tonight can help us to start talking with one another. after all, unlike our predecessors in the teutonia club 150 years ago, we don ’ t cut ourselves off and sing german folk songs ; instead we want to learn and benefit from one another. and i am certain that here in singapore, one of the world ’ s leading fintech hotspots, here is much to see that will enable us to better understand and learn. ladies and gentlemen, i wish you a pleasant evening with many interesting conversations. 1 www. handelsblatt. com / finanzen / banken - versicherungen / start - up - branche - wenige - glaenzen - viele - scheitern - bei - fintechs - rollt - die - pleitewelle / 24505994. html 2 bis : fsi insights “ innovative technology in financial supervision ( suptech ) – the experience of early users ”. 4 / 4 bis central bankers'speeches

by over a hundred countries worldwide. in the arab region, for example, only saudi arabia is a member of the basel committee, but countries from the whole arab region have adopted the basel rules to varying degrees. all in all, i am convinced that the effort we have put into the post - crisis reforms and the compromises we have made will pay off for all of us. they will contribute to a healthier and more sustainable global financial order. 4. no turning back considering the many differences between the countries involved – their economies, their financial sectors, their institutional set - ups – we have made remarkable progress over the last couple of years. but what ’ s next? in my view, we ’ re not done yet. we now need to cement the reform ’ s success. this requires two things. first, we need to take a “ constructive break ”, in which we protect the reform from sceptics and evaluate it. second, we need to ensure its consistent and comprehensive implementation, while at the same time acknowledging regional differences. let me start with that i dubbed a “ constructive break ”. some voices are already calling for us to turn back the regulatory clock. take the debate about deregulation in the us, or about competitive deregulation after brexit. often, the argument is that capital requirements and regulation in general have become too harsh and that they prevent the financial sector from supporting the real economy. to put it bluntly : these claims are misleading. they are exaggerated and not backed by empirical evidence. we must not repeat the mistakes made before the financial crisis and deregulate just because we think this would fuel economic growth, while in reality it actually fuels the next crisis. empirical studies suggest that tighter capital requirements are in fact beneficial, and not just for stability reasons. for example, they reveal that higher levels of equity capital are correlated with higher lending volumes. this is why i am in favour of a regulatory break. neither must we give in to calls for yet another wave of deregulation, nor should we tighten the screws of regulation further. there are a few notable areas where action is called for, such as the regulatory treatment of sovereign bonds. but apart from these, we should now wait and see how the new rules play out. we should use this break to thoroughly evaluate the impact of our recent reforms, and to amend and improve them where gaps and errors are found. in parallel, we need to focus our energy on the comprehensive and consistent