more global colleges for significant cross - border firms will become active in the near future. while colleges are a sensible approach to dealing with the global nature of the financial industry, they have their limitations, especially in a global context. in contrast to eu colleges, global colleges have no legal basis, and this hampers supervisory cooperation and information - sharing. dnb currently chairs two global colleges. in these colleges we provide for several it tools to encourage as much information - sharing and cooperation as possible, provided that the confidentiality of supervisory information is assured. conclusion ladies and gentlemen, let me conclude. the crisis has reminded us all too well that a new structure for financial supervision in europe is urgently needed. in a european context, the proposals of de larosiere group are a good point of departure, though specific amendments are required. at the end of may, the european commission will present its reaction to the de larosiere group proposals. i will give our present position. to improve macro - prudential supervision, the european systemic risk council should be set up as soon as possible. open issues about its mandate and institutional design should be resolved. regarding microprudential supervision, i am in favour of more centralised european decision - making, but only if the necessary requirements for such a leap forward are fulfilled. the central issue we need to settle on is burden - sharing at the european level. in a global context, the scope of supervision should be broadened and include all financial systemically - relevant institutions. in line with the g20 declaration, the functioning of colleges of supervisors should be supported.

mr. wellink looks at the united kingdom and emu speech by the president of the nederlandsche bank, dr a. h. e. m. wellink, at the meeting of the nederlandse city lunches in london on 16 / 6 / 98. introduction britain has a love - hate relationship with europe. love, because the uk, too, favours a powerful europe generating peace and free trade relations worldwide. at the same time, however, britain has always been in two minds about its own role, opposed as it is to a federal europe, where national sovereignty is curbed. it is not for nothing that churchill did not envisage his own country as part of a united europe at that time. the relationship between the united kingdom and europe is complicated further by the existence of a third party : the united states. the united states sometimes seems a more attractive partner. it is always easier, in a relationship, be it between states or between husband and wife, to operate with someone from one ’ s own background, in this case anglo - saxon, than with a partner from a totally different culture. all told, however, the british seem to be favouring europe. newt gingrich, the chairman of the us house of representatives, is wrong. he has said that britain would do better to join the north american free trade association than to take up with emu ; but what is the point of that? after all, both economically and politically, the uk has much stronger ties with europe. tony blair is evidencing a greater sense of reality when he holds that his country ’ s future lies in the heart of europe. the question is, however : is he talking about the next few years or about the distant future? the british are hesitant about european integration, as they have always been. the uk only joined the ec in 1973, when they were sure of its success. a similar process would seem to be taking place where emu is concerned. at first, the uk was eager to be in on the process, completely liberalizing its capital movements, but it subsequently demanded an opt - out clause so as not to be forced to take further action. such an approach is risky. there is always the chance than when jumping onto a moving train, one ends up between the train and the platform. a few years ago, no one was able to foresee that on 1 january 1999 emu would be setting off with eleven out of the fifteen