Mr. David Went:

I take that point, yes. Okay. Now, wait a second ... yes, there was a ... excuse me for reading from this, potentially ... We introduced this ... an updated liquidity policy in October 2003 and this was based on the Basel committee on banking supervisions paper, Sound Practices for Managing Liquidity in Banking Organisations, and there were three ... essentially this was looking at contingency funding and there were three specific examples. One was a moderate entity-specific crisis; in other words, this was a crisis just about us and you know, some money had gone astray or something like that. Under that ...an unexpected cashflow problem only likely to last a few days. It was presumed under this scenario that wholesale and retail deposits, short-term paper funding programmes would remain intact and that we'd sell off liquid assets to meet the thing. A severe entity-specific crisis which affected our ratings and this would have been where we would have suffered a major downgrade - two notches on long term and one on short term - and it was assumed there that unsecured sources would be severely affected. The scenario could take weeks to possibly three months to stabilise and it was anticipated that not only would we use our liquid assets, but we would use securitisation, you know, the eligible collateral to do that. And the final one, then, was an industry-wide crisis where there are liquidity problems in the banking system as a whole causing widespread disruption to markets. The best defence is described as maximising our ability to deal with stress under scenario two. Under that scenario, we also assumed that the regulatory authorities would be aggressive in providing support to the system, making Central Bank borrowing effectively the swing factor in ensuring the survival of the institution. We implemented ... we conducted those tests using the Basel requirements every month and they were submitted to ALCO, you know, to our asset liability committee, on a monthly basis. So, this was not something that we did not consider. We did consider it.