What a fortnight for Brazil. Rio’s victory over three developed-world metropolises to host the 2016 Olympics boosted the self-esteem of a country keen for respect on the world stage. It was accompanied by two other events that led to fewer sambas but which were still important: the upgrading of Brazil to investment grade by Moody’s, the final holdout among ratings agencies, and Brazil’s agreement to provide the International Monetary Fund with a $10bn loan – giving after years of taking. The IMF deal is part of a long-discussed $80bn likely to come from the Brics, rounded out by Russia, India and China. The holders of a collective $2,800bn in reserves are looking for more influence at the institution. With under 10 per cent of voting power – less than a third of what European Union nations collectively wield – they feel under-represented. Reforms approved to expand voting power of developed nations by 5 percentage points do not do enough to dispel the perception that the IMF is a primarily North Atlantic institution.

Critics of larger changes to the status quo might say that swollen reserves in part reflect a fleeting commodity windfall for countries such as Brazil and Russia, which were among the funds’ largest supplicants in the past 11 years. Though richer, the Brics still have more primitive financial systems than, say, Belgium. But the banking meltdown of the past two years has demolished such arguments. For the first time, a crisis of developed countries’ own making was eased by developing ones. Brics are an obvious source of funds to underpin the global recovery, so why not demand more clout? As western institutions have reminded them through periodic crises over the decades, money talks.