The Central Bank of Malta’s preparatory process for integration in the Eurosystem has undoubtedly benefited from its participation in ESCB committees and from the bilateral contacts established with many Eurosystem central banks, including the Oesterreichische Nationalbank and the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland, our partner in the Twinning Arrangement on communication strategy in which we participated with Cyprus. Some Eurosystem central banks, moreover, have responded favourably to requests for entering into cooperative arrangements with the Bank for the implementation of specific operations, such as in the field of reserve management. As for the public mood, price perceptions will probably remain a source of apprehension, at least in the immediate period ahead. Although 68% of Maltese respondents who participated in the latest Eurobarometer survey said that they are in favour of a relatively early euro adoption, some responses to the other questions suggest that the Maltese are not indifferent to what they hear about the possible negative effects of the single currency. The percentage of respondents who consider that the euro will be of personal or national benefit, 2 for example, is smaller than that of those who favour early adoption. And the main concern is not unlike that in the current euro area Member States. It is not about the ability of the ECB to deliver price stability over the medium-term. It is primarily about a temporary increase in price levels after the changeover, a fear which has been reinforced by what is reported in the Italian media.

These goals and principles should include common requirements vis-à-vis GSC operators before they start their operations, such as clear and proper risk management policies and means, regarding their stabilisation mechanisms, legal certainty of users’ redemption rights and potential claims on underlying reserve assets, and regarding linkages and exposure between their core components and the other entities of the financial system. In addition, there is a need to agree on adequate cross-border oversight principles and schemes between authorities in charge of jurisdictions impacted by the potential circulation of stablecoins. To that end, we could take inspiration and review existing standards and principles for cross-border cooperation in the field of market infrastructures or AML-CFT. - Thirdly, making concrete efforts – including live experimentations – to address weaknesses of the current payment and settlement landscape Adjusting the regulatory and oversight frameworks might not be enough as we have to make sure stablecoins do not become a bad solution to a real problem. Our current financial system  order rests on multiple issuers of settlement assets linked to the anchor settlement asset provided by central banks. In order to preserve the incentives and benefits for innovation, efficiency and stability, central banks as issuers of the reference settlement asset need to revisit and possibly adapt the conditions under which they make that settlement asset available. In that perspective, central banks could, for instance, issue their money in digital form, the so-called concept of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC).