...

Let me summarize the agreed position on a number of important points.

1. Establishment of the enhanced adjustment facility and review of the existing facility

Directors reviewed the existing Structural Adjustment Facility and agreed that it should continue to operate as in the past. The existing facility will continue to be available to eligible members that already have arrangements under the facility as well as to those that have not yet requested use of the facility's resources.

Directors agreed that a new lending facility-the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility-should be established and that it will operate concurrently with the existing Structural Adjustment Facility. The Enhanced Facility will be financed from two Fund-related sources-the Special Disbursement Account and the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility Trust-and will also include the possibility that other lenders might support enhanced structural adjustment arrangements through loans to qualifying members in association with loans under the enhanced facility. For a member qualifying for an arrangement under the enhanced facility, resources will be provided from the Special Disbursement Account to the extent that the member has not exhausted its potential access under the existing facility; resources made available in excess of these amounts will be provided from the Trust and from associated sources.

Until the cutoff date for commitment of resources, eligible members that have not yet made use of the resources of the Structural Adjustment Facility will have the option to request a full three-year arrangement under either the existing facility or the enhanced facility. Members currently making use of the resources of the existing facility may request a new three-year arrangement under the enhanced facility or continue their current arrangement to its conclusion. If a member currently using the resources of the Structural Adjustment Facility chooses to request a new three-year arrangement under the enhanced facility, that request should normally be made at the time of expiration of an annual arrangement under the existing facility. However, earlier replacement of an existing arrangement by a three-year arrangement under the enhanced facility could also be permitted in exceptional cases.

2. Terms and conditions of loans under the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility

Commitments of resources under the enhanced facility will be made upon approval of a three-year arrangement. All commitments and disbursements will be subject to the availability of resources. Commitments may be made at any time until the cutoff date. Most Directors agreed, taking into account the limited period of time during which the resources would be made available by contributors, that the cutoff date should be November 30, 1989. At the same time, most Directors considered that the final date for disbursements should not now be extended beyond June 30, 1992, although it was recognized that maintenance of this date would imply that there would be little flexibility to accommodate delays under annual programs in arrangements that were agreed later in the commitment period. This matter will be kept under review as experience is gained with the facility.

Disbursements from the Special Disbursement Account in conjunction with enhanced structural adjustment arrangements will be provided under the financial terms applying to loans under the existing facility, as amended. To the extent possible, the financial terms applying to loans from the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility Trust will be the same as those under the existing facility. In particular, it was agreed that the maturities of loans will be five and a half to ten years. Most Directors also believed that it would be appropriate to set the initial interest rate charged on loans from the Trust at 0.5 percent per annum, even if the amount of firmly committed resources in the Subsidy Account was initially not fully sufficient for this purpose, but additional resources were confidently expected. These Directors indicated that if it appeared, because of inadequate contributions or future adverse developments in interest or exchange rates, that resources available or committed to the Subsidy Account were likely to be insufficient to maintain the rate of interest at 0.5 percent throughout the period of operation of the Trust, the Fund should seek the additional resources necessary to achieve this objective. This issue is to be kept under review, and the interest rate will be adjusted as necessary at the beginning of each six-month interest period whenever resources available to the Subsidy Account are judged insufficient to maintain a rate of 0.5 percent on loans under the enhanced facility.

The intended terms for the Trust's lending, with which you have agreed, determine the essential features of the borrowing arrangements that will have to be concluded by the Fund as Trustee for the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility Trust and the lenders to it. These have been set out in a prototype circulated to potential lenders and annexed to EBS/87/245. While there will need to be comparability in substance among agreements, there will no doubt need to be alterations to the form and structure of this prototype to meet the particular legal and institutional requirements of individual lenders, and we will be flexible in meeting these requirements. There was further discussion of the security to be provided to the claims on the Trust. Directors accepted that the proposals that had been put forward to safeguard the resources lent to the Trust were adequate to provide the necessary assurance to potential creditors. Although noting the views of some Directors, I have repeated that the phrase "all such initiatives as might be necessary" had to be understood to include the possible use of gold.

I should also comment on a few specific financial issues raised in the papers. First, most Directors did not favor the inclusion of a provision on rescheduling because, inter alia, it was considered that this would create undue complications in light of the limited period for which resources were being committed by contributors and also because it was felt that such a provision could threaten the integrity of the Reserve that most contributors find to be an essential component of the facility. Second, most Directors did not find it appropriate to provide for temporary encashment of claims through the use of the Reserve, given the relatively small amounts that will be available in the early years and the importance of the Reserve as security for claims. Third, it appeared generally acceptable to most Directors that the provision for temporary suspension of calls should apply to all lenders. I should note in this connection that we appreciate the position of several contributors who are providing support to the enhanced facility, despite a very difficult balance of payments situation of their own.

