discourse. in my view, it is therefore not so much a question of taking a " giant leap ", but more of specifying and implementing existing 2 / 3 bis - central bankers'speeches considerations. and the clear aim here should be to make european capital markets more attractive. this is something for which harmonised, reliable and uncomplicated legal frameworks are crucial. the action plan presented in 2020 already provides very concrete recommendations for a total of 16 areas. one of these areas is the securitisation market. here, it could be possible to stimulate the market by reducing any unnecessary regulatory barriers faced by market participants. this would bridge a gap between bank financing and the capital market, as securitisations could help to distribute risk more efficiently in the capital market. another area is the currently highly divergent national regimes for corporate insolvency resolution. the lack of harmonised insolvency rules is currently considered one of the main obstacles to the free movement of capital within the european union. the eurosystem, too, plays a role in strengthening the capital markets union : through its objective of price stability, which is a major factor that makes eurodenominated assets attractive ; through banking and financial supervision, which inspires confidence amongst investors ; and by strengthening market infrastructure, for example through t2 in payments and securities settlement, in which the bundesbank plays a major part in development and operation. 5 conclusion ladies and gentlemen, anniversaries are an occasion for joy, and, at the same time, a good time for reflection. what is clear is that europe's success story has not yet reached its conclusion, and more progress is needed on the capital markets union, in particular. there is no shortage of big, new ideas here, as meaningful proposals are on the table. but, as former german federal president joachim gauck once said : " more europe requires more courage from everyone. " policymakers and the financial sector now need the courage to flesh out and implement these proposals in order to remove any obstacles on the road to deepening the capital markets union. it's a lot like running hurdles in athletics : speed is important, but so are good timing and fitness. you only reach your goal once you've successfully cleared all of the obstacles in your path. now is a good time to clear some more of these hurdles, which will surely bring us closer to the finishing line. thank you. 3 / 3 bis - central bankers '

2016 – an adequate timeframe, in my opinion, for mobilising these funds. it would also be right, in my view, to use the option granted by the srm regulation of also counting amounts which banks have already paid into national resolution funds towards their contributions. a european deposit guarantee scheme is not being regarded as a matter of priority at the moment, and rightly so. after all, a joint deposit guarantee scheme would necessarily mean joint liability. but joint european liability would necessitate joint european control, which would require more than the creation of a single supervisory mechanism. 6. 2 single supervisory mechanism the ecb is aiming to be ready to launch the single supervisory mechanism ( ssm ) on 4 november. this will require a mammoth effort by all the parties involved. it is a project that is comparable to the creation of monetary union, but is to be rolled out at seven times the speed. at the current juncture, the ecb together with the national supervisors is comprehensively assessing the balance sheets of 128 banks which, as things stand today, are candidates for direct ecb supervision. if the asset quality review and the subsequent stress test reveal that banks need to be recapitalised, the need for capital will have occurred on the watch of the national supervisors – so you could say it is a legacy issue. it is therefore down to the member states in question to repair these legacy issues before responsibility shifts to the ecb. private funds should be first in line to address any capital shortfalls. failing that, it should be up to the member state to recapitalise the bank in question, assuming the latter runs a viable business model. this asset quality review is a major undertaking for supervisors and the banks in question. yet at the same time, it is crucial for ensuring that the single supervisory mechanism gets off to a credible start in its mission to restore confidence in banks and revitalise lending in the euro area. hence the strict and demanding standards set by the asset quality review and the subsequent stress test. the assessment represents a huge administrative burden for the banks, so their misgivings are understandable. but if you are looking to paint a complete picture, there ’ s simply no getting round a thorough assessment. the procedure is even being likened to a full physical examination for banks. before a football club signs a new player, it first subjects him to a thorough medical – and that is more than just a quick once - over. of course there are some