, significantly higher than what they're talking about in bassle. but i don't know whether that will ever be agreed in bassle but yes, i think that may be more important than the risk-based standard. i mean this is the way you get at the fact that some important risks are not covered at all by bassle. now the difficulty with it is, is we used to have it that way. they said okay, we got one capital standard for the whole bank we're not going to buy -- in american terms we're not going to buy government securities anymore because we just want to hold things that are more profitable. we don't want to allocate 5% capital against government securities. and whatever you're doing, there are going to be games played. it's inevitable. so you try to make up the rules somehow anticipate that as best you can. but i really would say strongly that i think the risk based standard ought to be self-invented by leverage ratio. >> so leverage ratio to set the floor, to set the floor. >> yes. >> yes that's -- and then a risk-based mechanism. >> sometimes it may not alw

, significantly higher than what they're talking about in bassle. but i don't know whether that will ever be agreed in bassle but yes, i think that may be more important than the risk-based standard. i mean this is the way you get at the fact that some important risks are not covered at all by bassle. now the difficulty with it is, is we used to have it that way. they said okay, we got one capital standard for the whole bank we're not going to buy -- in american terms we're not going to buy government securities anymore because we just want to hold things that are more profitable. we don't want to allocate 5% capital against government securities. and whatever you're doing, there are going to be games played. it's inevitable. so you try to make up the rules somehow anticipate that as best you can. but i really would say strongly that i think the risk based standard ought to be self-invented by leverage ratio. >> so leverage ratio to set the floor, to set the floor. >> yes. >> yes that's -- and then a risk-based mechanism. >> sometimes it may not alw

, significantly higher than what they're talking about in bassle. but i don't know whether that will ever be agreed in bassle but yes, i think that may be more important than the risk-based standard. i mean this is t way you get at the fact that some important risks are not covered at all by bassle. now the difficulty with it is, is we used to have it that way. they said okay, we got one capital standard for the whole bank we're not going to buy -- in american terms we're not going to buy government securities anymore because we just want to hold things that are more profitable. we don't want to allocate 5% capital against government securities. and whatever you're doing, there are going to be games played. it's inevitable. so you try to make up the rules somehow anticipate that as best you can. but i really would say strongly that i think the risk based standard ought to be self-invented by leverage ratio. >> so leverage ratio to set the floor, to set the floor. >> yes. >> yes that's -- and then a risk-based mechanism. >> sometimes it may not alway

but if we could go back and just get -- dig a little more into your thoughts around bassle 3 you've talked then and been quoting as discussing the practical