Global Trends in Sovereign Debt Management - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

emily
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Global Trends in Sovereign Debt Management PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Global Trends in Sovereign Debt Management

play fullscreen
1 / 36
Download Presentation
Global Trends in Sovereign Debt Management
209 Views
Download Presentation

Global Trends in Sovereign Debt Management

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

    1. Global Trends in Sovereign Debt Management Ian Storkey, Storkey & Co Limited Public Sector Finance and Treasury Management Conference Tuesday, 27 May 2003 It is a honour to have this opportunity to begin the 2nd Public Sector Finance and Treasury Management Conference which follows on from the success of the conference held in April last year. Over the past 3 years, I have been encouraging the FTA to consider conferences to cover this important area of government financial management as sovereign debt management is not that well understood particularly throughout the Asia-Pacific region. There is certainly not the same level of knowledge and understanding as in Europe and North America where sovereign debt managers have been regularly meeting over the past 15 years. In fact, the Government Borrowers Forum met in Stockholm just last week. My objective is to enlighten you to global trends and some recent and rather innovative developments in public debt management.It is a honour to have this opportunity to begin the 2nd Public Sector Finance and Treasury Management Conference which follows on from the success of the conference held in April last year. Over the past 3 years, I have been encouraging the FTA to consider conferences to cover this important area of government financial management as sovereign debt management is not that well understood particularly throughout the Asia-Pacific region. There is certainly not the same level of knowledge and understanding as in Europe and North America where sovereign debt managers have been regularly meeting over the past 15 years. In fact, the Government Borrowers Forum met in Stockholm just last week. My objective is to enlighten you to global trends and some recent and rather innovative developments in public debt management.

    2. Presentation Outline Sovereign Debt Management IMF/World Bank Guidelines Global Trends Developing Countries ? Central/State/Local Governments including case studies Key Observations Consulting experiences and some suggestions I will provide an introduction to sovereign debt management, calling on the IMF/World Bank Guidelines for Public Debt Management released in April 2001. I will then cover global trends and developments calling on some country case studies to illustrate some of the more recent and innovative developments. I would like to wrap up with some key observations from my research and consulting assignments and leave you with some ideas and maybe challenges for you to consider both from a public and private sector perspective.I will provide an introduction to sovereign debt management, calling on the IMF/World Bank Guidelines for Public Debt Management released in April 2001. I will then cover global trends and developments calling on some country case studies to illustrate some of the more recent and innovative developments. I would like to wrap up with some key observations from my research and consulting assignments and leave you with some ideas and maybe challenges for you to consider both from a public and private sector perspective.

    3. Sovereign Debt Management International financial markets assign the status of sovereign debt to the public debt issued by governments. This status reflects the highest quality debt issuers in the market, and most with the strongest credit rating. As a result of this status, sovereign borrowers are expected to have a risk management culture that reflects the special set of responsibilities associated with representing the government in international financial markets. These responsibilities are considerable, particularly if the governments reputation in the financial marketplace is to be maintained at the highest level.International financial markets assign the status of sovereign debt to the public debt issued by governments. This status reflects the highest quality debt issuers in the market, and most with the strongest credit rating. As a result of this status, sovereign borrowers are expected to have a risk management culture that reflects the special set of responsibilities associated with representing the government in international financial markets. These responsibilities are considerable, particularly if the governments reputation in the financial marketplace is to be maintained at the highest level.

    4. Definition I have extracted a definition for sovereign or public debt management from the IMF/World Bank Guidelines which I will cover shortly. Clearly cost and risk are key components. However, other goals often include developing and maintaining an efficient domestic market for government securities.I have extracted a definition for sovereign or public debt management from the IMF/World Bank Guidelines which I will cover shortly. Clearly cost and risk are key components. However, other goals often include developing and maintaining an efficient domestic market for government securities.

    5. Importance Often largest financial portfolio in the country Potential for use of inside information Possible conflicts of interest Need for transparency of operations Need for open process for formulating debt management policies and public disclosure Should be applied to Central, State and Local governments A governments debt portfolio is usually the largest financial portfolio in the country (or state/region). It often contains complex and risky financial structures, and can generate substantial balance sheet risk for the government. Large and poorly structured debt portfolios also make governments more vulnerable to economic and financial shocks and have often been a major factor in economic crises. Therefore, sound risk management and sound public debt structures are required by governments to reduce the exposure to market, funding, liquidity, credit, settlements and operational risk. Any government should be risk adverse in its financial management therefore protecting against adverse events that may impact negatively on the governments finances. You will see that I have included not only central and state government, but also local government. This is an area of public finance that has fallen behind central/state governments in most countries, the notable exception would be New Zealand.A governments debt portfolio is usually the largest financial portfolio in the country (or state/region). It often contains complex and risky financial structures, and can generate substantial balance sheet risk for the government. Large and poorly structured debt portfolios also make governments more vulnerable to economic and financial shocks and have often been a major factor in economic crises. Therefore, sound risk management and sound public debt structures are required by governments to reduce the exposure to market, funding, liquidity, credit, settlements and operational risk. Any government should be risk adverse in its financial management therefore protecting against adverse events that may impact negatively on the governments finances. You will see that I have included not only central and state government, but also local government. This is an area of public finance that has fallen behind central/state governments in most countries, the notable exception would be New Zealand.

