( ecb ). the rate of price increase in the euro area was 1. 1 % - a dream result even by german standards. in january of this year, the inflation rate hit the 2 % mark. but it is expected that it will be below 2 % for the year 2000 on an annual average. by its policy, the governing council of the ecb is making it absolutely clear that it will go on conducting a monetary policy oriented to internal stability in future. that monetary policy strategy is based on two pillars. monetary growth - on which the first pillar of the ecb ’ s strategy rests - has been above the reference value of 4½ % for some time. lending to the private sector, too, has been persistently strong. both indicated that liquidity in the euro area was more than adequate. the second pillar of the strategy is a broad assessment of the outlook for future price developments. latterly, most of the relevant indicators having been pointing upward over the medium term undoubtedly due in part to the rise in oil prices and, of course, also to the downward movement of the euro exchange rate this exerts pressure on import and producer prices. and, because of second - round effects, they can in turn affect consumer prices. happily, the pay agreements recently concluded in germany have been quite within the scope for national income distribution. to that extent, the risk of second - round effects has been reduced. the same applies to opec ’ s decision to step up production of crude oil. in line with its monetary policy strategy, the ecb governing council has now raised its key interest rates three times. those decisions to raise interest rates took account of the existing upside risks to prices. they were taken to ensure continuing tension - free economic growth in the euro area, which is the basis for a sustained development of economic growth. there is thus no doubt about the ecb governing council ’ s resolve to safeguard price stability. that is significant because the future outlook for internal price stability - in other words, inflation expectations - are of major importance for a currency ’ s potential - perhaps even more important, in fact, than the current stability situation. that is because it is primarily the future that is traded in the foreign exchange markets. on the monetary side, the future for the euro looks decidedly good. experience has shown that, ultimately, the internal stability of a currency is invariably also reflected in its external value. naturally, the adjustment must not be in the sense that internal stability follows

andreas dombret : " basel iii - are we done now? " statement by dr andreas dombret, member of the executive board of the deutsche bundesbank, statement by dr andreas dombret, member of the executive board of the deutsche bundesbank, at the institute for law and finance conference on basel iii, frankfurt am main, 29 january 2018. * * * thanks nicolas, it ’ s a great pleasure to contribute to this panel. and, on behalf of the bundesbank, i am happy to see that so many outstanding experts accepted our invitation. please let me start with a confession : i strongly support the basel iii finalisation package – in these times, a global minimum standard is a crucial ( and noteworthy ) success. it contributes to stabilising the global financial system and prevents regulatory arbitrage. when talking about basel iii, many banks or lobbyists may think : “ things are never as bad as they seem. ” of course, they are hoping for of a less strict implementation of the basel standards. but i have to say that i, in their stead, would not cherish these hopes. looking ahead, all basel committee member jurisdictions must do everything in their power to ensure full implementation. but as important as basel iii is, we should not forget what it was made for — and what not. the basel iii standards are, first, minimum standards for, second, internationally active banks. let me say a few words about the first point : since basel standards are minimum standards, a country may decide to set stricter requirements. the second qualification of the basel iii standard is that it is for internationally active banks. as such, jurisdictions are free to apply a different set of rules to smaller, only nationally active banks that pose no threat to international financial stability. in sum, then, we should focus on truly global aspects, like regulating globally active banks, while leaving it to nation states to carry out those tasks that they are better suited to take care of, for example the regulation of locally active banks. in this sense, let ’ s not forget the former governor of the bank of england, mervyn king, who said : “ banks are global in life, but national in death. " to make one thing quite clear : there is no alternative to global standards, but within their implementation, we must not forget that a “ one size fits all ” approach does not always reflect national different banking systems. so, in sum : yes,