is to say claims with a maturity of more than five years – at german banks has risen from 60 % in 2007 to just under 70 %. the ratio among institutions in the savings bank and cooperative bank sector is especially high. at 83 %, it is significantly higher than the 47 % ratio for commercial banks. thus, we are in a situation in which banks and savings banks are holding many long - term, lowyielding investments in their books. moreover, valuations for many investments are extremely high. by contrast, risk provisioning in the german banking system is very low, at 0. 6 % of total assets. this makes banks vulnerable to unexpected macroeconomic developments, such as an abrupt hike in interest rates or an unforeseen deterioration in economic activity. at the same time, they have shortened the maturities of their liabilities. the ratio of overnight deposits to total liabilities towards non - banks has risen within ten years from 36 % to around 60 %. an important aspect in this context is that customers are parking their funds in deposits because interest rates on investments are so low. it is difficult to predict how these funds will be shifted as soon as more attractive investments become available. historical experience gives us a rough idea, but in view of the extreme situation of the current low - interest - rate environment it is of only limited use as a guide for the future. the bottom line here is that we see an increased vulnerability of banks to changing interest rates. this is why we have been keeping a very close eye on the topic of interest rate risk. our low - interest - rate survey 2017 focused on this very issue, simulating the implications of possible shocks for small and medium - sized banks and savings banks. one scenario entailing an abrupt rise in the yield curve by 200 basis points highlights banks ’ short - term vulnerability. in such a scenario, profits would initially plummet by around 55 % before staging a recovery in the medium term. this means that the speed at which interest rates are raised is crucial. the stress test carried out as part of our low - interest - rate survey combined several risks at once. besides an abrupt rise in the yield curve of 200 basis points, it simulated a simultaneous increase in credit and market risk. on aggregate, in such a case the tier 1 capital ratio would drop from around 16 % to around 13 %, which is to say by some three percentage points. yet a more detailed look reveals the positive impact of substantially improved capital levels

depends a lot on global developments. if necessary, we stand ready to use all of the instruments at our disposal. that includes the key interest rates and the size, composition and duration of our securities purchases. we will take a decision on this in march. how will the ecb ever manage to move away again from its expansionary monetary policy? technically speaking, it ’ s not hard to do. the us central bank is currently demonstrating how it ’ s done. what is more important is that our environment – and by that i mean government policies – should support us sufficiently in generating more growth. if this does not happen, we will have to keep rates low for a very long time. so it ’ s not just up to us whether the low interest rate phase can be brought to an end, it also depends on the pace of reform in euro area countries. but the refugee crisis means that we ’ re also facing a new challenge right now. is this going to affect economic developments? it is a huge challenge, not only in germany, but for europe as a whole. but the refugee crisis is also a great opportunity for europe if the refugees can be successfully integrated into the labour market. the more europe stands together in the refugee crisis, the greater is the likelihood that it can be overcome. as a european citizen, i believe that we are now at a historic moment when the eu must demonstrate that it is able to reach a european solution. bis central bankers ’ speeches is that realistic? europe has already overcome similar situations, for example during the debt crisis. in this case, given that we are talking about millions of people who are fleeing to europe, i personally believe that the eu has a moral obligation to find a joint european solution. the european project is not first and foremost a financial project. europe always was, and will continue to be, about bringing people together, not about dividing them. the euro area countries cannot even agree on whether or not there should be a common limit on payments in cash. what would you advocate? this is a matter for the eu finance ministers to decide on, not the ecb. there are countries in europe where cash is very important, and there are others where cash plays a lesser role. but the ecb is responsible for withdrawing the €500 note. we have direct responsibility for this because of course we print the banknote. the ecb ’ s governing council is currently considering very carefully the question of whether or not to withdraw the €500 note