Hi there, it's Sandy Alnok and today I'll be making a Slimline Elf card and there are glass ornaments in it. It's inspired by this card sent in by Elaine earlier this summer. She put hers on a swingy thing and I will write up some notes from her notes about what she did, what products she used, and link to them if I can find them. And I was inspired by this to go get another Mo Manning image because I love her images and I got another elf. So this one is carrying a couple of Christmas ornaments. I thought that would be fun to do some simple straight forward coloring on them but very realistic. So we're not going to do a ton of super crazy kinds of reflections on them but we'll make them look really beautiful. And hopefully that will help you in getting your own Christmas cards done. I'm going to start by coloring the elf though using my crazy purple combination. I always like to use a purple in the shadows because that's the color that you can dull down some of these browns with because Copic gives you colors that are really bright and intense and you don't really necessarily want bright intense colors on the skin tones if you're trying to go for realism. You want them a little dulled down and purples will help to do that. And sometimes the more reddish ones but mostly the more bluish ones, the blue violets. I've also used some darker skin tones on this because I'm going to be putting a lot of color and really saturating the color in the rest of the picture and I want the skin tone to be enough to hold up to it. I want it to be strong enough that it can withstand all that contrast that's going to be around it. The hat I'm using an R35 for the main color in all the stripes and with the reds I mean my favorite dark red is an R89 and the one that goes with it, just hand and glove is an R37 and then you can use an R35, an R24, an R14, 17, lots of different lighter reds but those two for the dark and the mid tone work with so much that they're just my go-to when it comes to doing reds. You can get darker with the reds by using a gray in there and the red but for something this small that's a little bit of overkill to put too much in there but I am going to go for heavy contrast in this because contrast is what makes your eye see something as realistic as dimensional and if you want your artwork to look that way you need to be willing to use some contrast. I know it's scary but it's worth doing. I'm going to use the same colors on the overalls and with the overalls I'm going to put shadows in areas where I think there would be shadows there's not much indicated here there's a few lines and I'm going to extend those lines with the R89 and just add more color in those areas and then when I switch to my R37 I'll extend those even further so I continue the wrinkles in the fabric and it will start to build that realism around the entire pair of overalls which is start stretching that color out and if you need to you can go back in again with the light red sometimes you get sometimes you don't really depends on how everything worked in this particular picture I'm seeing in my head the light is coming from the upper right hand side so all the shadows are on the left the shadows on the hat are on the left and when I start working on the stripes in the outfit the rest of the outfit I'm only going to really worry about doing a two color blend in these because there's not room very tiny areas and once you convince somebody that it's real by looking at other areas they're going to totally buy it even if you don't have a whole bunch of colors doing your shadow work in some of these small areas now this is where it's going to get scary for some of you use a C7 for my darkest on the whites yes a dark gray on the whites because the whites are going to look white when they're in comparison to the darks I'm not using a background in this so the whites are going to need something else to balance off of to start to look realistic so I'm using that really dark C7 most people won't go that far you know I'm a little braver than a lot of people so I did have a little bloop and went into the ear don't use the colorless blender when you're fixing that just use the color that's already there I use one of the flesh tones and that just pushed that out right away next up I'm using another gray to just blend a little bit softly some of the areas that needed a little softening on the edges so that I get some roundness but look how much better that hat looks when it's got that really dark color and it just makes a huge difference and then there's highlights along the top of the arm and the backside of the back so it matches the rest of the light coming from that upper right hand side so I was debating about which color to do the shoes so I left those for last and decided red shoes would be adorable so we've got red shoes on and any old random brown in the hair there's only a few strands so not much needed there as I said once you start adding a lot of realism to something else you don't really have to worry about it too much in some of the smaller areas and now I'm going to do one of the Christmas ornaments and then we're going to do the other two together but I'm going to do one in this order and basically what I tend to do is start off with some light colors and I try to draw in where my highlights going to be but I leave it bigger than I want the highlight to be in the end and I didn't want a pinpoint highlight but I wanted a soft blend from the outside to the inside and a soft blend is going to mean a lot of colors as we start working from the very darkest into the very lightest there's a huge range from that R89 which is going to be our darks to the R000 so there's going to be a lot of transition work and if you close up that highlight too soon you're going to end up with no highlight at all because you as you keep pouring more ink into this it's going to start bleeding need to be careful not to let it bleed outside of the image so do that outside edge with your whatever red is going to be your main red and then don't touch it any more than you absolutely have to because you don't want to keep pouring more moisture into that portion of the paper so here we go with the darkest red and I'm going to put a bounced highlight from the face that you can kind of see the reflection of the face in the bottom of that ornament and right now it's really bright if I go over with the R37 which is what I'm using right now it's not really dark enough because it looks more like a gap or a hole or a design element or something it's too sharp it's too contrasty so I am going to have to dull that down but I started working toward those highlights and just bringing that color up and then started trying to scrub at those edges but I'm noticing that I'm starting to get a little bit of bleeding in the paper I set it down for a second just walked away from it so it could dry a little bit before I went on to the next step and then I started with an R39 and once I added the R39 that gave me a better transition from the R89 up to the R37 and then I went cycled right back through all of the other colors again and I'm doing this one more slowly than I'm going to do the other two and you're going to see a little bit of a difference in how they come out because of it it's kind of up to you whether or not you want to do them more quickly or you want to spend more time laboring over them I never find that laboring does me a whole lot of good so working quickly we'll see how that goes so here on these two I'm going to put my main highlight should be in about the same place as it is on the other two now there are some science reasons why you would move it from one place to another because each of the ornaments is a different orientation to whatever the light source is but in this case we're just going to let them be about the same I sketched in just so you could see where they're going to be some other bounced highlights that are going to be in the bottoms but of course I have to go over them with this base color as they start building up the colors anyway so those are going to go away but I sketch them in for myself so they're in my brain I did go outside the lines and you can't really repair red very well may know that already so I've just extended the ornament a little bit larger and then once the R89 gets out there you're not going to see any of that now if you're coloring a very light pale color for your ornament then hopefully you can use something else like a colorless blender or a white pen that will light that but reds just don't really cooperate that way so into the R89 I'm leaving some of those bounce highlights bouncing off of the face and then the top one has just a little bounce from each of the two ornaments down below it now I haven't looked at ornaments to see what they look like in this particular orientation because they'd have to see them with a light on them and set everything up that's just too much work for my brain I've studied glass a lot I've drawn a lot of glass in my day and I just have a gut instinct for it so I'm trying to give you a few ideas on how you can simplify it a little bit keep one main highlight and if you've got an object that's really close like that face just let a little tiny bit of a bounced highlight show even though most people will notice it their eye tells them that's what it is and it's just something that's in your head so I'm adding extra colors as you probably noticed there were a couple extra colors that appeared in the list a little earlier because I needed more colors for transition please don't feel like you have to be able to get everything done in three colors because somebody on youtube said that you had to have three colors for a good blend sometimes it takes seven eight nine 12 colors to get a really good blend and I wanted these to look really really good and it took a lot to make that happen it took some breaks in between as the paper got saturated and I started feeling like I was it was starting to get out of control just let it go for a second make sure you also have something underneath of it have some white paper underneath of it not a surface that's plastic or glass or wood because if any ink is pooling underneath it's going to bounce back up into the paper and you're going to just be pouring more color back in and when it pours in from underneath you have zero control where it goes so you want to avoid that and just having a piece of cotton paper underneath of it is usually enough to help that out so I'm pretty satisfied with how this is going you know working my way back into those highlights and I can make them now as small as I want them to be because I'm satisfied with everything else and I can keep building into that if I had started with those tiny highlights they would be gone by now so I can keep them and then control with this final touch of the R 000 exactly how much light I want on each of them adding a little bit of shadow underneath it's thicker where the elf and the ornaments are than where just the hat is that tip of the hat and use some gray for the caps on each one of the ornaments and some white because there's scallops at the bottom of each one of those caps and they just have little decorative things on them so seem to need a little bit of highlight to make those sparkle just a bit now let's look at the back side of this and you can see the two that I did quickly and I did them with less TLC less breaks in between bled through more where the other one did not and I was just pouring the ink in on the second and third ornaments unlike the first one so you'll see differences like that depending on how much TLC you put in now the border that I have on the outside of this goes from light red at the top to dark red at the bottom in the colors that I colored in so I colored my own pattern paper quote unquote pattern paper by using some scrap that I was going to throw away or recycle I could turn it into something that I could just use the edge for the edge only will show added an ellen hudson sentiment to it if you're interested in doing more glass work I have a clearly copic class it's an advanced class it's got lots in it about coloring all different kinds of glass two of them are holiday related I can't remember if there's more of them in there that are holiday related but I know there's an ornament in there that is really cool and then we also have some Christmas lights so if you're interested in that kind of thing there's a link in the doobly-doo to that class you can go check that out and that's all I got for you today thank you very much for sticking with me through a 14 minute video I don't usually do them this long but I will see you guys later take care bye


