do the job this time. • obtaining adequate resources will not be an issue - - our organization has a great technical staff and we can always hire additional resources if it becomes necessary. good luck. as a bank supervisor, the federal reserve bank of new york will do whatever it can to encourage banks to set up and adhere to programs that deal with year 2000 problems. our examiners will focus on how well individual banks are doing and will highlight for senior management and directors those instances when progress may be lagging. this oversight will include not only u. s. banks, but also the u. s. branches and agencies of foreign banks. however, the motivation and determination to cope with the year 2000 problem must come from within banking organizations rather than from supervisory oversight. getting the year 2000 issue right is critical for every organization. failure to get it right will affect the integrity of the payments system and the performance of the domestic, and maybe even the global, economy. the federal reserve is working hard to make certain that our systems will be ready and fully tested. and i am pleased by the high level of central bank coordination on this issue, as the recent release of the basle supervisors ’ technical paper demonstrates. all of us need to make sure we are paying sufficient attention and applying appropriate resources to the year 2000 issue. only in that way will we be able to insure that the millennium changeover is an occasion for joy and optimism.

, settlement risk reduction should not be used to justify the concentration of market power. the g - 10 central bank governors have long been on record in favor of fair and open access to services that permit participation by a broad range of institutions, consistent with the prudent management of risk. such access was formally adopted as a requirement for multilateral netting systems, and i am convinced that the g - 10 central banks would apply a similar standard when evaluating the start - up of any major multi - currency settlement service. in sum, the evolution toward more transparent foreign exchange markets that we ’ ve observed in the past several years is largely a product of both technological progress in the private sector and conscious policy decisions in the public sector. none of the policy decisions, i should stress, were taken with any explicit or implicit intention of reducing market volatility. on the contrary, the policy community has viewed moves toward increased transparency as desirable ends in and of themselves for a number of reasons. for one, transparency promotes a more level playing field for all market participants. in other words, transparent markets tend not to be dominated by just a few players. rather, they are open to new entrants, large and small. in such markets, no one group of institutions or type of institution can develop a monopoly on information or competitive pricing. as in most industries, competition in the area of financial services spurs innovation, better service for customers, and a more efficient allocation of resources. second, transparency in these markets also promotes investment. if money and investment fund managers or corporate cfos can better understand the risks entailed in various investment alternatives, they are more likely to make the investment decisions best suited to their needs. the result, again, is a more efficient allocation of global capital than would otherwise be possible. to the extent, therefore, that reduced volatility in the foreign exchange market stems from improved transparency, i would view this result as a beneficial by - product - - one that also contributes to the ultimate goal of economic and monetary policy : namely, sustained growth and a stable price environment. the move toward increased transparency in global markets and the accompanying relative decline in foreign exchange market volatility and trading ranges that we have observed in the last year and a half have posed considerable challenges to market makers, spot traders, and brokers, on both an institutional and a personal level. there is an axiom in these markets that volatility is good for market makers. i believe that this is a