|
Financial rescue measures
Using public money to
restore confidence in the financial system, although controversial,
is sometimes necessary.
As the financial crisis
originating in the US continues to rage, the authorities there are
trying hard to contain the damage and hopefully put a stop to it.
The measures taken by the authorities so far, and the proposals
currently being debated, involve market intervention in one form or
another, and the use of large amounts of public money. A recent
editorial in a financial newspaper put it like this: "the follies of
a generation of irresponsible financiers will fall on future
generations of taxpayers." Whether the American people and their
government like it or not, they really have no choice. The
alternative of letting the markets take care of the problems might
lead to a financial meltdown that would throw the economy into a
tailspin, which would be a lot more costly to the community as a
whole. But it takes time, and possibly severe pain, for
stakeholders in a free-market economy to realise and accept the
inevitability of market intervention in special circumstances and
the use of public money to rescue the financial system.
There are different types
of institutions performing the basic function of financial
intermediation. In the process of matching the risk appetites of
investors and the risk profiles of fund raisers, these financial
intermediaries typically leverage themselves and take a variety of
risks, including credit risk. To function properly and to command
the confidence of investors and fund raisers, they need to have
adequate capital and liquidity. When financial crises come
financial institutions often find themselves short of both. At the
risk of over-simplifying things, to contain or end a financial
crisis, there is a need for the authorities to provide liquidity to
the financial system and facilitate the re-capitalisation of
financial institutions.
The provision of liquidity
is obviously the role of the central banks, since they are lenders
of last resort. They have been doing as good a job as circumstances
allow. In the US, for example, funds are now provided against
collateral of a much wider spectrum of financial assets (such as
equity) than in normal times; and for much longer repayment
periods. Readers may also have noticed large liquidity injections
by central banks in many other jurisdictions recently, including
Hong Kong where, because we are an open international financial
centre, market sentiment is determined to a great extent by
developments in international finance. It should be noted that the
money market in Hong Kong has been orderly, although there have been
heightened concerns about credit risk in the interbank market. The
HKMA stands ready to provide liquidity to the banking system as
needed, and there is a well-established and transparent framework,
built up over the years, for doing so. On Tuesday, 30 September
2008, we announced, as a precaution, five temporary measures to make
the framework for providing liquidity to the banking sector more
flexible and we may consider, if necessary, further measures to
enhance our ability to cope with further stresses in liquidity
conditions.
Provision of capital for
the financial system of a jurisdiction is a more delicate issue. In
the US, raising capital under current circumstances is obviously
difficult and the authorities need to determine whether there is a
need for the public sector to be involved in the re-capitalisation
of the financial system. When asset prices (especially property
prices) are falling and the asset quality of financial institutions
is deteriorating, prompt and adequate re-capitalisation is crucial
to prevent confidence in the financial system and the viability of
financial institutions from sliding away. I have said before that
the situation in the US is far too serious to let worries about
moral hazard be a pretext for inaction. I am therefore glad to see
the comprehensive measures proposed by the US Government to repair
the balance sheet of the financial system. I hope the US Congress
can reach a consensus on these measures soon, while understanding
Congress¡¦s views on the need for arrangements to protect the public
purse and the interests of "future generations of taxpayers" and to
strengthen the regulatory system to reduce the likelihood of a
repeat of the problems that led to the current crisis.
¡@
Joseph Yam
2 October 2008
¡@
Click here
for previous articles in this column.
|
|