period, i will continue to visit with a broad range of contacts to discuss economic conditions as i assess the appropriateness of our monetary policy stance. as i noted earlier, i continue to view inflation as a concern. in light of the upside risks that i just described, it remains necessary to pay close attention to the pricestability side of our mandate while being attentive to the risks of a material weakening in the labor market. my view continues to be that restoring price stability is essential for achieving maximum employment over the longer run. however, should the data evolve in a way that points to a material weakening in the labor market, i would support taking action and adjust monetary policy as needed while taking into account our inflation mandate. closing thoughts in closing, thank you again for welcoming me here today. it is a pleasure to join you and to have the opportunity to discuss my views on the economy and monetary policy. and given the recent fomc meeting decision and my dissent, i appreciate being able to provide a more detailed explanation of the reasoning that led me to dissent in favor of a smaller reduction in the policy rate at last week's fomc meeting. i look forward to answering your questions and to engaging with your members on bank regulatory and supervisory matters. 1 the views expressed here are my own and not necessarily those of my colleagues on the federal open market committee or the board of governors. 5 / 5 bis - central bankers'speeches

taking the last of my three adjectives. the economic policy response in this second phase of the crisis naturally, the economic policy response to this crisis should adapt to how the pandemic unfolds healthwise. at this second phase of the crisis, with the characteristics i mentioned, the economic policy response must combine two objectives : to support the recovery - which advises avoiding a premature withdrawal of the support measures that would raise the risk of economic growth undergoing more lasting damage - and to smooth the adjustment of the economy to the post - pandemic scenario. the importance of european support to achieve these objectives, the economic policy response in this second phase of the crisis should have the firmly resolute backing of the european union ( eu ). indeed, given the enormous economic and financial interactions across the area ’ s various economies, joint action is the most effective means of ensuring that the economic effects of the pandemic will be overcome in a shorter time and at a lower cost to each and every country. this is particularly important in the current situation, where we face a global crisis, but which is exerting asymmetrical economic effects on the different countries. european action is particularly important so as to avoid an uneven exit from the crisis that bears down on overall economic growth for a longer period. these arguments, beyond those relating to necessary european solidarity, highlight the importance of the agreement reached by the european council last tuesday with the approval of the european recovery fund. in fact, as you know, the result of the european council meeting some days back was, i would venture to say, most satisfactory. first, agreement was reached on the eu multiyear budget for 2021 - 2027, the negotiations for which had faced many difficulties in recent months, for an amount of €1, 074 billion. further, a recovery fund ( next generation eu ) has been created. this is additional to the budget and introduces a pan - european recovery financing framework that is unprecedented in the history of the eu. this fund will be financed by the european commission ’ s recourse, on behalf of the union, to the capital markets, for a maximum amount of €750 billion between 2021 and 2026, i. e. it is temporary in nature. the funds will be assigned to tackle the consequences of the covid - 19 crisis, both through loans to the member states ( 48 % of the total ) and through direct transfers ( essentially the remaining 52 % ). the gradual amortisation