samchain/econo-pairs-v1 huggingface dataset:
I would like to end by raising a couple of questions about the future shape of financial markets. The first is the extent to which we should be integrating both our analysis of risk and our approach to regulation between the insurance industry on the one hand and capital markets on the other. Quite apart from the increasing institutional interlinkages, the extent of risk transfer now going on between different parts of the financial sector demands a consistent approach to capital requirements across the sector as a whole. A second issue is the need to reflect liquidity conditions in determining the appropriate level of capital. If an asset can be disposed of quickly - that is if there is a robust liquid market for the asset concerned - the capital needed to guard against unexpected price movements will be less than if the prospective holding period is long. Liquidity conditions can of course vary dramatically not just between different instruments but over time and understanding how and why they vary will, I think, be an important area of investigation for the future. Conclusion That concludes a quick summary of some of the financial stability issues relating to risk and capital levels that we at the Bank of England are working on at the moment. Central bankers are by their nature a worrying breed (in both senses of the word! ), and commentators often note the regularity with which the Monetary Policy Committee says that it finds the outlook 'more than usually uncertain'.

I want to say a little about the tragic events of September 11th, which have further underlined the complex nature of the world we live in. Second, I would like to look at some of the ways in which formal models of market and credit risk of the type you will be studying here have already influenced the design of our regulatory regimes. Much has been achieved here, but much also remains to be done, and the current state of the art by no means captures every type of risk run by financial firms. So, third, I want to talk about some other safeguards which will continue to be necessary to improve the chances of maintaining financial stability. The Bank of England's role in financial stability The maintenance of stability in the overall financial system is one of the Bank of England's three core tasks - the other two being responsibility for monetary stability, and promotion of the efficiency and effectiveness of the UK financial system. That concern for system-wide financial stability does not reflect a paternalistic belief that central banks know better than the markets - indeed market disciplines have a very important role to play in maintaining stability. Rather, it derives from the fact that some types of problem which initially affect only individual financial institutions may subsequently threaten the stability of the system as a whole.
BIS Review 9/2010  7  Figure 3 Monetary policy interest rate (MPR)  MPR change  MPR level  (basis points)  (percent)  Japan U.S.A. Canada Switzerland Sweden Chile Hong Kong U.K. Israel Eurozone Peru Czeck Republic Norway Korean Republic Malaysia New Zealand Colombia Poland Australia Philippines Mexico India China Hungary Turkey Indonesia South Africa Brazil Russia Argentina Iceland  Turkey Chile Colombia New Zealand Iceland Peru South Africa U.K. India Brazil Norway Sweden Mexico Korean Republic Israel Australia Eurozone Hong Kong Indonesia Canada Poland Switzerland Czeck Republic China Hungary Russia Philippines U.S.A. Malaysia Japan Argentina -1,200 -1,000  -800  -600  -400  -200  0  0  200  From 4.Sep.08 to 15.Dec.09  2  4  6  8  10  12  At 15.Dec.09  Source: Bloomberg. Figure 4 Liquidity conditions of the interbank market at three months (*) (basis points)  400  400  300  300  200  200  100 0  Jan.07  Jan.08  Japan  U.S.A.  Jan.09  100  Volatility in developed markets (percent)  100  80  80  60  60  40  40  100  20  20  0  0  0  Jan.07  Eurozone  Jan.08  Jan.09  VIX index volatility  (*) Spreads between the Libo rate and the Overnight Index Swaps rate. Source: Bloomberg.

