Practical considerations

a)      Practical considerations

The imposition of a more stringent capital liquidity law follows already established domestic and internationally recognised policy pathways (Yeh, 2006: 1-12). The risk that such a policy will take longer than expected, or be distorted by some stakeholders is largely tied up with the question of political opponents attempting to block this proposal. The presence of political opposition to increased capital liquidity standards is certainly one large blockade to implementation. Many financial institutions in New Zealand feel already that demands on them to conform to the ten percent minimum are too high (Bollard, 2010: 34). Business interests collated under the umbrella of the ‘Business Roundtable,’ also oppose the more stringent application, for this may mean that less funds are available to them (Bollard, 2010: 34). Indeed, these concerns all have an aspect of truth about them, however if one considers that funds procured from a inflated leverage rate with little to no collateral are, perhaps, not the best idea to begin with, their concerns can be seen to be rather disingenuous. Nonetheless, such opponents are powerful, and still represent a threat to the implementation of this policy. To gain the political support necessary to enact such change, therefore these economic matters must be politicised (Langely, 2004: 77-81). If the RBNZ in conjunction with other institutions could link the ethic of this policy to broader movements around New Zealand, political traction will be gained (de Goede, 2004: 197). The ongoing protest movements against banker greed, and financialisation may find technical legitimisation in such policies as this one (Indiviglio, 2011: 1).[1] to enact this policy the institution responsible for gathering political support must engage with the public and link these esoteric issues with New Zealander’s everyday reality to counter big business interests.