from transit refugees. This has been ongoing since 2012, the beginning of this refugee issue to these transit countries. In almost a little time, resettlement is still not possible. What conclusion can we draw from this fact? Now, resettlement is still a burden for UNHCR. So, when we simply ratify the convention to include climate refugees, we only increase the number of refugees, not increase the capacity of countries or UNHCR to manage refugees. Because ultimately, throughout the government's debate, they have never shown the numbers. Today, you are too reliant on the number of climate refugees. Ladies and gentlemen, therefore, in answering this issue, we will focus on managed resettlement of climate refugees in a managed way, so that ultimately this problem will not escalate. Answering your question about the readiness of countries that have ratified this and so on. My answer from the government delegation is that among the 149 countries said to be ready, in terms of providing basic needs for refugees under the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol, they are ready to accept climate refugees if, at any time, climate refugees are recognized. Ladies and gentlemen, moreover, according to UNHCR research on the trend of readiness, there are two aspects of readiness: providing basic needs and acceptance by local residents, which shows that 136 countries have a high level of readiness. Ladies and gentlemen, in the matter of resettlement, it will never reduce the number of climate refugees. On the contrary, we are only moving them. The number of climate refugees will continue to increase year by year. Honorable, therefore, if the honorable house presents facts about the readiness of countries to accept refugees, if so, then why are there 58 million refugees in transit countries? Honorable, it is still a question in the debate hall. New facts from the open debate, according to the writing of "Australia Revisi Program Compact to Add Countries" by Review in Australia, on average, Australia has accepted 8.9 million refugees out of 35 million refugees. Of this number, honorable, it has become the country with the highest per capita refugee intake. And if we look at the report from the former Prime Minister of Australia, Scott Morrison, he stated that there is a refugee problem like the refugee issue in their country. This fact shows how, if the current situation is not ready, how can we guarantee the humanitarian issues for refugees? Third-world countries are willing to accept refugees. Suddenly, ladies and gentlemen, you mean that refugees can extend their lives and contribute to us and the economy, and Australia has no problem. Because you have not shown any evidence. Well, let's look at the real issue today. According to the article "Critical Time for Review and German" by UN Hasia, with the permission of the honorable house, climate refugees in Tanzania, 100 Tanzanians, depend on cutting trees around them to survive. Meaning, today they need a form of resettlement because first, they have the skills to build settlements to continue their lives. Second, they can contribute to any country willing to accept them. Ultimately, they will have a better life compared to the activity of cutting trees in their home countries where they live. Ultimately, the summary of the open debate today, the opposition delegation suddenly presents various facts showing that there are countries that can accept refugees, contrary to the Deputy Opposition Leader. Oh, they should be moved to a third country only. It cannot be like that. Because the development of the debate is not good development. But we still stand. We tell you that countries are willing, as long as they are recognized by UNHCR. That's all, ladies and gentlemen. The summary of the open debate. Two questions have not been answered by the government delegation. First, if these countries are truly ready, what about the refugees out there? That's first. Second, it is said that there will be sustainable migration. Won't you know about the population facts, ladies and gentlemen, where the density will not cause this country to continue to accept refugees, and refugees will ultimately lead to true sustainable migration as desired by the government? New facts from the open debate, ladies and gentlemen. The UN FCC in the strategy report for refugees towards COP 28 Dubai, organized in 2023, released a preliminary draft of the decisions of the conference. The decision will be a rejection of the proposal to recognize climate refugees. Ladies and gentlemen, considering the capacity and availability of countries in the world today to accept the increasing number of climate refugees year by year, and by 2050, one billion people, ladies and gentlemen, this forms two situations: first, the reluctance of countries to accept refugees, and second, the chaos in terms of protection and rights that should be given to refugees. Alhamdulillah, so the open debate session has concluded. Before we move on to the closing speeches, let's give the honorable parties time to prepare their speeches for the closing session. The house will be adjourned for 1 minute for the closing session. Each delegation can be represented by any speaker. So, in your opinion, will the motion today be accepted or rejected? Everything is silent, but the decision is not in your hands. Because we will introduce professional judges. Introduced to you, ladies and gentlemen. First of all, Mr. Kamarun Nizam bin Kamal. A round of applause for Mr. Kamarun Nizam, Head of the Creative Media and Visibility Section, Corporate Strategy and Communications Center, Putra