speeches · December 11, 1985
Speech
Paul A. Volcker · Chair
For release on delivery
9;30 A.M., E.S.T.
December 12, 1985
Statement by
Paul A. Volcker
Chairman, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
before the
Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy
of the
Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs
House of Representatives
December 12, 1985
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you
questions relating to the operational problems experienced by
the Bank of New York on November 21 and the response of the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York. My remarks will be
relatively brief. Mr. Corrigan, President of the New York
Federal Reserve Bank, who was on the scene and here with you
today, is in a position to review the specific facts and the
Federal Reserve response to the events as they unfolded in full
detail.
The settlement problem which resulted in the
$22.6 billion loan to the Bank of New York was caused by a
computer system software failure. The effects in this instance
were of unprecedented magnitude, measured by the amount of the
overnight loan. But the effects in terms of market performance
and risk were well contained.
It is also true that more limited computer
interruptions, either at private participants or at one of the
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-2-
Reserve Banks, are not unusual* The impact is typically small,
reflected only in temporary delays of minutes or hours in
operations or in final settlement for a day's work* This time,
the interruption was much more prolonged, extending overnight.
Consequently, potentially serious implications for the payments
system and the securities markets were highlighted although
they were avoided in this instance.
Since Mr. Corrigan will be reviewing in some detail
the particular circumstances surrounding the BONY borrowing, I
will simply turn to some of the policy issues.
Like it or not, computers and their software
systems — with the possibility of mechanical or human
failure -- are an integral part of the payments mechanism. The
scale and speed of transactions permit no other approach. It
is therefore appropriate to ask what type of backup systems —
both hardware and software — and controls should be required
of participants in the payments system, especially those with
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-3-
potentially large exposures measured relative to assets,
capital, and any other measures.
That is a question that must in the first instance be
faced by each participant* Those participants, however, also
face intense competitive pressures to minimize costs and cash
balances. As participants in and regulators of the payments
system, the Federal Reserve has the responsibility to see to it
that there is a countervailing pressure to provide protection
against unacceptable risks for the system as a whole.
In approaching that question, the Federal Reserve has
tried to identify and assess the risks facing participants in
the payments and settlement mechanisms, how these risks
interact, and what can be done to limit them in a
cost-effective way.
For some years, the Federal Reserve has been actively
encouraging participants to adopt measures and policies to
limit risk in payments and settlement systems and we are
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-4-
reinforcing our own computer facilities, including back-up
systems. After long discussions with other interested parties,
the Federal Reserve Board earlier this year, in May, issued a
policy statement addressing certain problems in this area.
That statement called upon participants in private funds
transfer systems — including the so-called CHIP1s system which
handles some hundred thousand individual international payments
transactions, valued at several hundred billion dollars, per
day — to better evaluate and control risks inherent in large
scale automated transfers. We also announced at that time
measures to control and reduce so-called "daylight overdrafts11
on our own books -- overdrafts which occur when, in the course
of a day, a bank exhausts its reserve balance with a Federal
Reserve Bank.
In the last analysis, no mechanical system can be
entirely "fail-safe" and also be commercially viable. The
costs would simply be too high, and the money and Treasury
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-5-
securities markets could not operate at the present level of
efficiency. Nor can key clearing operations be easily closed
down in the middle of a day without potentially impacting
severely on markets and third parties, sowing confusion at the
least, and at worst a chain reaction of losses. In these
circumstances, the importance of institutions having access to
the discount window is evident; in this instance, we could
extend credit with the knowledge that we were dealing with a
known and reputable depository institution, supervised by
federal authorities.
The discount window advance to the BONY was, by any
measure, enormous, but the collateral in our hands — U.S.
Government securities that had been delivered to us for the
account of BONY — was sound and the Reserve Bank also had
further security from BONY. The market could and did proceed
with its business, with minimal disruption. In contrast, had
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York refused to make payments
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-6-
on behalf of BONY as it received government securities for its
account, other market participants would have found themselves
short of cash, other banks and their customers presumably would
have been forced into overdraft, and requests for discount
window assistance, and financial pressures, would have appeared
elsewhere.
A question about the interest rate charged BONY for
the use of the discount window in this circumstance is entirely
appropriate. I have been assured, and Mr. Corrigan will
explain more fully, that the net result of all financial
transactions between the Federal Reserve and BONY was to offset
fully the "subsidy" arising from the fact that the discount
rate was below the federal funds rate prevailing that day.
Those particular results were, however, fortuitous.
At the same time, BONY did incur substantial expenses because
it had to finance overnight some $25 billion of securities,
upon which it received no interest. Notwithstanding that
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
circumstance, a special penalty rate, designed to encourage
better backup systems, when exceptionally large borrowing is
caused by the institution1 s own computer problems may well be
appropriate. Over time we will also be reviewing, as already
contemplated, our policies toward tolerable levels of daylight
overdrafts.
Your letter, Mr* Chairman, also asks whether the
Federal Reserve itself should play a larger role directly in
clearing securities — as a priced service — in order to
reduce the overall risks to the System. That, frankly, is an
area in which we would be extremely reluctant to enter, but we
will be glad to provide further analysis of the advantages and
disadvantages.
I believe it would be wrong to over-dramatize this
incident. There was a serious operational problem which
illustrated some potential vulnerabilities in the clearing
mechanism. But it is also true that the problem could be dealt
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-8-
with effectively within our present arrangements — in that
sense the system did, in this instance, prove "fail-safe." The
overnight loan, huge as it was, was fully secured, with an
ample margin of protection.
But the incident is also indicative of the relevance
of our continuing efforts — and that of the banks — to
control risk in the payments system and of effective
supervision of the participants. That work may seem mundane
and tedious — that is, until something goes wrong. Then, it
is also seen as essential.
* * * **
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Cite this document
APA
Paul A. Volcker (1985, December 11). Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/speech_19851212_volcker
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_speech_19851212_volcker,
author = {Paul A. Volcker},
title = {Speech},
year = {1985},
month = {Dec},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/speech_19851212_volcker},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}