able to respond with a huge package of measures owing to the monetary and fiscal space we created in the past period. had we postponed the adoption of measures, the consequences of such irresponsible behaviour would have been enormous. we would have witnessed unemployment, factory closures, billions of euros of gdp lost. had we not responded immediately and comprehensively, we estimate that gdp would have fallen by over 6 % in 2020, while the recovery, as was the case after the earlier, 2009 crisis, could last three to five years. owing to everything we have done, including the latest government measures, serbia will recover from the consequences of the pandemic in the course of this year. dear friends, we would not be able to talk today about sustainable development and innovation had we not protected our economy from the consequences of the pandemic with our measures. almost each month the national bank of serbia responded with some of its measures. to support economic recovery, in 2020 we cut the key policy rate four times, to the current level of 1. 0 %. we ensured even more favourable financing conditions, with interest rates on new dinar corporate loans reduced by additional 0. 8 pp in 2020 ( to 3. 2 % in december ). 1 / 3 bis central bankers'speeches as a result of all the measures we have adopted, total domestic lending continued at an almost two - digit growth rate for the third year in a row, with sound y - o - y growth of 9. 9 % recorded in december. owing to all the measures, and despite the pandemic, the npl ratio was lowered further, from 4. 1 % to 3. 7 %. thanks to the combination of all the adopted measures, last year interest rates on dinar and euro - indexed corporate loans almost equalised, led by a reduction in dinar interest rates. we had never had such situation in serbia before. moreover, in january this year the interest rate on dinar corporate loans of 2. 2 % was at a significantly lower level than the interest rate on euro loans which measured 2. 8 %. you have also seen that inflation in serbia is no longer talked about. in 2020 as well, we maintained average inflation at 1. 6 %, i. e. we continued to fulfil our primary objective even in the crisis year. we have also preserved the relative stability of the exchange rate, this being one of the key contributions to overall macroeconomic stability of the country and business

on the use of national taxpayers ’ money, for example, are unlikely to meet with much approval. at the moment, it is not possible to tell whether policymakers are prepared to take such comparatively far - reaching steps. as i see it, the objective should not be a “ big bang ” but rather the creation of better coordinated regulations and supervisory practices. iii i wish to talk now briefly about insurance supervision. in this area, too, the differences in the regulations in europe are probably still too great for a europe - wide centralisation of insurance supervision to appear an appropriate solution. but the debate is even going beyond that - in the direction of a european “ one - stop ” financial supervisory authority. given the problems in the individual financial sectors that i have just outlined, i do not believe that this would be a suitable organisational model for europe in the foreseeable future. moreover, “ one - stop ” financial supervision is not a familiar regulatory model in europe. it would therefore probably be difficult to implement. iv therefore, my conclusion is that it is necessary to close the remaining regulatory gaps, to harmonise the existing regulations and supervisory practices and to intensify cross - border and cross - sector cooperation among the supervisors. i believe that new institutions in europe are not practicable at the moment. the existing bodies should be strengthened instead. ensuring an appropriate system of regulation for the european financial system remains an ongoing task. more than ever, this calls for a flexible response from policymakers and regulators.