And we are recording now. So over to you Lisa. Great. Thanks very much Rob and thanks for the invitation to talk at today's webinar. Always happy to get out there and promote the work that we're doing in the library. So I'm going to be talking today about our Let's Online Information Literacy Tutorial and how we've increased engagement with Let's by really I suppose leveraging a couple of features within Moody, namely using the H5P software and also enabling the sub course feature and I'll get on to that kind of later on. So in terms of where it aligns to the European framework for digital competence, it's a couple of key areas that aligns to namely area three and area five and I've kind of highlighted those specific areas there as well so you could have a look at that. So I thought it'd be useful to give a bit of the context of why we developed an online information literacy tutorial before I go into some detail in kind of talking about the tutorial itself and how we've developed that. So firstly just to say that we've been active in that teaching and learning space for many, many years. In fact a team of librarians from DCU Library were the first recipients of the DCU President's Award for Teaching and Learning in the late 90s for their work on information literacy. The majority of work, the majority of information literacy delivery is curriculum based. So in other words we work really closely with our academic colleagues to identify where information literacy learning outcomes exist in their curriculum in their modules or programs and that's where our intervention is kind of at that level. So very early on we realized that that's kind of not sustainable on a large scale so we kind of really wanted to extend the reach of our information literacy program and to enable self-paced independent learning. So that's why we developed our online tutorial in the first place and now it's currently used to support our online and blended delivery. And just while I was kind of preparing this it kind of brought me back to when we first started preparing and planning for developing the tutorial and the library literature certainly at the time was kind of indicating that generic online information literacy tutorials weren't necessarily the most effective but because most of what we did was curriculum based already we thought we really needed something that kind of filled that gap and kind of students were falling through the gap and obviously we followed the kind of best pedagogical guidelines to develop it. So what actually is our Let's tutorial and our Library E tutorial for students? Well, it's a series of 10 short self-paced online tutorials with students in which students learn how to locate, evaluate, use information in an effective and ethical manner. We really aim it at that early level undergraduate but it can also be recommended as a skills refresher for like later years or kind of co-postgraduate students as well. So just to give you an idea of what's contained within the tutorials is that all of the content has been written by our team of subject librarians and it's kind of done very much in the DCU context. So what a DCU student kind of their landscape is in terms of information and engaging with information resources. So it's written by our own team of librarians. It has a number of kind of interactive elements to increase engagement and so the first one of these being our videos. So we've several videos. Some of them are interviews or kind of talking head videos that are with DCU lecturers and DCU staff and others are those that have been created by ourselves that address a specific learning need and probably our most popular one is our avoiding plagiarism with citing. We also use these videos in their own right as kind of reusable learning objects both within face-to-face in the classroom when we're meeting students and also to kind of push out content to students through various different means. We've also got a number of activities and again a different ways to engage the students along their kind of interaction with the tutorial. So these we've kind of created ourselves and others are built into the H5P tutorial software and I suppose the aim of these is to so that students can also test their learning along the way and these will be done in a more formative sense not in a summative sense. So we also have got our summative elements so for lecturers that wish to set this as an assessment piece so have students take the tutorials. We have an additional set of loop, moodle questions and quizzes that we set. You'll hear me saying loop and moodle throughout. I'm referring to DCU's iteration of moodle which we call loop. So lecturers can use these quizzes to basically set summative assessments for their students if they wish to as well. Students can come to let's in a variety of different ways. So obviously it's hosted on loop so they can access it in that way but we also have links on our library website so if you're looking to answer a specific question they might come to us through various different ways on our library website. Lecturers sometimes will recommend it so lecturers that know about it want to recommend it to their students and they'll come back to that kind of whole lecture kind of piece later on and also through recommendations from ourselves or the subject librarians when we meet with students in classes and it has allowed us to do kind of flipped classroom activities as well so we get the students to go off have a look at something on let's and come back and discuss it when we get to meet them face to face as well. And also it's used by our information services team so at the information desk or through interacting with students through email if they feel like let's would help support them in a particular task they can recommend let's to the students in that way so students can come to let's from a variety of different paths. I just thought it'd be useful to before I kind of explain a little bit about kind of H5P and how we've used that is just to tell a little bit about the story of let's and how it developed and how we come to choosing H5P as our platform which we currently use for our online tutorial. Let's was first developed in 2008 and it was actually through project funding I think we received even that could have even been a year or two earlier and so it was originally developed to be an OER and the first version of let's was actually a web based tool that existed of HTML and flash objects which we had developed by former students and media students in DCU the content as I mentioned before was written by our subject team and we also use the funding to develop a logo and branding to go along with it. So this was one of the good things about it was that it was easily updateable but that was more the HTML content rather than the flash objects at the time we didn't have that expertise that would allow us on the team itself to update those flash objects so they did become our date kind of you know as most fairly quickly and also we had limited analytics associated with it. So in 2013 we fully revised all the content and converted it to the articulate story line tutorial package I'm sure some of you have used that in the past as well we reduced it on another project and that's how we kind of came to know about it and it allowed us to really increase the amount of interactive elements that we had within loop within the tutorial itself sorry and it's when we first began hosting the tutorial on loop previous itself on the library website and this was the first one we began hosting on its own page so the let's page on loop and when we first developed those kind of loop quizzes to go along with it we had requests from several lectures for this to be embedded in their own module page and so how that basically worked was that the object itself was uploaded to the lecture page for them to include it as a SCORM package on their on their noodle page but this led to kind of issues around updating and version control because if we wanted to update something on the main tutorial it meant that we would have to update it where it existed everywhere on somebody else's page and that would lead to kind of issues around version control so in 2018 when Mark Linn from RTU came to show us H5P we were all over it from the beginning because it really looked like it was going to address some of the issues that we'd been having already it would have greater integration because it was created the objects were created and hosted within noodle and it would allow us to create more interactive and visual elements and also get those kind of enhanced analytics so be able to track things a little bit more and the biggest I think thing was that would give us the opportunity to have a single centralized version that was instantly updated whenever we wanted to make changes we also used it as an opportunity to make some other changes to the tutorial previously there there was three larger kind of objects learning objects so we decided to cut them into more bite sized chunks and that address was kind of the frequently asked questions that we were receiving from students so we used it to update our content to create new videos and add feedback so at this point in time when lecturers wanted to add it to their pages we were simply including it as a URL back to the main let's page on noodle but it proved to be really really popular so in 2020 so summer 2020 I approached Susanne in TEU who I worked really closely with on this with some other colleagues in the library and TEU as well to really kind of set out that criteria that we had for moving let's forward so essentially what we wanted to be able to do was to maintain that one centralized version of the tutorial on the main let's page on noodle what we wanted for lecturers to be able to embed it on their page because increasingly we were being asked if they could make it a compulsory element after a module so they wanted some way to be able to track their own students interaction with the tutorial as well but we wanted to still maintain that kind of oversight on all interaction with the tutorial whether it was through embedding on a specific page or coming to a via the library website or whatever it happens to be so after many conversations and emails and a lot of testing between ourselves and Susanne this is what we came up with which was to set