In the blockchain space, the industry in a number of jurisdictions has pooled resources to defray the cost of experimentation involved in developing scaleable use cases for the technology’s application. In Malaysia, nine banks have done this by coming together to develop blockchain applications for trade finance. Establishing shared networks, or opening up previously closed ones, is also gaining traction. This can be seen in the growing use of Open Application Programme Interfaces (or Open APIs). Over the last five years, publications of APIs in the financial sector have increased exponentially, with an estimated 200 new APIs published every year. In a survey that we conducted earlier this year, more than half of banks and insurers in Malaysia indicated plans to roll out open APIs in the near to medium term. At the industry level, the Bank has established an open API implementation group with members drawn from the industry, fintech community and key stakeholders to develop open API standards 2/5  BIS central bankers' speeches  for the financial sector as part of efforts to broaden access and promote innovation and competition. On the risk management front, the World Economic Forum announced less than three weeks ago the creation of a consortium to facilitate more coordinated efforts in addressing cybersecurity risks. This entails developing common principles for risk assessments, guidance for implementation, and a scoring framework. In the area of payments, the Bank has just last week issued the Interoperable Credit Transfer Framework (ICTF), which promotes collaborative competition or ‘co-opetition’ for mobile payments.

I assume that this is one explanation why, for instance, it took Sweden until 1999 before there was sufficient political support to grant the Riksbank increased formal independence and to confirm by law the price stability objective, despite the fact that these reforms had been proposed when the inflation target was introduced in 1993. However, the concern among politicians over making central banks independent is quite unwarranted. The independence does not, of course, mean that the central bank is free to conduct any monetary policy they wish; it only means that it should be able to use the means at its disposal to meet the objectives set by the political system without outside intervention. This is usually expressed as the central bank being instrument independent but not goal independent. The delegation of powers should be regarded as a means for politicians to ensure that the long-term aim of the monetary policy that they endeavour to achieve – but have difficulty guaranteeing – can become a reality. Furthermore, a natural consequence of the independence is that the central bank shall be accountable for its actions and that monetary policy shall be conducted in a transparent manner 7 . It is interesting to note that, despite fairly substantial initial doubts, people have afterwards been very satisfied with the reforms implemented. Monetary policy therefore appears to have essentially delivered what was hoped for and I am not aware of any country where making the central bank more independent has been regretted. Conclusion Let me round off.