a code for the purpose of my payment if my south african counterpart was using a different set of codes. to establish a basic level of consistency, the joint task force of the cpmi and payments market practice group have consulted on harmonising requirements for enhancing crossborder payments. [ 15 ] they received an excellent response and will be announcing the results in the autumn. another important dimension is the harmonisation of application programming interfaces ( apis ). almost two - thirds of the payment systems surveyed by cpmi [ 16 ] already offer apis to their participants. in the uk, our renewed rtgs has this month enabled its first api, with a full - fledged suite of apis due to be delivered next year. apis make it easier for payment systems and their participants to exchange data. the number of potential applications is vast. but to deliver real benefits these potential use cases rely on harmonised api standards. the cpmi is convening an industry panel of api experts ( apex ) from private and public sectors, to develop recommendations on the strategic direction for the industry. the standardisation of messaging and apis can enable quicker, cheaper and safer payments. but implementing the technical changes is only the first step. common practices and usage guidelines are essential in helping financial institutions operate across borders. importantly, the industry panel will not seek to add another competing standard. rather, it will evaluate existing api standards and develop recommendations for harmonisation based on current practices. it will also seek to develop lasting global governance forums to evolve and update the standards. the call for participation [ 17 ] is closing at the end of this month and i would encourage all relevant parties to consider applying. legal, regulatory and supervisory frameworks diverging approaches to regulation and supervision are a major source of friction in cross - border payments, and an area where i increasingly hear calls for change from the private sector. differences in how banks and non - banks are supervised can create opportunities for regulatory arbitrage. there are very good reasons why nations adopt differing approaches to financial institution supervision, data protection and financial crime prevention. nevertheless, international guidance and recommendations provide a strong principles - based framework for collaboration and interoperability between jurisdictions. a key part of the existing international framework for combatting financial crime is the financial action task force ( fatf ) recommendations. [ 18 ] to remain effective, they need to keep pace with market developments. global adoption of iso20022 standards also offers an opportunity to harness the benefits of improved data. fat

still in a relatively early stage. but it is reasonable to think that the amount of effort being put into these efforts in governments, central banks, international organizations, and universities will produce some well - conceived and well - tested metrics over time. some deviations from historical patterns are, even under existing states of knowledge, surely clear enough to justify some action. moreover, in the absence of time - varying macroprudential tools, the burden of systemic risk containment will rest entirely elsewhere. for time invariant measures to bear this burden, it might be necessary to have through - the - cycle constraints that strengthen financial stability at greater cost to economic activity. if a central bank is reluctant ever to use monetary policy in pursuit of financial stability goals at the expense of more immediate employment and price stability goals, the burden on time invariant measures would be large indeed. even if financial stability objectives are effectively incorporated into monetary policy, monetary tightening will surely not be the correct response to most instances of increasing leverage or asset prices that raise macroprudential concerns. well - developed time - varying measures might be effective in slowing the increase in systemic risk to give monetary policymakers more time to evaluate the need for a monetary policy response. there are two obvious places to begin a considered development of time - varying tools. one is in the traditional supervisory oversight of practices at regulated institutions, as enhanced bis central bankers ’ speeches by the increasingly horizontal, interdisciplinary features of large bank supervision. good supervision is always time - varying, in that it should respond to potential and growing problems in a directed fashion. 17 the coordination engendered by the liscc and parallel efforts facilitates the identification of potentially risky trends in, for example, underwriting certain forms of lending. the greater use of data, both for the regulated sector as collected by supervisors and for the economy as a whole as analyzed by our office of financial stability, further increases the prospects of timely supervisory responses. i do not want to overstate the significance of this evolution in supervisory practice, however. for one thing, as was shown by the experience with commercial real estate lending guidance issued before the crisis, supervisory guidance is an imperfect tool. in addition to the issues surrounding real - time interventions mentioned earlier, that episode revealed the potential for substantial political resistance to supervisory actions directed at specific sectors. still, with the institutionalization of financial stability concerns at the federal reserve and the fsoc, and with the ongoing improvements in relevant analytic capacities, there is room to develop this tool further