For a long time, the Riksbank, for example, based its forecasts on the assumption that the policy rate, that is the repo rate, would remain unchanged during the forecast period. Some central banks base their forecasts on both a constant interest rate and a constant exchange rate, which are often completely unrealistic assumptions. In such cases, the forecasts for inflation and the real economy are of course not the best forecasts. For a while, the Riksbank instead used the assumption that the repo rate would follow the market's expectations regarding the development of the repo rate. Although this is a more realistic assumption, it is not necessarily the same as the Riksbank's best forecast. These difficulties no longer apply to the Riksbank's forecasts as, since February 2007, the forecasts are based on the Riksbank's best forecast for the repo rate. In order to arrive at a fair comparison of the forecasts of various analysts, we should also take into account the fact that the forecasts are made at different times and are therefore based on different quantities of information. A forecaster that, for example, always publishes its forecasts later than other analysts has generally speaking more information on the economic situation when the forecasts are made. A comparison of the accuracy of the forecasts should therefore make adjustments for the forecasts being made at different times. Such a forecast comparison is included in the material for the evaluation of monetary policy in the period 2006-2008 that the Riksbank published a month ago.
Evidently the supervisor’s aim must be to ensure that the banking sector is a fortress against the storm and not an added problem that we have to face at the worst time imaginable. 1  Recently, it has been frequently said that the banking sector is in much better shape than it was before the previous crisis. This will allow it to become part of the solution. In any event, crises are, by definition, periods of transition and COVID-19, despite its specific features, will be no exception. I believe this crisis will serve as a catalyst which will speed up many of the trends that we have already seen and discussed on many occasions at our meetings. First, as regards the importance of digitalisation. Second, in respect of the need to gain in efficiency and cut costs. Also, naturally, as regards the criticality of good governance and risk control, underpinned by the best international practices which will allow institutions to react appropriately to such changing circumstances. And, above all, regarding having a sound and sustainable business model for the medium and long term. We do not know what the future holds for us, but what we do know is that the better prepared we are, the better we will fare. Before I conclude, let me apologise for not having made the most of this address to introduce a supervisory “wedge”.