course completion criteria and to enable the sub course setting so to set let's up as a sub course I'll go into that in a little bit more detail here so the first thing is the course completion criteria so for each of the 10 modules what we did was we had to individually go in and set course activity completion criteria in other words the students would have to view all of the content to view the content and to also take those formative questions and get at least 50% on those to be considered completed they can go and retake those questions as many times as they want until they get them right so really achieving that is actually it's not that difficult really and then we have our overall course completion so anybody that would complete all 10 of the modules would get a little tick at the end so they could see that the second thing is the sub course so once we got all that done the next thing was to look at setting up as a sub course so this was the recommendation from Susanne and we tested it we were really really pleased at how it worked so this would enable Electra to go to their module page and add an activity resource choose sub course and from that they would be able to select less so this would automatically register all their students on the course and to be allowed them to take all the modules and for Electra to be able to see if they had completed them at the end so that was a really key thing in kind of getting this part of it off the ground in terms of what a student will see they would see less on their own module page and they would see their progress on that particular course as well so this really I worked out really really well for us and particularly in the year that we're in now in terms of for online engagement and interaction so how it's worked out this year so far is that we have embedded it in about 18 modules across nearly all of our faculties so that means it was a compulsory element of those modules some of the lecturers chose to give marks for completing all of the courses whereas others it was just a requirement and they may be set an additional loop quiz alongside that so 1200 students over 1200 students completed all 10 of our tutorials so as I say we are very very pleased with that level of engagement we suspect that these 1200 students were probably those that had been embedded in their modules so it had been made a compulsory element to complete all 10 of them and of the 2300 plus students that accessed the course and completed at least one and in most cases it was more than one module we suspect that those were made up of students that came through access in the LRB website or through other paths to let's and some final observations we are very pleased with how successful this has been and how successful let's has been in general in delivering our information literacy programme and we really feel that that's been because we've continued to develop it over the years and following best pedagogical practices obviously so we've kept it relevant, we've kept it up to date we haven't just let it sit there in the corner we've really put the work into it and it's been reinvented as we went along also it's a real team effort in terms of the library team so as subject librarians we each have our own schools and faculties for which we liaise with and deliver our information literacy to so it's really important for something that supports all of our efforts that we all had some kind of ownership or involvement in it so we all contribute to the content and we all contribute to keeping it up to date in that way so really I think that's been the key factor in its success over the years and just kind of stepping back and looking at it when I was preparing this presentation I kind of realised how we kind of come full circle so we originally developed let's to reach those students which weren't getting those embedded classes and in fact now it's being used by academic staff to embed information literacy in their programmes and modules so it's kind of come very full circle in that regard and lastly just to say we do plan some future updates so we continually keep the content up to date which is really really important we also want to explore certificates so given a certificate of completion to anybody that has completed all 10 modules and just add more interactions and videos and you know continually keep those up to date and I'll just finish with a little bit of feedback from students so obviously you know we're happy with the numbers and the level of engagement and through our interactions with our academic staff but also really the student voice is what's really important so we're very heartened by the feedback that we received for less you know students finding it informative and interactive one student saying they defend or more confident and were able to successfully and a particular one that took me was a student that liked our father Ted example there as well so always good to get student feedback so that kind of brings me to the end of my presentation so back to you Rob now if you want. Recording so we're recording again now and it's over to you Kira. Good afternoon everyone can I just check can you hear me okay? Super. Thank you Rob and thank you everybody for joining us here today I've been delighted to be asked to attend and to speak to you today about how I've been using podcasts particularly over the last couple of months to account for alternative types of learning mainly asynchronous learning for our students in the Marino Institute of Education so to begin I suppose just to give you a little bit of flavor as to how I'm interested or why I'm interested in this area prior to taking up my current role in higher education I was a primary school teacher myself in a Desch Band 1 school in Bray in County Wicklow and when I was in the classroom I utilised podcasts in order to embed digital practice in my teaching and learning technique in the classroom and originally it was very much teacher led so I would have worked with the students to primarily I suppose improve their oral language approaches and technique vocabulary delivery all of that but then it very much became a part of the project that I took a backseat role and the students themselves started to record their own podcasts and we created our own podcast channel on SoundCloud and we would have recorded podcasts about school life we would have captured their learning doing reflective reading logs they would have done quizzes the student council and green schools started making little podcasts and recordings and then within the wider community hosting them on our blog so this is something that I've utilised for a long time and I found podcasts were really impactful there in that context because the students who maybe might have struggled to access the written word found that they found their own voice through podcasting and then also I suppose it was quite celebratory in tone and it allowed for us to capture the student voice and to share that with the school community so this is something that I've been interested in for a very long time so that leads us to where we are today and today's presentation where I hope I can kind of contextualise you know why we we went down the podcasting route in Marino podcasting in a time of Covid I really think it should be banned now blank in a time of Covid is the phrase we've heard far too frequently over the past couple of months it's almost as hateful as that pivot word which I've now banned there will be no more mention of pivot I'm very sorry I want to reflect also on how we did it what we learned from the process and reflect also on how it might work for you but also as you'll see from my presentation I was using a lot of external tools that I was then embedding on Moodle but I'm very interested to hear from other people who are using particular plugins perhaps to incorporate use of podcasting as well as individual recordings within their Moodle pages so I'd love to learn from you also so initially to begin with you know why podcasting and where does it fit into what we're trying to do so to give you a little bit of a background on myself I lecture across various education programmes in the Marino Institute of Education but this semester I actually am working across all of our teacher education programmes so I'm working with the second and third year Bachelor of Education students and also our PME students professional masters in education students so all of the students I'm working with will themselves go on and teach in the primary classroom so I always try to of course present anything that I'm doing with them as I am demonstrating the use of the tools for the purposes of supporting them in their learning but also in the hope that I am showcasing opportunities for them that they will then go out and try out these techniques themselves in the classroom so it is very much one foot in my own computer lab or in my virtual zoom classroom but also with a hope for them to find their feet in their own primary classroom as well so very much rooting it in the existing frameworks and you know Rob and I were talking in advance of today's discussion as to where podcasting would lie with the didge comp EDU and I suppose we settled on a competence 2.3 managing, protecting and sharing digital resources but in fact what you're doing with podcasting actually could be found at various different points in the framework itself and indeed within the primary context as I support my students for them to go out and our digital learning framework for primary schools in the primary school context you can find it sitting into lots of the different domains within the two dimensions of teaching and learning and leadership and management but when I work with the students I kind of I pitch it to them at the learner experience level within that domain and then within MIE of course like everybody we had to respond to the pandemic in an appropriate way and to that end our director of IT and e-learning Dr. Allison Egan presented a paper for all of us to consider to work towards a kind of a more unified approach to how we were teaching online over the last number of months and you see there I just took a screen grab from the paper that you presented that was adopted by our leadership team that has been very successful from speaking with students we were combining different elements of learning to ensure that the students were getting synchronous and asynchronous delivery to support them as they moved to learn online so you know obviously I know we have H5P fans amongst us here we would have incorporated that we really took our use of forums up a notch but actually it was the podcasting space that really interested me while I had done it before I kind of took it to the next level this semester so I suppose I saw this as an opportunity for me to look at what I was doing and to read into the context in which our students are now working and living so if you're anything like me you will listen to a lot of podcasts I swear by them to be honest with you and I found them very useful where over the last couple of months I've maybe struggled to engage with fiction texts or even the news it has been very very difficult so to escape to various different podcast channels and options that are out there was something that I really enjoyed and I realised from speaking to my students that they themselves also were in this space and I surveyed my students in advance of semester one this year and 52% of them told me that they were listening to at least four