If they are serious about this, the "basic vote" in the BWIs (250/country in the case of IMF), which has served primarily to facilitate a feeling of equality among states, must be given higher authority at the cost of the weighted elements, "the quota", and the principle of running the fund and the bank as private business corporations. USA will probably be skeptical, but legitimacy restoration of the BWIs must perhaps go beyond rhetorics. Countries like Saudi Arabia and China may be able to increase their financing and thus quota. But will the basic votes be given higher authority?

This work has partly been counterproductive and harmed poverty reduction in so far as it has harassed people who sends legitimate remittances to friends and relatives in poor countries through informal channels (e.g. hawala systems).

FATF is an international body initiated 1989 by the G7. Its aim is to develop policies to combat money laundry and terrorist finance. It also composes black lists and names and shames of countries who doesn't follow its recommendations/requirements in regard to transparency on financial flows etc. This have had effects on credit ratings.

I don't know the details of either FATF or remittances. Combating money laundry and terrorist finance is all good but critiques argue that FATF and others have been "over ambitious" in the post-911 era. For instance, FATF and the developed countries perceive all informal money flows as illegitimate.

Its widely acknowledged that ex-patriots from developing countries sends large sums to their friends and relatives in the home countries. While it may not be panacea for development -- in fact there can be several problems -- remittances to developing countries account for up to 3 times global ODA. But, it's hard to find and ATM in for example Nanga Tarbat. Therefore people often send money through informal and reciprocal "fei qian" or "hawala" systems. I know that Somali-Swedes in Sweden which is a FATF member who have sent money through such channels have been arrested and harassed but no evidence have been produced to suggest that they have done anything illegal.

"Informal services as well as some of the smaller MTOs, however, do not readily comply with international standards of transparency and accountability, which are also becoming tighter as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and other stakeholders seek to ensure better control and security through regulations and their enforcement... [C]lamping down on informal services regarding the effect on flows of remittances and the cost of transfers, on the other hand. ... can have strongly felt effects on livelihoods. The latter is underlined, for instance, in the case of Somalia." (Cerstin Sander 2003 Migrant Remittances to Developing Countries http://www.dai.com/pdf/Migrant_Re

What I missed to write is that to be fair FATF has aknowledged the importance of remittances even though they naively believe that all informal remittance channels shall be registered. Daunting task. Anyway, I don't understand why FATF is even mentioned in a top leader communiqué on the global financial crisis. Can imagine there are some tough agenda setting struggles. free trade, regulation, climate change, war on terror...