The financial crisis that shook the industrialized world could have caused a major disaster with unimaginable consequences on developing economies, much more severe than actually occurred. Had it not been for the determination of the economic policymakers around the world to stabilize the financial systems and implement significant fiscal and monetary packages, the economic performance would have been much worse. Nevertheless, the world could not prevent the “Great Recession”, the name with which this period has been already labeled, and world output will fall for the first time in sixty years. The ability of macroeconomic policies to react promptly was particularly important for developing economies, cushioning the impact of the global crisis and making it much milder than in the past. Chile was no exception. As we said time and again from the onset of the crisis, our economy could not and would not be immune to the events occurring in the world. Nonetheless, as we have also insisted, the policy framework we have in place allowed us to mitigate the effects of the global economic scenario. Today, two weeks short of the end of the year, we know that although we were not spared the recession, its impact was much milder than we had been accustomed to. It is enough to recall just a couple of episodes. In 1982–1983, while Chile saw GDP fall dramatically, the world economy was growing. Measured in market prices, Chile’s GDP variation was around 18 percentage points below the world average.
New issues during the year reached a record high to about $ billion and the outstanding global sukuk market has now surpassed the $ billion mark. Despite the more challenging international financial environment arising from the financial crisis that has occurred in a number of the advanced economies in the  BIS Review 97/2008  1  recent twelve months, the sukuk market while also affected, it has been to a lesser extent. Up until June 2008, it has held its ground with a total global issuance now exceeding $ billion. With greater recognition of the sukuk market as a competitive and attractive form of financing, the global sukuk market is expected to continue its growth going forward. The International Islamic financial hub evolving in Malaysia is supported by five pillars. Pillar 1: sukuk origination Following the first ever sukuk in the world that was issued in Malaysia in 1990, Malaysia has now developed a deep, liquid and vibrant sukuk market. Recently, the largest sukuk ever was raised in the Malaysian sukuk market in 2007. The magnitude was approximately RM15 billion or about USD5 billion equivalent. Despite being issued during the height of the subprime crisis, it attracted huge demand and was oversubscribed by more than two times. Sukuk origination has thus been identified as one of the important pillars of the Malaysian Islamic financial system. As of the end of 2007, more than 60 percent of the outstanding global sukuks originated from Malaysia.

In a world of low growth, the political rhetoric in some major economies has tended to focus more on the costs and less on the benefits. That is unfortunate, because given the current circumstances of the global economy, it is likely that we need deeper and fairer integration. For emerging economies in Asia and Latin America, the question for us is whether deeper economic and financial integration offers a feasible path towards unlocking sustainable growth of our economies? How do we mitigate the costs and maximise the benefits? The World Bank theme paper for this conference provides a useful starting point for thinking about these issues. I will leave it to the learned speakers today to ponder on that. I will just briefly share my perspective on this issue with respect to ASEAN and Malaysia. Asian regional economic and financial integration The ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint 2025 contains ASEAN’s vision of regional economic and financial integration over the next 10 years. When it came to formulating the 2025 Blueprint, the issue of the nature of integration has always been central. The fundamental challenge remains on how to use regional integration to leverage on ASEAN’s diversity in terms of economic size and structure, income levels, resource endowments and stage of financial sector development. Here, in the interest of time, l will just focus on ASEAN financial integration. I remember that soon after the Asian Financial Crisis, there was a lot of interest in looking at the European model of a single currency.
[6] It’s why we narrowed the gap between capital requirements for smaller banks using the Standardised Approach and larger banks using the Internal Ratings-Based Approach – in a way that reflects the risks they take and facilitates competition and healthier markets. [7] It’s why we established a New Bank Start-up Unit that, since 2013, has authorised thirty new banks to take on incumbents. [8] It’s why we are taking steps to streamline processes for authorizing some ventures in the wholesale insurance and reinsurance sector. [9] And it’s why we, along with the government, are considering a mobilisation regime for new insurers as part of the Solvency II review. [10] In these instances, our ‘regulatory T cells’ told us that we could takes steps to boost the health of markets while maintaining strong protection against risks from disorderly failure. Responsive regulation can be a helping hand boosting competition, not a dead hand stifling innovation. International competitiveness Effective competition is already a secondary objective for the PRA. But as I mentioned earlier, we will soon have another secondary objective to facilitate (subject to alignment with international standards) the international competitiveness of the UK economy, including in particular the UK’s financial services sector. This objective will also include facilitating medium to long term growth. I’m going to turn now to how we intend to use our new powers to pursue this new objective. This is going to be a very important change for us.

