|
Forum on China’s
Government Securities Market in the New Century
Hong Kong, Monday, 19 November 2001
Developing and Positioning Hong Kong’s Bond Market
Joseph Yam
Chief Executive
Hong Kong Monetary Authority
Introduction
It is a
great pleasure for me to be here today to share with you Hong
Kong's experience in the development of the bond market and
our views on the future prospects of that market. Before I go into
the subject, however, I would like to congratulate our friends from
the Mainland on their superb efforts leading to China's
accession to the World Trade Organisation. The signing of the
necessary documents a week or so ago marks the successful conclusion
of 15 years of sheer hard work and determination, and the beginning
of a new era in which the Mainland embraces globalisation in
earnest, to the long-term benefit of China, the region and the
world. I have no doubt that Hong Kong, in particular, will benefit
tremendously from this. The international business community has
been positioning itself, here in Hong Kong - a free and open economy
at the doorstep of the Mainland and an integral part of China - to
take advantage of the many opportunities that will open up in the
years to come. As the international financial centre of China, Hong
Kong is particularly looking forward to the opportunities arising
from a much quicker pace of financial liberalisation in the Mainland
after accession to WTO. Put simply, notwithstanding the gloom of
global recession, the future of Hong Kong is bright.
Bond
Market Development
Let me
turn quickly now to bond market development. There are a few points
that I would like to make immediately. The first point is a
basic and obvious one, so obvious that it is often overlooked. This
is that the bond market is a channel of financial intermediation for
the purpose of mobilising savings into productive investment that
promotes economic growth and development. There is a need for those
involved in the bond market - those responsible for its development
and those making a profit or a living from it - to be frequently
reminded of this basic purpose. This is particularly so when
considering the introduction of sophisticated products - derivatives
and the like. I have nothing against sophisticated financial
engineering, or against the engineers being well remunerated,
provided that the regulators and the market participants, both at
the wholesale and retail levels, are capable of appreciating and
coping with the associated risks. This may not often be the case. It
is possible that, while these products theoretically make the market
more efficient, in terms of spreading and managing risks, in
practice the risks may be magnified, to the extent of creating
systemic instability and disrupting the crucial flow of funds
through that basic and important channel of financial
intermediation.
The second,
again rather obvious, point is that the bond market is one of three
broad channels of financial intermediation, along with the better
developed, at least in this region, banking and equity markets. Less
obvious, perhaps, is the importance of ensuring that the bond market
commands a degree of robustness and efficiency capable of
channelling suddenly enlarged flows of savings to investment that
may be diverted from one or both of the other two channels as a
result of crises there. These channels should reinforce each other
in order that financial intermediation and therefore economic growth
can continue in times of financial stress. We have witnessed how the
US bond market helped substitute for bank intermediation in the
credit crunch of the late eighties. We have also witnessed how the
US banking system in turn played the back-up role when the bond
market failed to intermediate funds as a result of the LTCM crisis,
thus minimising the disruption to economic growth. In contrast, the
less developed bond market in this region failed to provide the
necessary backup when banks in a number of jurisdictions faced
difficulties. Funds simply dried up and there were debilitating
economic and financial consequences. Bond market development in this
region is thus an urgent task.
This task
is, however, hindered by a third point, which is that the
three channels of financial intermediation are in competition with
each other. This is so to the extent that the development of the
bond market, at least in this region, may have been inhibited by the
rather more efficient banking and equity markets. Understandably,
vested interests may have exerted a degree of influence to this
effect, and this is one reason why the bond market, where it is
underdeveloped, may have to be considered as a public good that
justifies the involvement of the official sector in its development.
This is indeed the case in Hong Kong, but it has come about only
after a long period of agonising over whether such deliberate
government involvement, in the freest economy in the world and
without a continuing need for government borrowing to finance budget
deficits, was appropriate. Perhaps with greater institutional
integration in the provision of financial services, the lack of
enthusiastic support in the development of the bond market from
service providers in the alternative channels of financial
intermediation will in time be transformed into co-operation or even
initiative, thus obviating the need for government involvement. In
the meantime, however, and having regard to the degree of financial
sophistication of most economies in the region, some official sector
involvement in bond market development seems justified. This might
be in the form of facilitating development of the market
infrastructure, ironing out administrative obstacles, helping with
education, etc, rather than more direct or obvious forms of subsidy.
