The second major program for disinflation was the exchange rate based stabilization program of 2000 under the IMF support. This program collapsed for known reasons in February 2001. At this juncture, one might wonder why Turkey was not successful in her disinflation attempts. I believe the answer lies, as already mentioned, in the lax fiscal policies. As I have already mentioned the very  2  BIS Review 57/2007  first law of the Central Bank did not have any provision for financing the government. However the amendment made to the law just before the Second World War to extend temporary short-term advance facility to the government, in order to smooth out the difference between timing of taxes and expenditures, was firmly incorporated in its Law in 1970. The provision stipulated that the government had the access to the Central Bank financing to the tune of 15 % of the total budget spending. Although this facility was phased out after the 1994 crisis, it was one of the reasons of fiscal indiscipline and high and persistent inflation in Turkey. As we all know, tough times call for tough decisions. The collapse of exchange rate-based stabilization program in 2001 was, in one sense, an opportunity for Turkey to “put her house in order”. The fiscal cost of the crises brought every individual in the economy to his senses. Fiscal discipline and tight monetary policy were the immediate answers to the chronic problems of Turkey. But how would this discipline be achieved?
1/5  BIS central bankers' speeches  Indeed, the various measures that were implemented have been instrumental in accelerating the e-payment agenda forward, only because of the cooperation of the industry, sometimes with a bit of nudging. But truth be told, we have been able to achieve so much. Today, the payments industry is no longer the exclusive domain of banks. The advent of FinTech driven by the increasingly inexpensive and pervasive internet and mobile technology has encouraged the entry of more agile non-bank players as potential disruptors or collaborators of the incumbent players. This has set the stage for an exciting new era in payments, an era in which the industry is expected to take on a larger role in delivering a more robust and efficient payments system for Malaysia. The Bank will facilitate this in three key ways: i. First, through policy initiatives to encourage collaborative competition or ‘co-opetition’; ii. Second, by further strengthening industry alignment; and iii. Third, by supporting more inclusive governance arrangements for the development of the payment system. Policies to promote co-opetition as a key enabler for greater efficiency, competition and innovation Network effects are critical to an efficient payment system. The larger the network of a payment system, the more valuable it is to users of the payment system.