Transcript of IMF Press Briefing

Transcript of IMF Press Briefing

July 14, 2022

MR. RICE: Well, good morning everyone. Welcome to this Press Briefing on
behalf of the International Monetary Fund. I’m Gerry Rice of the
Communication Department and as usual, our briefing this morning will be
embargoed until 10:30 a.m., that’s Washington time. Let me make a few quick
announcements and then turn to your questions. Great to see so many
colleagues on the screen here. And I’ve got some online as well, we’ll take
as many as we can today. So several announcements – Kristalina Georgieva,
the Managing Director is in Indonesia for the meeting of the G20 Finance
Ministers and Central Bank Governors, which is taking place there as I’m
sure you know. You will have seen her blog published yesterday as her
preview from the Fund’s perspective of the G20 agenda, so I know many of
you reported on that. And from there, she will move on to Japan, and she
will be meeting with officials and speak at the 25th Anniversary of the
IMF’s Regional Office there in Tokyo and will be posting that for you.
We’ll keep you apprised indeed of all that she’s doing on this Asia trip. I
want to remind you –- I know it’s on your calendars, that the update on our
World Economic Outlook will be on July 26^th –- Tuesday, July 26 ^th at 9:00 o’clock and that will be with our Chief Economist,
the Fund’s Economic Counselor, Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas. Pierre-Olivier
will have a press conference with you on that day, and you’ll be able to
join it via IMF.org, social media and so on. That’s July 26^th -–
that’s the WEO update, okay guys. Finally, we announced earlier this week
that the annual meetings which will be from October 10th to October 16 ^th. I know it seems far away, but as you also know it comes up
very quickly, but we did announce earlier this week that the Annual
Meetings this year will take place in person. So, these are the first
in-person meetings since the pandemic.So look forward to seeing you all at
the annual meetings in D.C. in person. That would — really will be that’s
something very, very nice to see all of you. Okay, that’s it on the
announcements. So let me turn to your questions. I want to turn to first of
all, Olivier RO from RFI -– Radio Rogez from Radio France International
because he’s joining us for the first time. He’s having a little bit of
difficulty with his —- I can see him there but he’s having a little bit of
difficulty with his camera, and I think with his microphone. I don’t think
you can come in, Olivier in which case you’ve just sent your questions and
I’ll take them. One is on debt. And Olivier’s asking, what’s blocking
progress for the three countries that have asked for more than a year to be
part of the G20 common framework, and why a year after no decision has been
taken on the restructuring of their debt. So that’s Olivier’s question.
He’s got a second question I will come to in a moment on the resilience and
sustainability trust, and I will take your question on that too Olivier.
But I want to ask because I know it’s very much on you minds. Does anyone
else have a question on debt or on the common framework, or the three
countries that Olivier refers to which as you know are Chad, Zambia and
Ethiopia. If you have a question on that please come in. I see David.
David, come on in. Anyone else just raise your hand and we’ll take a
cluster on these questions on that. David.

QUESTIONER: Hi Jerry. Thanks, good to see you after so many weeks. So,
there are a lot of meetings here. There’s finally some move here to Chad,
Ethiopia, and Zambia. Just wondering if you can give us an update on those
talks. You know, there was an earlier meeting for Chad on Wednesday. Do you
anticipate that there will be some sort of contingency arrangement based on
the price of oil? Because some of the creditors have been concerned that,
because of the high price of oil, they think Chad may no longer need a
restructuring. And if you could also comment on the other recent scandal in
Chad over embezzlement of funds from the National Oil Company, if that is a
factor in these talks. On Ethiopia, you know, there’s been some indication
that the United States has been an impediment to the deal there because of
its concerns about the ongoing civil war and so, you know, what is
realistic to expect from a creditor meeting on Monday. And then Zambia also
another meeting on Monday. Are you expecting official creditors to make
some commitments necessary to unlock IMF funding there. Thank you.

MR. RICE: Thanks David. Very comprehensive –-

QUESTIONER: Lot’s to get through.

MR. RICE: Very comprehensive. Anyone else want to come in on this one? Yes,
Shabtai, hi. Good to see you Shabtai. Good to see you the other day.
Fantastic event at Devex. Congratulations.

