The interest rate regains its role as a policy instrument After the drop in oil prices and the last devaluation of the krone in 1986, the interest rate had to be set to support our currency. The alternative was further devaluations, high inflation and economic instability. With a binding commitment to a fixed exchange rate policy from early summer 1986, interest rate setting was largely shifted to Norges Bank. 30 High inflation is associated with substantial real economic costs. This came into evidence when we managed to bring inflation under control again in Norway at the end of the 1980s. The fixed exchange rate policy was crucial in this context (see Chart 3). 30  Hermod Skånland dates this to December 1986 (see Skånland (2005)): “Tilbakeblikk på 20 år med ny sentralbanklov” [“A 20 year retrospective on the new Norges Bank Act”], Penger og Kreditt 3/05 (Norwegian only). In my opinion, this shift occurred earlier. 8  BIS Review 154/2010  Perhaps we can say that the pendulum had swung back from the view that prevailed in the early years after the war. At that time, it was not Norges Bank, but on the contrary fiscal policy and the detailed regulatory system that had failed. Norges Bank had to be given a greater role again in promoting a well functioning economy. Later, it would transpire that having brought inflation under control and a series of farreaching structural reforms in the 1980s and early 1990s, would pave the way for two golden decades in the Norwegian economy.
Ethical choices in an open economy], Høyskoleforlaget, and Fritz Hodne and Ola Honningdal Grytten (2002): “Norsk økonomi i det 20. århundret” [The Norwegian economy in the 20th century], Fagbokforlaget. 14  BIS Review 154/2010  bank. The central bank did not provide long-term loans on a large scale. 46 This distinguishes the management of the financial crisis in Norway from a number of other countries in that we are of the view that it is appropriate for such medium-term financing – as in the case of solvency support – to be provided by the government and not Norges Bank, if the situation has reached a point where this is necessary. 47 The measure is given a broad democratic grounding through government and Storting deliberations. This approach also serves to counter the kind of criticism that was levelled at Norges Bank when it provided funding for banks in the mid-1980s. Financial imbalances ordinarily build up over a long period before they trigger a crisis. Internationally, measures intended to prevent systemic risks in the financial sector are usually referred to as macroprudential policy. The government authorities should primarily use structural measures to dampen selfintensifying forces behind credit growth and rising property prices. The most important measure will be to increase banks’ capital requirements. The international minimum standard for banking regulation will be strengthened under the forthcoming Basel III framework. However, we note that some countries do not wish to subject their banks to stringent standards.