Thus, the three-month euro Libor, which had generally been 1.5% higher than the three-month Swiss franc Libor, saw its spread widen to 2.2% in 2007 and 2.7% in 2008. Our policy of stabilising the three-month Swiss franc Libor therefore enabled us to at least partly shield the Swiss economy from the repercussions of the international financial crisis. Unfortunately, the effect of relaxing monetary conditions since last autumn in order to lower the Libor was largely offset by the continuing appreciation of the Swiss franc against the euro. Between October 2008 and March 2009, our currency rose by nearly 10% vis-à-vis the euro, which was particularly inopportune in a phase of rapidly declining inflation rates and the contraction of global demand. On 12 March, to prevent the ongoing appreciation of the franc from neutralising the impact of our policy of lowering interest rates, we decided to buy foreign currencies on the foreign exchange market in conjunction with a further reduction of the Libor, with the aim of avoiding any further appreciation of the Swiss franc against the euro and injecting additional liquidity into the economy. In view of the risk of deflation, decisive action was called for, and we will continue to pursue this strategy for as long as the risk remains. Therefore, after 15 years of absence, we were obliged to intervene once more in the foreign exchange market. This does not, however, represent any reversal of our traditional strategy, which is to pursue an independent monetary policy aimed at maintaining price stability.

We can certainly expect that data quality and analytical frameworks will continue to improve over time. But our understanding of future crisis dynamics will never be perfect. Far from it. This means that we must be prepared to change course when required and acknowledge errors in judgment sooner rather than later, even if it means re-evaluating wellreasoned positions. This brings me to my second point on agility. Financial crises are inflection points of a cycle which materialise in the least predictable manner. This demands a high degree of agility of policymakers and the financial system to adapt to the new operating reality. Such agility is derived from crisis management frameworks that are well-anchored in clearly defined strategic outcomes and accountability structures, but also flexible enough to respond to a range of conditions. And critically, it requires investing in resources with deep experience and knowledge. Going back to the 1996 Everest expedition, Hall and his team had made every reasonable effort to incorporate comprehensive risk management and contingency planning into the preclimb plan. As things turned south, it became clear that the team was unable to respond quickly to the dynamic situation. Outdated and inefficient radio systems led to a communication breakdown of vital information. Physiological, psychological and technical readiness of some of the climbers was also in question. Their inability to respond fluidly to changing conditions created an overdependence on key resource persons. Combined with lack of experience to deal with a series of new challenges, leaders were incapacitated and team dynamics disintegrated quickly.