Page 1  The PRA's future approach to policy − speech by Vicky Saporta Given at the City & Financial Global event  Page 2  Published on 27 September 2022  Vicky explains how regulation that is strong and responsive can avoid unnecessary trade-offs between competitiveness and resilience. The Financial Services and Markets Bill 2022 introduces new powers and a new secondary objective on competitiveness and growth for the PRA. Vicky argues that the PRA can use these new powers to regulate responsively, and better tailor rules to the needs of the UK. Vicky sets out the PRA’s intention to take a proactive approach to the new objective. She explains that as a global financial hub, the UK’s competitiveness in financial services rests on its skilled workforce, and its deep and specialised markets. Vicky argues that the UK economy has more to gain by having a regulatory regime that is open to international business, nondiscriminating, predictable, transparent, responsive to threats and opportunities rather than in weakening standards to attract business. Speech Introduction The Government’s Financial Services and Markets Bill introduces important changes to the PRA’s powers and responsibilities. It does so to implement reforms identified by the Future Regulatory Framework for Financial Services Review, or the ‘FRF Review’. The reforms will move financial regulation back to a British style of regulation based on the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000, which we refer to as ‘FSMA’. Most technical rules will be made by regulators accountable to Parliament.
Over the next few months, the data are likely to be dancing particularly vigorously under the influence of the reversal of the VAT cut, a turnaround in the stock cycle and even the effects of the recent cold weather. Added to that, the MPC is acutely aware that initial data releases are often later heavily revised, and there is uncertainty over the timing of fiscal consolidation. The patience of UK households is likely to be sorely tried over the next couple of years. There is little scope for growth in real take-home pay, which may remain weak even as output recovers. It is clear that inflation is likely to pick up markedly in the first half of this year, a message reinforced by this morning’s news that CPI inflation reached 2.9% in December. The continuing pass-through of the earlier significant depreciation of sterling, while part of the necessary rebalancing of our economy, is offsetting to some extent the downward pressure on inflation from the large amount of spare capacity. And the rise in VAT back to 17.5% means that CPI inflation is likely to rise to over 3% for a while, or even higher for even longer were energy prices or indirect taxes to increase further. Although such price level effects do not constitute a continuing source of inflation, and hence should be temporary, they remain in the official measure of inflation for a full year.

Some has in fact already been withdrawn with the return of the standard rate of VAT to 17.5% at the beginning of the month. But uncertainty about how and when fiscal policy will respond has a direct bearing on monetary policy. And markets can be unforgiving. As Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke said recently about the similar fiscal position in the United States, “near-term challenges must not be allowed to hinder timely consideration of the steps needed to address fiscal imbalances. Unless we demonstrate a strong commitment to fiscal sustainability in the longer term, we will have neither financial stability nor healthy  4  BIS Review 4/2010  economic growth”. The Chancellor has made clear that the Spring Budget provides the opportunity to do precisely that. Over the past year, the UK economy has battled against the headwinds of an intense monetary squeeze and a sharp fall in world trade, supported by the tailwinds of a huge policy stimulus and a lower exchange rate. At this very early stage of the recovery, it is particularly difficult to judge the medium-term prospects for the economy. Ten years ago, I described how movements in macroeconomic data can sometimes bear a “resemblance to oldfashioned disco dancing – sharp movements in unpredictable directions creating much excitement, accompanied by a good deal of noise”.
Emerging market economies are very vulnerable to the reputational risk of non-compliance. Therefore we must take one step at a time. The infrastructure for compliance - legal, accounting and market - must be established and is an essential pre-requisite which underlies the success of these initiatives. BIS Review 84/2005  1  The implications on the several sub sectors of our economy from Basle II will have to be examined carefully with regard to access to finance and the pricing of risk. Uneven playing fields may arise as a result of the internationally active foreign banks adopting more advanced approaches, thereby improving their competitiveness over their local counterparts. Will the models developed by the foreign banks be relevant for the risks in our markets? These are the regulatory challenges which have to be addressed by the regulators. In meeting these challenges, the local banks must make best use of the existing resources to minimize the cost of full compliance. They can build on their existing data bases and leverage on the default data available in institutions such as the Credit Information Bureau. They can benefit from data pooling within the industry. All these resources must be harnessed. It is important that the banks do not lose sight of the long term benefits of Basle II of better capital allocation and consequently, better pricing, because they are embroiled in the details necessary to meet the deadline. The ultimate objective is financial stability.