podcasts a week so I suppose I started to realise then that there was an opportunity to direct my learning or my teaching rather so that their learning in the context of what I was doing with them in creative technologies would be reflective of how they themselves are living their lives and how they're engaging with material and the outside world so how did we do it we looked at a number of different options and across our teacher education programme I would obviously within my modules a creative technology using technology within enquiry based learning and indeed another module that I teach them on communicative competence so using technology to enhance how we communicate with the wider school community and in particular parents we would look at an array of tools and I looked at how we could incorporate a selection of these within our mooder page again showcasing the use of it as a learner with the hope that they could then bring it into their practice as an educator and to try these things out on school placement and then ultimately when they end up into their own classroom so in the first instance we would have worked with audacity and that would have been something that Alison would have recommended in her paper and in the tell me about IT approach and it worked really really well but I wanted to give I suppose more opportunities to showcase how we could use it and I think that was our podcast so we were plugging in and attaching our audacity recordings within Moodle but then we were also looking at the use of other tools and I would have explored that with the students as well and I would say this has actually changed how I have interacted entirely with all of my students and I have been showing the students how they can use to just send me voice messages and I can send them voice messages in return in the hope that we can bridge the gap between my home to theirs as they learn remotely we've looked at opportunities for using zoom to record audio but the one that we I think were more successful in getting them to utilise and to experiment with was the use of anchor.fm because it incorporates obviously so seamlessly into Spotify so that worked really well for us we utilise then different types of podcasts I've just used the graphic here from anchor but I had the different recordings existed on different platforms giving them opportunities to engage with them on whatever platform they were choosing to do and we had different types of podcasts that I broadly put into three different categories I would say the first one was Revisicast type podcasts where having done a lecture on the digital learning framework I would give them a synopsis on what it was that we had looked at that day then I would have given them the opportunity to have exposure to podcasts that were more like fireside chats where they would have normally been the type of lectures where I would have had a guest lecture come in so I would have recorded in that way and they could listen to it in their own time so that was the type of lecture content that would not necessarily need to be delivered in a synchronous way it would be referring say for example to assignments giving them an idea of what would be the expectations of the assignment due dates etc so they were the opportunities that I took to utilise a podcasting so what did we learn I did a midterm survey with them and then I did an exit survey with them last week when our teaching term ended and the podcasts were really well reviewed and across all of the different year groups and I thought it was interesting that the second year and their module is on inquiry based learning they seemed to really like that I was giving them an opportunity to try something that I wanted they themselves to be able to do but they were not able to do anything in the classroom the third year is kind of reflecting upon the idea that it allowed them to review content in an alternative way so of course they all had become zoombies over the last number of weeks withering away behind laptops and it was a really nice thing to be able to give them an opportunity to go walk the dog, get a cup of coffee and to have me in their ear for how we're all living during COVID and their learning was changing as a result and again the PMEs liked that this is reflective of their own interests anyway so it was something that they enjoyed so I would have embedded it on Moodle as I said but I really would like at this stage this was very much experimental over the last couple of months I would like to be able to analyse I suppose the level of engagement within Moodle so looking at plugins and everything going forward but I suppose over the last couple of months I did like the degree of flexibility that it gave the students allowing them to listen on different channels, different platforms so I suppose it's now I suppose putting it out there how do you think it could work for you across the programmes you're working in and the students you're working with to give it a go and again I'd just love to hear from anybody who is currently utilising podcasts at whatever level to work with their students my Twitter contact or my Twitter handle rather is down below reach out, get in contact and again if anyone has any questions or any suggestions in the chat I'd love to hear from you


Felly, ydych chi'n gallu'n gweithio. Yma, yma yw'r parenthion yn ddechrau i fynd i'ch cynnig. Mae'r hynny'n eu sydd yn ei ddweud, ac'r cyffredin hwn yn eich ddweud yma ymddangos. Maen nhw'n cael ei wneud hynny'n meddwl i fynd i'r cyfrifysgau yma, ond ydych chi'n gallu'n meddwl i'ch cynnig oherwyddâm. is of course there is not just a problem of trust in finance these days the Edelman barometer prepared for this conference showed that trust in many governments has fallen recently. But banks and other financial firms including insurers and asset managers can't draw much consolation from that many of them remain on the naughty step as far as the public are concerned more so probably in Europe and the US than in developed markets. Ac mae'n dweud y gallwn i'r cyflawnio ar gyfer. Yn y U.K., mae yw'r problemau yma yn 2013. Mae'r cyflawni'r cyflawni yn banc. Mae'r cyflawni'r cyflawni gael, mae'n rhaid i 73% o'r cyfeirio yma yw'r cyflawni'r cyflawni'r cyfflawni. 82% oedd yn ddweud i'r cyflawni'r cyflawni. Yn ym 4% o'r cyflawni, dwi'n ddweud i'r cyflawni'r cyfflawni yn banc, mae'n mynd i ffyrdd i'r cyflodol a'r nethigol. Yn 13% oedd yn ddweud i'r cyfflawni yma o'u cyflawni'r cyfflawni yn banc ANG i ddweud yn gyfer. Mae'n amddangosaint биol o'r cyfflawni yn ddweud. Yn 2013, yma ein bach bach yn ennill o'r cyflawni'r cyfflawni'r cyflawni. Mae'n adnod mewn mynd cwysylltu yn ddweud ond y peth. Mae'r cyffredin, 60% o bwysig yn ddigonol y banyddio'r cyffredin yn fawr, sy'n gwybod y bydd yn hoffa'r rhagleniaeth, i ddweud o'r rhagleniaeth o'r pethau'r gael. Felly, yn y Cymru, dyn ni'n rhaid o'r rhaid o'r rhagleniaeth arall, yn 2008, pe ffyrdd iawn i'r creu'r rhagleniaeth. I'r rhagleniaeth er mwyn yn ddiwedd, yn llawer o'i gael, yn gallu'r rhagleniaeth, yn y llyfridd ychwanedau, ac yn y cyfrifeth yn dweud o'r rhagleniaeth, Ond rhaid i'r mynd i'n meddwl, sy'n ei ffordd i'r wneud i'r relasiad yng Nghymru, i'r cyfnodd a'r bydau. Rwy'n meddwl i'r ffordd am gyfnodd. Ond rwy'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r bydau am y problemu, mae'r rhaid i'r wych yn ei rhan o'r ffordd? A ydych yn gweld yr ysgrifffyr? Wrth gwrs, wedi'u cyfnodd o'r wneud i'r ffordd i'r gwahau. Ond yn rhoi'r argoffi a'r gwahau? Or, oherwydd ymgyrchu ar gael o'r syniadau ar gyfnod o'r syniadau ar gyfer y syniadau, os ymgyrch yn trefnol yr oedd ymgyrch yn gweld. A oedd ymgyrch ar y cerddur honno ym mhelyn o'r fforddau, mae'r gyfnod yn ymgyrch yn rwyf... ymgyrch yn rwyf yn ymgyrch yn yr ymgyrch yn yr ymgyrch. Mae'r gyfnod, Jang Jang Chang, y cael ymgyrch yn ICBC, y gallwn ar y gweld gwirionedd yma, ac mae'r cerddur o'r llanel anul. We have Guillermo Ortiz, the chairman of Banorte, a former governor of the central bank of Mexico, a job he held for so long that many thought he'd held it since the 1919 revolution. Urs Roener, the chairman of Credit Suisse, one of the survivors of the crisis but of course affected in Switzerland by public hostility to investment banks generally. David Rubenstein, not a banker as he was hastened to tell us, the co-founder and co-CEO of Carlisle Group and Lord Adair Turner who has a murky past at Merrill Lynch and Standard Chartered but then was chairman of the financial services authority, the UK regulator until it was dismembered in April of last year. And now at George Soros's Institute of New Economic Thinking, thinking deep thoughts about economics and markets. Also I should note Archie Cox as our rapporteur who will be reporting back to the forum on how well we behave and how close we get to answering the question. The way I propose to proceed is to give the participants a first round of fairly open questions in alphabetical order. I hope that they will be brief in their response, a maximum of five minutes and then we will open it out to comments and questions from the floor and finally give them a chance to produce closing observations or just to say sorry. We'll begin with Zhang Qing and perhaps I could ask you Chairman Zhang. Do you think this problem of trust in financial firms and markets is as evident in China as it is in the West? Is this something that you feel is a problem for your institution? Banking sector has always been respected. Over several hundred years it has been the case. I think in this century in the first ten years we had a crisis impacted on politics, society and business as well as the bankings sector. Many banks went bust. Another side of the impact is on the trust in banks. China is no exception. The world is an open one. Banks exchange information, any scandal is quickly known and therefore given the crisis trust in banks in their companies. There is no compliance and in bankers it is shaken. I think in China it is the same. It is a process of social and democratic development. I think this will continue to be an issue but we are a trustee in that sense. We as a bank we have been entrusted with a heavy responsibility therefore people including these of you here you have entrusted us with your future and lives of your families and therefore we need a higher standard of ethics. What changes do you think have been made in China since the crisis that give you a feeling that the banking system is getting better or do you not see a positive trend? To be frank the financial sector is improving itself compared with the past. There is more emphasis on risk management. This is a lesson learned and also there is more focus on compliance because people know that many banks have been affected because of lack of compliance. There is now more focus on rights of the consumers. This is also an increased awareness of rights and protection of rights of consumers but also in terms of environmental considerations, social responsibilities. These are all more in focus now so as a sector we are improving having said that one have to say that we are still falling short of the expectations of us. Giemer, let me move on to you. How far do you think that this is a western preoccupation with trust? Is this something from your perch in Mexico City that looks the same as it does in London or in New York? Let me mention not just Mexico but all emerging markets that had a financial crisis in the 90s and then the first decade of this century starting with Mexico, the Asian crisis, Turkey, Brazil, you