Consequently, our dialogue did not end with the publication of the Basel II text this past June. Indeed, it cannot cease, because, as I mentioned, one of the Committee’s underlying goals is to develop a framework that can adapt to future advances in risk management practices. Supervisors are committed to monitoring and discussing these developments with the industry. The Committee will make adjustments to the framework to reflect the state of risk measurement and management when necessary. I am pleased to say that the Committee is already honouring this promise. One topic that we are studying carefully concerns the treatment of “double default.” Some representatives of the industry believe that Basel II takes an overly conservative approach to the risk of loss associated with exposures covered by guarantees: they suggest that the risk of both a borrower and a guarantor both defaulting on the same exposure is lower than the risk of just one party defaulting. The Committee believes that the new framework should recognise double default effects, and a working group is currently considering all of the implications, including those associated with measuring the effects, before we agree on a solution. We remain dedicated to finding a sound treatment of double default prior to the implementation of the new framework. Other groups are discussing potential improvements to Basel II’s treatment of certain trading-related exposures.
I strongly believe that Europe is in a unique position to lead the way in the cross-border implementation of Basel II and to make faster and more tangible progress than is currently possible on  BIS Review 66/2004  5  a wider international basis. We need to seize this opportunity with both hands, because it will not just benefit us in the EU but, I believe, also have a positive impact beyond our borders. We have two major advantages in this respect. Firstly, within the European Union, we have a set of single market legislation in the banking field, founded on harmonisation and mutual recognition. Furthermore, the division of supervisory responsibilities between our countries is embedded in this common legal framework and has been in place for some time. Secondly, from a practical perspective, we also now have the Committee of European Banking Supervisors - CEBS. This committee is directly charged with promoting convergence of supervisory practices and co-operation between supervisory authorities, and has a key role to play in the implementation of Basel II in Europe. For these reasons, I believe that we can - and must - be more ambitious and go further than others may be able to go in our efforts to ensure consistent implementation of Basel II and effective supervision on a cross-border basis. We should not only move faster, but also go deeper in our search for convergence.