to strengthen cross - border and cross - sectoral co - operation between supervisors, to enhance convergence in supervisory practices and to reinforce collaboration between supervisory and central banking functions. the eurosystem supports these conclusions. there are clear benefits in keeping supervision close to the institutions being overseen at the national level, while financial integration requires co - operation between the relevant authorities to be stepped up. in my view, positive developments have already occurred in the implementation of these recommendations. for example, the banking supervision committee of the european system of central banks – chaired by deutsche bundesbank directorate member edgar meister – has enhanced and continues to develop its regular monitoring of the soundness of the european union banking system as a whole, as well as its analysis of structural banking and financial developments. these activities rely extensively on the close and constructive co - operation established within the committee between central banks and banking supervisory authorities. indeed, the eurosystem regards the promotion of co - operation between central banks and supervisory authorities as one of its main contributions in the field of prudential supervision. however, the full implementation of the “ brouwer recommendations ” requires additional work in order to establish an effective information exchange – both in times of calm and in times of crisis – and to achieve further convergence in supervisory practices. in addition to the financial stability considerations, the issue of supervisory co - operation also needs to be looked at from the angle of the efficiency of the financial system. indeed, increasing attention is being paid by policy - makers and market participants to the remaining inefficiencies in the financial sector and the residual obstacles to financial integration. for instance, the recent “ gyllenhammar report ” drew attention to the need for greater standardisation of supervisory compliance requirements and practices because of the cost burden on financial institutions developing cross - border businesses. these conclusions were further reinforced in the recent report by the economic and financial committee under the chairmanship of yet another compatriot of mine – kees van dijkhuizen, the dutch treasurer - general. in a similar quest for greater efficiency, considerable attention has also been paid to the community regulatory process, with emphasis on the need to achieve swift rule - making and consistent implementation in different member states. the recent institutional agreement achieved on the implementation of the “ lamfalussy procedures ” represents a major step forward in the field of securities regulation. it removes the burden of detailed and cumbersome regulation at the community level by delegating rule - making powers to a

benoit cœure : the relevance of household - level data for monetary policy and financial stability analysis opening remarks by mr benoit cœure, member of the executive board of the european central bank, at the ecb conference on household finance and consumption, frankfurt am main, 17 october 2013. * * * ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the european central bank conference on household finance and consumption. this conference follows an important milestone in a project that the eurosystem took up more than six years ago, the household finance and consumption survey ( hfcs ). the results from the first wave of the survey were published last april, and the microdata were made available to researchers interested in their use. the conference programme is a testimony to the potential that the hfcs has to enhance our understanding of the economic behaviour of individual households. let me explain why the ecb decided to embark on this complex project. now more than ever, after the recent financial crisis, it is clear that aggregate data do not always reveal the whole story. the same aggregate statistics can be the result of different underlying situations. in particular, micro - economic sub - structures may react differently when facing a shock or an economic policy intervention. progress in economic theory and in empirical methods also highlights the usefulness of a more granular approach to macroeconomic outcomes. to be more precise, there are two areas of great importance for the ecb in which the use of household - level data can prove very useful : monetary policy and financial stability. monetary policy interventions have distributional effects across the population depending on the composition of the assets and liabilities of households. one could argue that monetary policy is in essence distributional in the intertemporal dimension and the euro area crisis has uncovered distributional effects of monetary policy in the spatial dimension. such effects are however unintended, or in other words, they are a means to an end, that is price stability. central banks should steer away from distributional politics. but there can be a thin line between intended and unintended consequences, which makes it even more necessary to understand the cross - sectional effects of monetary policy interventions. let me give you a few examples. the proportion of total assets invested in interest - bearing products and the proportion of liabilities subject to adjustable rates may to a large extent determine the response of a household ’ s future income and net wealth to a change in interest rates. we would like to know how homeowners vs. renters, poor