Economic Decision-Making Visibility

I mean, I think that's right. But the problem with the line of encouraging consensus is that it probably encourages people to sort of go along when they don't care too much. And sometimes it would be useful to actually have their positions articulated because they might not disagree very much from the mainstream, but they might still have useful angles that could be brought out. And, you know, the comparison, the governor made the comparison that we're moving towards matching some of the most transparent central banks in the world. That's not quite right. In Sweden, where she comes from, for every OCR decision, each member has to articulate in the published minutes their reasons for their views. Same thing's just been introduced in the Bank of England. So, you know, it's a step in the right direction, but it is a relatively modest one. They're encouraging board members to speak openly. That's a marginal step forward from what was there before. But the test is going to be whether some of them actually take that opportunity. In Australia, by contrast, their newly reformed Reserve Bank external members are required to do a speech at least once a year. So, as I say, steps in the right direction. The proof of the pudding is going to be in the eating. How much eventually gets disclosed? How many people choose to make speeches? So I'm not criticising it. It's just that it's not a particularly bold move.