Yes. This is an important point, and it goes to Monsieur Caron's question on our monetary policy framework.
We have a commitment to flexible inflation targeting, as you know, and an important component of that is a flexible exchange rate. I can link a few of the questions we have here—i.e., why do we have a flexible exchange rate? We have one of the longest histories in the advanced world with flexible exchange rates. In effect, it acts as a shock absorber, as there are shocks both domestically or internationally—shocks potentially, for example, to commodity prices that we see.
The basic point we make and that we've observed, and are observing elsewhere, is that the economy needs to adjust to these shocks. The exchange rate helps with that adjustment. If we were to persistently intervene and try to control the exchange rate, there's a variety of challenges with that. But even if we were successful, there's a variety of operational challenges with actually being successful in, say, holding the exchange rate down.
But even if we were successful, the economy would adjust anyway, and we would see the adjustment more broadly in the case of wages, for example. So if we had a fundamental competitiveness problem, and we were forcing the adjustment through falling wages in Canada, that is a much more difficult adjustment than to have an adjustment in the exchange rate that would flow naturally.
This is—and I hate to say it, but it's true—part of the challenge that a number of members of the euro zone are experiencing right now. In order to restore competitiveness, in effect they have to have deflation on wages, and that is extremely difficult and socially destructive.