I'll have to give a bit of a complex answer only because I don't really know what happens behind the scenes at the FATF and why, for example, it's not as effective as it should be. For sure, it has been effective in anti-money laundering law. It tried to be on counterterrorism and sort of missed the mark entirely on sanctions.
We are definitely a strong supporter of the FATF and we laud it, as we probably should, for what it does. I think there needs to be some sort of rethink on what it does. I think you noticed, for example, that the U.S. and Saudi Arabia are leading a separate group that met in Rome last week just to deal with counterterrorist financing, of which the FATF is a member. That suggested to me that maybe there's a little bit of lost confidence in the FATF. Why would they not simply go to the FATF since they're all members and have that meeting there?
It may be a suggestion that the FATF either.... Whoever's in charge of it on an annual basis should retain its jurisdiction for a much longer period to get much more accomplished, in a much more in-depth way. We either devote more resources to it, or we cut off the terrorist financing piece and just have a separate FATF, or a different body that just deals with terrorist financing that is much more specialized.
One of those two has to be the solution, but you know, 10 years have gone by and we haven't solved counterterrorist financing. Maybe it's time to find another solution.