Fourth ,
bond market financial intermediation need not be narrowly confined
to just a domestic phenomenon. It can and should take on an
international dimension. Through facilitating the inward investment
of foreign savings, the source of funding for much needed domestic
investments can be tremendously enlarged. This would also enhance
the overall efficiency in the international allocation of funds, to
economies that can provide a higher return commensurate with the
risks involved. An economy with capital controls should therefore
plan for the eventual internationalisation of the bond market, even
though the associated financial liberalisation process can be quite
a risky one. But risks are to be managed and not avoided, and the
benefits of open markets far outweigh the costs in terms of
financial instability. I can confirm this, even with the unpleasant
experience of the financial turmoil of 1998. Free and open markets
impose a valuable discipline on policy makers that is to be welcomed
in the long-term interest of the people they serve.
Fifth ,
and turning to the actual bond market development issues, there is a
need to adopt a comprehensive approach. We should address the demand
and supply sides, the environment in which they interact to discover
the prices for the debt instruments, including market making
arrangements and the determination of benchmarks, and the market
infrastructure, including payment, clearing and settlement systems.
Focusing
on these issues individually, and this is the sixth point,
there is usually strong latent demand for debt instruments,
particularly in economies with a high savings rate. Between the low
risk-return bank deposits and the high risk-return equity market,
there should be a risk-return profile that fits that of debt
instruments. The trick is how this latent demand, involuntarily
trapped at the two ends of the spectrum, can be brought out and
satisfied. Investor education and the creation of a retail network
to market debt will help. But the costs of the latter can be quite
substantial and possibly prohibitive, particularly in a low interest
environment, if the retail banking system cannot be relied upon to
support this wholeheartedly (which I am glad to add is not the case
in Hong Kong). Furthermore, when government debt is used by the
banking system as assets for acquiring liquidity support, the demand
from the banks may easily crowd out the retail demand. Nevertheless,
the institutionalisation of savings, if this could be organised,
through for example the introduction of professionally managed
provident fund schemes, should be quite effective in harnessing this
demand. This would, at the same time, enable the retail demand to be
transformed into a level of sophistication that, with the
appropriate supply response, will greatly enhance the efficiency and
robustness of the debt market as a channel of financial
intermediation.
The seventh
point I wish to make concerns the supply side. For an economy with a
continuing need to finance budget deficits there is of course a
natural supply of debt instruments, unless, like Hong Kong, it has
surpluses to spend. But the story does not end there. It is
essential for this supply of government debt to be organised in such
a way as to enable demands of different natures to be met. This
requires a well structured, transparent and predictable programme,
with a wide maturity spectrum.
Thus, my eighth
point concerns the interaction of demand and supply to discover
price reliably and efficiently. This is relevant to both the primary
and the secondary markets, and is best achieved respectively through
well-structured tender and market making arrangements. These may
involve last resort support from the regulators. There are many
successful models of such arrangements and there is ample literature
on them. The common objective is to ensure a high level of liquidity
to facilitate reliable and efficient price discovery, thereby
providing a benchmark yield curve upon which other issuers can
confidently and accurately price their own, hopefully much bigger
volume of, private sector debt. That is what we should aim for in
the development of the bond market if it is to play a meaningful
role in financial intermediation.