    6. IMF/World Bank Guidelines A key catalyst to recent trends and new developments has been the publication by the IMF and World Bank of Guidelines for Public Debt Management, which have been designed to assist policymakers in considering reforms to strengthen the quality of their public debt management and reduce their countrys vulnerability to international financial shocks. The Guidelines cover both domestic and external public debt and encompass a broad range of financial claims on the government. They seek to identify areas in which there is broad agreement on what generally constitutes sound practices in public debt management.A key catalyst to recent trends and new developments has been the publication by the IMF and World Bank of Guidelines for Public Debt Management, which have been designed to assist policymakers in considering reforms to strengthen the quality of their public debt management and reduce their countrys vulnerability to international financial shocks. The Guidelines cover both domestic and external public debt and encompass a broad range of financial claims on the government. They seek to identify areas in which there is broad agreement on what generally constitutes sound practices in public debt management.

    7. Basis for the Guidelines Based on the knowledge, experience and wisdom of many sovereign debt managers from debt offices and international agencies Released in April 2001 after international consultation 7 regional workshops were held around the world to discuss the draft Guidelines Guidelines not commandments Plenty of scope for tailoring to each governments unique circumstances can be used as a benchmark It is important to note that the Guidelines are not IMF or World Bank directives. They were designed through an extensive consultative process involving many countries including Australia and New Zealand. I have used the Guidelines as a benchmark for advising developing countries in building capacity and reforming their public debt management.It is important to note that the Guidelines are not IMF or World Bank directives. They were designed through an extensive consultative process involving many countries including Australia and New Zealand. I have used the Guidelines as a benchmark for advising developing countries in building capacity and reforming their public debt management.

    8. Components Guidelines cover six components: Debt Management Objectives and Coordination Transparency and Accountability Institutional Framework Debt Management Strategy Risk Management Framework Development and Maintenance of an Efficient Market for Government Securities The Guidelines cover six components and set out what are sound practices to address each component. Clearly, each country has its own specific characteristics and, therefore, the Guidelines have been designed to allow flexibility in their application to any particular country.The Guidelines cover six components and set out what are sound practices to address each component. Clearly, each country has its own specific characteristics and, therefore, the Guidelines have been designed to allow flexibility in their application to any particular country.

    9. Accompanying Document Released in November 2002 Provides 18 Country Case Studies Lessons from the Country Case Studies Rapid evolution that is taking place in public debt management More sophistication in managing stock of debt Addressing the Guidelines six components Following the release of the Guidelines in 2001, the Executive Boards of the IMF and the World Bank requested the two institutions to prepare an accompanying document containing sample case studies to illustrate how a range of countries from around the world and at different stages of economic and financial development are developing their debt management capacity in a manner consistent with the Guidelines. The accompanying document was released in November last year. Many of the case studies illustrate the rapid evolution and increasing sophistication in public debt management globally.Following the release of the Guidelines in 2001, the Executive Boards of the IMF and the World Bank requested the two institutions to prepare an accompanying document containing sample case studies to illustrate how a range of countries from around the world and at different stages of economic and financial development are developing their debt management capacity in a manner consistent with the Guidelines. The accompanying document was released in November last year. Many of the case studies illustrate the rapid evolution and increasing sophistication in public debt management globally.

    10. Prudent Practices Recognition of benefits of clear objectives for debt management Weighing risk against cost considerations Separation and coordination of debt and monetary management objectives Limit on debt expansion Developing a sound institutional structure and policies for managing operational risks Identify and manage risk of contingent liabilities The Guidelines and Accompany document set out six key areas that constitute prudent practices. These cover clear objectives particularly around debt and monetary management, risk v cost considerations, and sound institutional structures. They also cover prudent debt levels or debt sustainability, which is still a major issue in most developing countries but less so now in the developed countries as fiscal surpluses or balance has been achieved. Finally, they cover the risk of contingent liabilities. These can pose a major threat as the World Bank has assessed that the level of contingent liabilities in many countries may exceed the recorded level of public debt. Those countries that have adopted prudent practices in these six areas have achieved some key outcomes.The Guidelines and Accompany document set out six key areas that constitute prudent practices. These cover clear objectives particularly around debt and monetary management, risk v cost considerations, and sound institutional structures. They also cover prudent debt levels or debt sustainability, which is still a major issue in most developing countries but less so now in the developed countries as fiscal surpluses or balance has been achieved. Finally, they cover the risk of contingent liabilities. These can pose a major threat as the World Bank has assessed that the level of contingent liabilities in many countries may exceed the recorded level of public debt. Those countries that have adopted prudent practices in these six areas have achieved some key outcomes.

