Furthermore, it is at the core of central banking to prioritise macroeconomic objectives over the central bank’s own finances. Moreover, this situation could make it possible to resolve most of the problem in the auction, in a more permanent way than was previously envisioned. Preparations for the auction are now well underway, and the date and format will be publicised soon, so that the auction can take place in the first half of the year. Other things being equal, it should then be  2  BIS central bankers’ speeches  possible to move relatively quickly towards lifting capital controls on residents, as the current account surplus, foreign exchange inflows, and robust foreign exchange reserves provide ideal conditions for it. On the other hand, it is important to reach successful conclusion regarding offshore krónur before general liberalisation of controls on residents can take place. Now I would like to turn to longer-term issues regarding monetary policy and its relationship to other aspects of economic policy and prudential policy. In its reports entitled Monetary policy after capital controls and Prudential rules following capital controls, published in 2010 and 2012, respectively, the Central Bank described the new monetary policy framework and prudential rules that will be necessary to preserve financial stability and support monetary policy after the capital controls are lifted.
But transmission through the exchange rate channel is uncertain and volatile, as the exchange rate is also an asset price that fluctuates with speculative capital flows and can deviate from equilibrium over time, only to correct quite suddenly. Unless the financial system is that much better protected, this process can interact negatively with financial stability, as was the case in Iceland during the financial crisis. This is at the heart of the problem faced by small countries that pursue independent monetary policy and permit unrestricted capital flows simultaneously. The problem can be solved by adapting monetary policy to that prevailing in large countries even though it is not suited to domestic conditions, or by placing restrictions on cross-border capital flows, particularly those related to carry trade. The need for such restrictions is likely to surface earlier and more strongly in countries with shallow financial markets. But capital flow management measures that aim to restrict both carry trade and destabilising capital movements cannot be used as the first line of defence in the fight against inflation and macroeconomic imbalances, except under extraordinary circumstances. Such instruments will have adverse side effects and could push international obligations to their limits. But some sort of tools must be available for use if the need arises. In general, the first line of defence must be conventional management of the monetary-fiscal policy mix, supported by structural reforms and sound economic incentives.