are calibrated for the riskiness of their assets and exposures, the proportion of capital required does not vary systematically to counter the cyclicality that arises through elevated asset valuations and other channels. 5 the comprehensive liquidity analysis and review, or clar, is the federal reserve board ’ s periodic simultaneous supervisory examination of firms ’ liquidity buffers and risk - management policies. we use clar to analyze and adjust our supervisory program for emerging firm practices and risk areas not captured in the liquidity coverage ratio ( lcr ). for example, clar enables monitoring of firm liquidity positions for buildups of concentrations of risk beyond the 30 - day threshold. it also allows us to look more closely at risks that may emanate from areas such as intraday credit, which are not captured within the lcr but are captured by firms ’ internal stress - testing frameworks. as the board laid out in its november 2013 policy statement on the scenario design framework for stress testing, it uses a recession approach to develop the severely adverse scenario of the stress tests. see board of governors of the federal reserve system ( 2013 ), “ federal reserve board issues final policy statement for developing scenarios for future capital planning and street testing exercises ”, press release, november 7. the severely adverse scenario is anticipated to feature an unemployment rate over the first six bis central bankers ’ speeches tool two : time - varying broad macroprudential tools while our efforts are far advanced in building structural resilience, progress is less advanced in developing time - varying tools that counter the buildup of excesses across the system broadly or in a particular financial sector. these efforts are in earlier stages of elaboration and more of a departure from recent practice. here we can learn from financial authorities in other countries that have recent experience deploying a broader array of macroprudential tools. the classic case for time - varying broad macroprudential tools is to lean against a dangerous acceleration of credit growth at a time when the degree of monetary tightening that would be needed to slow it down would be highly inconsistent with conditions in the real economy. the basel committee agreed on a common countercyclical capital buffer framework for addressing such circumstances, and the federal reserve and the other u. s. banking agencies issued a final rule to implement the basel 3 countercyclical capital buffer for u. s. banking firms in 2013. under the rule, starting in 2016 and phasing in through 2019, the u. s

some time yet. even so, as we said in january, we expect that both exports and investment will return to positive growth later this year. since the start of the year, the labour market has continued to show strength. the adjustments underway in our oil sector will eventually be completed. and firms tell us that they need to make new investments, and the recent rules around capital cost allowances are likely to speed that up. the bank ’ s role in this process is to maintain a predictable environment for decision making. we have learned from experience that keeping inflation low, stable and predictable is the best contribution we can make to canada ’ s economic welfare. crucially, our inflation - targeting framework includes a floating exchange rate that helps our economy adjust to external shocks. we only have to look back a few years for an example. following the oil price collapse of 2015, movements in the exchange rate helped to offset the loss of jobs in the oil sector by boosting exports in other sectors. in addition to the solid economic base that comes from our natural resource sectors, we have numerous advantages we can use to create new economic growth. among other things, we have a well - educated and diverse workforce that is growing through immigration. and, we have trade agreements like the canada - united states - mexico agreement, the comprehensive economic and trade agreement with the european union, and the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans - pacific partnership. these agreements should help to buffer us from some of the negative trade developments i mentioned at the beginning. another possible buffer lies right here at home. recall that when the united states turned protectionist in the 1860s, we responded by uniting our own economic clout through confederation. in today ’ s trade - uncertain world, it is even more important that we continue to make progress in promoting trade among our own provinces and territories. and enhancing economic links between north and south is even more urgent, given the growing risks around climate change. you are already feeling the impact of climate change here, and it will affect almost every aspect of life in the north. lowering barriers to trade could certainly help mitigate these economic impacts. the good news is that trade in services among the provinces has been growing rapidly over the past 10 years and is already larger than interprovincial goods trade. the bad news is that goods trade between provinces has basically been stagnant for a decade. to make this point concrete, bank staff estimate that canada ’ s potential economic growth would increase by about 0. 2 percentage