bank ad skopje. dear guests, the fact that the leaders of this fund offered to present their financial services in the republic of macedonia, the central bank certainly encouraged and supported this initiative, shows that these important partners consider the republic of macedonia a friendly environment for launching various mutually beneficial business initiatives and projects. yet, we do not forget though, that some of these institutions had no doubts whatsoever about the republic of macedonia even in the most difficult periods for us after gaining the independence, since when nobody else was coming, they were here. we certainly appreciate that. regardless of all above, we still have many reasons that urge us to notice and convince others why is it good to invest in the republic of macedonia and to develop partnership with our economic agents and, of course, to inform on the activities that all of us in our country perform, directed towards increasing the attractiveness of the republic of macedonia as investment destination. hence, we definitely need such financial offers. the economic growth could be accelerated by more investments, competitive offer of financial instruments and products, which are likely to eventually bring about lower costs for borrowing capital. the potential investors should be aware that the macedonian financial sector is booming, but that the room for investments is yet to be opened. the gross national savings is low, not more than 12 - 17 % of gdp, over the recent several years. the gross domestic savings have been even lower over the last five years, swinging around 2. 5 % of gdp, on average. since 1995, the gross investments have virtually never exceeded 20 % of gdp. the foreign investments, except in the years of large privatizations by foreign companies, are also low, barely 2 % of gdp, on average, in the last 4 years. the total bank assets, even though registering a fast growth over the last years, making up roughly 50 % of gdp, still shows low level of financial intermediation in the country. the above figures were target of a deep impact of the external shocks the country suffered, besides, of course, the inexcusable delay of many essential reforms of the vital sectors of the country. but, eventually, the potential investors and creditors have to believe that : - the political and security shocks in the region and inside the country are behind us, - the economy accelerates its growth, which over the recent years is not below 4 % real gdp growth, - we preserve high macro - economic stability that implies exceptionally disciplined monetary and fiscal policies, which in turn result in low

liquidity requirements in the u. s. and globally have made banks more resilient and robust. the major u. s. banking organizations today have much more capital, much higher - quality capital, and much larger liquidity buffers than prior to the crisis. on the capital side, we have taken a belt - and - suspenders approach. the basel iii risk - weighted capital standards framework has been significantly strengthened ― a stronger belt ― and a supplemental leverage ratio requirement has also been imposed on large banks and bank holding companies to restrain overall leverage ― the suspenders. in addition, and perhaps most importantly, the capital requirements have now become much more forward - looking. each year a bank ’ s capital dividend and share - repurchase plan is assessed against the amount of capital the bank would potentially have under an extremely stressed economic and market environment given its portfolio of assets. the annual comprehensive capital and analysis review ( ccar ) process has pushed u. s. banks to improve their capital planning processes and forced them, when needed, to retain more earnings and to build up their capital. as a result, these banks are much less risky now than they were prior to the financial crisis, when their vulnerability was masked by a high, but unsustainable, level of profitability. 1 / 3 bis central bankers'speeches on the liquidity side, there has also been significant improvement. the liquidity coverage ratio and the net stable funding ratio requirements have forced banks to hold more high - quality liquid assets and have reduced the scope for maturity transformation. the ability and willingness of banks to finance illiquid, hard - to - value assets with short - term funding was an important element that contributed to the financial crisis. in addition, i believe that supervisory oversight has improved. there is more attention on horizontal evaluations across the systemically important firms and a greater emphasis on bank governance, risk management, cyber security, and bank data and technology capabilities than in the past. but the progress has not just been in terms of enhancing the strength of individual institutions. the system as a whole is also stronger because of a number of important initiatives. due to time constraints, i cannot be exhaustive today. but, there are four important structural changes to the financial system that are worth highlighting. first, the tri - party repo system — which matches institutional investors with bank dealers that need to fund their securities portfolios — has been made much safer. before the crisis, each morning the two large