    11. Key Outcomes Clearer objectives for public debt management Development of risk models (eg BaR, CaR, VaR) Greater clarity in the roles and responsibilities of the debt managers and their agents Open and accountable process for the formulation and reporting of public debt management policies Development of benchmarks and measures of performance Development and maintenance of an efficient market for domestic government securities Many countries have clear and orthodox objectives for monetary policy, normally based on annual inflation targets. On the other hand, government objectives for debt management have not always been well specified, particularly in terms of cost and risk. The development of clear objectives and risk models has been a key outcome. Greater transparency and accountability has been another. Many debt offices now produce a detailed annual report setting out their debt management framework and policies along with the debt office objectives and their performance in meeting those objectives. This can have an adverse reaction if the results show significant losses whether realised or unrealised (as was the case last year with the Commonwealths foreign currency liabilities). It is probably fair to say that similar losses have been incurred in the past. It is just that they were never reported and buried within large budget revaluations. The development of benchmarks and measures for assessing the performance of the debt managers has been the most significant development over the past 10 years.Many countries have clear and orthodox objectives for monetary policy, normally based on annual inflation targets. On the other hand, government objectives for debt management have not always been well specified, particularly in terms of cost and risk. The development of clear objectives and risk models has been a key outcome. Greater transparency and accountability has been another. Many debt offices now produce a detailed annual report setting out their debt management framework and policies along with the debt office objectives and their performance in meeting those objectives. This can have an adverse reaction if the results show significant losses whether realised or unrealised (as was the case last year with the Commonwealths foreign currency liabilities). It is probably fair to say that similar losses have been incurred in the past. It is just that they were never reported and buried within large budget revaluations. The development of benchmarks and measures for assessing the performance of the debt managers has been the most significant development over the past 10 years.

    12. Institutional Structures Separate DMO Austria (OEBFA) Germany Hungary (AKK) Ireland (NTMA) Portugal (IGCP) Sweden (SNDO) UK (DMO) Australian State Borrowing Authorities MoF DMO Australia (AOFM) Belgium Canada France (AFT) Netherlands (DSTA) New Zealand (NZDMO) Poland USA Denmark (Central Bank) In an attempt to increase the efficiency of debt management, a number of governments have delegated the operational dimensions of debt management to separate debt management offices (DMOs). Other countries have questioned whether it was advisable to operationally isolate public debt management from public policy. These countries have opted to establish a debt management office within the Ministry of Finance or Treasury portfolio with equally clear objectives and accountability as for the separate DMOs. The notable exception is Denmark where the debt office is located in the Central Bank. The responsibility was moved from the Ministry of Finance in 1991 as it was suggested that attracting and maintaining staff with the relevant skills would be easier if the debt office was placed in the Central Bank. The Danes have concluded that this move has helped centralise the retention of knowledge of most aspects of financial markets within a single authority and enabled stronger coordination between the management of foreign exchange reserves and central-government foreign debt. Most debt management offices have been established in the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s. The exceptions are the SNDO established in 1789 and the DSTA established in 1841.In an attempt to increase the efficiency of debt management, a number of governments have delegated the operational dimensions of debt management to separate debt management offices (DMOs). Other countries have questioned whether it was advisable to operationally isolate public debt management from public policy. These countries have opted to establish a debt management office within the Ministry of Finance or Treasury portfolio with equally clear objectives and accountability as for the separate DMOs. The notable exception is Denmark where the debt office is located in the Central Bank. The responsibility was moved from the Ministry of Finance in 1991 as it was suggested that attracting and maintaining staff with the relevant skills would be easier if the debt office was placed in the Central Bank. The Danes have concluded that this move has helped centralise the retention of knowledge of most aspects of financial markets within a single authority and enabled stronger coordination between the management of foreign exchange reserves and central-government foreign debt. Most debt management offices have been established in the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s. The exceptions are the SNDO established in 1789 and the DSTA established in 1841.

    13. Global Trends I will now turn to global trends and key developments in sovereign debt management.I will now turn to global trends and key developments in sovereign debt management.

    14. Evolution Phases To demonstrate the evolution of sovereign debt management, I have found through my experiences that I can use four categories to characterise the different levels of development and sophistication. I will go through each category to identify the key characteristics, debt management policies and practices, and to provide country case studies.To demonstrate the evolution of sovereign debt management, I have found through my experiences that I can use four categories to characterise the different levels of development and sophistication. I will go through each category to identify the key characteristics, debt management policies and practices, and to provide country case studies.

    15. Debt Issuance & Recording The first category I have referred to as Debt Issuance & Recording.The first category I have referred to as Debt Issuance & Recording.

    16. Debt Issuance & Recording Focus is on issuing debt given significant fiscal imbalance and accounting for debt Four key characteristics: Focus on developing domestic debt markets Fragmentation and problems in coordinating debt management with monetary policy Problems in analysing and controlling the impact of debt servicing on the budget Problems controlling contingent liabilities The major characteristic of this category is the focus on debt issuance to fund maturing debt and often significant fiscal deficits. Therefore, most debt managers focus on identifying borrowing opportunities both in external and domestic debt markets. For many developing countries, the domestic debt market is not well developed and the government is forced to access international markets, primarily from multilateral or bilateral sources. A secondary but important function is to record, service and account for debt transactions, which is essentially a debt ledger operation. There is often a silo approach to managing debt with different agencies of government responsible for domestic debt, external debt, FX reserves, domestic investments, cash management, and capital flows. There is also significant problems with identifying and managing contingent liabilities. Indonesia is a good example here which I will cover shortly.The major characteristic of this category is the focus on debt issuance to fund maturing debt and often significant fiscal deficits. Therefore, most debt managers focus on identifying borrowing opportunities both in external and domestic debt markets. For many developing countries, the domestic debt market is not well developed and the government is forced to access international markets, primarily from multilateral or bilateral sources. A secondary but important function is to record, service and account for debt transactions, which is essentially a debt ledger operation. There is often a silo approach to managing debt with different agencies of government responsible for domestic debt, external debt, FX reserves, domestic investments, cash management, and capital flows. There is also significant problems with identifying and managing contingent liabilities. Indonesia is a good example here which I will cover shortly.

