Since 2015, cybersecurity issues attract an increasing level of attention, and regulators have produced a large number of regulatory texts, both at national and international levels. This was called for to trigger the appropriate response and efforts from the industry. It helped the sector to reinforce its safeguards. Nevertheless, we must ask ourselves whether the multiplication of new regulations can have a counterproductive effect. From the panelists’ interventions, two issues need to be addressed: • First, we should avoid the possible proliferation of texts by standardsetters for banking, payments, securities services, insurance and/or financial markets. The FSB has already provided such evidence in a stock-taking exercise performed in 2017. Regulators are paying attention to cyber risks, and while they share the same objectives, regulatory texts tend to differ across regulators and as a result add to firms’ burden in terms of compliance with these various regulations, with  Page 3 sur 6 little marginal gain. Clarity would be enhanced by reducing the multiple variations in the formulation of requirements across institutions. In turn, regulators’ efforts would be streamlined and their experts employed more effectively. How can we better coordinate regulation? Obviously, a “principle-based” regulation on cybersecurity is preferable, rather than increasingly prescriptive standards, too rigidly “rules-based”. Supervision completes regulation. Principle-based regulation would give supervisors some room for manoeuvre to modulate their expectations to the risk profile of the institutions. • But then, we should also pay attention to the risk of regulatory arbitrage. Regulatory differences can create opportunities.

Lee Hsien Loong: Financial centres today and tomorrow: a Singapore perspective Address by Mr Lee Hsien Loong, Deputy Prime Minister of Singapore and Chairman of the Monetary Authority of Singapore, at the International Monetary Conference, Singapore, 4 June 2001. *  *  *  Mr Sandy Warner, President, IMC Ladies and Gentlemen:  Introduction I welcome all the delegates to this first IMC of the new century. Please allow me to share with you a Singapore perspective on financial centres as they are and as we expect them to be in the years ahead. In the last few decades the pattern of international financial activity has undergone major changes. Starting with a high concentration in a very small number of financial centres, activity then spilt over to more locations. But now with globalisation revolutionising the financial industry, and expanding the worldwide network of financial markets and activities, paradoxically the trend again seems to be towards concentration, with fewer mega financial centres, complemented by smaller centres with more specialised focuses. In Europe, London is the premier full-service centre, with others like Frankfurt and Zurich occupying strong niches - Frankfurt in the derivatives business and Zurich in private banking. In America, New York is pre-eminent with Chicago playing a specialised role in financial futures, and Boston in asset management. Both London and New York are not just continental but global financial centres, where the top financial institutions have congregated and capital markets run broad and deep.