government debt is good or bad, as i have already mentioned, is a sham question to a certain extent. another sham question is a choice between the financial stability and economic growth. both the central bank and the ministry of finance are being quite often criticised for focusing monetary and fiscal policies respectively on the problem of financial stability to the detriment of economic growth. in actual fact, economic growth is impossible without financial stability. while a stable budget is the basis of financial stability. it is possible to stake money, including government one, at the microlevel, at the level of small specific projects. to take risks at the macrolevel means to endanger economic growth and social stability. bis central bankers ’ speeches an important question is how to finance the deficit : through reserves or through debt? strictly speaking, both options lead to growth in net debt ( net of reserves ) and consequently to debt burden accumulation. that is why this choice is also a sham one to a large extent. nevertheless, since the commodity market risks are high, we believe that today the priority should be given to debt financing and keeping reserves for more complicated scenarios, when the access to debt financing is even more difficult. moreover, no doubt that the available reserves serve as an insurance from the market point of view and make the access to debt financing somewhat easier. in conclusion i would like to say a few words about how to reach the path of strong economic growth amid tough monetary and fiscal policies and prudent build - up of government debt. the matter is the structure of budget expenditure, rather than its volume, and the use of structural reform potential. the external conditions push the economy towards structural changes and balanced structural reforms may accelerate this process and make it less painful. the emphasis should be put on those industries, which turned out to be competitive in the current situation without government support. only they could become an efficient engine of development amid new reality. as it often happens, the best way to help businesses in the current conditions is not to interfere. the deficit resources of government support should be concentrated on assistance to the most vulnerable population groups, as well as on the development of infrastructure and human capital. bis central bankers ’ speeches

is important that we see balanced growth in retail lending. i said at the beginning of my speech that it is important not to reach dangerous levels of household debt burden. we are now being forced to pay attention to unsecured lending again. here 2 / 5 bis central bankers'speeches are some figures : in march of this year, debt on unsecured lending increased by 1. 9 % in just one month. according to preliminary data, it grew by another 1. 6 % in april. if such rates persist, then the annual growth will be about 20 %, which is much higher than the growth of household incomes. we are already seeing an increase in debt burden. now households are directing almost 12 % of disposable income ( 11. 9 % ) to servicing loans. this is 1 percentage point more than it was pre - pandemic, when we were already rather concerned about unsecured lending. we do not want this trend to grow, so we have returned to the macroprudential policy we pursued before the pandemic. this involves the following requirement : more capital on loans granted to borrowers that already have loans. but we understand that such macroprudential measures ‘ eat away ’ at banks ’ capital, which could be used to expand lending in other segments and cover losses on restructured loans. what ’ s more, these measures affect different banks in different ways, that is to say, they almost don ’ t have a discouraging effect on banks with a large capital reserve, while they seriously impact those banks that have a small capital reserve. therefore, we are once again addressing the duma. we know that the government has approved a draft law that allows the central bank to set quantitative limits on unsecured consumer loans for borrowers with a high debt burden. and it will not be an additional burden on capital. in our opinion, this will be positive and will affect different banks with different capital reserves equally. the introduction of quantitative restrictions themselves, if we are granted that right, is a crucial step, we understand, and we will discuss it in detail with the banking community. another risk that we are paying attention to, and we think that you are also paying attention to, is not only the increase in debt burden, but also the interest rate risk that individuals can unwittingly take upon themselves. thus, we came up with an initiative and published a report. we are also discussing with you the proposal of not allowing