We still have this view. The veto should be rolled back. As a absolute minimum, it should not ever be expanded. I do not anticipate any serious risk of the veto being expanded, because I do not believe that there is a serious political risk at this point of any agreement on any new permanent member. The veto is not the only problem in decision-making.
Continuity is also part of the problem.
The fact that a country is present in the Security Council year after year can be more important in terms of its influence on decision-making than the fact that it has got a veto. Except for resolutions, all of the actions are decided on by consensus and indeed most of the resolutions are adopted 15 to 0. So that gives a lot of power to even one member of the Council that wants to stand out on an issue. The real weight of that power is largely a factor of how long a country has been a member of the Security Council. Our experience has been that certainly the first six months and perhaps even the first year, a member of the Security Council has great difficulty.