    17. Debt Issuance & Recording Applicable to most developing countries Difficult to reform due to: Lack of necessary control and accountability to establish a separate debt management office High degree of interdependence between debt management and macroeconomic policies Inability to attract staff with the right skills under existing civil service structures Most developing countries fit into this category, although it should be noted that Australia and New Zealand were in this category up until the reforms in the mid-1980s. Why is it difficult to reform public debt management practices? To a large extent it will be dependent on the macroeconomic and fiscal environment. Australia and New Zealand did not start to focus on debt management reform until the fiscal deficit reduced and the debt managers were then able to give more attention to debt structures and management of risks in the debt portfolio. Developing countries are starting to consider reforms but have fundamental problems such as institutional rigidities and disincentives for change, low levels of remuneration leading to difficulties recruiting and retaining staff with the right skills, and strong political involvement in day-to-day debt management operations. Doesnt this sound familiar! It reminds me of the early 1980s in New Zealand and I suspect Australia. For the small number of countries in default, there has been an initiative out of the IMF to introduce a Sovereign Debt Restructuring Mechanism, but this is not gaining much support from the financial community.Most developing countries fit into this category, although it should be noted that Australia and New Zealand were in this category up until the reforms in the mid-1980s. Why is it difficult to reform public debt management practices? To a large extent it will be dependent on the macroeconomic and fiscal environment. Australia and New Zealand did not start to focus on debt management reform until the fiscal deficit reduced and the debt managers were then able to give more attention to debt structures and management of risks in the debt portfolio. Developing countries are starting to consider reforms but have fundamental problems such as institutional rigidities and disincentives for change, low levels of remuneration leading to difficulties recruiting and retaining staff with the right skills, and strong political involvement in day-to-day debt management operations. Doesnt this sound familiar! It reminds me of the early 1980s in New Zealand and I suspect Australia. For the small number of countries in default, there has been an initiative out of the IMF to introduce a Sovereign Debt Restructuring Mechanism, but this is not gaining much support from the financial community.

    18. Case Study: Indonesia Large refinancing risk to rollover debt issued to recapitalise the banks Debt/Cash management is fragmented Domestic debt market not developed Legal and institutional reform is required Australian Government through AusAID funding a capacity building program for PMON I have chosen Indonesia as the case study in this category. The Government of Indonesia issued around US$50 billion of bonds to the banks for recapitalisation following the Asian economic crisis and is now building debt management capacity within government and developing the domestic debt market to refinance these bonds which primarily mature between 2004 and 2009. This is a huge challenge for the Government of Indonesia given the credit rating of the country and the impact previous government regimes have had on the countrys reputation in the financial markets. The Australian Government is providing technical assistance through an AusAID funded project to build capacity in Pusat Managemen Obligasi Negara (PMON), utilising debt management expertise from Australia and New Zealand. There is still a highly fragmented approach to debt management with PMON now responsible for domestic bonds, Bank Indonesia responsible for treasury bills, and two different areas of the Directorate of Budget responsible for external debt and cash management. The Government of Indonesia is planning to set up a Treasury to integrate these functions.I have chosen Indonesia as the case study in this category. The Government of Indonesia issued around US$50 billion of bonds to the banks for recapitalisation following the Asian economic crisis and is now building debt management capacity within government and developing the domestic debt market to refinance these bonds which primarily mature between 2004 and 2009. This is a huge challenge for the Government of Indonesia given the credit rating of the country and the impact previous government regimes have had on the countrys reputation in the financial markets. The Australian Government is providing technical assistance through an AusAID funded project to build capacity in Pusat Managemen Obligasi Negara (PMON), utilising debt management expertise from Australia and New Zealand. There is still a highly fragmented approach to debt management with PMON now responsible for domestic bonds, Bank Indonesia responsible for treasury bills, and two different areas of the Directorate of Budget responsible for external debt and cash management. The Government of Indonesia is planning to set up a Treasury to integrate these functions.

    19. Liability/Cash Management The second category I have referred to as Liability/Cash Management.The second category I have referred to as Liability/Cash Management.