Malaysia University. He is the highest-class judge of the Malaysian University Debate Council and the overall chief judge of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition in 2023. A round of applause for Mr. Kamarun Nizam. The second judge is Dr. Nurhasmi bin Matsari, Deputy Director of Operations, Department of Environment. Give a round of applause. And the third judge is Madam Hajah Masitah binti Darus, Director General of Development, Department of Environment. There are the professional judges who will decide whether the motion today is accepted or rejected. This final round is the decisive round, whether their struggle will truly be proven. So, it is hoped that the honorable parties are ready to defend their cases and arguments respectively. Please, first, the representative from the opposition delegation to deliver the closing speech. Please. The debate today, I can describe the government delegation as daydreaming. Not grounded in reality. If this resettlement theory were truly happening and concluded that we could live peacefully with refugees, however, the government delegation missed the analysis of how the current implementation of resettling refugees is. Honorable, due to this lack of analysis, the government delegation remains in their fantasy. Honorable, if we recognize climate refugees, they can be saved. But they forget that resettlement involves various factors that need to be considered: the readiness and agreement of countries. If we could truly guarantee this today, we would not have a backlog of refugees. But now, the fact is that the government delegation in its debate hall has not yet resolved their proposal, which is too simplistic and idealistic. Honorable, if we recognize climate refugees in the refugee convention, it will bind countries. But the opposition is here. We analyze how the current scenario has happened with the ratification of refugees. Even though it binds 149 countries in the convention, how many countries have accepted refugees to the point of a refugee backlog? Honorable, if we add climate refugees, where else will we place them? And how will we lobby these major countries to agree to accept refugees? Even if they are willing, honorable, that projection has never been told by the government delegation. So, in the end, it will be a humanitarian response to climate change or the responsibility of countries that are forced to fulfill the obligations of the Refugee Convention solely. Honorable, this has never been shown. Second, I am disappointed with the government delegation. It is like "enau in the bushes, letting go of the shoots." Third, the government delegation has a dual goal. First, to address climate change, rising global temperatures, rising sea levels. But the second point suddenly says we want to be humanitarian, regardless of the impact on climate change. Honorable, it is enough to simply resettle refugees, and we are considered humanitarian. This cannot be. Honorable, the opposition delegation's use of early mitigation is also a humanitarian action for climate change that can save us from the projection of one billion two hundred million climate refugees by the year. Which is better in the debate hall? Of course, the opposition delegation. So, in the end, the Malaysian government delegation remains in fantasy. If their world order were to happen, with the refugee situation, each to their own, I would also join their fantasy. But no, honorable, because the opposition delegation today shows the ineffectiveness of the resettlement mechanism in facing climate change. When the climate begins to change, we have a projection that can be estimated. What is the impact in 30 years? So, do we need to rush to resettle refugees who have not yet been affected? Honorable, no. We need to prepare countries facing this crisis so they have mitigation to save their own citizens. Honorable, second, this is only true. We show that by allowing resettlement, we are actually legitimizing pollution that contributes to climate change. Honorable, in the end, the origin country that is at risk does not want to bear the consequences for their country. So they shift that burden to other countries. What is the promise to the sovereignty of other countries? That has never been mentioned by the government delegation or the opposition delegation. So, in the end, for the future and the future of climate change, we do not need to support the resettlement of climate refugees on humanitarian grounds. I request to continue to oppose. Thank you. Thank you. Insyaallah, on humanitarian grounds, it is a shared responsibility. Next, ladies and gentlemen, let us hear the final closing speech from the government delegation. Ladies and gentlemen, in fact, the opposition present in the debate hall is daydreaming. The motion of debate has still not been answered by the opposition delegation's table. So, I will summarize and conclude this closing session using the acronym CLIMATE. The essence of the government's case is like the moon behind the stars. Today, we assess the ability of climate refugee resettlement. How first, their status is equal to other refugees, ladies and gentlemen, so that their rights can be upheld to continue living. Second, we place them in countries that have ratified and are ready, and that is our desire on the government delegation's table. Ultimately, it is able to create a situation of preserving humanitarian needs due to climate change. A picture as a humanitarian response to climate change. Okay, a beautiful case, supported by 4 meticulous arguments. How to draw hair from flour. Ladies and gentlemen, the