QUESTIONER: Thank you very much. David asked a lot of what I was going to
ask and more, but I’ll just add that there are some countries like Ghana
that are now coming to the IMF for different types of assistance.
Obviously, these talks are going to take some time. I was curious if the
IMF has any ability to do any fast disbursements for these countries, so
that they can get over the immediate hurdles and not face serious balance
of payment crisis. And then Secretary Yellen this morning called out China
specifically on the common framework saying, you know, they she’s not
seeing real progress. I was wondering if that’s going to be on the Managing
Director’s agenda at the G20 as well. Sort of get China to do more on debt
relief.

MR. RICE: Thanks, Shabtai. Simon, welcome. Simon, not hearing you. You may
have to switch on.

QUESTIONER: Okay, great.

MR. RICE: Gotha, yep.

QUESTIONER: Good. So, thank you for taking my question. This is Simon Ateba
at Today News Africa and Washington. On Ethiopia, I just wanted to know how
you approach the situation. Do you need to wait until the civil war is over
or do you –- I just want to understand, to, you know, how you approach it
and then I have other questions. I don’t know if I can ask them now or wait
for you to come back.

MR. RICE: Okay Simon. Anyone else on this clutch of issues in countries.
Otherwise, I can give you what I’ve got. Good. So, broadly to begin with on
debt again, I want to refer to what Kristalina Georgieva has been saying in
recent days including this Devex event where we were with Shabtai. And
including in the blog yesterday. If you haven’t seen it, what she’s been
saying on debt really warning of the serious potential challenges facing
the world on the debt front. But she said in the blog we need decisive
actions now and she said time is not on our side, and she was urging large
lenders, both sovereign and private to step up and play their part. So, you
know, I think that was kind of a response to some of the issues that you’ve
been raising. More specifically, again we’ve been saying that a third of
emerging markets and developing economies are in debt distress, and for
low-income countries it’s worse than that. It’s actually nearly twice as
high, it’s 60 percent. So, the risk of debt crisis is increasing again as
the Managing Director has been warning and urgency is the word. No time for
complacency. And she will certainly be bringing that message to the G20 as
it meets over these next couple of days. So, what can I tell you on the
three specific countries that David and others mentioned. Let me just -–
I’ll tell you what I have, and you can follow-up though I don’t really have
much more on the specifics of the countries. But the three creditor
committees for Chad, for Zambia and Ethiopia are all set to meet in the
coming days, this month. And I think Kristalina Georgieva was the first one
to indicate that that was happening and that is happening. So let me just
go through them quickly. On Chad, again as Olivier said it was one of the
first countries to request a debt treatment. I can say that progress has
been made in our discussions with Chad on the overall macroeconomic
framework and reforms that could underly the first review of the program,
the extended credit facility that we have with Chad but that’s staff level
agreement, which as you know is a crucial first step, remains conditioned
on sufficient financing assurances as is the case with all our programs,
and that includes an agreement on the necessary debt treatment.

Again, consistent with Fund Program parameters, we need financing
assurances, and we need assurance on debt sustainability. So, the Creditor
Committee on Chad, we expect to continue to meet. We think it’s essential.
Again, that an agreement be reached promptly with all creditors, including
Glenn Core to allow us to submit this first review under the ongoing
arrangement that we have with Chad, and we’d then be able to put that to
our Executive Board as soon as we possibly can, and try and provide the
necessary financial support that Chad needs in this time of crisis. So,
again, those of you who follow the Fund, you understand what I’m saying
here. The staff-level agreement followed by approval of our Board is
standard procedure. So, that’s on Chad.

On Zambia, a second meeting of Zambia’s Creditor Committee we expect to
take place in the next week or so, and if official creditors can succeed in
providing the financing assurances, again, to Zambia within the next few
weeks, we can then take that to our Board for consideration of a program;
and, you know, that could happen very soon after our Board recess, which is
the first couple of weeks in August. So, we would be looking at probably
around early September for that. Again, provided these steps are taken.
That’s on Zambia.

