Okay. I take it there's a question mark after that.
The first thing is that I would note that G-20 leaders agreed in London on the importance of a macro-prudential approach to regulation. So that is a declared objective of all the major economic powers of the world.
The question is how to put that into place. As you rightly note, there are different perspectives from different agencies, and I would say further that there would be different ways to put this into place in different countries. It matters what your regulatory history is; it matters what the structure of your financial system is. And in Canada I believe we have extremely effective cooperation among the federal regulatory agencies—I am including in that the Department of Finance in discharging its responsibilities, obviously OSFI, CDIC, and FCAC—and that lends itself to certain solutions that could operate.
The issue is probably, first and foremost, to determine the precise tools, the mechanisms by which one would put this into place.
I would say—and I'm not commenting on your depiction of any aspirations—that what the bank can bring to the table in these discussions is a macro perspective. And when you look at what macro-prudential regulation or macro-prudential surveillance is, the issue is how either regulations or behaviours start and when they get to a point where they feed back on the macro-economic outlook and the economic cycle and exacerbate those cycles.
We are certainly seeing a very negative feedback from ignoring those issues in our partner countries around the world, and we don't want to put ourselves in that situation going forward.