first argument recognizes the status of climate refugees, which the opposition has debated. How about their rights? It has been answered in this argument. Second, creating managed climate migration. How about the border issue they are worried about? It has been answered in this argument. Third, resolving current country conflicts. They have debated throughout the debate hall. How about the conflicts that will arise? It has been answered in the third argument. And fourth, upholding the principle of global solidarity. Upholding the principle of solidarity, just like the environment, is a shared responsibility, and the spirit of this motion is that humanity is also our shared responsibility. Next, the flawed lens of the opposition delegation. How they failed to listen and comprehend. That's why what they chose was to slander. Two major slanders in the debate hall. First, they said we want to send these refugees back to their home countries. Datuk Sarjana has never presented about that. We send them to countries that are ready. Second, they said that we want to force these countries to accept. We have never said that. We said countries are willing voluntarily. Ladies and gentlemen, because that is the nature of this convention. And the first, second, third, and fourth arguments, they still have not answered the burden of proof regarding the capacity of our proposal. Upholding humanitarian values. What we are concerned about is climate change. Because I believe this debate is for us to first answer the issue of humanity. Because in the current situation, where will we place them and uphold their humanitarian values? Ladies and gentlemen, the core of the opposition's misunderstanding is like carrying murky water. Ladies and gentlemen, their question, which they raise, is about climate change. Ladies and gentlemen, if this motion is accepted, we will never cancel all climate change motions. We will continue with carbon trading, energy transition, promoting green energy. It will further complement these proposals, and these proposals will not stop. And which delegation has the eyes of which delegation? Ladies, I remind you again, the motion of debate today is: This house supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. Not: This house supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a response to climate change. Meaning, humanity is the matter that needs to be answered first, which the opposition delegation failed to analyze. Please propose. Sorry for stealing time. Assalamualaikum. Waalaikumsalam Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh. So, ladies and gentlemen, with that, the substantive and open debate sessions for the government and opposition delegations have concluded. Let us give a round of applause to the government delegation from Indonesia and also the opposition delegation from Malaysia National University. On this occasion, let us all give applause for the natural resources and environmental protection program, the Department of Environment, Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. And thank you to the honorable house once again. Alhamdulillah. Ladies and gentlemen, we have reached the end of this final debate session. Before I conclude, I would like to share a verse from Surah Ar-Rum, verse 41, which means: "Corruption and calamities have appeared on land and sea because of what the hands of men have earned. Allah intends for them to taste some of the consequences of their deeds, so that they may return [to Him]." This house supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. As the host, I would like to adjourn the debate session. Assalamualaikum. Thank you. The council, acting as the moderator, give a round of applause to both teams for successfully debating well regarding the motion: This house supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. With this, I announce the results. Honorable members, government and opposition delegations, along with the honorable house and the timekeeper. [Music] The environmental program is a program to build awareness and mobilize community members in activities of environmental preservation and conservation. The function of the program is to assist government agencies in addressing activities that pollute the environment. The goal is to raise environmental awareness among all levels of society, instill a sense of responsibility among the community to act and participate in protecting the shared environment, and provide the right channel for the community to make complaints or suggestions regarding the environment to the relevant government agencies. Clearly, the activities carried out include reporting or complaints about pollution cases, preventing and controlling pollution, environmental education and awareness campaigns, and beautifying the environmental quality. Imagine the world becoming increasingly hot due to deforestation, burning of fossil fuels, and increased carbon dioxide, all of which contribute significantly to global warming. How can 7 billion people...