My ninth
point concerns the market infrastructure, and by that I mean the
payment, clearing and settlement systems. This is regrettably the
most neglected aspect in the development of financial markets, not
just the bond market. Imagine how general investor confidence would
be damaged if the financial instrument that an investor had bought
got lost in delivery. Or if he had to wait a considerable amount of
time to receive it after he had paid over the money, or if the money
that he had paid over was not received by the vendor. I have often
pointed out that governments spend huge amounts of money and efforts
building the physical infrastructure to move people and goods around
safely and efficiently, but that not even a small fraction of those
resources is given to moving money and financial instruments around
safely and efficiently. The result, very simply, is inefficient
financial intermediation. Money is not mobilised to its full
potential, and economic progress is undermined. The financial
infrastructure that we want, to use a bit of market jargon, is one
that enables, as soon as possible after dealing, RTGS DvP, namely,
real time gross settlement with delivery versus payment for
transactions in financial instruments (RTGS PvP or payment versus
payment for foreign exchange transactions). This is what we have
achieved in Hong Kong.
Hong
Kong's Bond Market
Let me
turn now to the development of Hong Kong's bond market and
share with you our experience. As I said earlier, after agonising
over this for a long period, behind the convenient argument that if
there is a need for a market to develop it will develop by itself
without the urging of government, we decided to get involved. The
Exchange Fund Bills and Notes programme was subsequently introduced
at the beginning of 1990. But the primary justification deployed
then was the need for a money market instrument, targeted at the
banks as customers, to facilitate monetary management rather than
the development of the bond market. Nevertheless, we adopted a
comprehensive approach to the task. We put together an innovative
market making system that virtually guaranteed liquidity by allowing
a handful of market makers to go short in any issue of our paper for
as long as their overall holdings, with suitable haircuts, are long.
This has now been replaced by an even more robust arrangement
whereby short positions in particular issues are squared at the end
of the day through overnight repos against other issues. We also
built a paperless clearing, settlement and custodian system operated
by our Central MoneyMarkets Unit (CMU), which also provided similar
services to the larger volume of private sector debt. And, at the
same time as we introduced our Real Time Gross Settlement payment
system at the end of 1996, we moved on to DvP, or delivery versus
payment, with real time and end of day capabilities.
Meanwhile,
the supply of debt has steadily been increasing. Corporate bond
issuance has increased by 300 per cent in the last decade or so. We
also have an increasing variety of products, including
mortgage-backed securities and retail products brought to the market
by the Hong Kong Mortgage Corporation. All have been readily
absorbed by the latent demand to which I also referred earlier. And
with the recent introduction of the Mandatory Provident Fund
schemes, the demand for bonds has been building up quickly. In 1991,
the bond market has a size of only about 4 per cent of GDP. This has
grown to 35 per cent last year, and the share of private sector debt
is now at around 77 per cent. We have come a long way but there is
still a lot of room for expansion, as evidenced by comparisons with
bond markets in the G-3 economies. But our bond market has grown big
enough and has been robust enough for it to provide some meaningful
back-up in times of financial stress. In 1998-99 when, as property
prices fell sharply and the financial turmoil led to deteriorating
asset quality, the banks adopted a conservative stance in their
lending, corporate bond issuance increased significantly.
Positioning
for the Future
Our
present pre-occupation in the development of the Hong Kong bond
market is to bring in the international dimension. As an
international financial centre, we of course aspire to play a role
in international financial intermediation. To achieve this, our
efforts have been concentrating on two fronts. First is the
establishment of bilateral linkages of the appropriate elements of
our financial infrastructure with those of other jurisdictions
wherever it is compatible to do so, and whenever the counterparts
are willing. This basically is for the purpose of facilitating the
cross border investments in debt securities. Our CMU was linked up
with Euroclear and Clearstream in 1994, with the Central Securities
Depositories in Australia in 1997, New Zealand in 1998 and Korea in
1999. We also have a standing offer in the region to link up our
Hong Kong dollar RTGS payment system with other currencies with RTGS
capability so as to achieve payment versus payment in foreign
exchange transactions, in other words, to eliminate Herstatt risk.
But I must confess that, for the former, there has not been a lot of
traffic, and for the latter, there have been no takers, so far. I
hope this is merely a reflection of the fact that the financial
infrastructures of others are not yet ready for these types of
linkages. But I really cannot see a more robust arrangement than
what we have proposed for promoting and facilitating the
international financial intermediation that is found so lacking in
the region. But we shall be patient.
