. the acpr has since then actively participated in the work of the technical market risk group of the basel committee. the new rules proposed in the document currently submitted for consultation should permit a return to the impacts initially sought ex ante, i. e. an average increase of 20 % to 30 % in the minimum capital requirement for market risks. beside regulation – thus clarified – and microprudential supervision, macroprudential policies now round off in many countries the financial stability trifecta. in france, the acpr contributes actively to the discussions of the haut conseil de stabilite financiere ( high council for financial stability – hcsf ) chaired by the minister for the economy and finance. in the face of rapid and excessive growth in the debt of several large corporations, the hcsf has adopted a measure which comes into force on 1 july ; it imposes on french systemic banks a limit to their exposures to the most leveraged large non - financial resident corporations. the hcsf nevertheless remains vigilant in the face of the rapid increase in bank lending to the private sector, which stood at + 5. 5 % in the first quarter of 2018. french private debt reached 130 % of gdp at end - 2017, the highest of the large countries in the euro area. since 2014, it has risen by more than 9 % of gdp, while it has declined by 5. 4 % of gdp on average for the euro area. the hcsf stated on 29 march that it stands ready to act. in particular, if we have to decide, at our next meeting, on a countercyclical capital buffer, that would evidently not be in order to stop the lending today : it would be – as the name suggests – to avoid a credit crunch tomorrow when there is a cyclical downturn in the economy, particularly for small and medium - sized enterprises. should banks lack sufficient capital, they could manage the heightened risks thus materialising in their balance sheets by restricting new lending. it is this excessive credit cycle – the risk of “ go and stop ” seen during financial crises – that a moderate capital buffer must seek to smooth out. it should be noted in passing that a clear majority of member states of the european union have adopted other macroprudential measures page 3 of 6 to specifically limit residential lending, constraining households : in my view it is out of the question in france. ii. to reduce fragmentation and improve private risk sharing in

gabriel makhlouf : remarks on the mortgage measures framework review opening remarks by mr gabriel makhlouf, governor of the central bank of ireland, to the central bank listens event for the mortgage measures framework review, 15 july 2021. * * * welcome to the central bank of ireland, albeit virtually. i am delighted to welcome you to today ’ s central bank listens event. it is one of three listens events taking place this month focusing on the central bank ’ s mortgage measures. in 2015, the central bank introduced a set of measures to help guard against excessively loose lending standards in the mortgage market. while not always understood as such, the measures are essential to our mission to serve the public by maintaining monetary and financial stability and ensuring that the financial system operates in the best interests of consumers and the wider economy. we know that borrowers with high levels of debt relative to their income or to the value of their house are more likely to face financial difficulties in challenging economic times. by focusing on lending standards, the mortgage measures help to guard against a credit - fuelled house price boom like the one we saw in the 2000s re - emerging in the future. we review the effectiveness of the mortgage measures every year against their stated objectives. as part of that regular review, we look at the calibration of the measures and take into account wider housing and mortgage market developments. several changes to the calibration and functioning of the mortgage measures have taken place over the years because of these annual reviews. however, we ’ ve organised today ’ s event as part of our review of the overarching framework for the mortgage measures. you may be curious to know what exactly a framework review is and why are we conducting one now. as the mortgage measures are a permanent feature of the market, it is important that we not only do the annual review, but that we also consider the effectiveness of the overarching framework. this is good policy practice and i personally am not a believer in “ set and forget ” policy making, even if the policies have been effective. the framework review will take place throughout this year and next, alongside the regular annual reviews. it is now approaching seven years since the mortgage measures were first introduced. the environment in which we operate evolves constantly so it is important that our overall policy framework remains fit for purpose, whether that is the precise tools that we use, our strategy for how the measures operate in a changing environment, how we balance the benefits