In this world, life will continue. Ask yourself. [Music] Lestari Anugerah Environmental School (SLIIS) is an effort to implement the national environmental policy. The first green strategy focuses on education and environmental awareness through this program. Environmental education elements can be applied among teachers, students, and the local community. Subsequently, it is cultivated in daily practices. Five components are applied: curriculum management, special greening, and environmental conservation. Environmental conservation is a shared responsibility. Every school member can cultivate environmental sustainability practices at all times at the school level. Ask yourselves, children. Have you been responsible for protecting the environment? Water is the main source of water for our lives. Water needs to be managed to ensure water quality is safe for use. There are four types of water sources: groundwater, well water, lake water, and river water. [Music] What are the sources of water pollution? Surface runoff such as rainwater, waste such as sewage and industrial effluent discharged from drains, landfills, and daily human activities will provide indicators to us regarding the quality of river, lake, and sea water. Therefore, it is very important to ensure our water sources are in a clean and safe condition for use. Clean water leads to a prosperous life. [Music] [Music] Did you know that single-use plastic takes 400 to 1000 years to decompose and causes environmental pollution? As we can see, plastic is everywhere, in the sea, rivers, parks, and our surroundings. Plastic is one of the main causes of water pollution. Plastic discarded in our country's waters may be washed away to neighboring countries or vice versa. [Music] There are many options that can be used to reduce plastic use. You can practice using reusable water bottles, reusable bags, and reusable straws. Let us together take this initiative and make a change in our lives by reducing plastic use. It is everyone's responsibility to save the earth for future generations. Do we realize that by planting trees, we can save thousands of lives? Planting new trees can help absorb carbon dioxide from the air, which ultimately reduces the greenhouse effect. Green cover and forests are very important for well-being and quality of life. Besides improving our country's ecosystem and biodiversity, clean air is a priceless gift to the lives of humans and creatures in this universe. Fresh and clean areas are usually filled with flora. Flora releases oxygen into the air, allowing the body to get enough oxygen. Planting green plants not only provides a cool and comfortable environment but also functions to stabilize the surrounding temperature. Imagine if there were no more flora due to human greed. Will we still be able to breathe fresh air at that time? The choice is in all of our hands. Okay guys, hurry up, guys. Let me be healthy. Not necessarily diseases in the body. In 2012, the environment was given a punishment commensurate with the offense committed. Let us together protect the water sources in our country. The environment is a shared responsibility. River pollution is the main cause of polluted water. This pollution causes millions of users to be affected and economic sectors to lose millions of Ringgit. The government has taken firm action where offenders can be prosecuted under the Environmental Quality Act 1974 and also various related acts such as the Security Offenses (Special Measures) Act 2012 (SOSMA). Let us together protect the water sources in our country. [Music] Did you know that single-use plastic takes 400 to 1000 years to decompose and causes environmental pollution? As we can see, plastic is everywhere, in the sea, rivers, parks, and our surroundings. Plastic is one of the main causes of water pollution. Plastic discarded in our country's waters may be washed away to neighboring countries or vice versa. There are many options that can be used to reduce plastic use. You can practice using reusable water bottles, reusable bags, and reusable straws. Let us together take this initiative and make a change in our lives by reducing plastic use. It is everyone's responsibility to save the earth for future generations. [Music] [Music] Ladies and gentlemen, the ceremony will begin shortly. I would like to remind the audience to take their respective seats, using the designated chairs and not to change the position of the chairs that have been arranged. The audience is requested to stand when announced for the singing of the Negaraku anthem and the recitation of the Rukun Negara pledge. We request the cooperation of the audience to ensure that there are no disturbances while the ceremony is in progress. Hopefully, with the cooperation of the audience, this ceremony can proceed smoothly. Please return to your seats and do not change the original position of the designated chairs. Thank you. [Music] [Music] [Applause] Air pollution and the environment are our shared responsibility. This world is home to everyone. Water is the main source of water for our lives. [Music] There are four types of water sources: groundwater, well water, lake water, and river water. [Music] Water pollution is caused by surface runoff such as rainwater, waste such as sewage and industrial effluent, and daily human activities. This causes the quality of river, lake, and sea water to be polluted. Water will provide indicators to us regarding the quality of river, lake, and sea water. Therefore, it is very important to ensure our water sources are in a clean and safe condition for use. Clean water leads to a prosperous life. [Music] Attention to all attendees, please be seated. [Music] The chairs that have been arranged. Lestari Anugerah Environmental School (SLIIS) is an effort to implement the national environmental policy. The first green strategy focuses on education and environmental awareness. Through this program, environmental education elements can be applied among teachers, students, and the local community. Subsequently, it is cultivated in daily practices. Five components are applied: curriculum management. Environmental conservation is a shared responsibility. We announce the arrival of the honorable Director General of Environment, accompanied by dignitaries. [Music] [Music] Singing of the Johor anthem and Negaraku. