OSFI is going to have to play a key role in this because they're the federal regulator. The problem right now is that OSFI is very focused on looking at the risks to banks from the energy transition and not the risks to the energy transition from bank practices. I think we need to have both halves of that. OSFI said they were not allowed to do that and that doing that wasn't in their mandate. The recent report from the federal commissioner of the environment and sustainable development actually argued that, in fact, given the recent regulatory and legislative changes, they should be doing that. This is something on which OSFI has, in effect, been seen to be cutting with both sides of the scissors.
This is similar to the debates we're having and I'm hearing on supply versus demand. It's not supply or demand: You do both. Otherwise you're trying to cut a piece of paper with one half of the scissors. It doesn't work. You need to look at the risk to the financial system from climate change and what kind of risk the financial system, as it currently operates, poses to our climate, and we need to deal with both at the same time in a coherent fashion.