not see convincing evidence that structural reforms are impossible without strong market pressure. moreover, where very strong market pressure does lead to reforms, are we sure that they are the right ones? often we have seen in recent years that, when countries face severe sovereign debt tensions, they prioritise raising taxes rather than cutting unproductive monatsbericht oktober 2015. bis central bankers ’ speeches expenditure and delay structural reforms. those reforms that countries really need to boost their long - term growth – such as improving education or judiciary – do not come about in a crisis environment. they have to come about through societies recognising their deep - rooted challenges and collectively fixing them. but let ’ s imagine for a moment that all this were not the case – that market pressure was essential for structural reforms to happen – should that really be a factor in how the ecb makes its policy? remember that we have been given a narrow mandate in the treaty to deliver euro area price stability, and that narrow mandate is what justifies our independence. nowhere in the treaty does it say that the ecb should set interest rates in such a way as to force policy changes on unwilling governments. for us to do that would be undemocratic and a misuse of the independence we have been given. if anybody is to put pressure on governments to enact structural reforms, it has to be other governments within a democratically - agreed framework. indeed, this is why the ecb has frequently called for stronger european institutions for economic policymaking. the point here is that one cannot expect the ecb to deliver the objectives that rightfully belong to other policymakers. we will meet our price stability mandate, as we are obliged to do in the treaty. but it is up to individual countries to build on that foundation and make their economies work better ; and it is up to the euro area as a whole to strengthen the institutional architecture of our union. only with such a common, comprehensive response can we durably leave this crisis behind, and re - focus on the purpose for which the euro was launched : the unity and prosperity of the peoples of europe. that is no doubt a challenging task. but the cultural days are a reminder what europe is all about and why it is worth standing up for. bis central bankers ’ speeches

in terms of economic structures and policies. a single monetary policy implies that lasting divergences in unemployment levels and real growth trends are caused predominantly by different economic structures and economic policies in individual countries. moreover, income levels can more easily be compared across countries which use the same currency. monetary union thus makes it easier for citizens to identify best practices in other countries. this benchmarking benefits all the citizens of the euro area - in much the same way as consumers benefit from increased competition between firms in the form of higher quality and / or less expensive products. good and promising practices or policies can be better identified and more widely implemented, while less successful or ill - designed economic policies are easier to recognise. i am fully aware that it is not easy to implement structural reforms and consolidate government budgets because of the fact that the public opinion is sometimes not fully convinced that everybody would benefit from these reforms. the ecb, for its part, is not lecturing anybody, but considers itself part of the necessary process of awareness raising, of tireless explanation. we all need to explain to the citizens of europe that policies which enhance competition, competitiveness and flexibility contribute to higher employment and will ultimately improve prospects for real wage developments, growth and consolidation of government budgets.