The way you explain it, it's almost as if there were no problem, as though there were no individuals who haven't been put in a very precarious position by having invested in asset-backed commercial paper. But we all know that's not the case. We all know there are a lot of people who bought through banks or their affiliates something called “asset-backed”, despite the fact that it's a misnomer and was clearly misleading.
Now you're telling us that not only did you not sound the alarm, but it is your view that it was not only not part of your job but was strictly a provincial matter. Is that the view you're putting here before this committee this afternoon?