Former Bank of England Governor Mervyn King recently launched a more drastic idea, that a bank must hold more assets that can be used as collateral in the central bank than it has liabilities (including deposits) that can suddenly flow outwards.10 In this way, central banks could always intervene and have sufficient access to liquid funds. Admati et al. note in a response that the consequence of this would be that the authorities also supported bad banks, which would reinforce moral hazard problems and lead to banks that should be wound up not being wound up.11 There is a risk that we would then have so-called Zombie banks, and this would have negative effects on growth and efficiency. In any case, I believe that the instability of deposits is an issue that legislators and regulators around the world need to analyse more closely. The resolution framework also needs to be reviewed The second question concerns the resolution framework. This was introduced after the global financial crisis and the explicit purpose is to make it possible to resolve a systemically important bank in an orderly manner. The idea is that losses should be borne primarily by shareholders and secondarily by bondholders. Public funds should not need to be used. Allowing bondholders to bear potential losses also reduces the problems of moral hazard. So if you can use an effective resolution framework as intended, you reduce the problems created by the deposit guarantee. 10  See King (2023). 11 See Admati, Hellwig and Portes (2023).

The economies of Southeast Asia are particularly exposed to such reconfigurations as they have high participation in global value chains, but are located mostly downstream in those value chains, and thereby face higher risks of being left out. •  At the same time, greater importance attached to ESG considerations have led to new standards and expectations--new global rules of the game--about how countries can participate in international trade. •  For small open economies, the challenge is to find their place in the rapidly evolving international trade landscape. How should they position themselves between the major trading powers? To what extent can regional trading blocs help to increase their voice in the international arena? Where are the best opportunities to plug themselves into a new configuration of global supply chains? •  Small open economies can best navigate and benefit from the shifting trade landscape by keeping their outward orientation, strengthening domestic institutions, and undertaking structural reforms that enhance flexibility. This would allow them to harness technology to upgrade their production capabilities and adapt to new trade patterns, including integration into evolving global supply chains. Services trade, especially in intermediate services such as telecommunication services and IT management, offer large growth potential. As world trade bounces back following the pandemic, opportunities for exports of services are likely to exceed those in goods. Active engagement in bilateral and regional free-trade arrangements will also help to diversify the trade base. •  Our economies must also quickly adapt to the new global rules of the game.