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] To instill a sense of love and patriotism for the beloved country and nation, let us together renew the Rukun Negara pledge, which will be led by Brother Muhammad Afiq Muhammad Rabbani. Rukun Negara: Bahawasanya, negara kita Malaysia mendukung cita-cita hendak mencapai perpaduan yang lebih erat di kalangan seluruh masyarakatnya; memelihara satu cara hidup demokratik; mencipta satu masyarakat yang adil di mana kemakmuran negara akan dapat dinikmati bersama secara adil dan saksama; menjamin satu cara liberal terhadap tradisi-tradisi kebudayaannya yang kaya dan pelbagai corak; membina satu masyarakat progresif yang akan menggunakan sains dan teknologi moden; maka kami, rakyat Malaysia, berikrar akan menumpukan seluruh tenaga dan usaha kami untuk mencapai cita-cita tersebut berdasarkan prinsip-prinsip yang berikut: Kepercayaan kepada Tuhan, kesetiaan kepada Raja dan Negara, kedaulatan undang-undang, kesopanan dan kesusilaan, serta memelihara perlembagaan. [Music] technology, creativity, and I am Nurhasya Amirah binti Nazri, a 3rd-year Bachelor of Science in Software Engineering student, your host for today's ceremony. The frangipani flower is so fragrant, a beautiful bouquet. Greetings and a welcome to all. The kikir bird is under the pine tree. A smile is etched, a greeting is extended. Let's begin with Bismillah. Bismillahirrohmanirrohim. Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh. Greetings of independence and greetings to the honorable Dato' Wan Abdul Latif Wan Ja'far, Director General of Environment, the honorable Professor Ir. Ts. Dr. Ismail bin Said, Deputy Vice-Chancellor of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, representatives from the Ministry of Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change, directors of the Department of Environment, state branches, members of the debate committee, esteemed judges, participants, and distinguished ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the closing ceremony and prize-giving of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions. Alhamdulillah, we are grateful to Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala for His grace that allows us to gather in this beautiful hall this morning. The ceremony welcomes your presence to celebrate the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions. Raise your ten fingers, pray for blessings. Before we proceed with the next item, I invite Brother to lead the recitation of the doa. Al-Fatihah. Bismillahirrohmanirrohim. Alhamdulillahirabbilalamin. Wasolatu wassalamu ala ashrofil anbiya iwal mursalin. [Music] Allahumma innaka kholaqol azim. O Allah, You are the praiseworthy, You are deserving of all praise, You are deserving of all gratitude, You are the owner of all dominion. In Your hand is all goodness. To You, all matters return. O Allah, O Generous, O Merciful, bestow Your mercy and compassion upon this closing ceremony and prize-giving of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions held today. O Allah, bless it from beginning to end. O You who do as You will, we also seek Your protection from all matters that may mar our ceremony and from all matters that distract us from obeying You and from doing evil. O Allah, to You we entrust all our affairs. Robbana alaika tawakkalna wa ilaika anabna. Sayyidina Muhammad wa ala alihi wa sahbihi wasallam. Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, the Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions was first held in 1986 and has become an annual event since 1991. This program is organized by the Department of Environment in collaboration with the Malaysian Debate Council and Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. This year, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia has taken on the responsibility as host for the 29th edition. A total of 30 teams underwent initial screening and online selection from August 19th to 20th. Eight best teams were selected to advance to the quarter-finals and subsequently to the finals, which were held on August 26th and 27th. Therefore, the motion for the final round is: "This House supports the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change." Thus, a new champion will be crowned shortly. Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, to grace this morning's event, the ceremony respectfully invites the honorable Professor Ir. Ts. Dr. Ismail to deliver his speech with utmost respect. [Music] Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and greetings. The honorable Dato' Wan Abdul Latif [Music] Director General of Environment, the honorable Professor Ir. Ts. Dr. Ismail [Music] Deputy Vice-Chancellor of the Debate Council, the honorable Datuk Muhammad Ruswan bin Muhammad Baba Sakri, representatives from the Ministry of Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change, directors of the Department of Environment, state branches, members of the 29th Environmental Debate Committee. I welcome you. [Music] [Music] I also wish to express my gratitude to Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala for gathering us today to witness the final debate session and to complete the closing ceremony and prize-giving of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions today. On behalf of UTHM, as the host for the 29th edition, I would like to express my thanks for the presence of the honorable Dato' Wan Abdul Latif to officiate the 29th