name it. None of these countries had a domestic financial dislocation as a consequence of the global crisis. This is pretty remarkable. So this whole problem of loss of confidence and trust in the financial industry is not one that is present in general in the emerging markets here. Of course during our crisis, and I'll take the Mexican crisis, the Mexican crisis destroyed the banking system. It took about 10 years to rebuild and it took more than 10 years to rebuild confidence in the system. If you look at, you cited some numbers, some survey numbers at the beginning of your talk about perceptions in the UK. I saw a survey of Latin barometer which is a Latin American general survey on a number of issues. The confidence in the banking sector, they have never been high. It's not that bankers were ever popular in that part of the world or in many other parts of the world, but there has not been any noticeable slip in confidence in the banking sector in Latin America. What about confidence in regulators and central banks where they're the same or where they're different as overseers of the financial sector? Do you think that that has been damaged by the crisis and does that apply to Mexico and developing countries as well? I think that the best thing that regulators and central bankers when I'm here talking about the developed world can do to help restore confidence in the system is to finish with the reform agenda. I think that they have, I mean, we have heard a number of reports of advances in the reform agenda and I'm not going to go into that and that that is very true, but there's still a number of pending issues that unfortunately, I mean, given the nature of these issues, particularly, you know, the question of bank resolution, cross border, too big to fail and so on, probably take years. So this will drag on. I'm afraid for quite some time and the other aspect that it's something that Alex Weber was mentioning this morning is that you have these legacy issues that keep coming up, you know, every other week about litigation, about settlements, about, you know, or committed prior to the crisis, but they seem very real today and they seem, you know, like every day, like nothing is changing and that's a perception. It's probably a wrong perception. So I think that something that can constructively be done is to certainly improve the dialogue between the industry and the regulators and the central bankers. I think the initial sort of lobbying by the industry and pushing back on the reforms was not very successful. So maybe a change of tone and a change of attitude and particularly a change of communication, but also very importantly a change in behavior is fundamental to help restore this confidence. Thank you. Urs, from a Credit Suisse perspective and given the politics in popular reaction in Switzerland to failures, I'm sure you wouldn't deny that there's been a problem of trust, but would you like to try to talk us through the different types of constituencies of trust, if you like, in the financial sector? I think different things apply to clients versus the population and how you see the way in which the regulatory agenda has evolved in order to deal with these problems. Yes. I think that's a good starting point. I think you see literally, I would say, bifocational, almost trifocational issues. I mean, you talk about trust. When you talk about trust with clients, I would say that you probably see that on an individual basis you see it very differently. I mean, you've had banks that had seen huge losses of clients, clients funds. We had, during the crisis in 2008, I would say net new asset inflows of more than 200 billion over five years period, which is probably the largest of any bank anywhere. We have seen huge inflows during the crisis, also in our wholesale prime brokerage business. So, on an individual basis, I would say the trust with clients, and we have a lot of, obviously, discussions with clients, has come back in some instance, I would say, didn't probably not go away despite criticism about behaviour. But that's only one element of it. And then I would say the second area is conduct, and I'm sure we'll talk about conduct a little bit later anyway, so I will not deal with that. And the third point is, I would say, the issue with the public at large. And that obviously is heavily influenced by a number of things. I would say, first of all, the fact that probably the great moderation may have worked for a decade or so, but has not, in the end, has not worked as we have all seen. A lot of people have lost a lot of money. But what added to that was not just the disappointment, but also the anger that you had seen banks being bailed out by governments. And that obviously then triggered this entire discussion about too big to fail, the discussion about how can you make sure you have a system that is stable enough, even in a crisis, that will allow even large banks to fail and actually be taken out of the system.  I think, at that front, a lot has happened. And probably more has happened than a lot of the people are prepared to accept. I would say the issue of bailing, while it is not on a cross-border basis, I would say universally adopted, I would say there are countries where you could say they have now a system in place where basically the too big to fail issue is resolved. I mean the US would argue, and Paul Tucker is a good witness for that, would say well basically, as far as the US is concerned, I think they have a system now in place including bailing that would allow failing banks to take out of the system. The UK would probably argue the same way or along the same way. Maybe in Switzerland we have started to deal with the issue relatively early on, implemented it very fast and I would also argue we have a system now in place that works. What does not work yet is that apart from the differences you would see globally, there is not yet a totally aligned system that would allow global syffies to be taken out because there is no harmonisation of all the rules and unilateral treatment and respective acceptance and acknowledgement of acts taken by a home regulator versus a host regulator and the like. That's an issue that still needs to be resolved. It's high up on the agenda of the GFSB and I would argue probably also of the G20 but that's the ultimate litmus test for system stability as far as I'm concerned. That is something which is a prerequisite for rebuilding trust. People have to be convinced that in the future there may be banks that fail but if banks fail they will have to be taken out of the system and bankruptcy can occur as it would occur. In every other sector as well without governments having to come in and bail them out. I think that's an integral part and that is not yet, as I would say, fully resolved. Could I ask you to comment also on the point that Guillermo made, which I think is an important one, that there continue to be episodes, Libor obviously one, we now have the discussion of foreign exchange potential benchmark manipulation there. Do you think we're going to continue to see these issues? Some of them arguably nothing much to do with the financial crisis actually. You could be manipulating benchmarks at good times as well as bad. But this nonetheless creates a continuing drip of bad news which does affect trust of the system. Do you think we can expect to see more and more of that? I would say Guillermo in his analysis was actually not surprising. It was spot on. The trouble is if you have an industry and I would take it wider than just the banking system, just finance generally. If you are on the spotlight by the media or the public at large, every little incident basically kicks you back into the bad spot irrespective as to how much progress you have made in the interim. It's clear if there is a particular focus, obviously the scrutiny which you look into issues is even higher and there's no excuse possible for things that have come to light like Libor and possibly other things. That basically before you have resolved those issues and gone through them, I think it will be very, very difficult to fully restore trust in the system. One should not forget however that this is not just something which represents the banking sector as a whole, but it's something which are things that happened in the past that have to be worked up and have to be resolved. And this will take time. It will be difficult to create that trust that ultimately the sector desperately needs to be fully functioning in my opinion. And therefore I think it's a prerequisite that you get through these issues as industry-wide issues to the extent they are and on an individual basis to the extent that banks are at fault to put them behind you so that you can move on. But every additional incident that comes up, no matter how small it is, is in a way a step back towards creating that trust. So more trouble to come. David, you're not a banker, perhaps never wanted to be, but from your perspective Carlisle, obviously a huge financial institution of a different kind, do you think we're talking about a banking problem or do you feel in your business that there has also been a failure of trust or a collapse of trust in the financial system more broadly? Well generally I think we should make it clear that in good times and bad times people are not marching in the streets saying I love my bankers, I love my private equity investors because people generally don't do that type of thing. We're never going to be a situation where there's great popularity for banks because that has never been the case. Occasionally it gets worse than it is normally because when you go through situations of the type we've done you get a lot of headlines and banks have lost money and governments have to come in and provide some support and that's not popular. But we have to remember that we're dealing with a situation where we're not going to find people saying well my banks are as popular to me as Apple is or Starbucks is or people who produce products that people can touch and feel. Most people's relationships with banks are that they're probably paying more bank, more fees or money to banks and they're getting back from them because they're probably borrowing money or paying various fees and so probably banks are never going to be universally popular. I do think that most recent situation exacerbated a bit in part because regulators were very concerned that the banks could fail and if they fail maybe that would mean that customers money would be lost. It turns out that didn't really happen through this crisis. Customers money was more or less protected certainly in the United States but there was a concern that could conceivably happen. As the private equity, private equity did not get bail out money from the U.S. government. We don't really have government money that's insured the way FDIC insures money for banks so we're not quite in the situation where the public would feel that we had the same kind of relationship with them that banks might have. So I think private equity is not probably as unpopular as the banks became. I think private equity firms generally are not beloved by some people who don't invest with them. People that invest with them tend to like them because the returns have been very good. I think we can do a better job throughout the financial service industry of explaining what we actually do to justify the fees or the compensation or the way that business runs. But we have a hard time explaining to the average person in the