On Ethiopia: well, we welcome that the Creditor Committee has been formed
for Ethiopia, again, under this G20 common framework, and we have been and
will continue to work closely to provide the needed technical support to
the work of that Creditor Committee for Ethiopia and, specifically, we will
meet with the Creditor Committee for Ethiopia the week of July 18th to
update them what we see as the economic situation in Ethiopia. I know a
number of you were asking about the political circumstances, and so on in
Ethiopia. I don’t have anything on that, but we will be updating on the
economic situation for Ethiopia with the Creditor Committee for that
country the week of July 18.

That’s all I have on the three countries. You can follow up, but I can tell
now, I really don’t have much more than that, but you’re welcome to follow
up.

Shabtai asked about Ghana, in addition to those three countries. Shabtai,
you may have seen the statement we issued last night on Ghana. I see that
you did; good. So, I’m not going to repeat. It’s a fairly comprehensive
statement. I’m not going to repeat all that’s in there, Shabtai; but,
essentially, for those of you who haven’t seen it, we had been in
discussions with Ghana. They have requested an IMF program to support their
homegrown economic program. We did have an IMF staff mission in Accra from
July 6 through yesterday, the 13th; and then, as we pretty much always do,
we issued an end-of-mission statement. So, we’re at an early stage with
Ghana in the discussions for a program, and those discussions will
continue. I refer you to the ‑‑ I can say more but I’d really just be
repeating what’s in a very comprehensive statement on Ghana, and it’s right
there on the website.

Shabtai added to his question. Well, can the IMF do more, and can you do
something faster? So, you know, just a reminder that in this crisis over
the last couple of years, we have moved faster in an unprecedented way for
the IMF in terms of speed with our emergency financing, with our direct
debt relief and, of course, there was the SDR allocation less than a year
ago.

So, you know, we’re doing as much as we can, looking to do as much as we
can, Shabtai, and I’m sure you’re watching almost, you know, on a
week-by-week, and sometimes day-by-day basis. There’s plenty of action,
plenty of support going to countries from the IMF just in recent days.
Moldova, the $171 million to Senegal, the $456 million to Mozambique, the
$638 million recently to Benin. And, of course, emergency financing through
our facilities can still be provided when members face urgent balance of
payment problems and, what we call, and upper-traded trench regular program
is either not feasible or not necessary. But just to say, this is not a
static situation, we’re really moving every day, and I’ve just given a few
examples there of the types of support we’ve been providing.

We’ve taken a bit of time on this. It’s an important, it’s a crucial issue.
I’m sure it will feature; it will loom large at the G20.

Does anyone want to come back on that common framework? If not, I’ll leave
it there and let me just take Olivier’s other question. I’ll try and take
it quickly and then I’ll come to Argentina because I see a number of
colleagues raising their hands.

But, again, Olivia’s asking on the RST, how does it work? What’s the
timeline? Where are you on funding, et. cetera. So, again, Olivier, there’s
actually a lot of information on our website on the RST. There’s a really
good Q&A and you can find a lot of the stuff there. But, you are
correct. This is a very important, we think, new instrument for the IMF.
We’ve never had anything like this before, focused on the macro-critical
challenges facing countries, but the longer-term structural challenges with
macroeconomic implications, we have not had that kind of instrument.
Before, the IMF, as you know, normally, does short-term financing. So, this
is new and it’s focused on resilience, sustainability issues. Most notably,
climate change, pandemic preparedness, but other issues too. It covers a
wide range of countries, certainly low and vulnerable low-income countries,
but also vulnerable middle-income countries and fragile states undertaking
structural reforms. It covers, we estimate, about three-quarters of our
membership. That’s three-quarters of 190.

As I said, long-term financing, this is new. Twenty-year maturity,
10-1/2-year grace period, and low interest rates, and eligibility is high
quality policy measures, a concurrent financing or non-financing
arrangement with the IMF, sustainable debt ‑‑ I mentioned that earlier.
That’s true of all of our programs. And, you know, capacity to repay the
fund. All of that, again, standard stuff for our other programs.

