It is encouraging to note that similar efforts are being observed with other licensing authorities, selfregulatory bodies and industry associations governing respective DNFBP sectors. We are also privileged to have with us today, a representative from the Law Society of Singapore who will be sharing Singapore’s perspective and experience on the implementation of AML/CFT requirements. Recognising the growing money laundering and terrorism financing threats, many countries including Malaysia have intensified efforts to develop and maintain an AML/CFT regime that is robust and can effectively respond to the constantly evolving threats and vulnerabilities. These efforts are aimed at protecting the integrity of the financial system and the economy and preventing the abuse for criminal and terrorism purposes. In Malaysia, the AML/CFT regime was first introduced in 2001, initially scoping in financial institutions. This was extended to include non-financial institutions between 2003 and 2010, to more effectively address money laundering risks that fall outside of the financial sector. The Malaysian AML/CFT regime is characterised by four pillars: a comprehensive legal framework, implementation of preventive measures, effective enforcement of laws and regulations and close cooperation between agencies, both domestically and internationally. In 2015, the third report on Malaysia’s AML/CFT framework was published by the Financial Action Task Force (or the FATF), arising from an independent assessment of Malaysia’s compliance with the International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism and Proliferation. The report acknowledged Malaysia’s ‘high degree’ of technical compliance and a ‘substantial to moderate’ level of effectiveness in the implementation of international standards.

As Mervyn King, the Governor of the Bank of England, stated explicitly to the point2: “..that’s what we have to do with every variable that we look at, work out why it’s growing faster or slower than it was before and not to use some rather mindless regression.…The secret of good policy is to try and think trough what are the economics of the shocks hitting the economy at present. That in a nutshell is my philosophy of how you should do policy. Don’t rely on regressions from the past.” Having discussed the role of monetary policy and rather complex economic models, I will move on to the final theme which may seem more prosaic, notably measuring current inflation. In general, the production level of economic statistics is probably very high in Norway, as shown in international comparisons by the IMF among others. It would also seem that it is very cost-effective. Improvements are frequently made to the methodology and the compilation of CPI statistics. In August this year, the indices for electricity, books and air travel were revised. Last year, Statistics Norway changed the method for the treatment of rents in the housing market, and the previous year the food index was revised. A general view is that changes in statistics production should be well documented and should place particular emphasis on identifying the effects such changes might have on measured inflation.