challenge of adjusting to open trade is a serious issue that has not received the degree of attention it fully deserves. this may partly reflect the fact that the burden has been borne unequally and spread out over a long time period. it also may reflect the fact that the winners from trade have often tended to have a stronger voice than those who have been the losers. 3 / 6 bis central bankers'speeches research has documented that the effects on individuals of job dislocation — including those resulting from trade — can be significant and long lasting. older workers tend to suffer larger earnings losses, and may face larger transition costs. displaced workers may not have the appropriate skills to find good jobs in other areas of the economy, including in growing export sectors. when the affected industry represents a large share of the local economy, the damage is often magnified. in this case, the burden is more widespread because wages across the community are likely to be hit as well. and, this doesn ’ t begin to capture the full human toll — including the impact on workers who have lost confidence in the future and the poorer health outcomes that occur because of increased stress. for too many individuals in the united states, for instance, the american dream has been put at risk, with parents increasingly pessimistic about whether their children will have the opportunity to do better than they did. we should find better ways to help communities that are struggling because of the effects of free trade. in the united states, we have historically experienced a high degree of geographic labor mobility — much higher than in other advanced economies. the ability to move in search of better opportunities, when possible, has helped to mitigate some of the adverse effects of trade. but, mobility has declined in the united states in recent years, implying that the adjustment costs to trade may have increased. protectionism is not the answer given these costs of global integration and more liberalized trade, what is the best path forward? protectionism can have a siren - like appeal. viewed narrowly, it may be potentially rewarding to particular segments of the economy in the short term. viewed more broadly, it would almost certainly be destructive to the economy overall in the long term. countries need to compete better, not compete less. trade barriers are a very expensive way to preserve jobs in less competitive or declining industries. they blunt opportunities in export industries and they reduce the affordability of goods and services to households. indeed, such measures often backfire, resulting in harm to workers and

is working with isda, lch and others to ensure this change is implemented smoothly. these reforms, including to the timing of sonia publication, will take effect from march / april next year. working group on sterling risk - free reference rates let me now turn to the issue of forging a market consensus on the appropriate risk free rate. all speeches are available online at www. bankofengland. co. uk / speeches here the bank set up the risk free rate working group with the objectives of identifying an rfr and promoting its use as an alternative to sterling libor. we used our convening power to do this because we recognised that individual market participants, acting alone, cannot overcome network effects. only coordination and cooperation across a broad spectrum of market participants can create the conditions for change. we also believe that the solution must come from the market – that is why the group is market - led. as you know, and having considered the merits of two secured benchmarks alongside sonia, the group has now reached a decision to recommend sonia as the rfr. this is welcome progress : the main priority from the bank ’ s perspective was for the market to coalesce. we were committed to supporting whatever decision the group made. that is what having a market - led process means. as it happens we were not surprised by the outcome because the transition path to a secured rate would clearly be much more difficult than it will be for sonia. a consequence of the group ’ s decision is that sonia will grow in importance. administering a systemically important benchmark is a new departure for the bank – but it is a role we accept given our statutory ability to collect the underlying data. we will administer sonia as a utility, for the benefit of the market, on a cost - recovery basis. i know francois will say more about how the sterling working group made its decision. for my part, i would like to take this opportunity to thank francois, members of the working group, and their institutions, for their commitment and hard work in getting to this point. however the task is not yet finished. attention now turns to the adoption of sonia as an alternative to sterling libor. the working group has an important ongoing coordination role to play. the main focus so far has been on the derivatives markets. indeed we invited dealers to form the working group in the first place because our experience of derivatives reform suggests they can be most influential in catalysing a transition. but it is stating the obvious