swayed the imf ’ s calculations. might the imf be suggesting that, with growth at 2. 0 %, the euro area is creating inflation? not necessarily. when appraising the potential emergence of new inflationary pressures, it is not only the actual growth rate that has to be compared with the potential rate, but also the level from which growth started out at the time of the recovery and the remaining gap between the actual and potential gdp levels. in other words, 2. 0 % growth does not automatically mean further inflation, regardless of the size of the so - called gdp gap and the rate of unemployment. the ageing of the population might lead some observers to think that europe ’ s potential growth is set to fall, or at any rate to remain inexorably low, at a time when the united states continues to present growth rates that are double those of europe. it would be a mistake to reach such a conclusion in general. other factors could counteract the effects of the ageing of the population. the factors explaining the difference in growth rates between the united states and the euro area are population trends, differences in the growth rates of productivity and the degrees of labour force utilisation. the negative impact of population ageing can and must be offset by introducing measures to boost the contribution of the other two factors to euro area growth. to sum up : the ecb remains cautiously optimistic as to the trend in the european economy. would you say that interest rates stand at the appropriate level? you will have noticed that we have preferred since last april to cease using this term in our communiques. is it no longer appropriate to use the adjective “ appropriate ”? in a way. we have preferred to cease using the word so as to dispel the impression that had prevailed in financial markets that by using it, we are committing ourselves to maintaining interest rates unchanged for a considerable period of time. it is a controversial decision. some observers are wondering whether the ecb may perhaps be losing some of its transparency. this decision must not lead people to think that the ecb is less transparent about its policy stance or that it no longer wants to guide the markets. we believe that monetary policy must be, generally speaking, predictable in the light of our strategy and goals. however, this does not mean that we have to send out specific signals or express a “ bias ” regarding the future stance of monetary policy. indeed, i take the view that, in general, although

in order to address the challenges accompanying these processes of economic adjustment and structural reform will be discussed tomorrow. given that the policy panel will consist of high - calibre policy - makers from both old and new member states and from eu institutions, one does not have to be a follower of the rational expectations hypothesis to anticipate a lively debate, be that on labour and product market reform ; on financial sector policies ; on monetary and fiscal policies ; or on exchange rate policy and the merits of erm ii membership. ladies and gentlemen, as i said at the beginning, this is the third time - the third time the ecb is organising a central banking conference. and i hope there is not only good luck in odd numbers. i also hope that our third conference will again offer a valuable forum to have intellectually stimulating debates, exchange insights, generate new ideas, and enhance the good contacts between central bankers and academia. judging by the experiences of the first two conferences, i have every reason to be confident. thank you very much for your attention.