I would take you back to Basel III. If we go with the full implementation of Basel III for all financial institutions—I think federal policy-makers recognize that it's not a good option—it would essentially bind us to rules that are the same right now for the big banks, with one exception. Under Basel III, there is opportunity for big banks, because of their structure, to actually design their own capital floor. That wouldn't be available to credit unions.
What we've found is that the previous iteration, Basel II, has been quite sufficient in leaving in or keeping a high level of safety and soundness for credit unions. We're asking policy-makers to take a very mindful approach as they take that international standard and adapt it so that it's calibrated to small domestic institutions and doesn't undermine our ability to lend money—for example, to be involved in mortgage lending.
That's one example. I talked as well about our market conduct code. Instead of adopting new regulatory approaches for credit unions, with all the attendant compliance costs, what we're asking is that both federal and provincial policy-makers just not do that. It's a fairly significant red tape avoidance exercise. We think that co-operative values have already demonstrated a high level of member service. We can codify those, and we can demonstrate compliance with a self-made consumer code.