My assessment is that in terms of understanding the risks and framing possible mitigating actions, we will fare better if we start by focussing on the activities that create such market risk, and then as appropriate move on to the entities that house those activities. The policy response from the authorities is by nature an activity that needs to be carried out through close international co-ordination. The Bank of England is committed to playing its part, consistent with the major presence of financial market activity in the UK, alongside and as a part of the work of the G20 under the auspices of the Financial Stability Board. References Jens H. E. Christensen and James M. Gillan “Does Quantitative Easing Affect Market Liquidity”, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, Working Paper 2013-26. Ingo Fender and Uif Lewrick “Shifting tides – market liquidity and market-making in fixed income instruments”, BIS Quarterly Review, March 2015 http://www.bis.org/publ/qtrpdf/r_qt1503i.pdf Financial Policy Committee: Record of the Meeting, 24th March http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/Records/fpc/2015/apr.aspx  2015. The Financial Services Authority, “The Failure of the Royal Bank of Scotland: Financial Services Authority Board Report, December 2011. Stanley Fischer, “The Importance of the Nonbank Financial Sector” speech at the “Debt and Financial Stability – Regulatory Challenges” Conference, the Bundesbank and the German Ministry of Finance, Frankfurt 27 March 2015. Grace Xing Hu, Jun Pan and Jiang Wang “Noise as Information for Illiquidity”. The Journal of Finance, XXVIII, No 6 December 2013. Michael Joyce, David Miles, Andrew Scott and Dimitri Vayanos “Quantitative Easing and unconventional Monetary Policy – An Introduction”.

The UK is undergoing a consolidation of key retail payment systems under a single New Payments Architecture (NPA), aimed at addressing the lack of a common entry point for access and different on-boarding processes for participants across the different systems. Similarly, Australia launched the New Payment Platform earlier this year, which is seen as a key payments infrastructure for the domestic market. Of significance, these developments share common outcomes – to avoid duplication of industry resources, widen network reach and enable economies of scale. Here in Malaysia, pooling of resources at the infrastructure level has been a longstanding strategy for the payment system. As early as 1997, Malaysia had consolidated its three ATM networks to eliminate fragmentation in that segment. More recently, we saw the formation of PayNet which serves as a shared payment infrastructure to facilitate domestic payments. Of note, PayNet will be launching the Real-time Retail Payments Platform (RPP) next week. This will be supported by a National Addressing Database (NAD) that enables users to pay seamlessly and securely using simple identifiers such as their mobile phone, national registration 4/6  BIS central bankers' speeches  or business registration numbers. At the international level, regulators should also seek to collaborate towards promoting greater harmonisation or centralisation of legal, technical and operational arrangements for payments. These include exploring the adoption of international standards such as the ISO 20022 messaging standard. These standards would enhance compatibility across different infrastructures and pave the way towards greater cross-border interoperability.