The term “Vancouver model” comes from a professor in Australia who observed what was taking place in Vancouver, John Langdale. I used that in the “Dirty Money” reports. It was later accessed, and that's where Mr. Cooper comes up with it.
It speaks to the movement of money out of China avoiding capital controls that exist in China. As an individual, you can only take the U.S. equivalent of $50,000 per year out of China. If people want to move money out, they have to find other ways of doing it. The Vancouver model really was a situation in which underground bankers—and it's a bit complex to answer quickly—facilitated the movement of money out of China without the money physically moving. It was all done by way of electronic communications. When a person shows up in Vancouver, they would receive a sum, minus a service charge, equivalent to what they had deposited with the underground bankers in China.
That is not to say that the state uses that method. That is what individuals were using, because they wanted to move their money into a safe haven, i.e., Canada, or they wanted to use it for casino gambling, for investing or for any number of different reasons. I don't necessarily know that we know how foreign states move their money, but the one thing I was urging the committee in the previous session I spoke at is that following the money is important. In any process that's put in place, we have to keep that in mind.
Enforcement agencies that are looking at a registry have to have the necessary expertise and resources to look at what we can call, very broadly, the money laundering aspect. How did the money get there? Most money can be traced back. It's only cash that's really difficult. Everything else can be traced in one way or another. You have to use other techniques to follow cash.
I don't know if that answers the question, in this short period of time.