And, perhaps most importantly, we should continue to engage in discussions like this one, so we work together to identify lessons learned and best practices as we pursue our common goals of a safe, sound, and stable banking system. I think we should be optimistic that with the right tools and technology, the right level of commitment, and the right people at the table, we can build cultural capital and mitigate misconduct risk. We all have a role to play in mobilizing our organizations to advance this critical work. Thank you for your attention. 1 5/6  BIS central bankers' speeches  1 I would like to thank Stephanie Chaly, Robert Fitchette, Jim Hennessy, and Jackie McCormack for help preparing  these remarks. 2 Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Reforming Culture and Behavior in the Financial Services Industry:  Progress, Challenges, and the Next Generation of Leaders, June 18, 2018 and Workshop on Culture Measurement and Assessment, June 21, 2017. 3 See SR 16–11: Supervisory Guidance for Assessing Risk Management at Supervised Institutions with Total  Consolidated Assets Less than $ Billion, June 8, 2016 and SR 12–17 / CA 12–14: Consolidated Supervision Framework for Large Financial Institutions, December 17, 2012 for details for small and large banks, respectively. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Federal Reserve Board requests comment on proposed guidance that would clarify Board’s supervisory expectations related to risk management for large financial institutions, January 4, 2018.
Last year’s rapid disinflation was not least the result of the substantial appreciation of the króna, which in turn can be attributed to better external balance, lower inflation expectations as the year wore on, greater confidence in stability, and expectations that large-scale investment projects would go ahead. Disinflation last year can also be attributed to a considerable weakness in domestic demand. National expenditure  BIS Review 18/2003  1  contracted by 2½%. The decline in fixed capital formation was particularly pronounced, but private consumption also contracted. In spite of the contraction in national expenditure, however, GDP declined by only ½%. This was due to favourable foreign trade developments, with a contraction in imports and expanding exports. The sudden turnaround in Iceland’s current account from 2000 to 2002 is almost unparalleled among the developed countries. In 2002 there was a 1.8 b.kr. surplus on the current account, or 0.2% of estimated GDP. In 2000 the deficit amounted to more than 10% of GDP, as I mentioned earlier. This shows the great adaptability of the Icelandic economy, which to a large extent can be attributed to the wide range of reforms that have been made to the structure of economy in recent years, including changes in the monetary framework. Now I shall turn to last year’s inflation developments in more detail. In 2001 inflation climbed rapidly, from 5.6% at the beginning of the year to a peak of 9.4% in January 2002. Last year, inflation slowed down steadily and dropped to 1.4% in January 2003.