consensus helps 68 agencies and other members from two dozen countries with different perspectives and agendas come together around our shared interest in a stable global financial system. international negotiations and standard - setting is not the best approach to all problems, but in my past experience as a treasury department official, it is often the best way to tackle problems that are global in scope. by actively participating in the fsb and engaging with its members at a high level, the united states is supporting high international standards that are equal to those in the united states. our standards will be most effective when other major economies embrace them in a consistent manner. the goal is to limit the risks of another financial crisis and do what we can to promote prosperity and a bright future for the people you serve so faithfully in the great state of utah. the fsb was created in april 2009 and was the successor of a less - formal group known as the financial stability forum. see www. fsb. org / about /. 5 / 5 bis central bankers'speeches

i get back to the good news i delivered earlier, about steps being taken in washington to tailor regulation and reduce the regulatory burden on community banks. but, of course, these are two sides of the same coin. appropriately reducing the regulatory burden for community banks is possible when we can get an accurate picture of the risks and vulnerabilities in the broader financial system, which utah ’ s banks are part of and depend on. tailoring does not mean abandoning our responsibility to promote a stable financial system, but embracing it, assisted by fsb efforts to ensure that reforms are having the 4 / 5 bis central bankers'speeches intended effects and supported by the global standards that the fsb and other international standard - setting bodies are able to establish and promote. in closing, i want to address an issue relevant to any international organization, which is sovereignty. more specifically, we sometimes hear concerns that international bodies such as the fsb threaten our sovereignty by imposing rules on the united states, which would be a concern. let me be clear : the fsb has no enforcement powers, no legal authority to command its members to do anything, and not even authority, as in some international organizations, to induce action based on contractual obligations. the fsb does not impose obligations, it addresses problems — problems that are of great importance to the united states and which, because of the global nature of the financial system, we cannot address alone. the united states and other governments created the fsb and participate in it because it is in our national interests to do so, and that is really the basis of its effectiveness. the united states is not weaker or less independent by participating in the fsb or other standard - setting bodies. on the contrary, when rightly structured our participation in these groups makes our financial system significantly stronger by ensuring that the u. s. perspective is part of the discussions and reflected in standards agreed to. our consumers and businesses are more secure and prosperous because the fsb helps make sure that all countries are doing their share in promoting financial stability and not gaining an unfair advantage. like some other effective organizations, a source of the fsb ’ s power is that it functions by consensus. that can make reaching decisions more difficult, but it also yields decisions that can be truly effective solutions because all participants feel a stake in them. it is useful when the credibility and commitment of the decisions are especially important, such as when my fed colleagues and i set monetary policy. at the fsb, relying on