Lim, C H, Krznar, I, Lipinsky, F, Otani, A and Wu, X (2013), “The macroprudential framework: policy responsiveness and institutional arrangements”, IMF Working Paper, WP/13/166. Maddison, A (1995), “Monitoring the world economy, 1820 – 1992”, OECD Publishing. 12  BIS central bankers’ speeches  Newman, M E J (2005), “Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf’s law”, Contemporary Physics, Vol. 46, No. 5, pp. 323–351. Nier, E, Osinki, J, Jacome, L and Madrid, P (2011), “Institutional models for macroprudential policy”, IMF Staff Discussion Note, SDN/11/18. North, D (1981), “Structure and change in economic history”, W.W. Norton & Company. North, D (1991), “Institutions”, The Journal of Economic Perspective, Vol. 5, No.1, pp 97–112. Olson, M (1982), “The rise and decline of nations: economic growth, stagflation and social rigidities”, Yale University Press. Olson, M (1991), “Autocracy, democracy, and prosperity”. In Strategy and choice, edited by Zeckhauser, R J. Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 131–57. Reinhart, C and Rogoff, K, (2009), “This time is different: eight centuries of financial crises” Princeton University Press. Sachs, J (2005), “The end of poverty: How we can make it happen in our lifetime”, Penguin. Simon, H A (1971), “Designing organizations for an information-rich world” in: Martin Greenberger, “Computers, Communication, and the Public Interest”, pp 38–52, John Hopkins Press. Smith, A (1759), “The theory of moral sentiments”, London: A. Millar. Veblen, T (1899), “The theory of the leisure class: an economic study of institutions”, Macmillan and Company, New York.

As with monetary policy, both operate subject to statutory objectives and remits set by Parliament. And as with monetary policy, each is subject to rigorous accountability mechanisms enforced by Parliament. Both FPC and MPC have instrument, but not goal, independence. These institutional features have attractions as a response to the time-consistency dilemma which faces financial policymakers. The Bank of England is an institution with around 320 years of history. Financial crises have pock-marked its history. This ought to provide the Bank with the institutional memory necessary to make sense of dots on distant horizons, to diagnose emerging obesity in the financial system’s tails, to conscientiously object to next time appearing different. The primary objective of the FPC is to preserve the resilience of the financial system and, subject to that, to support the government’s objectives including for employment and growth. That ordering of the FPC’s objectives helps lean against short-term pressures to go for growth today at the cost of instability tomorrow. In effect, the FPC provides the longsightedness necessary to preserve future stability at a time when private risk horizons may be shortening. And it provides necessary insurance against future tail risks at a time when these tails may be fattening. This macro-prudential regime, with the FPC at its centrepiece, is an explicitly institutional solution to the financial policy dilemma. It is regulation of the system for the system: of the system because the FPC’s focus is system-wide; for the system because the FPC’s aim is stability in the wider economy.