one aspect of pragmatism is the need to be bold and timely in introducing new policy tools, even unconventional ones when it becomes necessary. when a new crisis occurs, it is likely that the factors causing it are unprecedented. it goes without saying, that the solutions required to remedy the problem requires new measures as well. using conventional and ‘ consensus thinking ’ are unlikely to be an effective remedy. policy - making is also increasingly characterised by shorter time horizon. with the rapid developments in the financial markets, the window of opportunity and effectiveness for policy has shrunk considerably. gone are the days when policy - making can take months to formulate and implement, let alone years. as financial markets evolve, the shelf - lives of policies have also become shorter as policies can become ineffective very quickly. such an uncertain environment necessitates the deployment of new and untested policies. the “ audacity of pessimism ” – as mervyn king calls it – a situation when policymakers start scrambling to address problems only when things have gone terribly wrong – may prove too little too late to salvage the situation. constant, holistic and courageous assessments of implemented policies are therefore crucial in ensuring that policies remain relevant. another area of policy pragmatism that seldom gets discussed is the ability and conviction in reversing policies when deemed appropriate. in my years as a central banker, there seems to be an unspoken rule among global policymakers that certain policy paths are one - way, no - return endeavours. any policy reversals are seen as a backward move that is time inconsistent, which could risk a permanent damage on trust, reputations and credibility of the central bank. for me, this mindset is not tenable and counterproductive. it is imperative to realise that under extreme circumstances, a reversal of policies may be beneficial and in fact, necessary for the greater good and wellbeing of the society. sometimes, taking a step backward may be the best way forward. a case in point is in the area of liberalisation. while we have benefitted from an open market, and are strongly committed to the principles of this approach, we believe that countries should be cautious in its adoption, giving due consideration to the various trade - offs and preconditions. there might be a situation where a ‘ short moratorium ’ for further liberalisation becomes necessary. as with everything else, a balanced approach is always the preferred and wiser option. liberalisation is not a ‘

debit cards. there are only 8 terminals per 1, 000 inhabitants in malaysia compared to more than 20 terminals per 1, 000 inhabitants in advanced countries. the growth rate of the point - of - sale terminals in malaysia have slowed down considerably from 14. 6 % in 2011 to 6. 1 % in 2012 and 3. 2 % in 2013, indicating a potential saturation of pointof - sale terminals among the higher tier merchants who can afford the current level of merchant fees charged by the financial institutions. the recent hikes in interchange fee, which is the fee payable between financial institutions in a payment card transaction, are likely to make payment card acceptance even more costly for merchants. interchange fee forms a significant part of the fees paid by merchants for accepting payment cards. the continued indiscriminate increases in interchange fee would hinder the expansion of point - of - sale terminals, especially among small merchants. to prevent a system - wide increase in merchant fees, the payment card reform framework would moderate the increases in payment card acceptance cost. this would be achieved by subjecting interchange fees to ceilings which are set based on objective and transparent criteria. in addition, the framework also seeks to address distortions in the payment card market in order to foster an efficient, transparent and competitive payment card industry in malaysia. b. enhancing the payment card infrastructure to complement the payment card reform framework, the banking industry has committed to invest approximately rm1. 1 billion over the next 6 years for industry - wide infrastructure development to further enhance the payment card security and expand the point - of - sale terminal network. this would make malaysia ’ s payment card landscape more competitive. the infrastructure development that would be undertaken by the industry includes, among others : bis central bankers ’ speeches • the expansion of the point - of - sale network by an additional 570, 000 point - of - sale terminals, especially among the lower tier merchants ; • the adoption of chip and pin, which is a more secure cardholder verification method for purchase transactions, by 1 january 2017 ; and • the migration of the domestic debit card from its proprietary standard to the internationally - recognised emv standard equipped with contactless functionality by 1 january 2018. these developments are exciting changes in store for the payments sector. with it, comes an enormous opportunity to expand business and enhance value to consumers. c. highlights of development in delivery channels and payment system infrastructure as banks serve various segments of the economy, it is important to widen the accessibility of e - payment