3. Framework for lending under the Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility

Resources to be made available under the enhanced facility will be committed upon Board approval of a three-year arrangement and disbursements will be made semiannually in accordance with the provisions specified in annual arrangements. The preparation of policy framework papers will be an essential element of the enhanced facility, and the policy framework process will be strengthened to reflect the summing up of the June 1987 review of the structural adjustment facility (EBM/87/93, 6/19/87), as well as continuing discussions with eligible recipient countries, the World Bank, and the interested donors.

Directors were in broad agreement that the objectives of programs under the enhanced facility should be to promote, in a balanced manner, both balance of payments viability and growth through mobilization of domestic and external resources, improvements in resource allocation, and the removal of structural impediments. Such programs should involve a substantial effort to strengthen the external payments position in a sustainable manner, and in particular to assure substantial progress during the three-year program period toward an overall position and structure of the balance of payments that is consistent with orderly relations with creditors and a reduction in restrictions on trade and payments, while permitting the timely servicing of obligations to the Fund.

Directors agreed that monitoring of enhanced programs supported by arrangement under the enhanced facility will be conducted through benchmarks. Most Directors favored the establishment of quarterly quantitative benchmarks for the key financial variables, and the use of structural benchmarks to monitor implementation of the most important structural policy measures. Most Directors supported the establishment of some benchmarks, including, where appropriate, some structural benchmarks, as semiannual performance criteria in all cases. In addition, midyear reviews will also be required in most cases. I have fully noted the reservations expressed by a number of Directors regarding the treatment of benchmarks as performance criteria, and I assure you that performance criteria will be limited in number and will generally involve only a subset of the benchmarks. Similarly, prior actions will be required sparingly, but when necessary to lay the basis for a long or difficult adjustment process, and particularly where arrangements involve a front-loading of disbursements. In the event of a substantial delay in completion of a midyear review or in agreeing on an annual program, the total amount of resources to be made available to a member could be reduced or rephased over the remaining period of the arrangement.

Most Directors agreed that access to the resources of the enhanced facility will be differentiated according to the strength of the member's adjustment program and its financing need. The structure of the member's external debt and its prospective debt service burden, along with the expected evolution of other macroeconomic aggregates, will be important elements in this assessment. Directors generally agreed that access under three-year enhanced structural adjustment arrangements will be subject to a maximum limit of 250 percent of quota. However, Directors stressed again that the access limits do not constitute entitlements, and they agreed that access should normally be below the maximum and that the guidelines should be applied so that the rate of access for all qualifying members would average about 150 percent of quota. It was also indicated that, in highly exceptional circumstances, the maximum could be exceeded, but it was not envisaged that access would exceed 350 percent of quota even in these cases. These access limits, along with the operation of both the enhanced facility and the existing facility, will be subject to review in light of experience and the utilization of the available resources.

Directors agreed that the amount of resources committed to an individual qualifying member under a three-year enhanced structural adjustment arrangement and the amounts for the second- and third-year arrangements will be reviewed at the time of consideration of each annual program. However, most Directors indicated that, subject to the availability of resources, the amounts committed to a member would not normally be reduced because of developments in its balance of payments. However, in the event that balance of payments developments were markedly more favorable than envisaged at the time of approval of the three-year arrangement, and particularly because of improvements in the external environment, it would be suggested that the member reduce voluntarily its use of enhanced resources, either by requesting lower access at the time of approval of an annual arrangement or by forgoing in whole or in part a midyear disbursement.

Directors agreed that disbursements of loans under enhanced structural adjustment arrangements will be made semiannually, upon approval of an annual arrangement, and subsequently, on the basis of observance of performance criteria and, in most cases, completion of a midyear review. A range of views was expressed regarding the possibility of a limited front-loading of disbursements in some cases. Nonetheless, there seems to be a consensus that, subject to the availability of resources, the guideline should be that a uniform distribution of disbursements would be preferable and that any front-loading should not result in first-year disbursements exceeding 40 percent of the total amount to be made available under the three-year enhanced structural adjustment arrangement. However, I take it that there may be scope for a higher first-year disbursement in some very exceptional cases. Existing policies regarding members with overdue obligations to the Fund will be retained; how best to deal with cases of large and protracted arrears is a question to which we will return soon, but in a different context.

4. Relationship with other Fund facilities

Directors noted that members qualifying for loans under the enhanced structural adjustment facility would retain eligibility for access to the Fund's general resources. Access to those resources will have to be examined carefully on a case-by-case basis, taking into account a range of factors envisaged in the present guidelines, including past performance and use of Fund resources, terms, the possible availability of financing from the enhanced facility and other sources, and the speed and time profile of the anticipated balance of payments adjustment.