public what we actually do to earn these kind of compensation levels. We should do a better job at it. But generally I think the worst is probably behind us for a few years or so. I think the public is now focused on more other things. I think in the United States we passed Dodd Franks. The Volcker Rule regulations are now out. I think by and large they will be probably implemented. There will be some adjustments here and there. I think we're now on to other things. I think it's probably a good thing. I think the banks now have cleaned up their balance sheets. I think the other financial service firms have done a better job of explaining what they do. And I think in the future when there are future problems like the type we have or if there are we've got to be have more transparency as the problems are going through. But nobody should think that all of a sudden people are going to jump up and down and say I love my banks. I love bankers. Now with one exception I would say it is an interesting phenomenon that when you ask members of the public in the United States do you like the Congress. Well the Congress has a popularity rating of about six or seven or eight or nine or 10 percent. Do you like your congressman. They like 99 percent like their own Congress. That's why 95 percent of them get reelected. The same is probably true with one's banks and bankers. Probably people say I like my bank and probably 90 percent of the people like their own bank. But do they like bankers generally. No probably 10 or 11 percent. So it's the same phenomenon as congressmen. They don't like the industry generally or they don't like Congress generally but they do like probably their own bank or their own congressman. The Financial Stability Board recently invented an exciting new acronym the NBNI SIFI which is I believe the non bank non insurance systemically important financial institution. Do you think we need such a category and are you bidding to be in it. Well it would be an honor to think that one is significant enough to be in that category but everything else being equal I would prefer to avoid being in. There's no doubt that some financial institutions have become larger than they were before private equity firms were historically very very modest organizations. Now some of the largest manage 150 to 200 billion dollars. That's a large in this context. But again the private equity firms that we're talking about are really not systemically important in the overall scheme of things in my view. I don't think that if a private equity firm did poorly all of a sudden the financial system would collapse. I think banks are in a different situation so I think we should look very carefully at whether we're going to overly regulate some parts of the financial service system that we don't really need to regulate regulation is a necessary evil but we don't need to over regulate and historically when we've had these crises we have over regulated and the result of that has been not that we've solved the ability of governments to avoid future crises but we probably constrained business to do the kind of things they probably should be able to do. So I would say that generally I prefer to avoid the honor of being in one of those those institutions. Thank you. Well perhaps the FSB will hear this. Well finally we get to a former regulator turned quasi academic. So it's very much a case of last and least. The it's is it a question of behaviors in banks that got into this mess or should we also think about the way in which we have thought about financial markets if you like efficient markets hypotheses rational expectations models which it's argued did create a mindset in which regulators and others were inclined to say well look hey if the market says that this peculiar instrument is worth this price then who are we to question and led to a kind of reverence for for markets if you like which which perhaps caused us to be too indulgent towards them in the past. Is that a thesis that you would share and if so how are we getting out of it or have we got the beginnings of any new model which would allow us to achieve a better equilibrium if you like between markets and regulation. I think it's a very good question and I think the fundamental answer is yes. I mean I think if we go back to why has trust been lost in banking in particular financial services more generally it is partly conduct issues and those include both the extremes of fraudulent dishonest conduct like the libel fixing which is a shark and it produces lurid headlines you know highly paid people cheaping cheating the libel system and then sending emails to each other saying come over and we'll have a bottle of Bollinger and we'll celebrate you know this little trick more generally for retail customers a feeling in some countries that highly commission oriented sales people were selling in products that they didn't really need like in the UK payment protection insurance and more generally even at the wholesale level stuff which has come out about people selling to pension funds or insurance companies securities whose value they doubted to investors whose intelligence they disparaged so all of that has had a major effect but let's be clear I think the biggest thing that is blown trust in the banking system is that there was a financial crisis and that that financial crisis produced a huge setback to people's prosperity people lost their jobs they lost value in their house and this is a problem because it came after a period of very significant and overt and public confidence that we'd solved all the problems and that the financial system was helping to make the world a more efficient and a safer place so the fact is that if eight years ago we probably wouldn't have had a discussion eight years ago here of whether compensation in the financial system was too high but if such a question had been answered at that time I think that the bankers would have been able to say well that's an absurd question we're doing some very very complicated things you know this this trading is very complicated but it's making the world a more efficient system our risk management that's really very clever it has to be very clever because we've got a complicated system out there that costs a lot of money the defence would have been yes we're being high paid for some very sophisticated things which are making the world system both safer and more efficient and 2008 was the crash of that proposition and the crash of that proposition is a problem not only for the industry but also for the official sector for regulators central banks the IMF and for academic economics the fact is that as Howard has suggested officialdom largely went along with the proposition that the more innovation we had the more structuring the more derivatives the more that we would distribute risk into the hands of those best place to deal with it we put forward the idea that more liquidity had with trading the better price discovery the more efficient the system would be it's quite interesting to look at the IMF's global financial stability report from April 2006 it has a wonderful quote and it goes roughly as follows it is increasingly recognised that the distribution of credit off bank balance sheets into the hands of those better place to bear it has increased the resilience of the financial system and here's the great phrase this resilience and remember this is April 2006 for 15 months before the onset of the worst financial crisis this resilience may be seen in a lower probability of commercial bank failure so we got it wrong and sitting behind the official sector getting it wrong I think there was a set of academic theories that got it wrong we fell over in love with the idea of efficient markets that markets were all efficient that they priced things in a rational way and we did that despite looking at the history of crashes and panics and manias which told us that that wasn't true we fell in love with the rational expectations hypothesis and the mathematical way of a modelling economics which failed to realise the importance of behavioural and reflexive and self reinforcing effects and I have to say central bankers in their monetary theory and in particular their monetary models fell in love with a bizarre proposition which is that the financial system wasn't very important I mean broadly speaking most monetary models in central banks didn't have a financial sector there the idea was that the financial sector was like the car manufacturing sector it might be doing useful things but it didn't have a macroeconomic importance it was described by a lot of theory as being a veil through which the monetary stimulus occurred but it had no particular consequences and I think the fundamental problem of all of this was that we developed a thesis that we could treat financial markets and services like other markets and industries and I think the fundamental point about recovering trust both in the area of conduct and in the area of macro stability is to start by recognising that financial markets and services are very very different they're very different in their customer relationships for the simple reason that particularly at the retail level the retail customer has almost no ability to test drive financial services, asset management services etc and see whether they like them they are not empowered there is an asymmetry of information and capability and that creates a duty of trust on behalf of a financial services industry which doesn't apply elsewhere but it's not also in the area of macroeconomics we cannot treat financial services as just markets like any other the absolute essence of what we have got to grip in economics is why do financial systems introduce extreme instability into the market economy and I think we are beginning to get some ideas of that Howard but I think this is very early days of developing some much more effective economics than that which dominated before the crisis Thank you. I'm going to open it up to the hall now but just let me ask one question. Guillermo you are a central banker through this. Do you recognise this intellectual prisoner that you were of these theories? Well let me just add to what Adair said he was quoting this passage from the IMF financial stability report just a few months before the crisis and let me remember in our discussions in Baal and this was a place where central bankers would gather and would speak freely and part of the reason why the sort of financial sector was left out of this modeling exercises in most central banks analysis was the belief that the financial institutions had developed such sophisticated models of risk management that it was almost impossible for regulators to improve on them and this notion of light touch regulation and the notion that financial institutions would not only allocate resources from savers to the most productive users but that more importantly they could manage risk well was pretty pervasive and I think that that is absolutely true. I mean if you look at the statements of some very prominent central bankers you know as early or as late as 97 2007 sorry 2007 the probability of a systemic problem was very much minimized so I'm just expanding a little bit on what that is. While we did have a financial crisis that was significant more significant than we've had quite a while we are not going to repeal the business cycle for a while there was talk in the United States that we now had such sophisticated models at the Fed that we could effectively repeal the business