exports, on our employment and on our standard of living. this difficult and delicate situation requires that all stakeholders look beyond their narrow self - interest and share in the pain of adjusting to the new realities. it is a matter of continuing surprise to me that in the fifth year of an unprecedented financial and economic crisis of global proportions, some of our banks are still insolently reporting record profits. i am happy however to see that, at least on this score, i am no longer a lone voice in the desert. others have recently joined me in denouncing this state of affairs. the competition commission has just completed an exercise on the bundling of insurance products where some banks were suspected of taking unfair advantage of their customers by selling them possibly overpriced insurance products from associated suppliers. it is currently investigating into credit card charges – another area where malpractices are rife, at least internationally. the government authorities have also stepped in. they set up a second commission of inquiry on the procedures and practices of sales by levy to which banks have recourse when they foreclose on properties secured as collateral. it started work earlier this month. you may rest assured that the bank will take corrective actions to remedy the situation. it may be appropriate here to point out a growing trend to impose very hefty fines on global banks in other countries for all manners of misdemeanours and transgressions, ranging from conspiracy to rate - rigging. bank ceo ’ s and chairmen have been seen off the stage for their failures and violations, including money - laundering offences. these are not just corporate banking failures ; corporates only act through individuals. these are therefore also individual failures. criminal prosecution of the individuals responsible is something that we shall be hearing more about in the weeks and months ahead. to my mind, this places individual responsibility at the centre of things. the reforms that are now being envisaged to prevent future crises, will hopefully address this issue. we feel strongly that banks – and those working in them at whatever level − should be held accountable for their actions. eight months ago, at the bank ’ s annual dinner for economic operators, i had invited bank executives and directors to reconnect with reality – and not to do things that would resurrect the image of banksters. i understand some bankers had then toyed with the idea of a walk - out. two weeks ago, the very respectable economist magazine – in its uk edition

differences include most notably so - called national discretions and options. on one hand, the new framework provides for a gradual transition to the new capital requirements, in line with the basel iii accord. the regulation gives countries some discretion in setting the pace of convergence towards the new requirements, which may give rise to temporary differences in the treatment of some specific aspects. for instance, a country may decide to bring forward the application of the new capital conservation buffer, initially envisaged for 2016, or the deduction of certain capital components. moreover, the regulation provides for a series of national options that might give rise to permanent differences in the treatment of specific aspects. it is logical that the ssm should work to achieve a degree of harmonisation, seeking to restrict national options of a permanent nature. it is perhaps less logical to take steps in the case of temporary discretionary arrangements, which by their very nature must disappear within a few years. different accounting practices, especially as regards provisioning, also significantly affect the uniformity of capital figures and should be a supervisory concern. it is thus reasonable to expect the ssm to contribute to convergence in the interpretation of international accounting standards. and it is essential that the ssm should strive equally to revise the calculation of riskweighted assets. that will call for a detailed review of the risk models used by banks and the adoption of corrective measures should unjustifiable deviations be detected. macroprudential policy macroprudential policy, insofar as it seeks to identify systemic risks, prevent them and increase the industry ’ s resilience, has an important role to play. the very nature of these risks is global in dimension, meaning that coordination between the various authorities with responsibilities in this field is needed. at the same time, it should be borne in mind that while the risks may be considered common to the euro area as a whole, their impact and intensity vary from country to country. this heterogeneity not only depends on the characteristics of each country, but also on the particular juncture of the financial cycle. for example, at present certain euro area countries evidence risks associated with excessive real estate market prices, while in others this risk is not discernible. macroprudential policy thus requires a coordinated approach by the various institutions, and at the same time attention must be paid to considerations of a national nature. in a monetary bis central bankers ’ speeches union like the euro area, the heterogeneity