of including a standing chapter that describes our view of a number of current stability issues of a more political nature is interesting. one advantage is that it would give us a reason to jointly develop an overall view on issues of this nature a couple of times a year. today this is done on an ad hoc basis, in connection with responses to submissions or in connection with some form of reasoning in the financial stability reports. however, a change of this type requires considerable additional work for those working on the analyses and would also take up more of the executive board ’ s time than at present. it therefore needs to be considered in the light of other commitments. there are other areas of the assessment where i am more undecided. one of the recommendations was that we should regularly take into account other operators in the infrastructure than the banks and institutions. i agree that it is important to look further afield, not just in obvious places, when trying to identify threats and shocks. we should most probably take some steps in this direction. however, there are also risks entailed in this suggestion. one strength of our method of working has been the concentration on central, systemically - important issues. if we broaden our commitments we may be forced to give up some of this depth, and what we publish may be more difficult to grasp. some of the recommendations concerned international connections in the stability work. increased international surveillance is one of their recommendations that we are happy to follow. the integration of financial systems is increasing all the time and requires that we raise our gaze to take in the world around us. we already have this aim, but much remains to be done. another aspect of internationalisation that is emphasised concerns crisis management. we are encouraged to continue with our crisis management exercises, but to carry them out together with our european colleagues. this is an important issue that we discussed in more depth in the financial stability report published a year ago. we observed then that an integrated financial market has positive effects on the economy as a whole, but that it entails challenges for those of us who oversee the system. as the banking systems in different countries become more dependent on one another, the contagion risks will increase further. given this, it is important to identify what roles are played by the different authorities. who should bear the main responsibility if one of nordea ’ s finnish branch offices were to suffer problems - we or our colleagues in finland? conclusion let me round off with a hope that i have been

the banks manage without any threat to their survival? by testing how hard potential risks would hit the banks ’ resilience, we can gain an idea of how robust, or stable, the system is. the riksbank ’ s most important tool for influencing financial stability is our analysis. credible and knowledgeable analysis can probably often be used to influence and convince market operators. our analysis can also provide support to the government and to finansinspektionen who have more instruments at their disposal. given all of these difficulties, why should the riksbank devote itself to stability work? one reason is the central role we play in the payment system. the riksbank, together with the commercial banks, forms the hub of this system. together we supply instruments of payment. the banks distribute the banknotes and coins we issue. they also hold current accounts connected to the giro system and operate charge card systems. the riksbank supplies accounts in the rix payment system that the banks can use to make large - value interbank payments. another reason is that there is a correlation between the other objective of our operations - to maintain price stability. a stable financial system is a necessary condition for successful inflation - targeting. the riksdag has therefore given the riksbank has the task of “ promoting a safe and efficient payment system ”. how does the riksbank work with financial stability? our task can be said to consist of two parts - preventing crises and being prepared to manage them should they nevertheless arise. the preventive work involves overseeing the financial markets and the institutions active in them, and also participating in the design of the regulatory framework. oversight the regular oversight of stability entails both detecting potential risks that can arise in the financial system and assessing the financial institutions ’ strength to resist any problems that nevertheless arise. the riksbank presents its analysis of possible risks and of the banks ’ resilience in its financial stability report, published twice a year. the next report will be published in two weeks ’ time. the intention is to convey our view of the risks and the banks ’ resilience to participants in the financial markets, as well as to others with responsibility for, or interest in, these issues. hopefully, the report can contribute to a well - informed debate on the stability of the swedish financial system and influence those participating in the system. the riksbank can also use the financial stability report to show how we work to achieve the objectives the riksda