cycle we could modulate our way out of having recessions that proved not to be the case and I don't think we now really feel that we can get rid of these kind of business cycles. And so we're going to have a crisis or a recession or something of this type again in the future and we shouldn't think that we have figured out through Dodd Franks or anything else how we're going to eliminate this type of possibility. But this was no ordinary business cycle but we'll have things like this in the future. I'm sure but I was looking the other day at a paper published by the Dallas Fed just six months ago and they were estimating that the cost in the United States of the crisis in terms of output for gun is between 40 and 80 percent of 2007 GDP to the states. So I mean this is this numbers are just massive. We're not going to repeal the business system but I think we would be a business cycle but I think we should be aiming to make sure we don't do 2008 again. I mean broadly speaking there are two of these in the history of advanced capitalism and they're this one and they're 1929 to 33 and we're not going to get rid of the normal business cycle. But I think we ought to be aiming to get rid of cycles like this. We can do better than we did in protecting people against what happened before and maybe enhancing protection that some people would like. But I don't think we should feel that we are so smart that we're now going to figure out how to plug every potential problem in the system because every time in the past as Ken Rogoff pointed out in his book when people figured out that they've had a problem and they're going to try to plug it next time and fix it. They have missed what was the next problem. So there will be something in the cycle next time. We won't really anticipate. We don't know how great it will be. Part of what happened this time was exactly what happened in the 1920s. It was an expansion of credit very similar to 1920s. Well the interesting thing is about the banking system. It isn't that we create new mistakes. We just keep repeating the same mistake. I mean pretty much the iron law of banking is that somewhere in the world every 15 years we have a massive commercial real estate. But they didn't have the type of mortgages in the 20s that we had now. What we were doing was giving mortgages to people who really didn't deserve them probably by normal standards. And that probably wasn't the case in the 20s I think. The other difference also was that the interconnectiveness of the system was huge and that wasn't probably not the case in 1929. As you have observed just as the regulators lost control of the financial system in 2007 I have lost control of this panel. But we will try to regain control just as the regulators have. And let's take one or two points from the floor down the front if you could give your name and designation and the number of your bank account. I think of the first two. Alex Edmonds from Wharton and the London Business School. So Howard mentioned at the start the public's mistrust with incentives. So what's your guys' view as to the role that incentives played in the crisis? So one view just to caricature it is the incentives were completely wrong. The bankers knew they were taking bad decisions to maximise risk for the short term but they did this because they had short term incentives. Institutional investors knew this as well because they were only caring about holding their shares for the short term. But the other view is that that actually wasn't incentives like Lehman Brothers had perhaps closest to the compensation model that people advocate. Employees owning stock in their own firm and it was instead as Lord Turner was suggesting bad models so those were bad mistakes in the end but these were not deliberate mistakes. So where do you stand on the spectrum and what does this mean for your views as to how to change governance and compensation to solve this trust issue going forward. And in particular if you think it's sort of bad model, nobody has the right model, academics, practitioners, regulators don't have the right model. How are we going to stop a new crisis from happening as David was intimating? Thanks. I'm going to be quite disciplined because if we have one question and five answers that won't really work I'm going to ask Urs and then Adair quickly to comment on that. Ok well on the first one I think to have models and to have good risk models is something which we should not just now throw overboard and say well no this hasn't worked in 2008 now we don't want to have risk models anymore. I think that we work I think the whole industry including with regulators we work very hard on developing and having proper risk models. I think that's a prerequisiter for functioning global financial market as far as I'm concerned. As it relates to your compensation or incentive issue I think there's common wisdom that you have to set the right incentives for people. Now you can have an argument as to whether this was the case before 2008 and you would find incidents where this was the case that perhaps incentives were not properly structured. I think in this area a lot has happened since the crisis. If there is one area where I think universally globally you have seen a huge development it's in the area of compensation and incentive steering. We have learned a lot more I mean longer deferrals and so forth but as you rightly pointed out in Lehman in the case of Lehman that was not the problem. I mean most of the senior people at Lehman had their entire wealth stuck in the firm by way of being shareholders of the firm. So there was no reason to actually assume that they would have to it was basically a problem of the incentive. I think incentives may have co-contributed to the whole thing in certain areas. There's no question about in certain in certain businesses but I don't think it would singly that as the primary factor for the crisis. Well broadly speaking I agree. I think I think it played a role. It was crazy to be paying people large cash bonuses at the end of the year before you'd really worked out whether what they'd done was sensible. Or had left a toxic trail and I think it's good that we put in place the many reforms that we've made but it's less important than other things. Do I think that there were a whole load of bankers with Dick Fould, Fred Goodwin sitting there in 2006 saying oh this is OK. I've got to put option on to the taxpayer so I'll just ride this thing for as long as possible. No on the whole what they were saying is I'm a really really clever person. I am involved in a wave of innovation which is making the world a better place. I mean that was their thinking. They were brought it. They were caught up in the same this time it's different hype. They weren't cynical. They were deluded. And so the fixing the incentives is important. We have to do it but it's not as important as the development has much more powerful levers to lean against the inherent nature of the credit and asset price cycle. That's the crucial bit of the economic models so I think we have to get right. Thanks. Thanks. Yeah. Back there. Can you get a microphone. Thanks very much sir. This is a very. So can we have your name and my name is Rana Kapoor. I've. Privileged enough to have established a bank called Yes Bank. In a very turbulent times through the global crisis through the eurozone crisis and a very protracted Indian crisis which is still going on. And I'm very happy to report to you. I have confidence. I have conviction. And I think also very effective communication believing that a business of banking is a public trust business. My question sir is that we discuss the vagaries of the past. We discuss the new elements of regulations in the future. But the incidence of risk in banking whichever part at least in my assessment is reputational risk beyond credit risk beyond structural risk is really reputational risk. How do you build brand equity which creates a trust mark which creates immense confidence of the public to really believe in banking all over again. And it's got tainted because of past reasons. But it can be built with super confidence if the regulators start taking it a little easier. So my question is how do you really take care of the most important risk which is reputational risk. Thank you. Sorry to come back to you. But I guess I mean it's not that as I said at the start Credit Suisse was not one of the worst. But nonetheless you were affected by the broad reputation of investment banking. How do you think about reputation risk in your bank reputation risk has always played a significant role. I mean I start from the premise that actually trust of the clients and society at large is the fundament of the foundation of what banking is all about. And I think what has been lost or had been lost in the past a little bit was the idea that you know this is truly a service industry and you have fiduciary trust relationship with your clients and you have to do what is best for your clients. And that everything that you do that undermines that notion actually goes against your reputation and if it goes against your reputation it is detrimental in the end also to your economic success. So it plays a very significant role. We have high standards. We actually measure our people against it is a significant part of the assessment of performance of our people of our senior people as well. And in my opinion it's one of the fundamentals to actually run a bank successfully long term. Chairman Jang you are building a reputation internationally of course ICBC has a big reputation in China already but as you enter new markets which you have been doing on quite a sizeable scale. How do you think about building a reputation for your bank. I have listened very carefully for the discussion and I would like to expand my answers. I think that the reason of the crisis caused by stakeholders and I think that some stakeholders takes the main responsibility for instance the regulators and the bankers. So in order to prevent the risk and I think that we could do four things to re-establish our reputation. Firstly we should re-establish our regulations because the creative activity on the one side and the regulation on the other. But regulation should not go ahead of the and then so we should create creation. So we should we have a saying in China that if we lost some sheep the sheep coming out of the cages and we should first find the holes and mend the holes. And for instance now we have a Basel III and the regulations such as this such as a Basel III should be established as soon as possible. Secondly we should re-establish the target and for instance commercial banks and the investment banks they have a problem that they said the target is too high. So short term they are they are they are pursuing the short term interest. So well now with the regulation with the tighter regulation we should set the target a little lower and in this way we could have obtained a sustained inability in the long run. And so thirdly we should re-establish the trust because the banks are the trustees and from the middle ages there was only one bench with a bench with a banker sitting on it. And if the money was not paid and the bench will be held by the clients and hit the bankers. So now it's actually the same thing and I think that there is an invisible asset for our bankers that's the trust and that's very important. So the thirdly we should go back to our tradition and now we have seen the modernisation of the banks and some banks are forgetting their basics and their originals. And so what are their basics apart from all these financial derivatives, the variety of complexity, the products and the people get lost in their basic services.  