Environmental Debate Competition today. His presence will add to the splendor of this program and inspire the audience, especially the students who will be future leaders of the country. My highest appreciation and thanks also go to the Department of Environment Malaysia (JAS) as the main organizer of the debate competition between Higher Learning Institutions for choosing Hussein University as the host this year. Thanks are also extended to our collaboration partners: the Ministry of Higher Education (KPT), the Malaysian Debate Council, and Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DBP), who have greatly assisted in planning and implementing the debate competition. Last but not least, appreciation to the organizing committee consisting of staff and students who have sacrificed much of their time to ensure this competition runs smoothly, both online and offline. The 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions is an annual event that is synonymous with the debate calendar in Malaysia. The debate competition between Higher Learning Institutions was introduced in 1986. This program aims to enhance knowledge and awareness among students regarding current issues related to policies, initiatives, and implementation activities at the national and international levels related to environmental conservation and preservation. This truly reflects that today we place our trust and confidence in the younger generation towards environmental sustainability, especially in our country. Today, we have witnessed the final debate between representatives from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) and Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) with the motion concerning the resettlement of climate refugees as a humanitarian response to climate change. Congratulations to the two finalists: UKM and USM. I congratulate the debaters who have successfully presented the issues maturely and informatively, clearly demonstrating the readiness of students to be agents of change for the nation's development agenda in the future. For your information, 30 teams participated in this competition this year, with the initial screening conducted online on August 19th and 20th. Eight teams advanced to the semi-finals. Public speaking, in general, is an important element in a person's development. Student involvement in programs and activities like this actually encourages an increase in communication skills, critical thinking development, social networking expansion, increased confidence, and leads to leadership opportunities in career and economic achievements. This is not just about seeing Higher Learning Institutions as providers of skills for employment, but rather about nurturing values and skills that will produce a more contemporary and sustainable generation for the environment. To the students, whether you win or lose, there is always victory and defeat, but do not be discouraged or feel inferior. You have successfully represented thousands of students from your respective institutions to compete. Continue your interest and passion in participating in these discussions. This debate arena is a garden of knowledge. Today may not seem sweet, but its results will be remembered. Finally, before I conclude my speech, I would like to express my appreciation once again to the honorable Dato' Wan Abdul Latif, Director General of Environment, for officiating the 29th Environmental Debate Competition today. Thank you also to the Department of Environment Malaysia, Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia, Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, the Debate Council, and the organizing committee. Congratulations to the winners who will be crowned shortly. [Music] Thank you to the honorable [Music] ladies and gentlemen. The durian tree is in the garden, the straw stem falls to the ground. Your speech is eagerly awaited, making the ceremony more splendid. The ceremony continues with an invitation to the honorable Datuk Wan Abdul Latif Wan Ja'far, Director General of Environment, to deliver his speech and officially close the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions with utmost respect. The ceremony invites. [Music] The honorable Professor Ir. Ts. Dr. Ismail, Deputy Vice-Chancellor of UTHM, the honorable Professor Haji Lukman Hakim Haji Ismail, Deputy Vice-Chancellor of the Debate Council, the honorable Datuk Muhammad Ruswan, directors of the Department of Environment, state branches. [Music] Departments and branches under the Ministry, members of the Board of Directors, senior officers. [Music] The organizing committee of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition. [Music] Esteemed judges, participants, and distinguished ladies and gentlemen. Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and greetings. Salam Malaysia Madani. We offer our gratitude to Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala for His abundant grace that allows us to be together in the final round of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions held today. I also welcome the presence of all attendees to this ceremony, which directly shows our concern for the sustainability of our environment. Thank you and I express my gratitude to UTHM and the organizing committee for organizing this year's debate competition, which took place on August 19th. Thank you to Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia as the host, the Debate Council, the Ministry of Higher Education, and Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka for their collaboration in organizing such competitions. This is part of the government's initiative under the Ministry of Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change, through the Department of Environment, to produce capable future leaders who will drive environmental sustainability. Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, the Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions was first held in 1986 and has become an annual event since 1991. Following the Malaysian government's declaration of October 21st as National Environment Day in 2016, the Environmental Debate Competition, the oldest in Malaysia, has become one of the programs implemented under the National Environment Day celebrations. Various motions and ideas related to the environment have been successfully discussed and debated, which have opened the eyes and minds of the public to be more concerned about the environment. Initiatives like this indirectly increase public awareness of the issues and challenges of environmental sustainability that we must face and tackle together. The competition, which began on August 19th and concludes today, is the culmination of a competition involving 30 higher learning institutions. This program is a concerted effort towards environmental conservation to be realized by students and higher learning institutions to foster awareness among the younger generation. This program will also increase public awareness of environmental sustainability, enhance individual self-identity by appreciating the issues highlighted, and further ignite the spirit of love for the earth. Therefore, let us appreciate this environmental debate program as a joint effort by the government for environmental sustainability, which is a valuable gift from God. Various efforts have been made by the NRCC to increase public awareness regarding the importance of environmental sustainability, including cooperation with NGOs, corporate bodies, higher learning institutions, schools, community leaders, local communities, and the public in general. I am confident that these sustainability efforts are not limited by time, place, or individuals. Therefore, I urge everyone to support the efforts driven by the NRCC and its agencies. Distinguished ladies and gentlemen, in conclusion, I congratulate all the participating debate teams and congratulate the teams that have reached the final round of the Environmental Debate Competition today. Winning or losing is part of the competition. What is more important is the experience and knowledge gained throughout the competition. I would also like to once again express my appreciation to all the parties involved in organizing this debate competition. With the recitation of Bismillahirrohmanirrohim, I am pleased to officially open the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions in 2023, in conjunction with the National Environment Day 2023 celebration. May our efforts be blessed by Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala and benefit everyone. Wassalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh. [Music] It began here with 30 participating teams and 114 participants in the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions in 2023 on August 19th and [Music] 20th. The initial online selection resulted in 8 teams advancing to the quarter-finals and semi-finals, which took place at UTHM in 2023. They competed fiercely in this program. The final teams will compete for the championship. [Music] Who will be crowned champion of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions? Let us witness together. Now comes the awaited moment, the climax of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions. The ceremony for the presentation of souvenirs and prizes to the winners. The ceremony invites the honorable Director General of Environment to present to the recipients. I invite the honorable Professor Ir. Ts. Dr. Ismail, Deputy Vice-Chancellor of UTHM, to be the representative. [Music] Next, we invite Tuan Haji Razali Che Mat, Director of Policy and Research Department, Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, to receive a souvenir on behalf of DBP. Please proceed. [Music] Next, we invite the honorable Director General of Environment to present a souvenir to the honorable Professor Ir. Ts. Dr. Ismail as a token of appreciation for hosting this edition. [Music] [Music] The ceremony invites the esteemed judges of the final round to receive their souvenirs. I now invite the Chief Judge. [Music] Next, the third judge, Wan Hajah Masyitah binti Darus. [Music] Next, the fourth judge, Tuan Haji Syafi'i bin Ase. [Music] Next, the ceremony invites the fifth judge, Encik Muhammad Nazrin. [Music] And finally, the ceremony invites the seventh judge, Tuan Haji Razali bin. Next, the ceremony invites Professor Ir. Ts. Dr. Ismail, President of the Debate Council, to receive. [Music] Next, the ceremony is honored to present an award to a former president of the Debate Council. Before that, allow me to read a brief biography of the award recipient. This recipient is an individual who has enriched the environmental debate competition for 25 years as the President of the Debate Council. He has also served as the moderator for the International Malay Language Debate 10 times, inter-school pantun competitions over 25 times, and history quizzes organized by the Malaysian Historical Society over 2010 times. Currently, he is actively involved as a guest speaker for public speaking and hosting courses, as a master of ceremonies, a writer of articles for magazines, and a lyricist. For his invaluable contributions in the field of public speaking, the