establishment of the unified unsecured money market in euro. in addition, the simple quotation of all euro area stocks and government bonds in one single currency was seen per se as an immediate step towards integration. more recently, however, there has appeared a certain frustration as - despite all the ongoing efforts and initiatives observers seem to comment more on the obstacles to progress than on its continuation. for my part, even though i acknowledge that the current situation is not fully satisfactory, i would not want to take an exaggeratedly negative view on this issue. progress may at times be slower than the end - users of the market are entitled to expect, but it is still taking place. i believe, however, that the particular market conditions that we are now facing may provide an opportunity for an acceleration of the process. the current pressure for cost - cutting and efficiency gains in the financial sector at this particular moment in time may accelerate the movement of consolidation, in particular in the field of market infrastructure. stock exchanges are naturally an essential part of this movement. integration, however, should not occur only as a reaction to external pressures. it should also be proactive, motivated by a vision of the optimal organisation and infrastructure of the market that can best serve the interest of all its users. the time and effort spent devising this optimal structure may appear to be intense today, but it can yield considerable returns tomorrow. but let me remind you why we, at the ecb, put so much emphasis on the integration of financial markets. one source of interest stems from our tasks as a central bank. this has multiple facets. the implementation of monetary policy clearly requires an efficient and fully - integrated money market. it also requires a high degree of integration of the securities market, because our credit operations are fully collateralised, and therefore rely heavily on the smooth delivery of securities. moreover, a homogenous transmission of monetary policy actions across the whole euro area clearly also greatly benefits from efficient and fully - integrated markets. furthermore, our interest in market integration also stems, of course, from our statutory duty to promote the efficiency and soundness of payment systems, as well as our responsibility to contribute to the maintenance of financial stability. lastly, but in my view most importantly, a well - functioning single market for financial services will benefit economic development within the eu. 2. what type of financial integration and how ( and by whom ) can financial integration be furthered? stating why we want integration gives us a huge clue as to

what type of integration we want. integration must be assessed first and foremost through the benefits effectively generated for users of these markets. integration should result in harmonised access to the market, single technical platforms where appropriate and, of course, fair access to all participants wherever they are located in the euro area. however, it is only when integration results in a genuine increase in competition that it becomes tangible and can provide all these benefits. i would now like to address the question of how - and by whom - the process of integration of europe's financial markets can be developed and completed. to do so, i will take in turn the points of view of the three beneficiaries of the integration process : firstly, each individual market participant ; secondly, the economy at large ; and thirdly, in between these two extremes, the community of participants in each market segment - for instance yourselves, the stock market community - taken as a whole. competition the first beneficiaries of financial integration are and will always be all individual participants in the market. issuers benefit from access to a broader pool of savings, while investors benefit from access to a more diversified spectrum of investment opportunities. intermediaries also benefit from more opportunities for business and from economies of scale. insofar as integration benefits the self - centred interest of each individual participant, it can and should be furthered naturally by the individual participants pushing initiatives as part of an environment of free competition. public intervention : legislation and regulation at the other extreme, as i have already underlined, financial integration benefits the entire economy through the means of externalities from the financial sector to the real sector. this public interest - in the strictest sense - justifies public intervention, in particular as regards the supervision and regulation of the financial markets. a considerable amount of work has been undertaken in this field by the authorities of the european union, under the head of the eu council and the commission, to translate at a pan - european level the public goods role traditionally exercised by markets at national level. in practice a large part of the work has been directed towards the abolition of regulatory, tax and legal barriers to a truly unified financial system. these barriers are for the most part well identified, even though solutions take time to be devised and implemented. co - ordination within the private sector in between competition and public intervention, however, there exists a third possible driver for european integration, and one which i believe has still further scope to be used. this is co -