And I think that we should go back to our traditions and only in this way we could re-establish our trust. And well I wouldn't use the word of reasins and we should restart re-establish our trust. Thank you. Thank you. Well back to the future is the motto there perhaps. Let me take, yes at the front here. Thank you. I know who you are but not anybody does. Katinka Barysh from Allianz. When we have a crisis in politics we might fiddle with the electoral system and increase the supervision of party finances. But most importantly we call for more honest and better political leaders. Perhaps a question to Urs Röhrner and Adaird Hörner. Do you see a role for the bankers themselves in overcoming that crisis of trust that we still have? Thank you.  Would we be better if an honest man led Credit Suisse. I'm just paraphrasing. I think I got the idea. I would say it's probably one of the deeper prerequisite. I think what you have to do is basically you have to, first of all you have to define the values of what your organisation stands for and then you have to live them. You have to live by example. If you don't do that then you have to take the consequences. There's no question about that in my mind. Otherwise you will not be able to fix it. I mean let's not forget what ultimately banks are. Banks are the amount of capital, actually sizeable amount of capital now as a result of the changes of the regulation. Funding credit and a lot, a lot of trust by everybody, all the market participants, clients, people, other banks and so forth that actually you will honour your commitments. That you have to make sure and you have to live that and you have to live that by example and you have to make sure that you do this in a credible fashion. Credibility is probably one of the most important assets that you can have. Not just if you are the chairman or the CEO of a bank but across the bench if you are a managing bank. Actually it's probably not only true for banks if I may say so. David, I'd say about 30 years ago or so we began to deify business leaders and began to publicise them to a greater extent than before. I would say 30 years ago or longer ago bankers were more or less faceless and very few people could name the chairman or CEO of most banks. Today because of the proliferation of media, because of the crises we've had and because of all kinds of new services, internet services, blogging, so where everybody seems to know the name of the CEO of every major bank and as a result they have a greater obligation and so do people in private equity to deal with the issues of reputation. They have to stand up and be the symbol of their organisation because the organisation itself can't move and people can't get their minds around what an organisation does as much as what the CEO or chairman are doing. So the CEO and chairman have to be much more public, much more transparent, they have to be a role model. I think some of them have done a very good job of that, some have not done as good a job of that. I think most of them now recognise that in the future they've got to be more public than they were, more transparent and more understanding of the concerns of the average public and citizen than probably they did 20 years ago or even 10 years ago. Thank you. I'm going to take one more, just about got time I think. Yes, here, third row. My name is Jeroen Daisblwm, I'm the Dutch Finance Minister and presently also the President of Eurogroup. I'd like to pick up on that last point of the role of bankers because I was struck today in a couple of sessions by the openness in which some of you are bankers and regulators now talk about the problems that we've had and how we're dealing with them. I find in my practice that I as a politician have to talk to the public and to the parliament and to media about what we're doing regarding the banks. And I'm not being helped very much by bankers, I'm being quite frank. So what I'd like to ask you is to have the same frankness and openness that you have here today in this more or less private setting outside and talk to the public and tell them what you're doing and also reflect on what's happened. I'm not asking you to apologise, not at all, but make the analysis in all openness and frankness and talk to the public about what you're doing. And my second point would be we're all trying to work out how to not have another crisis. We're probably getting things wrong and over-regulating and doing the wrong things and this is probably all true. But it would certainly help if when we take steps forward the financial sector would not respond so defensively or negatively but also say sometimes these politicians are probably doing the right things and the regulators are probably right in imposing some more strict rules and regulations. That would also be a signal that you understand where it comes from. So thank you very much for your openness and directness today and hope to hear much more from it. Thank you. Aded, did you feel when you were a regulator until quite recently that the financial system was still too defensive and not prepared to come out and communicate in the way the minister asked? I certainly think that the industry in response to the re-regulation that was required that it still had a tendency towards a reflexive attitude was if we said the capital ratio should really be 10%, they'd say how about 10% minus 2. Whatever we said it was less and at any time that we said it there were always arguments of why you'll get in the way of lending to the real economy, we won't be able to raise the capital etc etc. There is a very strong tendency to as it were fall into a negotiating stance with the regulators and I think there was a failure on the behalf of the industry to realise that the public really didn't like that and correctly didn't like that and in the face of this enormous crisis of 2008 really wanted the industry to say we want to come over on to the same side as the regulators and the central banks and work out how radically we have to reform this to be a more stable system. I think that tendency which I think has diminished over time but certainly during the course of the debates about Basel III I can't actually remember any of the bankers whom I was dealing with saying you know you say it should be 10%, how about 12% funnily enough none of them went that way and it would probably have helped the debate if they had. So you're still part of the problem or are you becoming part of the solution? Let me maybe get some nuance to what the minister had suggested. It's still probably an initial reaction when in the wake of the crisis and the first I would say regulatory proposals came forward was somewhat defensive but I think that stance by the industry has changed very quickly and I can give you an example from my own country. I was a member of the expert commission that designed the debate to fail law. Now that was not an easy law and as you probably know the Swiss standards are among the highest in the world. I signed off on them. I can say that now it was a unilateral decision in the end as to how we designed the system because I was personally convinced it was the right thing to do and I've had many colleagues who have done that in similar fashion in industry bodies and the like but one should not just misperceive the fact if the industry organisations or individual bankers say well but this one we don't like because you think it doesn't make sense. I can give you another example. There's a clear tendency now towards balkanisation in the regulatory environment across the globe. I mean every country doing its own own scheme or its own own laws which we find as an industry is not what should happen because it undermines the various sense of global finance. Now as a banker you have to stand up and say don't do that. Get also your act together, align the regulatory system, harmonise it, have tough and clear rules. I'd rather have tough rules that are clear for everybody and are universally applied and I can tell you when I think back about Basel 3. At Basel 3 negotiations when you read these reports and the footnotes with all the little exceptions for every country as to buy when they have to do it those were not bankers that had introduced them. That was part of the overall regulatory setting process by governments. Sometimes because governments were responsible for certain banks that were a bit closer to the government than others and so forth. So I can give you hundreds of examples. I think when you take it on the face of it I think the general learning of the industry is something had to be done. What happened was good. Generally aligned regulation on a global and harmonised basis makes a lot of sense. Industry has also helped. We have introduced bail-in as a concept that came from the industry. It did come from regulators I would say. That's something that's the path on which we should go but doesn't mean that bankers should then simply sit here and say well no matter what is being proposed we are not allowed to say something if we think it doesn't make sense. Do you have the argument? Do you have a discussion about it? Maybe sometimes you are right and sometimes you are not right. We are out of time. I was just going to say self-flagilation is not a normal human instinct and bankers aren't going to flagulate themselves any more than regulators are. When regulators do something wrong they don't go in and say to the legislators we did something wrong and changed things the way we did it. They negotiate and they negotiate with legislators just the way bankers are negotiating sometimes with regulators. So I don't think it's fair to say that the bankers are always interested only in their own interest. They are interested in the public interest as well. They may have a different perception of it but think about the bankers. Bankers today are operating under the vocal rule. It took four years for the regulators in my country to figure out what that rule was. So how would you like to be a banker dealing with regulators who can't come up for four years with a rule? Now they've come up with it and it's a little complicated 800 pages or so but it's not always a one sided street where the regulators know exactly what the wisdom is and the bankers and business people don't. We are out of time and therefore not going to have another round nor am I going to do a ten minute summary. I think that it would be hard to summarize because I think there have been differences of opinion on the panel. That's always a good idea in my view but I think we would have to say a couple of things. One is that this problem is not fully solved partly because of the ancestry of the past and there are likely to be more issues emerging and they will require handling rather carefully. And secondly there remains an unfinished regulatory agenda both internationally and indeed in individual countries. But I would say that there was a sign here and indeed in some of the very interesting comments on the floor of a debate which is a sense of people all being on the same side of attempting to rebuild trust in the financial system. Well I think that that will require still further cooperation between politicians, regulators, bankers and indeed even NBN and ISFI. I'm sure you're going to be one in Carlisle. Thank you all for your contributions.