Monetary policy in Singapore is centred on the management of the exchange rate. As an international financial centre with open capital markets, we are exposed to large and sometimes, volatile capital flows. To facilitate the effective conduct of our monetary policy and to avoid large swings in our $ exchange rate, we have a policy of discouraging the internationalisation of the $ However, we recognised that the trade-off was a less vibrant capital market, particularly the debt market. So we have progressively relaxed the specific restrictions over the past six years, while maintaining the intent of the policy. The results have been positive. The non-internationalisation policy is now down to two basic safeguards to discourage speculation in the $ - banks may not lend $ to non-resident financial institutions in order to speculate on the $ and non-resident borrowers who raise $ through bank borrowings or on our capital markets must swap or convert these $ to foreign currencies before remitting them abroad. This stance remains appropriate, and continues to underpin the effective conduct of our monetary policy. Nevertheless, there is scope for further fine-tuning. We have decided that non-resident, non-financial issuers of $ bonds and equities will no longer be required to swap or convert their $ proceeds into foreign currencies before remitting abroad. Non-resident, financial issuers of bonds and equities will still have to do so. This will give the issuers greater flexibility in managing their $ funds.
Even though the region saw quite notable bond fund outflows since the Fed began to raise rates in March, such outflows have yet to cause any significant disruptions. That being said, there is no room for complacency. For one, as the global economy is heading towards a growth slowdown, if not an outright recession, Asian EMEs may be less able to look for support from external demand to cushion the effect of tighter global financial conditions. Moreover, capital outflow pressures faced by the Asian region may persist, leaving EM Asian currencies and FX reserves to bear the brunt of global tightening. 4. Unfortunately, there are limits as to how much these shock absorbers can shield the domestic economies from tighter global financial conditions. In particular, even though exchange rate flexibility can be a useful shock absorber, research suggests that currency depreciation is not a panacea for cushioning the impact of US rate hikes. As a few papers in today’s Workshop would argue, given the centrality of the US dollar in the international financial and monetary system, a US monetary tightening shock and an appreciation in the broad US dollar index can still induce a widening of EMEs’ sovereign credit spreads. Worse still, for more vulnerable EMEs with significant FX mismatches, allowing their currencies to depreciate is not an appealing option; instead, their central banks may actually have to tighten monetary  policy even when global financial conditions are already tightening, in order to support their currencies and prevent their FX liabilities from spiralling out of control.