had to face amid a flood of capital. third, the exit from these measures has not been easy. while the post - crisis environment provided an opportunity to gradually normalize the reserve requirements levels ( thus supplying an additional counter - cyclical tool ), they remain high by european standards. however, despite all these obstacles, i think the resort to unconventional policy instruments had 3 major advantages. bis central bankers ’ speeches i would name first the fact that they certainly managed to limit the size of the disequilibria. i have no doubt that the outcome would have been a lot worse had we been complacent and relied entirely on the self - corrective behaviour of markets. i will give here just one example : forex interventions limited significantly exchange rate fluctuations, with the appreciation during the massive capital inflows and the depreciation after the crisis outbreak not exceeding 25 percent. in the absence of such interventions, the magnitude of fluctuations could have been as high as 40 to 60 percent. the foreign exchange purchases made before the crisis not only limited the unsustainable leu appreciation and the associated loss of export competitiveness, but supplied the ammunition for subsequent interventions to cushion the currency depreciation once the outbreak of the crisis changed the direction of the flows. and i believe this is the second benefit of the approach. last, but not least, thinking outside the box allowed us to avoid incurring losses after 2006. while profitability should not be a concern for a central bank, this development proved very fortunate from the perspective of the political economy. on the one hand, it allowed the nbr to preserve its independence in relation to the government by not generating quasi - fiscal deficits in a period with an increasing fiscal imbalance. on the other hand, it helped preserve institutional credibility in relation to the banks subject to nbr supervision, which were closely monitored in terms of capital adequacy. moreover, through our actions we wanted to avoid rewarding the speculative behaviour several commercial banks were engaged in ( i. e. carry trade ) and instead incentivize them to focus on their core activities. bis central bankers ’ speeches

10 years of romania ’ s eu membership : looking to the future liviu voinea, deputy governor, national bank of romania 26 october 2017 ten years after romania ’ s eu accession, the world has changed dramatically : the global financial crisis of 2008 - 09 led to the revision of rules in the international banking system, to growing social discontent with major consequences in terms of flourishing populism and protectionism, as well as to a reshuffle of maps – be they geopolitical, military or economic. uncertainty is running higher today than prior to the crisis and the room for quantitative easing policies based on stimulating demand has narrowed considerably. looking ahead, both the european union and romania need structural reforms. as regards the eu : many steps have been taken so far at institutional level : stability and growth pact, crd iv ( capital requirements directive ), banking union, srb ( single resolution board ), ssm ( single supervisory mechanism ), esrb ( european systemic risk board ). when needed, monetary policy undertook – in europe as well, similarly to the us, uk or japan – to escape recession and deflation and to foster renewed economic impetus. a challenge to the eu is to maintain the pace of economic growth as the ecb gradually exits from quantitative easing. another challenge facing the eu is to manage brexit properly and avoid other exits, which would question the very essence of european identity. the eu should continue and complete institutional reforms, by finalising the banking union, the aspects regarding the operationalisation of edis ( european deposit insurance scheme ), by setting mrel ( minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities ) for banking groups ; moreover, the eu should move towards a fiscal union without debt mutualisation, should leave less room for discretion and comply with rules once they have been adopted, it should clarify the fine balance between the consolidated microprudential supervision of banks and national accountability in terms of resolution. but maybe the most important factor for the cohesion and coherence of the european project is the success in safeguarding the four fundamental freedoms : the free movement of capital, goods, services, and above all persons within the union. a union that would waive these principles would no longer be the union that was established in 1957 and that romania joined 10 years ago. as regards romania : romania has accomplished a lot in the past ten years : nominal convergence, real convergence in part, financial stability, it has gained market confidence and has implemented structural reforms.