set every uk bank ( and building society ) a requirement for the minimum amount of such loss absorbing resources – known as mrel – it needs to hold. this requirement will need to be met in full by 2022. mrel covers both the capital a bank holds in going concern and the capital and debt that can be bailed in if it fails and enters resolution. the biggest uk banks already have going and gone concern resources sufficient to absorb losses of almost a quarter of their risk - weighted assets, and are well on their way towards meeting their full mrel requirements. current levels of loss absorbing resources mean that even if the major uk banks saw losses six times the losses they incurred over 2008 and 2009, there would be sufficient private sector resources that could be bailed in to recapitalise the bank and stabilise it without taxpayer support. and next week, alongside the purple book, we will publish for consultation the bank of england ’ s proposals on how these loss absorbing resources should be distributed within banking groups. all speeches are available online at www. bankofengland. co. uk / speeches in setting the timetable for meeting full mrel requirements, the bank has considered the balance of costs and benefits. issuing mrel imposes costs on banks. these costs will be minimized if banks are able to build up their mrel loss absorbing debt to replace their existing debt as it matures. it could be counterproductive if, in seeking to impose requirements intended to address financial stability, we did so on a timetable that dislocated the banking system and made it more not less vulnerable during the process. third, statutory powers and loss absorbing resources are necessary but not sufficient conditions for an effective resolution regime. there are other barriers to resolution that also need to be addressed. resolution must provide continuity, whether continuity of access to financial market infrastructure, continuity of contracts or operational continuity. for example, services such as it that underpin critical functions will need to be set up in a way that enable them to continue in resolution. the bank is working alongside the pra in assessing firms ’ readiness to meet operational continuity in resolution. we should however have no illusions about the resolution of a major bank. if it happens, even when the regime is fully in place, it will be a very painful exercise. resolution is not a magic wand ; losses will need to fall on creditors. even if we are prepared in advance, stabilising a large failing bank will not be easy. but

william c dudley : the us monetary policy outlook and its global implications remarks by mr william c dudley, president and chief executive officer of the federal reserve bank of new york, at the bloomberg americas monetary summit, new york city, 20 april 2015. * * * matthew higgins, richard peach, paolo pesenti and joseph tracy assisted in preparing these remarks. it is a pleasure to have the opportunity to speak with you here today. in my remarks, i will assess the outlook for the u. s. economy and the progress that the federal reserve has made toward its dual mandate objectives of maximum employment in the context of price stability. over the past few years, the u. s. economy has made considerable progress toward achieving these goals. yet we still have further to go – the unemployment rate is still too high and the inflation rate too low. because the economic outlook is uncertain, i can ’ t tell you when normalization will occur. the timing is data dependent. we will have to see what unfolds. whenever such a shift in policy occurs, we need to be mindful that it most likely will be accompanied by some degree of market stress and turbulence. moreover, the normalization of u. s. monetary policy could create significant challenges for those emerging market economies ( emes ) that have been the recipients of large capital inflows in recent years. this leads to an important question : what can the federal reserve do to address these risks? while tightening cycles by the fed can pose challenges for emes, these need not be disruptive. the combination of stronger u. s. growth, improved eme fundamentals and effective fed communications can limit the stresses caused by the onset of tightening. the experience will vary across emes, but emes as a group are better equipped today to handle the challenge than they were in the past. as always, what i have to say today reflects my own views and not necessarily those of the federal open market committee ( fomc ) or the federal reserve system. the u. s. economic outlook since the end of the great recession more than five years ago, the u. s. economy has grown at a disappointing 2. 3 percent annualized rate. several times over that period, it appeared that growth was strengthening, but each time such hopes were subsequently unfulfilled. we appear again to be at a similar junction. real gdp growth accelerated over the last two years, rising at a 2. 7 percent annual rate. however