    20. Liability/Cash Management Focus is on integration of liabilities and cashflows within a risk management framework Three key characteristics: Reducing or eliminating foreign currency debt Integration of debt management and aggregate government cashflows Risk management around budget debt service cost with techniques such as BaR and CaR The major characteristic of this category is the increased focus on managing debt within a risk management framework and the integration of debt management with all of governments cashflows. This has led to many countries deciding to reduce or eliminate foreign currency exposures. European governments have been able to achieve this more quickly as a result of Euro denominated debt becoming classified as domestic debt. In developing risk models, countries in this category have assessed the major risk as being the extent to which volatility of financial variables affects the budget through changes in debt servicing costs. These debt offices have preferred to measure risk on a cashflow basis rather than full mark-to-market basis using Value-at-Risk. Portugal is developing a model based on an integrated Budget-at-Risk indicator for the debt portfolio. Canada, Denmark and Italy are developing Cost-at-Risk measures based on the effect of interest rate fluctuations on the annual costs of the debt.The major characteristic of this category is the increased focus on managing debt within a risk management framework and the integration of debt management with all of governments cashflows. This has led to many countries deciding to reduce or eliminate foreign currency exposures. European governments have been able to achieve this more quickly as a result of Euro denominated debt becoming classified as domestic debt. In developing risk models, countries in this category have assessed the major risk as being the extent to which volatility of financial variables affects the budget through changes in debt servicing costs. These debt offices have preferred to measure risk on a cashflow basis rather than full mark-to-market basis using Value-at-Risk. Portugal is developing a model based on an integrated Budget-at-Risk indicator for the debt portfolio. Canada, Denmark and Italy are developing Cost-at-Risk measures based on the effect of interest rate fluctuations on the annual costs of the debt.

    21. Liability/Cash Management As I mentioned, a major characteristic is the integrated approach to government debt and cash management. The information that debt managers need to make borrowing and investment decisions can be complex, particularly if there is little coordination between government agencies and unexpected flows to/from the government. Often each of the flows shown in the diagram are managed by different agencies. Debt offices in this category have become very focused on aggregate cashflows. Quality cash management requires accurate forecasting of the cash flows between the government and the banking system and end-of-day cash balances in government accounts. Many countries have difficulty forecasting cashflows accurately, particularly daily as required by the central bank for monetary policy purposes. Some countries have adopted incentives for government cash management to improve the forecasting and management of expenditure and revenue cashflows, and to utilise surplus funds. Australia and New Zealand have been at the forefront of reforms in government banking and cash management.As I mentioned, a major characteristic is the integrated approach to government debt and cash management. The information that debt managers need to make borrowing and investment decisions can be complex, particularly if there is little coordination between government agencies and unexpected flows to/from the government. Often each of the flows shown in the diagram are managed by different agencies. Debt offices in this category have become very focused on aggregate cashflows. Quality cash management requires accurate forecasting of the cash flows between the government and the banking system and end-of-day cash balances in government accounts. Many countries have difficulty forecasting cashflows accurately, particularly daily as required by the central bank for monetary policy purposes. Some countries have adopted incentives for government cash management to improve the forecasting and management of expenditure and revenue cashflows, and to utilise surplus funds. Australia and New Zealand have been at the forefront of reforms in government banking and cash management.

    22. Case Study: Australia AOFM established in 1999 with responsibility for all aspects of debt management ..to manage the Commonwealths net debt portfolio at least cost over the medium term, subject to the governments policies and risk preferences. Debt portfolio/cash management focus Foreign currency liability position is being eliminated I have chosen Australia and the UK as the case studies in this category. The Commonwealth followed the trend of most OECD countries by establishing the Australian Office of Financial Management (AOFM) in July 1999. The AOFM which is located within the Treasury Portfolio has an objective which addresses both cost and risk. At this point, the focus is on Commonwealth debt portfolio management and the Commonwealths aggregate cash position. The Department of Finance and Administration administers the day-to-day cash management regime. The Reserve Bank of Australia manages the Commonwealths foreign currency reserves. I have chosen Australia and the UK as the case studies in this category. The Commonwealth followed the trend of most OECD countries by establishing the Australian Office of Financial Management (AOFM) in July 1999. The AOFM which is located within the Treasury Portfolio has an objective which addresses both cost and risk. At this point, the focus is on Commonwealth debt portfolio management and the Commonwealths aggregate cash position. The Department of Finance and Administration administers the day-to-day cash management regime. The Reserve Bank of Australia manages the Commonwealths foreign currency reserves.

    23. Case Study: United Kingdom UK DMO took over responsibility for debt management from Bank of England in 1998 ..to minimise over the long term the cost of meeting the governments financing needs, taking into account risk, whilst ensuring the policy is consistent with the objectives of monetary policy. Starting to move to an ALM approach The UK Debt Management Office (DMO) was established in April 1998 following an earlier announcement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that responsibility for setting of official interest rates was being transferred from Treasury to the Bank of England and that the Bank of Englands role as the Governments agent for debt and cash management was being transferred to Treasury. The objectives were to ensure that debt management decisions could not be influenced by, or thought to be influenced by, inside information on interest rate decisions, and to increase transparency in debt and cash management operations. The DMO assumed responsibility for debt management on 1 April 1998 and for cash management on 3 April 2000. As the Governments treasury manager, the DMO aims, with Treasury, to lead, develop and deliver the Governments debt, cash and fund management objectives.The UK Debt Management Office (DMO) was established in April 1998 following an earlier announcement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that responsibility for setting of official interest rates was being transferred from Treasury to the Bank of England and that the Bank of Englands role as the Governments agent for debt and cash management was being transferred to Treasury. The objectives were to ensure that debt management decisions could not be influenced by, or thought to be influenced by, inside information on interest rate decisions, and to increase transparency in debt and cash management operations. The DMO assumed responsibility for debt management on 1 April 1998 and for cash management on 3 April 2000. As the Governments treasury manager, the DMO aims, with Treasury, to lead, develop and deliver the Governments debt, cash and fund management objectives.

