This means, quite simply, that the members act as individuals. This applies both when we are out speaking and when the interest rate is set. The interest rate decisions are made through voting and the members can publicly state whether or not they share the majority view. In the case of so-called collegial committee, there is instead an agreement that the individual members’ views are subordinate to the group’s overall opinion. If there are internal differences of opinion, they  8  See, for example, Blinder, A.S., (2007), "Central Banking by Committee: Why and How?” European Journal of Political Economy 23, 106-123. BIS Review 40/2007  7  are often concealed from the outside world and once a decision has been taken, all of the members officially support it. The combination of making interest rate decisions in a group and signalling between the monetary policy meetings is not entirely problem-free. If we assume, for instance, that an individual member is to hold a speech a few weeks prior to a monetary policy meeting where he or she gives signals that the interest rate should be changed. Regardless of whether or not the Executive Board is an individualistic committee, I believe that sometimes there may be uncertainty as to who is actually sending the signal. Is it merely the individual member who is describing his or her view, or is he or she expressing the majority's opinion?
In the case of Hong Kong, where the financial industry is so critical to the economy, this obviously carries even more importance. Now, as a survey has found, we are fortunate in Hong Kong to have one of the highest levels of consumer trust in banks and financial services compared to other places.3 But we’ve seen in the financial crisis how fragile trust can be. So we need to guard against complacency, and work towards ensuring that Hong Kong remains a beacon to the rest of the global financial services industry. Whether one is a financial institution, a financial regulator or a consumer, this is in all our interests. So, how do we get there? In short, my argument this morning is that we will do so by recognising the interdependence of these three groups. Each has a role to play, but each also needs the help of the others. And, I would argue, at the heart of this interdependence lies effective consumer protection and education. I would like to discuss briefly each group in turn – first, the role of financial institutions. “The role of financial institutions” As I alluded to just now, financial-services institutions have a direct interest in upholding the reputation of the industry as a whole. I believe success in this regard rests on two pillars. First, nurturing a culture of honesty among practitioners. Second, an absolute commitment to  1  Mr André Laboul, Head of the Financial Affairs Division, OECD and Chairman of the International Network on Financial Education.