Andrew G. Haldane, Robert Gray and Henk J. Brouwer ANDREW G. HALDANE* I have four points to make: on progress to date on crisis resolution; on where next for the Sovereign Debt Restructuring Mechanism (SDRM); on the resolution of non-sovereign and non-solvency crises; and on moral hazard. On Progress to Date The title of Part V is ‘The aftermath of the SDRM debate’. ‘Aftermath’ makes it sound like a time for tending the sick and wounded following some bloody and destructive battle. In fact, the war of words has been a fairly constructive one. Certainly, this debate has helped catalyse change on the crisis resolution front, which had not been much in evidence in the preceding ﬁve or so years. It is possible to speak of tangible progress in a way that would have been unimaginable two years ago. International public policy has three stages: the ideas stage; the turning of those ideas into words (or policies); and applying those policies in practice. On that basis, and over the past 6–12 months, tangible progress has been made on: 1. Access Agreement has been reached at the IMF on new criteria and procedures to accompany any lending above the normal (100/300 percent of quotas) IMF lending limits. Exceptional lending should, in future, require an exceptional level of justiﬁcation. So we have gone from ideas (for example, Haldane and Kruger 2001) to policies. And the next step is to go from policies to actions in live country cases; 2. Collective...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.
Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.
Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.