And we are fortunate to have Jerry Corrigan engaged in working to shape a set of recommendations to help us get the balance right. Regulatory structure Apart from the mix of incentives and constraints set by regulatory policy, the structure of the regulatory system in the United States needs substantial reform. Our current system has evolved into a confusing mix of diffused accountability, regulatory competition, an enormously complex web of rules that create perverse incentives and leave huge opportunities for arbitrage and evasion, and creates the risk of large gaps in our knowledge and authority. This crisis gives us the opportunity to bring about fundamental change in the direction of a more streamlined and consolidated system with more clarity around responsibility for the prudential safeguards in the system. In this regard, Secretary Paulson's blueprint outlines a sweeping consolidation and realignment of responsibilities, with a clear set of objectives for achieving a better balance between efficiency and stability, between market discipline and regulation. This proposal has stimulated a very constructive set of discussions, and will help lay the foundation for action when the dust settles. BIS Review 74/2008  5  The most fundamental reform that is necessary is for all institutions that play a central role in money and funding markets – including the major globally active banks and investment banks – to operate under a unified framework that provides a stronger form of consolidated supervision, with appropriate requirements for capital and liquidity.
The assessment made by the Riksbank so far is that average working hours will show a tentative rise when economic activity improves. To summarise, there is reason for considerable concern regarding the future labour supply. If there is reason to be slightly more optimistic over productivity growth, the opposite applies to the labour supply. A number of factors, such as demographic developments, absence due to illness and the proposal for shorter working hours all indicate a decline in the labour supply over the coming decade, unless there is a change in policy. 4  BIS Review 16/2003  Future potential growth What does all this mean for the assessment of the economy's potential growth capacity right now and in the coming years? If we uncritically assume the simple model I outlined earlier, we could calculate an estimate of potential growth by simply adding together the trend values I showed in the diagram on productivity growth and the number of hours worked. I have done this in my next diagram (Figure 9). Measured in this way, potential growth was just over 1.5 per cent up to around 1992. Since then it has risen gradually to approximately 3 per cent in 2001. However, my discussion of the causes of the decline in actual growth in recent years showed that there are good reasons to believe that 3 per cent is an overestimate of the growth potential in the Swedish economy today.