Let us consider the prerequisites for capital account liberalisation and Iceland’s position on the path towards fulfilling them: The IMF Stand-by Arrangement has ensured sufficient foreign exchange reserves to roll over Treasury debt in coming years and address potential outflows associated with the first stages of liberalisation. When the loan facilities have been drawn in full, Iceland will probably be in a better position than many European countries in terms of refinancing risk. This will place the Icelandic Government in a comfortable position when it seeks foreign market funding once again. A central government budget aimed at ensuring a primary surplus in 2011 has now been drafted and, according to the medium-term fiscal programme, the Treasury will record an overall surplus in 2013. According to these estimates, public sector debt will peak in 2010. Fiscal consolidation is the cornerstone of the policy aimed at reviving Iceland’s creditworthiness and creating the conditions necessary for capital account liberalisation and sustainable exchange rate stability. Thus it is vital to adhere to these objectives. 2  BIS Review 138/2010  The financial system is now in a better position than it was only a few months ago to withstand the volatility of short-term capital flows that could accompany the removal of capital controls. The most recent Supreme Court judgment eliminated a large source of risk that had made it extremely difficult to estimate the banks’ liquidity. According to the Icelandic authorities’ Letter of Intent, the Financial Supervisory Authority will review the banks’ planned responses to the judgment by 15 November.
The UK economy entered the crisis with too much debt in banking, in the household sector, in government and, for the nation as a whole, externally. And the UK entered the crisis with the composition of demand imbalanced – too much public and private consumption, too little net trade. Indeed, aggregate demand had been unbalanced for so long that the economy’s productive capacity was (and probably still is) unbalanced, investment in capital having followed the pattern of demand. For prosperity to be put on a secure footing for the longer term, adjustment is still needed. With one vital exception, engineering structural change in the economy is not the responsibility of the central bank. The exception of course is the safety and soundness of the banking system, which is a precondition for broader monetary stability. An undercapitalised banking system would not be able smoothly to supply sufficient credit to aid recovery as demand picks up, enabling investment in innovations and efficiency. Nor has it been able to do so as much as needed to help capital shift to firms and sectors that are beneficiaries of the new pattern of global and domestic demand. In my view, that may explain some of the weaknesses in productivity growth.9 The Financial Policy Committee required recapitalisation of the UK’s big banks and building societies not simply because that is needed to underpin stability, which it is, but also because a resilient banking system is a precondition for sustained and better balanced recovery.