Generally, the younger population aged between 20–35 years old – perceive long-term financial planning apply to a time horizon of only the next 10 to 20 years. Therefore, financial education introduced from an early age and throughout life events is certainly essential. With sufficient basic financial knowledge and relevant skills – ingrained into the younger individuals’ behaviour and attitude – they will be more prepared and empowered to lead a healthier financial lifestyle as they move into adulthood. Financial education from young – serves as a firm foundation to influence behaviour for a more sustainable life-long financial planning. Towards this end, Bank Negara Malaysia, in collaboration with the Ministry of Education – has successfully integrated basic financial education elements into the school curriculums beginning 2014, which will be expanded to all primary and secondary school levels by 2021. Similarly, greater attention should also be accorded to long-term financial and retirement planning from young, or when entering the workforce. There should be greater awareness on the importance of saving for the future. As most of us here represent employers throughout Malaysia, I would urge that financial education and planning aspects should be embedded in our training modules, including the retirement module developed by AKPK and KWSP. Moving on the second focus area on – individual responsibility to take charge of its own financial decisions and well-being. The Financial Capability and Inclusion Demand Side Survey 2015 – also suggests that Malaysians are not adequately taking charge of their own financial decisions and well-being.

And last, but not least, the leverage ratio could also play an additional role in mitigating bank’s and supervisor’s model risk and measurement error, providing a backstop to riskbased capital measures. Indeed, it could also play a role by itself by constraining leverage in the banking system. But a really crucial challenge is good calibration. Furthermore, there are difficult questions to be addressed regarding impact assessments: What is the meaning of “significant” when referring to the increase of the capital requirements? What is the best approach to capture outlier banks which are making savings through the use of aggressive modelling techniques? Is the impact going to be measured by categories of banks with similar profiles and business models? In this sense, in order to ensure that the analysis is based on the best quality data, the engagement of the industry is crucial, both through sharing its views by responding to consultation processes, and also by contributing with the best quality data to the quantitative impact study being conducted by the Basel Committee. To conclude, it is essential that the final design of the whole framework is consistent and that any potential interactions between different measures are properly evaluated. To conclude, I will say that it will be possible to design a framework that keeps the incentives for sound risk management and that eliminates unwarranted differences in risk weighted assets among banks, while avoiding any significant increase in the capital requirements for the global banking system. Thank you very much for your attention.