market mechanisms must, therefore, be instituted to ensure efficient capital mobilisation and its prudent allocation in securing long - term economic growth with assured stability. needless to say, the development of efficient markets needs to be supported by high - quality market participants. intermediaries, issuers, investors, regulators and professionals play important roles in generating this growth dynamism in our financial markets. within the context of both domestic and international challenges, the accounting profession therefore plays an important complementary role towards building a credible, reputable and internationally competitive economy, irrespective of the capacities in which they perform. this includes not only in your capacity as auditors, but also as advisors, consultants, directors or even as members of the corporate sector. in auditing financial statements, accountants have the most intricate knowledge of the financials of companies. they are able to ascertain the drivers of performance and are equipped to provide an independent and objective evaluation on the opportunities and risk profiles of firms. thus, for instance, in the absence of accurate financial reporting, it would become difficult for banks to make informed decisions about credit allocation unless they have confidence in the information provided by financial reporting. it is the quality, reliability and objectivity of this information which stakeholders rely upon to make informed judgment and allocate resources efficiently. transparency is imperative to imbue confidence amongst investors in our markets. the quality of information and the integrity of the market place act as strong modes for brand differentiation. while the quality of information has immediate and far - reaching implications for a particular enterprise, it eventually permeates to the market and the economy as a whole. it is, therefore, not surprising to find that the accounting profession is being constantly challenged to meet the demands for quality information. as key providers and verifiers of information, the bottom - line is simple : the higher the quality and integrity maintained by the profession, the stronger and more resilient will our markets be. the investing public in india is at present broader and much more discerning than earlier. a crisis behind closed doors in past decades often becomes a matter of the broadest public concern at present. the globally noticed accounting irregularities at leading corporate entities in recent years have provided graphic evidence as to how much the absence of accurate, timely and comparable financial information can impede the effective working of markets. more generally, the debilitating effects of deficiencies in financial reporting have been amply demonstrated by the spate of financial crises

however, divisions could arise on what exactly these standards and practices should be ; whether they are driven by the specific conditions prevailing in the worst hit financial systems and, therefore, inappropriate and burdensome for the relatively healthy ones ; and, the knowledge and human capital requirements to implement them effectively across a diverse set of countries. i have tried to provide some examples of potential dividing lines, drawing on my experience and observations of the process in the finance track. let me conclude this segment of the presentation by reiterating the point on which it began. this is an extremely differentiated and heterogeneous set of countries, whose conditions and priorities differ both in the short term and over the long run. it would be extremely naive to expect that such a group would be able to reach agreement on anything beyond the immediate crisis at hand, despite their ambition to tackle structural issues. from this perspective, any consensus on any issue is an achievement. it reflects the recognition that, notwithstanding differences between countries, global integration is a process that can be chaotic and disruptive if not handled in a collective and coordinated way. what is true for crisis management is also valid for the range of structural issues that the g20, as well as those which other multilateral processes are dealing with. an emerging market economy / indian perspective against this backdrop, let me now attempt to articulate what i would call an “ emerging market economy ” perspective, but which also reflects my characterization of the indian perspective. an important premise in this perspective is the point i concluded the last segment with. the process of globalization has enormous potential benefits for emes in all its forms. but, it also brings with it significant risks, such as the vulnerability to shocks which emanate outside their sphere of control. the best way to optimize on the “ risk - return ” tradeoff from globalization is to adhere to a common set of standards and rules, which, as i said earlier, forces the process to be driven by fundamental factors rather than by regulatory arbitrage, broadly speaking. on the basis of this argument, emes will see a clear benefit from engaging in any process that can develop and enforce such common standards and practices. the g20 is one such process, with the distinct advantage that, being a relatively small group, reaching consensus where it can be found is not too difficult a task. however, emes have significant domestic objectives and challenges and these must take priority in their policy decisions. many are dealing with the critical challenge of providing