ceremony is honored to present a special award to the individual named [Music]. The honorable Professor Ir. Ts. Dr. Ismail is invited to the stage to receive the special award. [Music] The ceremony continues with the presentation of prizes to the winners. Leading the list of recipients for the Best Debater Award for the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions is Saudari Nur Syahira Balqis binti Syahrul Nizam from International Islamic University Malaysia. Please proceed. [Music] Next, we will give a round of applause to the teams that have reached the semi-finals of this competition. We invite the first team from the institution of higher learning to come to the stage to receive. [Music] UKM to come to the stage. [Music] [Music] Next, we invite the second team that qualified for the semi-finals, Universiti Kuala Lumpur (UniKL). Please proceed. [Music] Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, the results of the final competition are in our hands. Well, the results of the final round of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions. The Best Debater Award for the final round of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions has been awarded to Brother Muhammad Hanafi from [Music]. [Music] I will announce the champion of the competition. [Music] I hope everyone is clear. Next, it is time for the awaited moment. Based on the evaluation of the esteemed judges, the judges have agreed with a margin of 2.25 points, with a winning score of 43. The champion of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions is awarded to [Music]. Automatically, the champion of the Environmental Debate Competition. [Music] [Music] We invite the champion of the 29th Environmental Debate Competition between Higher Learning Institutions, Universiti Sains Malaysia. [Music] Represented by Saudari Nurul Abdullah. [Music] All winners are requested to come forward for a group photograph. [Music] [Music] The winners will receive a cash prize of RM 8,000. [Music] All winners are requested to come forward for a group photograph with the VIPs. [Music] [Music] The ceremony records its gratitude to the honorable Datuk Wan Abdul Latif Wan Ja'far, Director General of Environment, representative of the honorable Minister of Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change, and the dignitaries for gracing the ceremony. The VIPs are invited back to their seats for the next session. Ladies and gentlemen, let us give a round of applause to all the winners and congratulations on the 29th Environmental Debate Competition. The durian tree is in the garden, the straw stem falls to the ground. Your speech is eagerly awaited, making the ceremony more splendid. The ceremony continues with a Zapin performance, "Warisan Johor." [Music] [Music] [Music] Let the wind blow through the rice. [Applause] Let the wind blow through the rice. [Applause] If life is not pursued, it will not bear fruit. If life is not pursued, it will not bear fruit. [Music] [Music] [Music] If you want to be beautiful, plant a seed. It is good to plant yams. If you want to be beautiful, plant a seed. It is good. If you make a sound, do not let it reach others. If you make a sound, do not let it reach others. [Music] [Music] [Music] If there were no lunar eclipse, there would be no stars. If there were no lunar eclipse, there would be no stars. If it were not for women, I would not have come here. If it were not for women, I would not have come here. [Music] [Music] If the pearl of the beach is the pearl of my heart, a perfect gem. My youth is in the painting of my life. Its colors are new, waiting for your aroma to be sought. Longing for its fragrance to bloom, the fragrance of the garden's splendor. Blessed, such is the dream. As long as there is breath in my body, my plea to you, star, send me your light. May it be a decoration of love in my soul. My message to you, my dear, bring back my heart. Easy and forever you breathe by my side. [Music] [Music] To you, star, send me your light. May it be a golden decoration of love in my soul. My message to you, my dear, bring back my heart. Easy and never certain by my side. [Music] [Music] Your aroma fills my heart. [Music] Give a round of applause to the Seri Irwana group from SMK Datuk Bentara Luar for their entertaining Zapin performance just now. Ladies and gentlemen, the Zapin performed earlier is an ancient cultural heritage of Johor, symbolizing the politeness and courtesy of the people of this state in their behavior, in line with the principles of Rukun Negara and this year's National Independence Day celebration. Ladies and gentlemen, to further enliven the 66th National Independence Day celebration, let us all sing the Jalur Gemilang song. Attendees are requested to stand while waving their flags. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Spirit. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Next, attendees are invited to the central area for a group photograph with the VIPs. Photographers will be on stage. Please gather in the center. VIPs will be on stage to take photos. Attendees are requested to gather in the center of the hall. I request. [Music] [Music] [Music] Everyone, get ready. Smile, everyone. [Music] [Music] Three times, Merdeka! Next, I invite the honorable Director General of Environment and the dignitaries to exit the hall. [Music] Fully. This country. [Music] Which has been provided by the Department of Environment. Champion of the Environmental Debate Competition to the stage. [Music] [Music] For your presence, for your presence today, please accept our apologies if there are any.