Summary of submissions
We recently consulted on a new risk assessment framework proposed to evaluate applications to open an ESAS account with us. The consultation is part of an access review of our Exchange Settlement Account System (ESAS) to consider eligibility changes.
Feedback was largely positive and shows considerable demand, mainly for Non-Bank Deposit Takers (NBDTs) for access to ESAS for OCR and liquidity purposes only. NBDTs want direct access to an ESAS account as they currently have to hold funds with ESAS account holders, which get the financial benefit.
Read the summary of submissions (PDF, 464 KB)
We expect to publish submissions later in the year.
The feedback warrants further research to determine the opportunities and risks of enabling membership of ESAS for the specific purpose of having an OCR account.
It is vital that ESAS maintains its high level of integrity and reliability so any decisions on changes to the access criteria need to take into account any undue risk to the payments system that broadening access may cause. We will provide updates on decisions on how we will proceed.
We are working on the review’s second consultation which will propose a revised ESAS access policy and criteria requirements and will publish this and invite feedback from early 2024.
About the consultation
We asked for feedback on the ESAS access Risk Assessment Framework (RAF) proposed to form part of our revised ESAS access policy and criteria.
An important part of how we apply the access policy is assessing risks that may be introduced into the system by the ESAS applicant. We would use the RAF to evaluate the risks that an ESAS applicant may pose to the system if they were accepted to become an account holder. The draft framework considers CPMI-IOSCO's Principles for Financial Market Infrastructure (PFMI) in capturing the risks relevant for a systemically important payment system such as ESAS.
Read the consultation paper (PDF, 890 KB)
All information in submissions will be made public unless you indicate you would like all or part of your submission to remain confidential. Respondents who would like part of their submission to remain confidential should provide both a confidential and public version of their submission. Apart from redactions of the information to be withheld (blacking out of text) the two versions should be identical. Respondents should ensure that redacted information is not able to be recovered electronically from the document (the redacted version may be published as received).
Respondents who request that all or part of their submission be treated as confidential should provide reasons why this information should be withheld if a request is made for it under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). These reasons should refer to the grounds for withholding information under the OIA. If an OIA request for redacted information is made the Reserve Bank will make its own assessment of what must be released taking into account the respondent’s views.
The Reserve Bank may also publish an anonymised summary of the submissions received in respect of this consultation.