to implement the developed requirements, however, some countries have needed a more formal legal basis. in addition, the proposed payment services directive envisages a number of mandates on security requirements for the european banking authority ( eba ) to work on in close cooperation with the ecb. therefore, the forum is now co - chaired by the eba and the ecb. it formally supports both the european system of central banks and the eba in their decision - making processes. the european commission and europol are represented as observers, and there is also dialogue with other authorities, such as the eu ’ s agency for network and information security. cooperation, in particular between overseers and supervisors, is essential since they have complementary views, and not every country has the resources to build up its own know - how in this relatively specialised field. for example, one country might be more focused on it and risk management, while the other focuses more on the payment system in general. some authorities have mandates to look at investor and consumer protection, or competition, while others do not. yet we all share a common interest in maintaining trust in the security and efficiency of payment services. these values are sometimes at odds with innovation. bis central bankers ’ speeches innovations – such as virtual currencies or payment account access services – can be disruptive. they may reveal where the inefficiencies of mainstream solutions lie and change the way we think about the “ service aspect ” of payments, but we should not forget that they often imply financial or security risks, which need to be weighed up against the benefits. my philosophy is to learn from these solutions so as to make genuine payment services more secure and efficient. new players on the market are welcome so long as they are trustworthy and manage their risks adequately. they should not, however, put the end user or the security of other providers at risk. today is an excellent opportunity to discuss not only what the forum has delivered and how it has successfully combined security and efficiency, but also the challenges that lie ahead for the security of retail payments. i wish you a lively and interesting debate. please use this opportunity to exchange your views with our experts. we constantly listen and learn from you and other security experts to shape our requirements. finally, i would like to thank all those who have actively contributed to this work. please continue to make payments in europe both more secure and more efficient. last but not least, a big “ thank you ” to the banque de

platform for payment service innovation. the challenge for europe progress towards an integrated market for payments has not been without its problems. europe still does not have an integrated, standardised card payment network, with the vision of being able to use any card at any payment terminal in europe having yet to be realised. europe ’ s largest card payment networks are still not interoperable. for example, germany ’ s girocard and france ’ s cartes bancaires account for a substantial number of card payments in the euro area ’ s two largest economies. however, owing to significant technical differences, a supposed lack of a business case and an absence of political will, these two networks remain separate – as do most other national card schemes. as a consequence, it is more convenient to use non - european cards when travelling across europe. although some standardisation work has been carried out via the european cards stakeholders group, europe still does not have its own europe - wide card scheme, so we remain fully reliant on non - european schemes when making cross - border card payments. although they provide a valued service, those schemes raise certain questions from a governance perspective. european banks have relinquished their influence in this area, possibly because of short - term profit considerations. indeed, large non - european companies now play a significant role in the provision of payment services in europe, while european banks are focused solely on serving their national markets. let ’ s face it : the foundations laid by european institutions have not been leveraged by european providers in order to offer pan european services. instead, those foundations are often exploited by multinationals from outside europe offering innovative, consumer - friendly solutions. indeed, european banks seem to have surrendered much of the pan european payment business. paypal now dominates the market for online payments in europe, using the pan - european sepa credit transfer and sepa direct debit schemes to provide harmonised services. meanwhile, 2 / 4 bis central bankers'speeches google, apple, facebook and amazon – often referred to collectively as “ gafa ” – are also offering significant payment services with pan - european reach, some of which involve joint ventures with individual banks at national level. at the same time, chinese giants like alibaba and tencent are advancing. while these companies are to be admired for their ability to expand and provide innovative services that consumers want, i would ask why there are no european companies competing in that arena. there is a risk that our dependence on foreign providers will increase further as