But in general one can say that it is not so much about inventing new tools, as it is about using traditional supervision tools in a new way – they will be more specifically aimed at signs of exaggerated credit expansion and indebtedness in the economy at large, at the systemic level. What are these tools in more concrete terms? What does a regulation lever consist of? I have already mentioned the possibility to vary amortisation requirements for mortgages. Another example is the countercyclical capital requirement for banks proposed in Basel III. The idea is that the capital requirement will increase if credit growth increases in relation to GDP. This entails a higher lending cost when credit growth is high, and also increases the banks’ resilience. A further example is a ceiling on loan-to-value ratios similar to the mortgage ceiling recently introduced by Finansinspektionen (the Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority). This kind of ceiling creates incentives for households to acquire a buffer that reduces the risk of their balance sheets being weakened if property prices fall. Regulation of the loan-to-value ratio could also contribute to slowing down lending and house price increases and thus counteracting a housing bubble. …but traditional supervision is still important But while the discussion now mainly concerns macroprudential tools, it is important that we remember to keep improving the more micro-oriented, traditional bank supervision. Just because it proved insufficient to prevent the financial crisis does not mean that it is unimportant.
But at the same time, this may be a strength compared with the regulations, simply because it is difficult to “circumvent” an interest rate increase. BIS Review 164/2010  7  Another reason why monetary policy may in some cases be needed as a complement is that there will probably be quite considerable resistance to using regulation to prevent a creditdriven bubble. Banks and other financial market participants may perceive regulation to be a larger intervention than an interest rate increase, and consider it to be aimed only at them. In addition, things often look very good just as a bubble is inflating, so resistance would probably be particularly strong when measures are needed the most. The political and psychological pressure on those pulling on the regulation lever could thus be substantial. Important with a good allocation of responsibility I thereby come to an issue that is just as important as how regulations should be designed; namely, who should pull on the regulation lever and when. Lessons can be learned from monetary policy when it comes to responsibility and mandate. If an authority has a sufficient degree of independence it can more easily withstand external pressure. And if it also has clear and specific objectives, it has greater opportunity to do a good job, while at the same time it is easier for society to evaluate it.