We may not be entirely comfortable with the thought that every purchase we make is recorded. It may be too reminiscent of the society described in George Orwell’s 70-year-old novel 1984. Fourth, Ola no longer has access to money directly backed by Norwegian authorities. We no longer have functional legal tender. The monetary system has been turned over to private entities. Alternatively, Ola has to use another country’s currency – in our hypothetical case, the euro. We have to ask ourselves: should we allow private solutions to compete freely in developing means of payment, or must the authorities play a role? The crucial factor is whether solutions based on private money deliver the characteristics the payment system should have. The system must be able to channel payments swiftly, safely, at low cost and in a user-friendly manner. The means of payment itself – our money – must be universal, because money is only useful if it is widely used. This requires trust. Deposit guarantee schemes and banking regulation promote trust. The objective of monetary policy is to maintain stability in the value of the currency. Norges Bank assists private operators in implementing faster and safer payments. We cooperate with other authorities to oversee and supervise the payment infrastructure to ensure robustness and efficiency. Privacy rules prevent unauthorised access to payment information. But there are some characteristics deposit money lacks. It cannot offer anonymous payments. The system is vulnerable to advanced attacks. Having more money on deposit than is covered by the deposit guarantee scheme involves risk.
Real convergence encompasses factors such as labor mobility, price and wage flexibility, exposure towards external shocks, industrial structures, and so on. Judged by these factors, convergence among future members of the EMU still has a long BIS Review 102/1997  -3-  way to go. This is important because to be successful a European monetary policy depends exactly on these factors. Without a high degree of real convergence, monetary policy is bound to have different effects in different parts of the monetary union. The very idea of a single European monetary policy would thus become unrealistic. The ECB would come under political pressure to accommodate mutually incompatible wishes from different parts of the monetary union. The result could only be a less than optimal monetary policy and rising inflation and interest rates. For EMU to be successful the member states of the EU should therefore make determined efforts to further real convergence. The convergence criteria as laid down in the Maastricht Treaty require member states of the EU to achieve certain goals by spring 1998. Convergence, properly understood, can however never be something that can be pinpointed to a certain point in time, but must be an ongoing process. It does not make sense to require countries to get their fiscal situation under control by a certain date, just to let them go unpunished on a public spending spree shortly afterwards. Prudent fiscal policies should not only be a requirement for becoming, but also for remaining part of the EMU.