Provided this language is flexible enough, like GS1 standards or HTML, it ought to be capable of describing any instrument whatever their underlying complexity. Once developed, maintaining and updating this common language and syntax is likely to need some global governance body to act as guardian. This is akin to the role played by GS1 and W3C for supply chains and web standards. The success of these global standards organisations, without the need for regulatory intervention, sets an encouraging precedent for finance. Using the common language of finance So if a common language for finance were to arise with these features, what benefits might be expected? (a)  Improving risk management in firms  Like retail giants, global financial firms face a hugely complex logistical problem. Like Wal-Mart, they produce multiple products, in multiple locations, with multiple counterparties  30  Financial Stability Board (2012). 31  International Organization for Standardization (2001). 32  International Swaps and Derivatives Association (2012). 10  BIS central bankers’ speeches  working to multiple timelines. The world’s largest banks have hundreds of thousands of assets, tens of thousands of counterparts and operate to timelines ranging between 50 years and 50 milliseconds. Like Wal-Mart, avoiding failure relies on the effective management of risks arising from these vast financial inventories and relationships. The financial crisis exposed myriad weaknesses in those risk management practices, especially among the larger and more complex financial firms. Several reports, from both the official and private sectors, have exposed those deficiencies.33 Many of the lessons are common.

The European Central Bank is one of the main initiators and active supporters of the idea of SEPA and related projects. The ECB participates as an observer in the works of the EPC Plenary, thus exercising some kind of “supervision” over the works on SEPA. Independently of the above, the ECB cooperates with the banking community through other SEPArelated initiatives, e.g. through COGEPS (Contact Group on Euro Payments Strategy). Moreover, ECB representatives participate in meetings of the EPC working groups as observers. Until last year, the Eurosystem’s central banks were less active in this respect. However, as the time goes by and the risk of failure of SEPA keeps growing, central banks have decided to become more involved and to act as a catalyst that could lead to the implementation of the vision of SEPA in Europe. You should also remember that most decisions on payment systems in the euro area are taken by the Eurosystem’s central banks, which means that the National Bank of Poland and other central banks from beyond the Eurosystem have had limited access to information and little influence on the works on SEPA. According to the NBP, the representatives of the Polish banking system and other institutions that participate in the works on SEPA should continue their activities taken to prepare and work out SEPA standards and mechanisms for their implementation. It is thus crucial that the above mentioned persons present views agreed upon in Poland when stating their stance before authorities responsible for decisions regarding SEPA.