To enter the Eurozone is a very important, very grave and irrevocable act. Neither the accession country concerned nor the Eurozone could afford the risks associated with a mistaken decision. •  Thirdly, accession countries must strengthen their fiscal and external positions. Given the aim of attaining real convergence over time, accession countries will have to devote significant public resources to funding investment. However, candidate countries’ weighted average public deficit amount to 3.6% of GDP in 2001. The fiscal consolidation currently planned by some accession countries is welcome and likely to require sizeable expenditure cuts or tax increases. Looking ahead, accession countries will have to implement fiscal consolidation very credibly with a view to avoiding the risks associated with the existence of high “twin deficits”, i.e. fiscal and external. •  Fourthly, a sound and efficient banking and financial system is key. Significant progress has been made over the past few years in rehabilitating the banking sector and encouraging foreign ownership. The latter has also contributed to greater integration into the EU financial system. Nevertheless, adapting the legal and regulatory framework is a process entirely in the hands of the accessing countries. The intermediation role of the banking sector remains fundamental for the efficient use of capital and sustained growth. Progress in corporate governance, the enhancement of the legal and supervisory frameworks that support the banking sector, and an efficient fight against money laundering, are also crucial. These improvements are conducive to achieving the macroeconomic objectives of the accession countries.

4  BIS Review 71/2002  10  split almost equally between intermediated and non-intermediated assets . Although credit still plays a prominent role in the allocation of financial resources, credit institutions themselves are relying on the financial markets to manage their balance sheets. These two points suggest that the benefits of enhanced liquidity entail the management of a new range of risks. This should not lead us to conclude that financial integration has necessarily negative side effects from the point of view of financial stability. Financial integration may help to foster financial instability. I would like to put forward three reasons for this: •  First, the setting up of a large currency area eliminates disruptions arising from currency risk that would otherwise prevail between the participating countries. Domestic economies are immune to currency misalignment episodes that disturb regional trade. Currency risk premia are eliminated from interest rates. •  Secondly, the setting up of a large currency area implies an overhaul of market infrastructure. In this respect both public bodies, such as national central banks and market participants, have a unique opportunity to pool best practices. Indeed, this has been the case in the euro area where, for example– the TARGET system, interlinking domestic real-time gross settlement systems, has demonstrated its ability to absorb large volumes of cross-border flows, and to perform well even in critical circumstances such as September 2001.