The ESRB recommends that macroprudential responsibility should lie with one institution or one council and that this body should have control over suitable tools to attain its objectives. This is to establish a clear responsibility. Moreover, they recommend that the central banks should play a leading role in macroprudential policy and that the macroprudential supervisory body should have operational independence. It is now time for me to return to the Financial Crisis Committee’s proposal, and how this relates to the demands I consider should be made regarding a framework for macroprudential policy – demands that are also expressed in the ESRB’s recommendation. …but the Financial Crisis Committee’s proposal does not go very far… Two days ago, 23 January, the Financial Crisis Committee published its proposal as to how we should organise macroprudential policy in Sweden.13 In principle, the proposal is that the current council for cooperation on macroprudential policy between the Riksbank and Finansinspektionen is confirmed by law and supplemented with independent experts and an observer from the Ministry of Finance. The council shall work to promote greater knowledge of systemic risks and to develop macroprudential tools. Moreover, it shall analyse risks and discuss suitable measures. A secretariat for the council will be established at the Riksbank. However, the council will not have any powers of authority; its work will consist of exchanging information and discussion. Decisions on the application of macroprudential tools will lie with Finansinspektionen or the Riksbank, with both being given responsibility for macroprudential policy.
Unemployment in the EU and the euro area has reached historic levels, especially amongst the youth. Economic growth is weak and is mainly concentrated in central countries of the euro area. Our countries have been affected by this situation for objective reasons. Trade relations, movement of capital and workers, and the financial system are channels that pass these problems on to our economies. The form, size and extent of this impact have evolved over the past four years. At present, the situation is reflected in the decrease of domestic demand, decline of economic growth, reduction of available income, loss of confidence and deterioration of optimism; this is, in turn, reflected in higher savings. Consequently, these developments have placed the focus of economic policies towards economic activity and revitalisation of optimism in order to boost investments and consumption. On the other hand, maintaining financial stability becomes a necessity, creating thus a binomial of priorities that condition each other and require a simultaneous solution. The Albanian economy is increasingly facing the challenge of economic growth. Although the Albanian economy enjoys consolidated macroeconomic stability and sound financial foundations, aggregate demand has been weak during the first nine months of 2012. Both domestic and foreign demand suffer from high uncertainty, relatively tight lending standards, and limited space for discretionary and stimulating policies.