The other
front that we have been working on is the replication of our Hong
Kong dollar financial infrastructure for the US dollar, the popular
currency for international financial intermediation. We have late
last year completed this for the debt clearing system and the RTGS
payment system. We have linked these to the corresponding systems in
the Hong Kong dollar financial infrastructure. I won't bore
you with the technical details. What this means is that we now have,
in this time zone, a robust financial infrastructure for US dollar
transactions that can accommodate, among other things, a US dollar
bond market in this region. You do not have to wait until New York
opens before you can achieve finality of settlement of your US
dollar transactions in bonds or, indeed, in any US dollar
denominated financial assets, if they are lodged with our CMU in
Hong Kong. Furthermore, any Asian currency with an RTGS payment
system, if it is linked up with our system, will be able to achieve
PvP or payment versus payment for the two currencies in real time.
We already have PvP for Hong Kong dollar versus US dollar
transactions - the first in the world.
I have, as
you are probably aware, drifted into the positioning of the Hong
Kong bond market for meeting future challenges. We have, through our
efforts in the development of the financial infrastructure, put
ourselves in a position to play the ideal host to the bond market of
the region, or of this time zone. I hope members of our financial
community can leverage on this position of strength and bring
issuers and investors of US dollar bonds to Hong Kong. Further
development of the bond market is largely in their hands. As central
banking officials, we in the Hong Kong Monetary Authority have done
what we can appropriately do, in the provision of this public good
- a robust financial infrastructure. We can, of course, replicate
this financial infrastructure for other currencies, and indeed we
are currently exploring the possibility of doing so for the other
major international currency not domiciled in this time zone - the
euro. And if this is appropriate, we can also transfer our
technology to others through our advisory services. I am, in
particular, thinking of the RMB financial infrastructure, which in
my opinion requires urgent strengthening, not just for facilitating
the development of the RMB bond market, but also for facilitating
the many further measures in financial liberalisation following WTO
accession.
Meanwhile,
our US dollar financial infrastructure in Hong Kong, coupled with
the market making arrangements that have been well tried for over a
decade, and the critical mass of financial institutions, is ideal
for the launching of a US dollar bond programme for the Mainland. I
understand, of course, that with foreign reserves well exceeding
US$200 billion, there is arguably little need for the Mainland to
raise additional foreign debt. But part of the outstanding foreign
debt could be refinanced in Hong Kong through such a programme.
Perhaps with a liquid market and a reliable benchmark yield curve
established, similar to those of Exchange Fund paper in Hong Kong
dollars, the overall borrowing costs could be lowered. This seems
worth trying, for the downside risks are minimal and the benefits
could be substantial, to the Mainland in terms of potential savings
in borrowing and road show costs, and to Hong Kong, in terms of
consolidating our position as the regional bond centre.
And we are ready to play our
part in the development of the RMB bond market in the Mainland, in
accordance with the timetable associated with WTO accession,
starting, slowly, with the establishment of joint ventures for
underwriting and trading, and the development of RMB bond funds and
so on. But what we hope for is that, in the fullness of time, the
Mainland authorities can come around to accommodating full access to
the RMB bond market from Hong Kong. I am sure there will be demand
for RMB assets in Hong Kong, if the demand is not there already. I
know that this matter, and other issues concerning financial
intermediation of the RMB outside of the Mainland, raises
complicated issues of capital account controls that need to be
resolved cautiously. But I would like to reiterate my view that,
with increasing economic integration between Hong Kong and the
southern part of the Mainland, some, possibly an increasing degree
of, mobility of capital between the two economies is inevitable. The
choice is whether to channel properly this flow of capital openly
and, if considered desirable, in a controlled manner, and to monitor
it, or to leave it in the dark, when ironically it is performing the
useful role in promoting the efficient use of capital in the two
economies. There is a great deal that the free and open financial
markets of Hong Kong can offer in RMB financial intermediation, and
I am delighted that, at this important point in China’s economic
and financial development, one of the themes of this conference is
how this can be effected. I wish you a very fruitful discussion
during the rest of this forum. Thank you.
|