have to complete economic and monetary union. we at the ecb will conduct monetary policy independently so as to safeguard price stability. sz : you keep saying the euro is irreversible. mr draghi, you speak like the chancellor of europe. draghi : i am communicating this message as the president of the ecb to all stakeholders, citizens, businesses and markets. investors need a long - term vision because they undertake long - term commitments. for them, it is very important that our leaders and governments are determined to keep the euro irreversible. so, if i say this, i am saying what our political leaders are fundamentally saying. sz : so you are covering up the failure of politics? draghi : again, i am saying it because it is important to do so. markets should know that the euro is irreversible. that helps them to properly price euro area assets and it helps us in the conduct of our monetary policy. sz : have you ever wanted to become a politician? draghi ( laughs ) : no. sz : why not? draghi : because you do the things you like to do. sz : before us, you had a visit from the greek prime minister, antonis samaras. greece has not met the deficit limit of 3 % of gdp even once. how can such a country stay in the euro area? draghi : by changing. the country has to fundamentally change its policies. and this is what everybody is telling them to do. sz : but greece is seeking further help, after all the help it has already received. it is said that samaras wants a cut on the billions of euro due on the greek bonds the ecb holds. draghi : we haven ’ t discussed this, but – anyway – i ’ m against it. sz : your new bond purchasing programme reminds us of italy in the 1970s, when the central bank helped the state out in its financing, which only increased the problems. bis central bankers ’ speeches draghi : that was something completely different. it took place decades ago, when the italian central bank wasn ’ t independent from the state. in italy things have changed completely since then. banca d ’ italia has now been independent for decades, and has not financed any government deficit. we have to move away from cliches of the past if we want to address the future! sz : the bundesbank has a different view :

lack of participation in decisionmaking and in civil, social and cultural life. one important thing to note is that poverty cannot be defeated through charity. empowering people with a means to sustaining themselves in the long term is the solution that can defeat poverty. 5. unemployment is at the center of poverty. for the poor, labour is often the only asset that can be used to improve the lives and wellbeing. it is crucial that we empower the poor who have the potential but often lack opportunities to shape their lives. bidirectional cause - effect relationship between financial exclusion and poverty 6. as i said earlier, poverty is generally associated with a low level of income. this income is primarily directed towards consumption thereby leaving very little for saving / investment. a low level of savings obviates the need for a banking account thereby creating financial exclusion and lack of investment opportunities. this creates a barrier for financial inclusion from the demand perspective. conversely, financial exclusion can deprive people of the benefits and the incentives offered by the financial system. poverty can, therefore, be self - fuelling from generations to generations. bis central bankers ’ speeches how to break this vicious circle? 7. i am not an economist. many eminent speakers would dwell on this issue during the day. however, i wish to put forward some perspectives as i see them. let me begin with measurement of poverty. i am not on whether those spending below rs. 32 in rural areas or below rs. 47 in urban areas ( as defined by the rangarajan committee ) or rs. 27 and rs. 33 respectively as fixed by tendulkar panel earlier, are to be considered poor. my question is whether such income levels across countries or states ( even after adjusting for purchasing power parity ) are comparable without taking into account the availability, quality and cost of such basic amenities as health care, education, transport, sanitation etc. would not a composite index ( if one can be devised ) of these two elements would be a truer indicator of real poverty level? this can be elaborated with several measurable examples but time limit does not permit to do so. 8. extending that argument further, would it mean that there could be two ways to address the challenge of defeating poverty? a. state ensures availability of quality amenities i mentioned earlier to all needy citizens – question is, whether it is feasible? b. empower and facilitate all citizens to earn such levels of income that they can buy these services from the open market