It is of course possible to constantly register whether a crisis has occurred or not, but if a crisis has not occurred it is difficult to determine whether the measures taken have been well-designed or not. As it is a case of unpopular measures, one might think that it would be an advantage if the decisions were made by people who in practice cannot be dismissed. But this this may not be a particularly good solution from a democratic point of view. At the same time, macroprudential policy may address the issue of macroeconomic stability in such a way that it comes close to what monetary policy aims to achieve. The historicallyhigh level of household indebtedness in Sweden does not perhaps in the first instance pose a risk of financial crisis but to macroeconomic development in the longer term. A fall in housing prices in connection with an economic slowdown with increased unemployment could lead to a severe downturn if the households reacted by significantly increasing their saving to compensate for declining wealth.21 This risk relates to financial and macroeconomic  18  Similar criticism was expressed by my colleague Kerstin af Jochnick in the speech “Monetary policy and macroprudential policy”, 25 January 2013. 19  The European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB) highlights the role of the central bank in its recommendations on institutional frameworks for national macroprudential policy (see the Recommendation of the European Systemic Risk Board of 22 December 2011 on the macroprudential mandate of national authorities).
As a complement to a good corporate governance structure, credit institutions should be equipped with a sound risk culture. Such a culture should infuse the design and workings of the organisation and its management criteria, systems and methods; it should be founded on control procedures whose reliability has been duly tested; and its application should be overseen by departments possessing sufficient power and independence. All this should be substantiated by internal and external auditors and be highly visible to the market. Finally, I would like to stress the need for all types of financial institutions to apply due diligence. They should know their clients and systematically monitor their operations so they might prevent, and where necessary curb, not only money laundering and the funding of terrorism but also any other attempt to use the financial system for illegal or unethical purposes. Beyond the obligation all individuals and corporations have to observe and comply with the law, good practices in this area have an important supervisory dimension, as they play a decisive role when preventing or curbing such serious risks as those pertaining to reputation, legal risk, and so on. Despite the unquestionable importance of market discipline and good corporate governance, these are complements to banking supervision and, therefore, cannot replace it in respect of its essential task, namely "to promote the sound functioning and stability of the financial system", as stipulated in article 7 of our Law of Autonomy.