training you. what can we do? nothing much! we can only do one thing and that is to continue to train new staff. leadership training is very essential. i commend the rotaract club for its immense contribution to training. making a difference making a difference is one of your rallying calls. it is a powerful one. but making a difference in what and to whom? i believe that you can make a difference on many levels. although we may not know it, we do make a difference to people ’ s lives irrespective of our position in society. we as parents make a difference to our children. we as managers and leaders in our organisation make a difference to the people that we work with. as national leaders we make a difference to the whole country. at these multiple levels of effectiveness the key to making a difference however must be at the personal level. we get that personal level right then we can influence people the right way. we get that wrong we are bound to fail. i always believe that personal victories must also precede interpersonal victories. link to communities the other theme that strikes me as very interesting is the link between corporate fiji and the communities. this is an important theme. several of your sessions today will cover this corporate responsibility. profitability is no longer the only driving force of corporates although it is still important. this larger responsibility to society has grown in global attention in recent years. why? in my view it has to do with sustainability. corporates now realise that we live in an interrelated world. no one is an island anymore. globalisation is here to stay. what one country or corporate does affects many other things in the country and the whole world. global warming is a classical example. one day if we are not careful we will all disappear under the waves. so whatever we do we now must ensure that we do them in a sustainable manner. polluting your backyard is not sustainable. dealing unfairly with your workers is not sustainable. ignoring the community is not good corporate sense. corporates are now linking more closely with the community than ever before. i commend rotaract ’ s for its community work. i am told that some proceeds of your attendance today will go towards buying computers for vishnu deo memorial primary school. this is certainly a win - win combination – where the youth are trained and the community benefits from the fees that you collect. actions not words i like your vision “ take the lead

the congress. the congress did intend that the fdic impose risk - based premiums, but the 1996 act limits the ability of the fdic to impose risk - based premiums on well - capitalized and well - rated banks. and these two variables - - capital strength and examiner overall rating - - do not capture all the risk that banks and thrifts could create for the insurer. the board believes the fdic should be free to establish risk categories based on any well - researched economic variables and to impose premiums commensurate with these risk classifications. although a robust risk - based premium system would be technically difficult to design, a closer link between insurance premiums and individual bank or thrift risk would reduce moral hazard and the distortions in resource allocation that accompany deposit insurance. we note, however, that significant benefits in this regard are likely to require a substantial range of premiums but that the fdic has concluded in its report that premiums for the riskiest banks would probably need to be capped in order to avoid inducing failure at these weaker institutions. we believe that capping premiums may end up costing the insurance fund more in the long run should these weak institutions fail anyway, with the delay increasing the ultimate cost of resolution. the board has concluded, therefore, that if a cap is required, it should be set quite high so that risk - based premiums can be as effective as possible in deterring excessive risk - taking. in that way we could begin to simulate the deposit insurance pricing that the market would apply and reduce the associated subsidy in deposit insurance. nonetheless, we should not delude ourselves that even a wider range in the risk - based premium structure would eliminate the need for a government back - up to the deposit insurance fund, that is, eliminate the government subsidy in deposit insurance. to eliminate the subsidy in deposit insurance - to make deposit insurance a real insurance system - - the fdic average insurance premium would have to be set high enough to cover fully the very small probabilities of very large losses, such as during the great depression, and thus the perceived costs of systemic risk. in contrast to life or automobile casualty insurance, each individual insured loss in banking is not independent of other losses. banking is subject to deposit run contagion, creating a far larger extreme loss tail on the probability distributions from which real insurance premiums would have to be calculated. indeed, pricing deposit insurance risks to fully fund potential losses - - pricing to eliminate subsidies