those ccps whose activities are “ super - systemic ” for the eu market establish themselves in the european union. they are a step in the right direction and represent the only viable mechanism to guarantee that european authorities and national central banks in particular, can control and manage the risks that ccps are likely to pose to the financial stability of the european union. once the provisions on the resolution of ccps have been finalised, the compensation framework within the eu will have been improved considerably. 2 / 3 bis central bankers'speeches * * * let me conclude with a general remark that concerns the economy : we need a system to assess, ex post, the economic effects of the reforms. france fully supports the work of the fsb to develop a structured analytical framework, which germany has rightly included in its priorities for its g20 presidency. europe, and germany and france in particular, now has a special duty to protect financial regulation – a regulation that is sensitive to risk, balanced in its treatment of banks and nonbanks and binds the entire international community. generally, that is what we ’ ve been doing well since 2009, and it is what continues to inspire us. thank you for your attention and i wish you an excellent conference. 3 / 3 bis central bankers'speeches

, pleasant and not so pleasant, but, paraphrasing a woodrow wilson school adage from the time i was here, “ wherever you go, there you are. ” if you are not happy with yourself, even the loftiest achievements won ’ t bring you much satisfaction. 3. the concept of success leads me to consider so - called meritocracies and their implications. we have been taught that meritocratic institutions and societies are fair. putting aside the reality that no system, including our own, is really entirely meritocratic, meritocracies may be fairer and more efficient than some alternatives. but fair in an absolute sense? think about it. a meritocracy is a system in which the people who are the luckiest in their health and genetic endowment ; luckiest in terms of family support, encouragement, and, probably, income ; luckiest in their educational and career opportunities ; and luckiest in so many other ways difficult to enumerate – these are the folks who reap the largest rewards. the only way for even a putative meritocracy to hope to pass ethical muster, to be considered fair, is if those who are the luckiest in all of those respects also have the greatest responsibility to work hard, to contribute to the betterment of the world, and to share their luck with others. as the gospel of luke says ( and i am sure my rabbi will forgive me for quoting the new testament in a good cause ) : “ from everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required ; and from the one to whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded ” ( luke 12 : 48, new revised standard version bible ). kind of grading on the curve, you might say. 4. who is worthy of admiration? the admonition from luke – which is shared by most ethical and philosophical traditions, by the way – helps with this question as well. those most worthy of admiration are those who have made the best use of their advantages or, alternatively, coped most courageously with their adversities. i think most of us would agree that people who have, say, little formal schooling but labor honestly and diligently to help feed, clothe, and educate their families are deserving of greater respect – and help, if necessary – than many people who are superficially more successful. they ’ re more fun to have a beer with, too. that ’ s all