We aim for the RST to leverage additional financing, not just IMF financing
from official and non-official sources. Where do we stand on funding? Our
initial aspiration is to get to $45 billion. We stand at close to $40. We
are at $37 billion, about $37 billion right now, and we’re hoping to get to
the $45 really soon. And, when will it all kick in? We aim to start RST
lending by around the time of our annual meetings in the Fall. So, it’s not
far away. It’s coming up in the early part of October. Again, depending on
securing the sufficient funding, but the bottom line is very good progress
on the RST, on this new instrument. Thanks for the question.

Colleagues from Argentina. I see Liliana. I see Raphael. Liliana. And I see
Juan Manuel. Hi, guys. Come on in. Liliana, you first.

QUESTIONER: Okay, thank you. Thank you, Gerry. While we have a new Minister
of Economies, Silvina Batakis, and my question is did the Minister,
Batakis, discuss with the IMF staff to change the goals agreed in the
program. I’m referring as an example, for instance, the fiscal goal to
reduce the fiscal deficit to 2.5. Are conversations going ahead in this
point? Thank you, Gerry.

MR. RICE: Thank you, Lilliana. Raphael or Juan Manuel, do you want to add?

QUESTIONER: Yes, thanks, Gerry. Two questions. MD Georgieva said in an
interview with Reuters that some painful actions might be needed. I was
hoping you could clarify what exactly did she mean by painful actions. And
a second question. Does the IMF still categorize Argentina’s program as
credible and realistic? Are you sticking with that characterization of the
program? Thanks.

MR. RICE: Hey, thanks, Raphael. Nice to see you. Juan Manuel, come on in.

QUESTIONER: Hi, Gerry, and everyone. Well, the first question. What can we
know about the second quarterly review of Argentina’s program; and,
secondly, similar to what Raphael asked, the new minister of the economy
announced this week a plan, a fiscal plan. So, my question is: are these
measures match with the need of painful actions mentioned by the Managing
Director, Kristalina Georgieva?

MR. RICE: Thanks, Juan Manuel. I\’m seeing Patricia. Hi, Patricia. Come on
in.

QUESTIONER: Hi, Gerry. Also, in tune with my colleagues, I would like to
ask if there is a meeting coming up, agreed to meet the new members of the
Argentine economic team? And when can we expect the next review?

MR. RICE: Good. Thanks, Patricia. Rodrigo, are you looking to come in on
Argentina? I see your hand raised. Is this on Argentina or something else?

QUESTIONER: Thank you, Gerry. Anything I had on Argentina my colleagues
asked. I want to ask about Ukraine. So, you can come back to me later.

MR. RICE: All right. I\’ll come back to you then, Rodrigo, yes. So, thanks,
guys, for that clutch of questions on Argentina. Let me give you what I
have.

So, last week, just within the past week, our Managing Director, Kristalina
Georgieva, and our Director for the Western Hemisphere Department, whom you
all know, Ilan Goldfajn, they each had calls with Minister Batakis. And the
Managing Director issued a short statement after her call. She
characterized it as a very good call with the Minister where they discussed
the implementation of the ongoing program, Argentina\’s program, supported
by the IMF. And the way she put it was we\’re looking forward to continuing
our constructive engagement to promote economic stability and inclusive
growth in Argentina in this very challenging global environment that
Argentina and pretty much every country is facing right now.

I can add to that, again, responding to some of your questions. I hope that
our staff, team on Argentina, including our resident representative in
Buenos Aires are already engaging with the Minister and her technical team.
As you know, and as some of you mentioned, the Minister recently and
publicly reiterated her commitment to implement the Fund supported program
and the agreed program objectives.

And the announced measures referred to by the Minister are consistent with
the objectives of the program that had been agreed to strengthen
macroeconomic stability and begin tackling Argentina\’s deep seated
challenges, specifically in what the Minister said, we welcome efforts to
strengthen expenditure controls, tax compliance, and public debt management
coordination. So, we continue to engage with the Minister and her team as
they work to implement their economic program that\’s supported by the Fund.

Someone asked, maybe it was Juan Manuel, about the second review and that\’s
expected to take place in September. And we will communicate about that in
due course.