    24. Case Study: United Kingdom Recent additional responsibilities: supporting additional issues of the National Savings and Investments Guaranteed Equity Bond by reducing the Government's exposure to the equity market an expansion of the Deposit Facility to allow local authorities to deposit surplus funds with the DMO DMO is now operationally responsible for handling loans to local authorities and for managing funds for some government departments The DMO aims to: 1. Deliver the Governments debt, cash and fund management requirements and local authority lending services efficiently and effectively. 2. Develop and lead with Treasury the strategy on debt, cash and fund management. 3. Develop and drive with Treasury the strategy on the management of the central government financial balance sheet. 4. Advise on and deliver innovative and practical solutions to broader government financial issues. In 2002, the DMO took over operational responsibility for the parts of the former National Investments and Loans Office that handle lending to local authorities and manage funds for other government departments. Therefore, the UK DMO is now moving to the third category on my diagram and potentially to the fourth category.The DMO aims to: 1. Deliver the Governments debt, cash and fund management requirements and local authority lending services efficiently and effectively. 2. Develop and lead with Treasury the strategy on debt, cash and fund management. 3. Develop and drive with Treasury the strategy on the management of the central government financial balance sheet. 4. Advise on and deliver innovative and practical solutions to broader government financial issues. In 2002, the DMO took over operational responsibility for the parts of the former National Investments and Loans Office that handle lending to local authorities and manage funds for other government departments. Therefore, the UK DMO is now moving to the third category on my diagram and potentially to the fourth category.

    25. Asset-Liability Management The third category I have referred to as Asset-Liability Management.The third category I have referred to as Asset-Liability Management.

    26. Asset-Liability Management Focus is on debt issuance and managing debt within a risk management framework Four key characteristics: Full integration of assets and liabilities Full identification of contingent obligations Risk management based on market values with techniques such as VaR Benchmark portfolios and RAPM The major characteristic of this category is the full integration of assets and liabilities including contingent liabilities and a balance sheet risk management approach. There are only a select number of countries that have moved in this direction. The main characteristics are a risk management approach based on full market values using Value-at-Risk methodologies and the widespread use of benchmark portfolios for measuring performance of the debt managers. New Zealand has been particularly innovative in this approach which is the next case study. The major characteristic of this category is the full integration of assets and liabilities including contingent liabilities and a balance sheet risk management approach. There are only a select number of countries that have moved in this direction. The main characteristics are a risk management approach based on full market values using Value-at-Risk methodologies and the widespread use of benchmark portfolios for measuring performance of the debt managers. New Zealand has been particularly innovative in this approach which is the next case study.

    27. Case Study: New Zealand NZDMO established in 1988 and now is a part of the Asset-Liability Branch of Treasury ..to maximise the long-term economic return on the Governments financial assets and debt in the context of the Governments fiscal strategy, particularly its aversion to risk.. Integrated ALM approach Use of VaR and Stop-Loss Limits Transfer pricing ? RAPM Zero net foreign currency debt The Government established the New Zealand Debt Management Office (NZDMO) in July 1988 as a separate Branch in the Treasury. It was integrated into the Asset and Liability Management Branch in 1997, just after net foreign debt was eliminated. NZDMO has pioneered many of the innovations in sovereign debt management, particularly within an asset-liability management framework. You will hear more about this from Philip Combes and Greg Horman from the NZDMO in the plenary session tomorrow morning. One unique characteristic of the New Zealand framework has been the zero net foreign currency position through hedging of foreign exchange reserves. The foreign exchange reserves, which are managed by the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) are immunised by foreign currency debt issued by the NZDMO. The RBNZ specifies the currencies and term structure and then enters into a transaction with the NZDMO to create a RBNZ liability and a Crown asset. This approach is unique across OECD countries and to-date has only be replicated by Canada.The Government established the New Zealand Debt Management Office (NZDMO) in July 1988 as a separate Branch in the Treasury. It was integrated into the Asset and Liability Management Branch in 1997, just after net foreign debt was eliminated. NZDMO has pioneered many of the innovations in sovereign debt management, particularly within an asset-liability management framework. You will hear more about this from Philip Combes and Greg Horman from the NZDMO in the plenary session tomorrow morning. One unique characteristic of the New Zealand framework has been the zero net foreign currency position through hedging of foreign exchange reserves. The foreign exchange reserves, which are managed by the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) are immunised by foreign currency debt issued by the NZDMO. The RBNZ specifies the currencies and term structure and then enters into a transaction with the NZDMO to create a RBNZ liability and a Crown asset. This approach is unique across OECD countries and to-date has only be replicated by Canada.

