very much hope and believe that negative deposit rates are a temporary phenomenon worldwide and not a permanent feature of normal monetary policy. when potential growth picks up and inflation rises, they will be a thing of the past. now, however, this instrument is being tried in many countries because normal interest rates are close to zero and central banks are faced with the problem that the real equilibrium interest rate is negative and inflation is so low. neither development was created by central banks, but they are trying to overcome them. which isn ’ t easy. do you not feel simply overwhelmed as a central banker every now and then? there have been calmer times for central bankers, i guess. is “ helicopter money ” one of the tools available to the ecb, i. e. the idea that a central bank prints money and gives it directly to the public? the original idea of helicopter money refers to the direct financing of public expenditure. that is not an option for us. that is not something that we are considering. as president draghi has said on this topic, the treaty on the functioning of the european union prohibits direct financing of governments in the euro area. isn ’ t there a great danger that the ecb ’ s stance undermines the necessary adjustments in the economy, as the cheap money makes balance sheet adjustments unnecessary or keeps unviable banks and businesses alive? some critics warn that the ecb is ultimately creating “ japanese conditions ”. that is certainly not the case. of course, no policy is completely “ clean ” – there are always side effects. but the responsible authorities must stick to their given target. for us, it is an inflation rate that is below, but close to, 2 %. we do not ignore the consequences of our actions. but we must also fulfil our responsibility and others have to fulfil theirs. that also applies to potential risks to financial stability resulting from current monetary policy – basically, a task for macroprudential supervision, not monetary policy. the federal reserve ( the us central bank ) has increased its key interest rate for the first time after seven years of a policy of zero interest rates. does that make the ecb ’ s job easier or more difficult in the long term? both scenarios are possible. our task would be more difficult if bond yields in the euro area were to increase along with us interest rates in the medium term, but that is not likely. what is likely, however, is that the interest rate increase will have an impact

on emerging market economies. that may lead to a further dampening of growth in these countries, which is already weakening. that would make it harder for us. in contrast, it would be easier if, for example, the “ lift off ” ultimately leads in the medium term to an increase in the foreign currency price of us exports. that would help to normalise inflation worldwide. some observers fear turbulence in the financial markets as a result of the almost unprecedented divergence between the monetary policy of the federal reserve and the ecb. i don ’ t see any particular source of risk there. everyone understands that both central banks are reacting to their domestic situations – to growth, employment, inflation. and both history and theory clearly show that when countries ensure equilibrium in their national economy, that is positive in the end for the equilibrium of the global economy as a whole. so you don ’ t share the concerns that the dollar ’ s appreciation could turn out to be stronger than expected, with negative consequences for the united states and emerging economies? it is nearly impossible to predict exchange rates. bis central bankers ’ speeches the biggest impact of qe appears to be on exchange rates. the ecb has therefore been accused of pursuing, at least indirectly, a policy of depreciation. we do not have any sort of target for the exchange rate. we have spoken about the ecb ’ s mandate and target. would you consider it meaningful to review both of these in the future, as you did in 2003? no central bank is changing its inflation target at the moment and we are not considering anything like that either. i do not see any need to engage in such a discussion now. president draghi said at the start of december that, in the future, the governing council will have to take into account the fact that inflation has been well below 2 % for a long time. this reminded some of the idea of price - level targeting, whereby if a target is missed, that shortfall must be made up for later. is a rethink on the horizon? that is certainly one of the over - interpretations which i mentioned earlier. i would never agree to price - level targeting. that is also not a consideration for us. during the financial crisis and the euro area debt crisis, the ecb has continually gained more power and become a political player. what will be the consequences of this in the long run? i don ’ t agree with your assumption that we have become more political – that is simply