see nbp fsr of february 2016 ( financial stability report ) : ‘ the experience from attempts to rescue sk bank confirmed the necessity of prompt introduction into the polish legal system the provisions of the bank recovery and resolution directive – brrd ’ ( p. 52 ). bis central bankers ’ speeches in this respect, we have to be mindful of banks ’ concerns about compliance costs, the complexity of the new framework and its cumulative impact. inconsistencies between the different levels of legislation should be avoided. at the same time, more clarity about the interaction between the various acts and measures would be welcome. we agree on the need to standardise and streamline data reporting initiatives to reduce unnecessary burdens for banks. proportionality must guide action in the reporting area if we want to be consistent with the objective of preserving diversity of business models within the eu. and if there are concrete cases to improve the overall consistency of the post - crisis framework by avoiding overlaps and gaps in the regulation, these should certainly be addressed. conclusion let me draw to a close. a stable financial system is an absolute prerequisite for sustainable economic growth, but stability alone is not enough : as has been said before, we all want stability, but we should not want the stability of the graveyard. it also has to be profitable for banks to provide credit to the real economy. for that, we need a more favourable business environment in europe but we also need less uncertainty, including in the realm of regulation. the cost of equity cannot stay above the return on equity forever. put differently, regulatory reform is necessary but it should lead to regulatory reliability. we should aim for regulatory completion yet still strive for a new dynamic equilibrium to provide the solid foundation that banks need in order to operate effectively. i am convinced that the transformation of europe ’ s banking landscape currently in progress can lead to a stronger, more competitive and more resilient banking system if we succeed in balancing change and stability. bis central bankers ’ speeches

main roles for the eurosystem in this regard : first, as an operator, to ensure that we provide the right services for the settlement of payments and securities ; second, as a catalyst, to facilitate standardisation and interoperability ; and third, as an overseer and supervisor, to safeguard financial stability and ensure a level playing field. some of you may say that there is another challenge, namely the need to cope with the many changes in the regulatory framework. while i fully agree that we should provide stable framing conditions in terms of regulatory certainty, we should not forget where we have come from : the transition from the “ old normal ” to the “ new normal ” was accompanied by the biggest bail - out in history, costing european taxpayers almost two trillion euros. 3 in response, the european union ( eu ) has strengthened and harmonised the regulatory framework with the single rulebook and by introducing a paradigm shift from “ bail - out ” to “ bail - in ”. in the euro area, we went even further with the establishment of the banking union. the banking union was a game - changer in the crisis as a way to weaken the banksovereign nexus. it was also an unprecedented step towards deeper integration of europe ’ s banking sector. the single supervisory mechanism ( ssm ) is the basis for independent, tough but appropriate supervision across the banking union. it is also an open project where non - euro area member states can join through close cooperation. speech by yves mersch : distributed ledger technology – panacea or flash in the pan?, 25 april 2016. around 5 trillion euros of aid ( including state guarantees ) have been approved by the commission between 2007 and 2015 of which 1. 7 trillion were used at the peak of the crisis. state aid scoreboard 2015 > aid in the context of the financial and economic crisis. bis central bankers ’ speeches deposit insurance and effective resolution tools it is important in the “ new normal ” not only to strengthen regulation and supervision but also to establish a framework in which it is possible for banks to fail without challenging the stability of the whole financial sector. here the frameworks for resolution and deposit insurance are central. at the eu level, beyond the establishment of the single resolution mechanism, the directive on deposit guarantee schemes has already harmonised important provisions in deposit insurance, such as the coverage level and the payout period, and thus strengthened depositor protection. but ultimately we have to go further in the banking union to ensure that depositors