    28. Case Study: New Zealand Auckland Regional Council typifies new treasury management regime under Local Government Act Minimise the ARCs costs and risks in the management of its borrowings and maximise its return on investments. Liability Management Policy: Debt ratios, limits, borrowing & security Interest rate risk Liquidity management Counterparty credit risk While looking at New Zealand, it is worthwhile covering the recent developments with Local Government treasury management as this has been significant and has established international best practice. The Local Government Act 2002 permits local authorities to borrow in New Zealand dollars, with the debt raised not guaranteed by the Government of New Zealand. However, the Act requires the local authority to have in place amongst others: a revenue and financing policy a liability management policy an investment policy Therefore, each local authority has developed a comprehensive treasury management policy which is fully disclosed during the planning process. For example, details are on their respective website. This transparent approach and level of disclosure and reporting has received positive comments from a number of sources including one of the rating agencies. While looking at New Zealand, it is worthwhile covering the recent developments with Local Government treasury management as this has been significant and has established international best practice. The Local Government Act 2002 permits local authorities to borrow in New Zealand dollars, with the debt raised not guaranteed by the Government of New Zealand. However, the Act requires the local authority to have in place amongst others: a revenue and financing policy a liability management policy an investment policy Therefore, each local authority has developed a comprehensive treasury management policy which is fully disclosed during the planning process. For example, details are on their respective website. This transparent approach and level of disclosure and reporting has received positive comments from a number of sources including one of the rating agencies.

    29. Full Treasury Management The fourth category I have referred to as Full Treasury Management.The fourth category I have referred to as Full Treasury Management.

    30. Full Treasury Management Focus is on providing full treasury services to government and government agencies Four key characteristics: Client servicing Asset-liability management framework Risk management based on market values with techniques such as VaR Benchmark portfolios and RAPM The major characteristic of this category is the inclusion of client servicing through the provision of treasury services to other government agencies and to local authorities. Ireland is one of the few countries to provide these services at central government level, which I will now cover as the next case study. The major characteristic of this category is the inclusion of client servicing through the provision of treasury services to other government agencies and to local authorities. Ireland is one of the few countries to provide these services at central government level, which I will now cover as the next case study.

    31. Case Study: Ireland NTMA established in 1990 as an independent agency ..to fund maturing debt and the annual borrowing requirement of the government in such a way as to protect both short term and long term liquidity, contain the level and volatility of annual fiscal debt service costs, contain the governments exposure to risk and outperform a benchmark.. NTMA has now become the international benchmark for all debt management offices The management of the national debt in Ireland was delegated to the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA) by legislation enacted in 1990. This delegated authority includes issuance, secondary market activity, and all necessary ancillary activity such as for example, arranging for clearing and settlement. The debt management activity of the NTMA relates only to the debt of the central government. The debt of other arms of the government, such as local government authorities, regional health boards and state bodies, remains the responsibility of those bodies, subject to approvals and guidelines issued by the Department of Finance. However, NTMA has additional mandates in these areas.The management of the national debt in Ireland was delegated to the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA) by legislation enacted in 1990. This delegated authority includes issuance, secondary market activity, and all necessary ancillary activity such as for example, arranging for clearing and settlement. The debt management activity of the NTMA relates only to the debt of the central government. The debt of other arms of the government, such as local government authorities, regional health boards and state bodies, remains the responsibility of those bodies, subject to approvals and guidelines issued by the Department of Finance. However, NTMA has additional mandates in these areas.

    32. Case Study: Ireland Recent additional responsibilities: National Pensions Reserve Fund State Claims Agency: The mandate is to manage claims against the State to ensure that the State's liability and associated legal and other expenses are contained at the lowest achievable level. Central Treasury Service: To be offered to Local Authorities, Health Boards, Vocational Education Committees and other public bodies. Fund Investment Services: To be available to Ministers who have funds under their management or control. The NTMA has been empowered to offer a central treasury service, in the form of deposit and loan facilities, as well as treasury advice to a range of designated local authorities, health boards and local education committees. It has also been authorised to advise ministers on the management of funds under their control and, where the requisite authority is delegated, to manage such funds on behalf of that minister. The NTMA currently manages the assets of the Social Insurance Fund under such delegated authority. It has also been mandated to manage the National Pensions Reserve Fund under the direction of the National Pensions Reserve Fund Commissioners who are appointed by the Minister for Finance. Finally, the NTMA is mandated to manage claims against the State to ensure that these liabilities and associated legal and other expenses are contained at the lowest achievable level.The NTMA has been empowered to offer a central treasury service, in the form of deposit and loan facilities, as well as treasury advice to a range of designated local authorities, health boards and local education committees. It has also been authorised to advise ministers on the management of funds under their control and, where the requisite authority is delegated, to manage such funds on behalf of that minister. The NTMA currently manages the assets of the Social Insurance Fund under such delegated authority. It has also been mandated to manage the National Pensions Reserve Fund under the direction of the National Pensions Reserve Fund Commissioners who are appointed by the Minister for Finance. Finally, the NTMA is mandated to manage claims against the State to ensure that these liabilities and associated legal and other expenses are contained at the lowest achievable level.

