readability score at the high school level — in other words, a level that would be accessible to the majority of canadians. of course, our subject matter is complex. but we can, and we will, make our communications more widely understandable. we want our content to be accessible to everyone who wants to understand our issues. we want those already reading our content to read even more of it. and we want the media to continue to report on our issues accurately and to engage us in constructive commentary. this speech, in case you are wondering, rates at about a grade 12 level in terms of vocabulary and sentence structure. even so, not everybody will read this speech or hear about it on the news. we have to be creative to reach more people who are interested and help them understand what we do. social media is an important element in this effort — through twitter, linkedin and other platforms. but it is only part of the effort. last year, we re - opened the bank of canada museum in ottawa. the museum helps canadians understand all the work we do. it takes a hands - on approach — encouraging people to interact with the exhibits. plus, it is the best deal around, because admission is free! the museum is working with educators across canada to help develop material for classrooms. tied in with that effort is the museum ’ s website, aimed at the whole country. the bottom line is that we want canadians, especially youth, to understand what the bank does as part of a solid grounding in basic economics. we are also replacing one of our regular publications, the bank of canada review, which has always been aimed at a specialized audience. in its place, we will be launching a new digital - only publication : the economy, plain and simple. it will explain key economic concepts and issues in an understandable way for the general public. we want this publication to stand out for its use of plain language, infographics and other visual content that will make what we do more accessible. in fact, you will see more visual elements — including videos and interactive charts — in the digital versions of all our publications. and as we announced earlier this month, we are changing how we communicate about financial stability issues. starting this autumn, a new financial system hub on our website will offer clear and up - to - date reports on the financial system, also aimed at a broad audience. let me make one last point about connecting with the general public. yes, we want people

on the banking system and economy as a whole. therefore, supervision is a way of forcing banks, individually and collectively, to recognize the broader impact that their risk - taking and risk - mediation decisions might have on society at large. it also substitutes for some of the market discipline lost, and attempts to offset the “ moral hazard ” that arises, due to the existence of the safety net. it is the possibility that poor managerial decisions by one bank will then spill over to other banks and eventually to the public at large that provides the rationale for supervision and regulation. that possibility is also a key factor driving the federal reserve ’ s need to remain a bank supervisor. without such active, on - site experience supervising and evaluating bank activities, the central bank would, i believe, be less prepared to deal with financial crises that inevitably arise. in addition, the federal reserve is the operator of important parts of the nation ’ s payment system, both wholesale and retail, and as such has a stake in the proper functioning of banks and the banking industry. however, we should also recognize that supervision and regulation are not without costs to banks and, in turn, to society. therefore, i believe that we should aspire to the minimum amount of regulation and supervision that is consistent with maintaining safety and soundness of the banking system and with maintaining financial stability. after all, the marketplace is ultimately the best regulator, and we should look to the market for guidance and feedback, wherever possible. similarities between consultants and supervisors given these fundamentally different incentives for banks to have consultants and supervisors, why would an obviously intelligent ceo of a major bank compliment us on providing “ consultations ”? the answer is that a good examiner brings some of the same strengths to an examination that a good consultant brings to a consulting assignment, namely objectivity, cross - firm experience and critical technical expertise. like consultants, the independent assessments that examiners make are becoming more dependent on statistical sampling and on the accuracy of a bank ’ s internal information systems. requiring banks to have, on an on - going basis, sound internal procedures should reduce risks to the financial system and lead to fewer surprises overall. reviewing procedures, though, entails a more subjective approach than reviewing credits. although analyzing credits can be complex, the potential resolutions are few. the examiner reaches a conclusion about individual credits and the overall quality of the loan portfolio, and his findings are communicated to the bank. some loans are charged - off, others are written down, and the results are