This often results in structural defects in the financial systems that are not conducive to the maintenance of monetary and financial stability; for example, regulatory gaps, low transparency and market concentration. These defects also breed unethical behaviour. Indeed, free and open emerging markets are considered by some as markets that can be rather freely manipulated. They also call them ATMs. But I still believe that financial openness outweighs the risks of financial instability, and that the risks I mentioned just need to be, and can be, managed, simply by being sensible in the development of the financial system, reminding ourselves always that the primary purpose of the financial system is financial intermediation that supports the economy. Although it provides employment for quite a number of people, including us, and profits for a lot of capital, the financial system does not and should not have a life of its own. Gradualism is perhaps a prudent attitude, even if this means taking a little more time or appearing for a time to be not as welcoming as the top players in international finance would like. "Because others have it" is definitely a risky attitude to take in financial development. And as developed markets are going back to basics, a no-frills approach to financial development may not be a bad idea. Financial openness does not mean getting all the top brand names to set up shop in your backyard and importing innovative financial instruments and practices. Indeed, some of those innovative financial instruments may be toxic.
We welcome external users accessing these systems for their payment, clearing and settlement needs, through directly becoming members of these systems, indirectly using the services through corresponding relationships with the existing members, or having them linked up with their own payment, clearing and settlement systems. Some of you may, for example, be wondering how you could use the RMB for trade settlement, something that is being promoted by the Mainland authorities. You can, of course make use of correspondent banks on the Mainland, and therefore pay or receive RMB arising from imports and exports there, where the money stays. But should you wish to pay or receive RMB offshore where there is greater freedom in the mobilisation of the relevant funds, albeit for the time being there is still a dearth of RMB denominated financial instruments, you can do so in Hong Kong. Thank you and I wish this year's SIBOS great success. 4  BIS Review 106/2009