    33. Australian State Governments QTC: ..to minimise financial risk in the public sector, while sourcing the lowest cost of funds for our customers. TCorp: ..to manage major debt portfolios for the NSW Treasury (the Crown debt portfolio) and 12 agencies to achieve below benchmark cost of funds while observing agreed risk limits. TCV: ..achieving relative certainty of interest costs, while minimising borrowing costs and refinancing risk, and managing the financial and operational risks of the general government sector treasury operations in a prudent manner. I would like to finish the case studies by briefly referring to the Australian State Central Financing Authorities (CFAs). It would seem that the NTMA is adopting many of the services provided by the CFAs. The CFAs were set up in the 1980s to provide full treasury services to the State Government and government agencies. They clearly fit within this last category. They have clear mandates, strong governance structures, and best practice risk management frameworks. For example, TCVs Prudential Supervision policy is based closely on APRA and BIS requirements and will be required to comply with Basle II requirements when these are introduced. You will hear more about liquidity risk management from Fiona McNabb and Chris Sutton from TCV later this morning.I would like to finish the case studies by briefly referring to the Australian State Central Financing Authorities (CFAs). It would seem that the NTMA is adopting many of the services provided by the CFAs. The CFAs were set up in the 1980s to provide full treasury services to the State Government and government agencies. They clearly fit within this last category. They have clear mandates, strong governance structures, and best practice risk management frameworks. For example, TCVs Prudential Supervision policy is based closely on APRA and BIS requirements and will be required to comply with Basle II requirements when these are introduced. You will hear more about liquidity risk management from Fiona McNabb and Chris Sutton from TCV later this morning.

    34. Key Observations I will finish this presentation by providing a few observations from my own experiences and recent consulting assignments.I will finish this presentation by providing a few observations from my own experiences and recent consulting assignments.

    35. High Performing DMOs Clear mandate Strong governance Strong emphasis on risk management Good treasury systems Clear responsibilities Linkage to cash management Last year, I was involved with a study visit to the debt offices in Australia and New Zealand by representatives from the Thailand Public Debt Management Office. During a post-visit review, we identified six key factors that would be needed to become a high performing DMO. These were identified as: a clear mandate and delegated authorities to operate freely within this mandate, subject to limits and controls set by Government a strong governance structure with a Board of Directors or Advisory Board to oversee the operations a strong risk management culture with clear risk management policies, limits, and compliance monitoring good treasury systems to support the operation a clear organisational structure based on segregation of front, middle and back office functions responsibilities of managing debt closely integrated with government cash management and financial assets All six factors certainly differentiated the debt offices or financing authorities from their counterparts in Thailand, and I suspect for most of the countries across Asia-Pacific.Last year, I was involved with a study visit to the debt offices in Australia and New Zealand by representatives from the Thailand Public Debt Management Office. During a post-visit review, we identified six key factors that would be needed to become a high performing DMO. These were identified as: a clear mandate and delegated authorities to operate freely within this mandate, subject to limits and controls set by Government a strong governance structure with a Board of Directors or Advisory Board to oversee the operations a strong risk management culture with clear risk management policies, limits, and compliance monitoring good treasury systems to support the operation a clear organisational structure based on segregation of front, middle and back office functions responsibilities of managing debt closely integrated with government cash management and financial assets All six factors certainly differentiated the debt offices or financing authorities from their counterparts in Thailand, and I suspect for most of the countries across Asia-Pacific.

    36. Key Observations Preservation of sovereign reputation Increasing sophistication on identification and management of risks, including risks with contingent obligations Increasing recognition of expertise to assist in government financial management Potential to provide outsourcing services to government agencies and other countries There are four key observations I will leave you with. Given the sovereign status, one of the highest priorities for all DMOs is the preservation of the reputation of the government in financial markets commensurate with this status. This was certainly imbedded into the culture of the NZDMO. There has been significant progress and innovation in applying standard risk management practices to the management of sovereign debt portfolios. Many of these developments I have covered throughout this presentation. The expertise developed and maintained within the DMO is increasingly being used to assist public sector policymakers in wider areas of financial management. For example, NZDMO and the UK DMO are involved in advising on balance sheet management, particularly with respect to various government unfunded or contingent liabilities. This expertise can be of value to other government agencies as they do not have the resources or skills to manage their treasury activities. This is of course a core function of the CFAs. Could this service be provided to other countries?There are four key observations I will leave you with. Given the sovereign status, one of the highest priorities for all DMOs is the preservation of the reputation of the government in financial markets commensurate with this status. This was certainly imbedded into the culture of the NZDMO. There has been significant progress and innovation in applying standard risk management practices to the management of sovereign debt portfolios. Many of these developments I have covered throughout this presentation. The expertise developed and maintained within the DMO is increasingly being used to assist public sector policymakers in wider areas of financial management. For example, NZDMO and the UK DMO are involved in advising on balance sheet management, particularly with respect to various government unfunded or contingent liabilities. This expertise can be of value to other government agencies as they do not have the resources or skills to manage their treasury activities. This is of course a core function of the CFAs. Could this service be provided to other countries?