So, the bottom line I think is, you know, questions were asked about where
is the program? Are the objectives still the same? Is it realistic, and so
on? To which, you know, I would just refer to what I\’ve just said and what
the Minister has said, that the objectives remain. And I would, again,
repeat that we have had a very positive initial engagement with the
Minister. And we look forward to continuing to work constructively to
achieve the agreed objectives. And that\’s where the focus of the
discussions is, and those discussions are ongoing.

Martin, you didn\’t get a chance. Come on in. Martin. Martin, did you want
to come in on Argentina? Martin Canasberger (phonetic), can you hear me? I
thought I saw your hand raised, Martin. You\’re having trouble so, okay.
We\’ll come back to Martin.

I\’m going to turn to Maoling I think has a question on China. Martin, I\’ll
come back to you. I see your. Maoling?

QUESTIONER: Hi. Thank you, Gerry, very much for taking my question. I want
to ask about the Chinese economy because it has been hurt badly by the
lockdowns related to COVID-19. I was wondering whether the IMF has some
suggestions for Chinese policy makers in terms of how to handle the economy
under the current circumstances.

MR. RICE: Thank you, Maoling. I heard you loud and clear. I also heard an
echo of myself. I hope everything — I hope you\’re able to hear things
clearly, everybody. If you have a problem, let me know. And Martin, I\’ll
try and come back to you.

On Maoling\’s question about China, and she was asking about the economic
impact of the lockdowns and IMF\’s ongoing advice on the economy. So,
clearly, a key issue in the short term, given the large impact the recent
lockdowns had on economic activity in China, is for macroeconomic policy to
step up and meet the challenge of the slowing growth momentum that we are
seeing in China. And in that context, we welcome the shift to a more
expansionary fiscal policy this year.

But even more support would help counter the ongoing growth slowdown. This
fiscal support would be particularly effective, in our view, if focused on
vulnerable households through transfers and strengthening of the social
protection system. In addition, given low core inflation and a still
negative output gap, our view is that the Peoples Bank of China should
continue to provide monetary support. The reduction in key policy rates
earlier this year helps lower borrowing costs, strengthens investment. It\’s
a welcome step towards interest rate based accommodative policy.

But, — and coming a bit more directly to your question, Maoling — but the
lockdowns also emphasize the importance of continuing to adjust China\’s
zero-COVID strategy. In particular, mitigating the disruption to economic
activity from COVID would require ramping up booster shots and targeting
the under-vaccinated elderly. This should eventually allow adjusting the
containment strategy to become more flexible and less restrictive. That\’s
what I have for you, Maoling, on China.

I am seeing Heather Scott asking about — Heather\’s got a couple of things.
But Heather\’s asking about Sri Lanka. Heather Scott, AFP. What are the
prospects for aid for Sri Lanka given the political upheaval? Is the Fund
considering any emergency bridge financing to help deal with the immediate
crisis? Sri Lanka, much in the news. Let me ask if anyone else has a
question on Sri Lanka and I\’ll try and take a clutch of them. Matthew, hi.

QUESTIONER: Yeah, sure. Thanks a lot. I\’ve been wanting to ask this. I
mean, given the turmoil in the country and President — or not-President
Gotabaya Rajapaksa now reportedly being in Singapore, I guess I wondered if
you could specifically, what\’s the relationship? Does this have to shake
itself out, including the Prime Minister\’s role, before the IMF can do
anything? What is — I know you often say you won\’t speak to political
things, but this is kind of an extraordinary situation in which, you know,
people are swimming in the presidential swimming pool. They held a mock IMF
session in the presidential palace.

What is the sort of minimum of political stability that the IMF would see?
Who are they talking to, I guess? That\’s my question on Sri Lanka.

MR. RICE: Right. Good question. Anyone else coming in on Sri Lanka or wants
to? Okay. Then I will take the couple of questions we have from Heather and
from Matthew.

So, like everyone else we are, of course, deeply concerned about the
ongoing crisis, it\’s impact on the Sri Lankan people, and particularly the
poor and the vulnerable groups in Sri Lanka. Again, like everyone else,
we\’re closely monitoring the political and the social developments there.

