That's a great question. I was in Toronto last week and was asked the same question at three different events.
I was part of the Canadian delegation that created the EBRD back at the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1988-89; I've actually gone through that.
You should appreciate that if the Asian infrastructure investment bank gets off the ground, it's going to take three to five years to get functioning. Personally, I think Canada should be there. I think we should be talking to our American neighbours and saying, “One way or another, we can be your eyes and ears. We can ensure that we have the right governance structure, the right investment structure, and the right principles in the bank.” I was at a dinner last night with a representative from the German Bundesbank. We talked about this, and about why France, Germany and Britain are there; they see the role that China is going to play in the world going forward. We want to have an institution that reflects multilaterals and all interests.
If I were sitting in Finance Canada and somebody asked for my advice, it would be to make sure that the Americans understand fully why we're doing this. I think we have to skate to where the puck is going, and the puck is going to Asia. Appreciate the fact that it's going to take a number of years before the bank makes any dent in the infrastructure deficit in Asia.
In the interim, we have to keep using the World Bank, the IFC, private capital markets, and the Asian Development Bank, where Canada is already engaged.
That would be my response to your question.