Crisis response to date. As the world economy has become engulfed in the worst crisis in many generations, the Fund has mobilized on many fronts to support its member countries. We have responded with prompt, large and flexible financial support where needed. Our monitoring, forecasts, and policy advice, informed by a global perspective and by experience from previous crises, have been in high demand. We have deployed a broad financial safety net, through an overhaul of our general lending framework that makes it better suited to members’ needs, and by garnering pledges for a massive increase in Fund resources. And we have contributed to the ongoing collective effort to draw lessons from the crisis for policy, regulation, and the global architecture.

Crisis response to date. As the world economy has become engulfed in the worst crisis in many generations, the Fund has mobilized on many fronts to support its member countries. We have responded with prompt, large and flexible financial support where needed. Our monitoring, forecasts, and policy advice, informed by a global perspective and by experience from previous crises, have been in high demand. We have deployed a broad financial safety net, through an overhaul of our general lending framework that makes it better suited to members' needs, and by garnering pledges for a massive increase in Fund resources. And we have contributed to the ongoing collective effort to draw lessons from the crisis for policy, regulation, and the global architecture.

The recent financial crisis has given renewed urgency to the need for resolution systems for financial institutions, which both safeguard financial stability and limit moral hazard. However, experience demonstrates that these systems will not be effective unless progress is also made in developing a framework that applies on a cross-border basis. Since many systemically important financial groups operate globally, an uncoordinated application of resolution systems by national authorities will make it much more difficult to both secure the continuity of essential functions (thereby limiting contagion), and ensure that shareholders and creditors bear the financial burden of the resolution process.

The recent financial crisis has given renewed urgency to the need for resolution systems for financial institutions, which both safeguard financial stability and limit moral hazard. However, experience demonstrates that these systems will not be effective unless progress is also made in developing a framework that applies on a cross-border basis. Since many systemically important financial groups operate globally, an uncoordinated application of resolution systems by national authorities will make it much more difficult to both secure the continuity of essential functions (thereby limiting contagion), and ensure that shareholders and creditors bear the financial burden of the resolution process.

The Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) has produced a detailed report that provides valuable insights on how the IMF responded to the global financial and economic crisis. The analysis in the report is broadly balanced, and Managing Director welcomes the IEO’s finding that the IMF played an important role in the global response to the crisis, and broadly supports the report’s recommendations

As the evaluation notes, the Fund’s rapid response was not without costs and risks. The decision to provide extraordinary access, including through emergency financing, in the face of this unprecedented crisis has inevitably raised pressures on the Fund’s own, and its members’, balance sheets. Moreover, according to the report, some stakeholders did not feel adequately consulted in the initial weeks of the pandemic, staff experienced enormous work pressures, and in at least a few instances, national authorities did not perceive that the way policy guidance on 2 access was applied was entirely evenhanded. I am confident we can learn from the experience and do even better in the future; and I believe the IEO’s high-level recommendations will help us to do so.

The IEO report provides a welcome opportunity to reflect on the IMF’s initiatives to expand and deepen its financial surveillance work in response to the Global Financial Crisis. In order to improve the relevance and traction of bilateral financial surveillance, the IMF needs to deepen financial and macrofinancial analysis, particularly in Article IV consultations, including by taking practical steps to better integrate Financial Sector Assessment Program analysis in Article IV consultations and by increasing financial skills and expertise among staff. The IMF should continue to work to enhance the impact of IMF multilateral surveillance by increasing rigor and transparency, and by deepening collaboration with international partners. On scaling-up the IMF’s work with the international regulatory agencies to assess the impact of reforms, the IMF has undertaken several assessments of different aspects of the reforms following the 2012 Financial Surveillance Strategy. Some of these have been conducted jointly with the Standard Setting Bodies.