We hope for a resolution of the current situation that would allow for our
resumption of a dialogue on an IMF supported program. You may recall that
in June, less than a month ago, things are moving so fast, but less than a
month ago there was an IMF staff team in Colombo. And we did have
discussions, actually, constructive discussions with the authorities on a
set of economic policies and reforms that could be supported by,
potentially by an IMF program. We don\’t have a program with Sri Lanka right
now. But we were discussing what could be a program.

Clearly, the political and the social emergency situation I guess we could
characterize it and we all see what\’s happening, you described it, Matthew,
has, you know, interrupted those discussions and we hope to resume as soon
as possible. In the meantime, you asked, you know, who we\’re talking to,
Matthew. We do have technical counterparts still in, you know, some of the
key ministries in the central bank and the Ministry of Finance. So, we are
able to continue discussions there.

But the, you know, the high-level discussions with the authorities that we
would need to begin discussions on a program, we hope again, that these
would be able to resume as soon as possible. So, you know, looking to do
all we can in just an extraordinary difficult situation.

Heather, I don’t have anything about emergency or bridge financing. You
know, as I just described, we were having these discussions with Sri Lanka.
And we hope to resume them as soon as the situation has stabilized a bit.
And, of course, an important part of those discussions is the debt
situation. Sri Lanka\’s public debt is assessed as unsustainable and as is
the case with every IMF program, not just the case of Sri Lanka, for
approval by the Board. And we are not at that stage, but for approval by
the Board, a program would require adequate assurances on debt
sustainability. So, that\’s what I have on this, you know, situation that\’s
of great concern in Sri Lanka.

Heather had a question on Pakistan. I\’m going to come back online in a
minute. If you have a question, please raise your hand, raise your virtual
hand. Heather\’s question on Pakistan. What\’s the status of talks? So,
Heather, much like the case of Ghana, we issued a statement within the last
24 hours on Pakistan. I want to refer you to that. It was that we have
reached — the substance of it was we\’ve reached a staff level agreement
with Pakistan, you know, it\’s been much in the news. And it\’s an agreement
on a combined seventh and eighth review of the program that we do have with
Pakistan that will translate into about 1.17 million being disbursed to
Pakistan. Pretty much, straight away, and a reminder that this brings total
disbursements from the IMF to Pakistan under the ongoing program to well
over $4 billion, about $4.2 billion. And we\’re hoping this will help to
stabilize the economy and amongst other things help expand the social
safety net to protect the most vulnerable; accelerate structural reforms;
and stabilize the macroeconomic, help stabilize the macroeconomic situation
in Pakistan. That\’s what I have. The statement is quite substantive.

Heather, do you want to come in on, on Pakistan, follow up. I see your hand
raised Heather, but I do not hear you. There you are, Heather.

QUESTIONER: Now, Gerry.

MR. RICE: There you are. Nice. Now, I see you as well, which is terrific.
Hi.

QUESTIONER: Okay. Sorry about that. Yeah, that question was a little out of
date. I gave it before the statement was issued, but I did want to follow
up. Do we have any sense of timing on the Board meeting for that agreement?

MR. RICE: Heather, I don\’t have anything beyond what the statement says.
But look, as you know, the Board meeting can follow — you who follow the
Fund, and I know you do, Heather can follow any time between three, six
weeks, within that period could be slightly earlier, could be slightly
later, could fall within that, but that\’s roughly the ballpark between the
staff level agreement and then the final agreement, which comes from our
Board.

Okay. I\’m going to move off Pakistan. I\’m going to — Martin, I see your
question on Argentina.

QUESTIONER: Great.

MR. RICE: You\’re asking about hyperinflation. Do you share the same fear?
What do you think about the financial crisis? The huge difference, official
alternative exchange rates. Martin, I really don\’t have much to add beyond
what I said to other colleagues on Argentina. So, I want to acknowledge
your question. These are important issues. They will be subjects of the
ongoing discussions I\’m sure, but I don\’t have any specific detail on that.

So, let me come back in the room and I see — Rodrigo, I don\’t think we
took a question from you. David, I see you I\’ll come to you. Simon, I see
you. I\’ll come to you. Rodrigo.

QUESTIONER: Thank you, Gerry. I wanted to ask about Ukraine and where are
you advising them in terms of payment of foreign debt? And is the advice
different for the sovereign and for the SOE or is it the same?