Quite apart from our own Hong Kong-specific initiatives, there are movements for reform at the international level, resulting from a very different experience in the more developed economies, which we cannot ignore. This point brings me to my second observation: the need to move with the times. The past year has seen a plethora of ideas and proposals for reforming financial regulations, and interventions by government that were unprecedented in their nature and scale. Even in economies less deeply affected by the latest crisis, including Hong Kong, it has been necessary to deepen government involvement, for example in more extensive deposit guarantees or in more intense supervision of banks' risk management – although it is gratifying that so many of the tools that we have been able to rely on, including the apparatus and contingency arrangements for ensuring liquidity, have been developed in a pre-emptive rather than a reactive way. On the various emergency measures, I am quite sure that in the fullness of time, these will either be turned into standing arrangements or withdrawn, hopefully through smooth exit strategies. But, current sentiment is clearly demanding much closer regulation and supervision of banks over the longer term. Quite what form this will take remains to be agreed on in international forums, although the thinking already seems to be towards improvements in the level and quality of banks' capital; new global standards for measuring, managing and supervising liquidity risk; and macro-prudential supervision to reduce the pro-cyclical dynamics of financial markets.
Elvira Nabiullina: Current economic environment and monetary policy in Russia Statement by Ms Elvira Nabiullina, Governor of the Bank of Russia, at the State Duma of the Russian Federation on the Bank of Russia Annual Report for 2014, Moscow, 16 June 2015. *  *  *  Good afternoon, distinguished colleagues! While introducing the Bank of Russia Annual Report, I will give a brief overview of our activities such as monetary policy, banking and financial market regulation and supervision, and the national payment system. Before passing on to the report, I would like to briefly describe the current economic situation, the environment, in which we implement our policy. The last year was a troubled one, oil price fall and financial sanctions emerged as serious challenges to the Russian economy. The economy has slowed while decline in investments became manifest in the period of high oil prices and rather low interests rates. This determined the specifics of the current situation – unfavourable developments in external conditions overlapped structural economic slowdown. The situation was especially challenging as the economic downturn coincided with high inflation. Currently, we have managed to curb inflation. According to our forecast, an economic growth (quarter-on-quarter) is expected to resume later this year. Certainly, a lot will depend on the efficiency of the joint efforts of the Government and the Central Bank. The observed improvement and financial stabilisation must be supported by structural changes. They are indispensable for a sustainable economic growth. These include a better business climate and higher labour productivity.

How do we see our objectives in the current conditions? Our priority task remains unchanged– it is the price stability. Despite a leap in inflation last year and earlier this year, our medium-term inflation target is still 4%. We estimate it to be achievable. Another important task is to maintain financial stability amid current turbulence. And third, we ultimately aspire to creating balanced macroeconomic conditions to put the economy on the track of sustainable economic growth. We will have to tackle these issues in challenging external conditions. The pace of the global economic growth will not be high; other countries’ monetary policy will keep influencing the Russian economy; the oil market is likely to remain unstable. Therefore, the economy will have to adjust to the new realities when both oil prices and exchange rates fluctuate both upwards and downwards. A few words on the banking industry. Economic developments of the last year could not help but impact banks. Generally, all the economic indicators showed quite good dynamics last 2  BIS central bankers’ speeches  year – assets and lending were on the rise. Profits, though 40% lower than in 2013, were non-negligible at the level of 600 billion rubles. However, the situation certainly began to change. We can see slower lending rates. In some months of the year we have registered losses in the banking system as a whole. Profits in January-May this year amounted to nine billion rubles.
First, however, it is important to underscore the advantages that accrue from a global financial system of the type that has been developed in the past decade. The countries which participate in the international capital market tend to have higher per capita growth rates than other countries. The globalisation of production and trade calls for new solutions for payments and financing. It is also a great advantage to have a financial system that is capable of channelling savings to those parts of the world that need them most for investment. However, participation in the international capital market presupposes that a country has an adequate banking system with accounting regulations and other institutions, such as thorough supervision that ensures sound banking practices. This has evidently not been the case in a number of the countries that are now affected by the crisis. Nor should we forget that the banking system in Sweden was not fully prepared at the time when our credit market was deregulated. If loans from the international capital market are channelled to a country where the banking system and other financial institutions are not ready to function in this community, the result may thus be loan losses. But, as you know, it takes two to tango. It may well be asked why banks in the industrialised countries have arranged loans to countries that evidently were not yet sufficiently sound borrowers. Capital has been flowing to emerging markets in a broad stream in recent years.

New regulations may simply do more harm in the present situation. But the players in international financial markets do need to review their systems for evaluating risks. Risk assessments based on historically determined correlations between different assets may be inadequate when earlier patterns are broken and the supply of liquidity changes. In the short run the problems in the global economy must be solved at their origins. Via the International Monetary Fund, in certain situations the international community can contribute liquidity if the countries in question are prepared to take measures. It is, indeed, an enigma that the world’s second biggest economy, Japan, has not managed, year after year, to tackle the problems in its banking system. Economic development in Japan is highly important, not least for other countries in the region. All observers are agreed that the problems in the banking sector must be rectified. Fiscal measures are also called for. Nor would I rule out the introduction, as part of a stability programme, of a numerical inflation target that might help to modify the negative expectations. It is my hope that the current signals about future measures will be fulfilled. The US Federal Reserve is also strongly focused on the problems in the global economy. In Europe the action of central banks will be determined by the extent to which Europe is affected by what is now happening. To date, however, it looks as though Europe is moving in the right direction.