background, the ecb will definitely follow - up on your request for further analysis. i do not exclude that we will conclude that there is a real case for enhancing the present framework which relies essentially on the vigilance of the financial institutions that are themselves under supervision as regards their counterparty risks on the hedge funds. but i also note that any such enhancement should be agreed upon at the level of the international community and, in particular, on the basis of an appropriate transatlantic discussion. as regards payment and settlement issues, let me first thank the european parliament for the support expressed for the implementation by november 2007 of the target2 system. being an integrated large - value payment system, target2 will provide for efficiency gains and improved liquidity management by banks. in this regard, i should like to refer to an increased pressure to also have an integrated platform for the settlement of securities transactions in euro. the eurosystem is therefore currently examining, in co - ordination with the european commission and in close co - operation with the market, the feasibility of setting up a eurosystem infrastructure for the provision of securities settlement services in central bank money. a decision on whether to offer such a service, referred to as “ target2 - securities ”, is expected in early 2007. in the field of retail payments, we strongly support the efforts to establish a single euro payment area ( sepa ). we welcome the eu commission ’ s initiative for a directive on payment services and i warmly welcome european parliament ’ s contribution to a swift adoption of this directive to assist the banking industry in their implementation of sepa payment instruments as from 1 january 2008. i thank you very much for your attention. i am now available to answer your questions.

not account for more recent events, in particular developments in emerging markets and sovereign spreads. 5 / 7 bis central bankers'speeches the overall high level of resilience achieved by the euro area banking system should not hide the fact that areas of vulnerability remain. to briefly characterise the summary results, i would group the banks into three broad categories depending on their final core capital ratio in the adverse scenario. clearly, i am using indicative benchmarks rather than formal thresholds. first, banks with stressed core capital ratios above 11 % reflect strong capital positions and comfortable capacity to withstand shocks. there are 9 banks in this group, representing 15 % of total assets of the euro area banking sector. in the second category, 12 banks had core capital ratios between 9 % and 11 %, representing about 45 % of total assets. these banks displayed a reasonable degree of resilience overall. however, some of these banks still have work to do to enhance capitalisation and reduce their vulnerability to stress. finally, banks with core capital ratios in the adverse scenario below 9 % display a weaker, though still satisfactory, capital position. these 12 entities, representing almost 40 % of total assets of the sector, should increase robustness and enhance capital positions to face challenges ahead and will thus be closely monitored. in summary, the overall resilience of the banks supervised by the ecb has increased compared with the stress test conducted two years ago. banks start from a better capital position. capital depletion in the 2016 and the present exercise stand at similar levels. risks and vulnerabilities identified across some institutions, business models and constituencies, however, require close monitoring. furthermore, the analysis of aggregate results and their interaction with the real economy, going beyond supervisory ratios, confirms that macroprudential pre - emptive policy has an important role to play in safeguarding the stability of the whole system. thank you for your attention. 1 see declaration on strengthening the financial system from g20 summit in london ( 2 april 2009 ) and “ the leader ’ s statement ” from g20 summit in pittsburgh ( 24 – 25 september 2009 ). 2 for an overview of the european system of financial supervision see the european commission ’ s overview on financial supervision and risk management and the legal framework of the ssm. 3 the ecb defines financial stability as a state whereby the level of systemic risk is contained. systemic risk can best be described as the risk that the provision of necessary financial products and services by the financial system will be