Yes, although we have to be careful not to rest on our laurels. Just because we got it right in the past doesn't mean we should stop there. We do have credibility on the financial regulation dimension, but we're losing credibility on other issues, like, for instance, on security regulations, where we don't have a national security regulator, which is fairly unusual for an OECD country, or on the economic issue of climate change. Let me stress again that climate change is an economic issue, not just an environmental issue. Our capacity to show leadership on issues like banking regulation is compromised when we are at the back of the pack in terms of international cooperation on other issues like climate change. We need to think of this as a cross-issue movement to lever Canada's positive reputation and its diplomatic capacity into a leadership role on the world stage.
Let me say in relationship to this that I believe there's nothing that would make Barack Obama happier than to see Canada stepping up to the diplomatic plate. He and his administration have an awful lot on their table. They can't deal with it all in a truly effective way. To have a trusted partner like Canada, which has serious diplomatic capability, taking on some of that load and showing leadership, and working together while exercising leadership, would be enormously appreciated. We talk about the fact that we're important to the United States in terms of energy. Yes, we are. We're also potentially important to the United States as a diplomatic leader, doing things that they simply don't have the time or the capacity to do.