|
LUJIAZUI FORUM
Concurrent Panel Sessions
16:00 – 17:30
Friday 9 May 2008
Competition and Cooperation among
Global and Regional Financial Centres
Remarks by
Joseph Yam
Chief Executive
Hong Kong Monetary Authority
1.
There are two points that I would like to make.
2.
First,
given that many jurisdictions claim to be or wish to develop as
international financial centres, we need to be clear about what actually
defines an international financial centre. We in Hong Kong have given
much thought to this, principally because Article 109 of the Basic Law
of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region requires that "The
Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall provide
an appropriate economic and legal environment for the maintenance of the
status of Hong Kong as an international financial centre". We obviously
do not wish to fail in this legal responsibility.
3.
I do not believe that being the nth largest foreign exchange trading
centre or the presence of many of the largest international financial
institutions are good definitions for an international financial
centre. Indeed, with the advancement of information technology, there
may be a tendency for the market place to migrate into cyber space. In
my opinion, an international financial centre is a centre in which the
function of financial intermediation, which is so important for
supporting economic growth and development, takes place on an
international dimension. In other words, an international financial
centre is an international meeting place between those with surplus
funds and those in need of funds. Thus when Hong Kong provides a
significant platform for investors from, for example, Europe and America
to invest their money in financial instruments issued by fund raisers
from the Mainland of China, or provides the window for investors on the
Mainland to access investment opportunities in the rest of the world, we
qualify for the status of an international financial centre.
4.
With this definition in mind, the crucial pre-requisites for an
international financial centre are first the existence of
sizeable overseas demand for international financial services – the
mobilisation of savings overseas and the attraction of foreign capital –
and secondly the willingness for such demand to be satisfied
there. Of course, there are also the ability to provide those financial
services and the many attributes that go along with that ability,
including the protection afforded by the rule of law, an efficient
financial infrastructure, a quality environment, and so on. But I think
it is the existence of substantial demand for financial services from a
large hinterland that comes first. New York, of course, has the largest
economy in the world that is free and open to support its status as an
international financial centre, providing financial services that
mobilise US savings to the rest of the world and attracting foreign
investments, and servicing domestic financial intermediation at the same
time. London, of course, has much of the European economy in addition
to the United Kingdom economy. Hong Kong has the Mainland of China, the
third largest trading partner, the fourth largest economy, the largest
foreign reserve holder and home to participants in the key financial
markets that collectively form the largest player in the world.
5.
The second point I wish to make is that, under "One Country, Two
Systems", there are two financial systems in China, both in a position
to serve the interests of the country in the all-important function of
financial intermediation. This is unique and there are no relevant
precedents in the financial history of the world. Because of the
uniqueness of this arrangement, there is understandably considerable
scepticism both internationally and within China on how it might work.
Let me tell you. The two financial systems are different in a variety
of ways, with the financial system on the Mainland operating in the
developing environment of a socialist market economy and the one in Hong
Kong operating in the familiar environment of a capitalist free market
economy. We all know that where there are differences, there are
opportunities for exploiting relative strengths, addressing relative
weaknesses and maximising synergies between the two systems, remembering
always the national interest of making financial intermediation more
efficient for the country as a whole. In other words, there is a need
to develop a complementary, mutually-assisting and interactive
relationship between the two financial systems. This incidentally is
national policy, articulated by Premier Wen on the occasion of the
National Finance Working Meeting held early last year.
6.
Given, however, that there are considerable controls in the financial
system on the Mainland, including capital controls, and that the
financial system in Hong Kong is among the freest in the world, to
develop the complementary, mutually-assisting and interactive
relationship between the two financial systems there is a need first
to establish channels to promote the mobility in an orderly manner
between the two financial systems of (1) money, (2) investors and fund
raisers, (3) financial instruments and (4) financial intermediaries.
Given also the increasing use and the clear prospects of the renminbi as
a medium for international financial transactions there is also a need
secondly to develop the ability of the financial system in Hong
Kong to handle financial and other economic transactions denominated in
the renminbi. Thirdly, as the mobility of money, investors,
borrowers, financial instruments and financial intermediaries between
the two financial systems grows, there will be rapid growth of financial
traffic between the Mainland and Hong Kong. Consequently there is a
need for robust links between the financial infrastructures of the two
financial systems. This then is our strategy. In terms of actual
measures – something that Antony also wants me to talk about – I would
refer you to the eighty recommendations in the Report of the Focus Group
on Financial Services published in January 2007 as Hong Kong's response
to the Eleventh Five-Year Plan of the country published in 2006 and as
Hong Kong's input to the National Finance Working Meeting in 2007.
7.
As you may be aware, the implementation of our overall strategy and many
of the detailed recommendations involve the relaxation of controls in
the financial systems on the Mainland. While the benefits of financial
liberalisation are clear, so are the risks to financial stability, as
the Asian financial crisis of 1997-98 and the current turmoil in the
developed financial markets demonstrate so vividly. Here there should
be a strong emphasis, to quote the Premier again, on gradualism,
controllability and the ability to take initiatives at the right time.
And in the context of pursuing the complementary, mutually-assisting and
interactive relationship between the two financial systems, financial
liberalisation should not be seen as helping Hong Kong. We welcome
support from the Mainland in discharging our legal responsibility in
maintaining the status of Hong Kong as an international financial
centre, but I hope I have convinced you that in developing our strategy
and our recommendations, we very much have the national interest
foremost in our minds.
8.
As to Antony's question on whether Shanghai is a threat to Hong Kong's
status as an international financial centre, I hope my description of
our strategy will bring you around to the view implicit in that strategy
that we see a complementary, mutually-assisting and interactive
relationship, where relative strengths are exploited, relative
weaknesses are addressed and synergies maximised; and not a relationship
characterised by cut-throat competition, as some may have portrayed it.
Joseph Yam
|