The establishment of a Single Resolution Mechanism Let me turn to your second chosen topic, the establishment of a Single Resolution Mechanism. The Single Resolution Mechanism should be centred in a Single Resolution Authority with a European Resolution Fund at its disposal. I welcome the European Council’s December statement that during the course of 2013, the Commission will submit a proposal for such a mechanism for Member States that are participating in the Single Supervisory Mechanism. The ECB shares the European Council’s view on timing for the Single Resolution Mechanism, namely that it will be required once bank supervision is effectively moved to the Single Supervisory Mechanism. We therefore welcome the European Council urging the co-legislators to examine the proposal as a matter of priority with the intention of adopting it during the current parliamentary cycle. There are four main reasons for a Single Resolution Mechanism, with a Single Resolution Authority at its centre. The first reason is that only a Single Resolution Authority will ensure timely and impartial decision-making focused on the European dimension. In a situation where a cross-border resolution is required, the Single Resolution Authority would avoid national focus and pursue the optimal resolution strategy, thus mitigating coordination problems. The second reason is that the Single Resolution Authority would credibly pursue the least cost resolution strategy, assessing possible cross-border spillover effects and systemic concerns, and ensuring that resolution costs are first and foremost borne by the private sector. It would thereby minimise resolution costs without recourse to taxpayer money.

David Rule: Simple, transparent and comparable securitisation Speech by Mr David Rule, Executive Director for Prudential Policy of the Bank of England, at Global ABS, Barcelona, 17 June 2015. *  *  *  Thank you for inviting me to speak at Global ABS 2015. For the past couple of years the Bank of England has been working with the ECB to consider what can be done to foster the development of robust and well-functioning securitisation markets in the EU. Last year we published a joint discussion paper 1 and received helpful feedback from a wide range of commentators. One theme was support for defining the characteristics of simple, transparent and comparable securitisation – more on that in a moment. More recently, we published a joint response 2 in support of the European Commission’s consultation on securitisation and look forward to the Commission’s forthcoming legislative proposals. A key objective of the Capital Markets Union in Europe is a financial system in which stable market-based funding complements bank lending as a source of finance for the economy. Securitisation can be an important part of that stable, market-based funding, alongside other markets such as equities, bonds and private placements. Banks can use securitisation to diversify their funding and transfer risk on underlying loans. Importantly, non-banks can also finance lending through securitisation. Banks and non-banks can use securitisation to help match the maturity of their liabilities to their assets. This is particularly important in the context of housing finance.