mr. davidson. >> yes, i am mr. davidson. [laughter] >> its vision as well as -- [laughter] >> you know, one idea is that if you're going to have this single issuer or a few issuers to avoid this monopoly situation is that you can allow that to exist only as a cooperative so some sort of industry cooperative like the dtcc and so if there is monopoly profits they have to go back into the chain where it's competitive either above or below that cooperative. i do think having, you know, one or two issuers is good. trying to get as many participants to take the credit risk is good but you do have to find a way of standardizing the mortgage products so let's say we had 20 different mortgage originators all who would go through this one guarantor but they all had 20 different like loan documents, 20 different types of disclosure, then we'd have 20 different markets and that isn't going to promote the liquidity we need. so it's just a careful balancing act between spreading the risks and standardizing. >> let me ask as a final questi

mr. davidson, your comments. you are mr. davidson. >> yes, i am mr. davidson. [laughter] >> excuse me. >> you know, one idea is that if you're going to have this single issuer or a few issuers to avoid this monopoly situation is that you can allow that to exist only as a cooperative. so some sort of industry cooperative like the dtcc and there is monopoly profits, they have to go back into the chain where it's competitive either above or below that cooperative. but i do think that having one or two issuers is good, trying to get as many participants to take the credit risk is good, but you do have to find a way of standardizing the mortgage products. so let's say we had 20 different mortgage originators, all who would go through this one guarantee or, they all had -- guaranteor. it's a careful balancing act between spreading the risks and standardizing. >> let me ask a final question. to all of the panelists but i'll begin with you, mr. davidson. which is you have proposed a subordinated debt approach. but i think it implicates a bigger issue which is, recogniz

mr. davidson? >> so, while the mortgage tba market is essential like the futures market, it does have some important differences. one of them is that under current sec rules you cancel a private security before it is created. where in the tba market you can sell loans to go go into the security that has been critics at least technically some rules would need to change in order to create a tba market which would allow physical delivery of loans. so in most futures market people don't deliver their product. they don't deliver the court to the exchange or to the counterparty. use a pair those traits are. in the tba market, most of the originators actually sell the loans into a short position that they have created. in addition, we found a financial market is that financial markets that have government guarantees behind them, so sovereign markets, trade with much greater liquidity and the non-cyber markets. so, i agree that futures market could work. many of our clients also use futures markets, the tr

mr. davidson. i think it implicates bigger issue, which is recognizing that we should take steps now to begin a transition that legislative text -- steps and it is not likely going to happen likely today. i think everyone has suggested that there are things today that should be considered to begin this process, that could save us the trouble of trying them in the future on a larger scale or adopting them as an exclusive remedy. if you can comment on your approach and how it may work. and then what are the steps that you would suggest outside of legislative per view over the agency's today and the legal framework. >> i believe it is something are exploring currently to add capital. they probably need approval of at hcfa. i think they can move in that direction. i like the subordinated bond approach. i think they should use more private mortgage insurance. the key fact is sending the message to f.h.p. at eighth that experimentation is good -- fhfa that experimentation is good. finding the right solut

mr. davidson? >> without some guarantee we will have fewer fixed mortgages and rates would be higher but more importantly the stability of the availability of mortgage credit would be much lower. private markets when you go through a shock to the financial system is that back for a while and it takes a while to recover. during that time mortgages would be less available. >> let me ask the question again. a lot depend on what goals we have when we go into it. if the goal is to maintain what people assume is the american mortgage, long term, not 30 years but 20, fixed rates and relatively low monthly payment, can we do that without a guarantee from the federal government? >> certainly much less likely that the percentage in 30 year fixed rate mortgages without government guarantee. turned out there are some investors who want to take prepayment risk but don't want to deal in credit risk but engage in transactions where they can by hundreds of millions of dollars of securities at one point in time and

mr. davidson. you propose the subordinated debt approach but it implicates the bigger issue which is recognizing we should begin to take steps now to begin a transition that legislative steps because it takes a long time to get legislation through and the potential is not likely going to happen today or even next year but as you suggest and everyone on the panel has suggested there are things today that should be considered to begin this process, maybe an experiment that doesn't work out and saves as the trouble of trying them on a larger scale for adopting them as an exclusive remedy. if you can comment on your approach and how it might work and is it feasible to adopt it today i would like to a -- ask the other panelists what are the steps you would suggest within the purview of the agencies today and as you understand it, legal framework. >> the subordinated approach is something gses have done in the past. it is something the gses are exploring different ways of adding private capital. it is do

mr. ian davidson. >> scottish police assisting their english colleagues is part of the benefit of the union. but could i ask, could i ask why is it from the beginning of the riot the government has given the impression of being -- [inaudible] always playing catch up, doing too little, too late, and is this not a sign of incompetence? >> of course i don't accept that, but i think it is important that forces come to each other's aid, and just as if there were problems in scotland, english forces would do the same thing. >> daniel -- >> thank you, mr. speaker. many of my constituents have watch inside horror the events in our city, and they have written to me overwhelmingly to say when are we going to have tangible and enforceable penalties for parents who don't discipline their children? >> as i said earlier, there are parenting orders, they can be used, they can involve parents paying quite hefty fines, and i very much encourage their use at this time. >> helen jane. >> the prime minister is quite right, to insure people are safe and to bring criminals to justice. but when that has been done