This pact reasserts the commitment of the government to good governance and it sets out a number of activities to be pursued through July 2007 in ten key areas. These include efforts related to: free and fair elections, anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, procurement, the Office of the AuditorGeneral, civil service reform, decentralisation and the role of non-state actors (notably the private sector and civil society), the creation of a more conducive investment environment, implementation of the extractive industries transparency initiative and better public service delivery in health and education. The Pact also commits the four budget support donors to further harmonisation around the government’s programme”. Enforcement of the governance agenda is consequently exercised by the donor community through inclusion of governance requirements in the programmes of assistance agreed with the country; establishing them as conditionalities and trigger requirements for release of funds; providing technical assistance to ensure the performance of these elements of the programme, including provision of personnel in some cases. We may note in passing that action on all these requirements is in progress and the related programmes are in varying stages of implementation. Civil society is also becoming increasingly important in trying to put pressure on government to deliver on governance issues. In the Sierra Leone context, special mention may be made of the Campaign for Good Governance, the Civil Societies Organisation, the 50/50 Group, the Lawyers Centre for Legal Assistance (LAWCLA) and other bodies. A recently established chapter of the Institute of Directors pays particular attention to the improvement of corporate governance.
Similarly, they must focus on promoting and disseminating sound management practices. This is particularly the case for the fair pricing of financial services to ensure a competitive playing field that is not detrimental to the sound position of the financial participants. At the macro-prudential level, it falls to the relevant authorities to ensure macro-financial and macro-prudential oversight. •  Domestic supervisors play a fundamental role in this respect. They have close links to the financial players and have a deeper understanding of developments in their respective sectors. They can monitor such developments in real time and react to them more effectively. •  The internationalisation of activities and of financial institutions also calls for in-depth discussion and close cooperation between national supervisors. The work conducted by international supervisory organisations, such as the Basel Committee, the IAIS or the IOSCO, makes a vital contribution to this effort. The implementation of the numerous international codes and standards developed by these bodies has now to be carefully examined. Allow me to seize this opportunity to salute the work the Financial Stability Forum is accomplishing in this respect. The financial authorities’ second objective should be to constantly verify the relevance of safety nets. Regulators must, of course, ensure that their supervisory mechanisms are adapted to an evolving financial sector. The Gramm Leach Bliley Act adopted last year by the United States illustrates this concern, which has resulted in a new allocation of the roles of the different American supervisors.