MR. RICE: Okay. Anyone else coming in on Ukraine? Okay. So, maybe just,
stepping back on Ukraine, Rodrigo. We\’ve been supporting them with a
program loan of 1.4 billion. We\’ve supported them from the SDR, their SDR
allocation. We\’ve established the administered account, what we call
administered account from donors to support Ukraine. Canada, Germany, the
Netherlands have all stepped in so far. We\’re expecting more in the coming
days. We attended the Ukraine Recovery Conference, which focused more on
the reconstruction. At the moment, Ukraine is servicing its debt in an
orderly way. And we would expect that to continue. So, just to respond to
your question, what we\’re also saying is that what we see as the priority
in terms of financing for Ukraine right now is grant financing in the
immediate and the short-term. That\’s the best form of assistance that can
be provided by the international community, in light of the war situation
and the nature of the shock. And that would allow the Ukrainian Government
to remain operational without incurring further debt, which is an important
dimension of the question you asked.

QUESTIONER: Sorry. So, there\’s no recommendation on requesting payment
freezes or anything like that?

MR. RICE: No, I don\’t have anything beyond Rodrigo of what I just said.
Okay?

QUESTIONER: Thank you, Gerry.

MR. RICE: Thank you. David, did you want to come in on something else or
are you okay, David Lawder?

QUESTIONER: No, Gerry I\’m okay. We\’ve got a lot to get through here before
10:30. Thanks.

MR. RICE: You do. Thank you, David. Appreciate it. Simon?

QUESTIONER: Thank you, Gerry, for this question again. I would like to ask
you two question. One on Angola, if you can access the state of the Angolan
economy. I noticed recently you had a projection growth of about 3 percent,
and on the upcoming IMF, World Bank Annual Meetings. I don\’t know if you
can tell us more how many delegates do you expect? Is there any change? Do
you anticipate any change from 2019 when it was last done in-person? Thank
you.

MR. RICE: Thanks Simon. Simon, I\’ll need to come back to you on Angola, and
we will come back to you immediately after the press briefing. Okay. I\’m
not up to date myself on Angola, but it\’s a good question and we will come
back to you after the press briefing.

On the Annual Meetings. Simon, again, they’re going to be in-person for the
first time since the pandemic. And we are certainly hoping that as many of
our member countries will be represented in-person as is possible. We\’re
all monitoring the situation with COVID. We see how it\’s dynamic to say the
least, but we have a plan, and we have an objective and an aspiration. And
that aspiration is that we will see our member countries to the greatest
extent possible in-person in Washington, in October. That\’s what I have on
that.

Anyone else looking to come in, because, if not, then I\’ll take the last
question, which is from David Herblings on Bloomberg. And David\’s asking
about Kenya. What\’s the status on additional funding? Are they considering
a waiver of conditions such as Kenya requested, including established a
government’s central payroll inflation target? It\’s a pretty detailed
question, David. I can really only answer pretty broadly on Kenya, which is
that we are scheduled, our Board, is scheduled to discuss Kenya\’s third
review under the IMF program arrangements on July 18th. So, that\’s Monday,
and we will be able to give you more detail on what you\’re asking after
that meeting. We have commended the Kenyan authorities\’ strong program
commitment. Actions to, in response to external challenges. And the
program, as I say, supports those objectives, including to put debt on a
downward trajectory and demobilizing taxes, spending wisely will create
space to meet social and development needs. The program includes specific
actions to promote transparency, reduce the risk of corruption, and so on.
So, I guess my message is David sit tight. The Board is meeting on Monday,
and we will have more thereafter, including publication of the full report
that the Board looks at on Monday. As always, we will publish that and I\’m
sure a lot of the details that you\’re asking about will be in that report.

So, with that we have hit the 10:30 hour almost. I want to thank you for
joining us today. We will not have another press conference before the
Board recess that I mentioned, first two weeks of August, but there will be
a full-fledged press conference from the IMF on July 26th on the WEO update
led by Pierre Olivier Gourinchas. I know many of you will be, looking
forward to that. Stay safe and well everyone, and look forward to seeing
you all soon. Bye-bye.

* * * * *