to the first element : innovation. the banque de france is a proponent of digital innovation in financial services. there is no denying that technology has opened up a wealth of opportunities for innovation, and that we still haven ’ t unlocked its full potential. however, in finance, the majority of these innovations also have the potential to be highly disruptive, be it in payments, in financing ( think of crowdfunding ) or in financial markets ( think of hft, which has more questionable objectives ). we are witnessing the emergence of a fully - fledged and constantly evolving digital ecosystem. faced with the competitive threat from innovative newcomers, traditional players can respond using different strategies : establishing partnerships, acquiring fintechs or competing for new markets and activities. 2. the second element is stability. although banking and financial innovations can stimulate growth in the financial system and foster economic expansion, we know bis central bankers ’ speeches only too well that they can also be a source of instability, as evidenced by the subprime crisis. digital innovations actually expose the financial system to new forms of risk. first of all, the digitalisation of financial services presents a new issue for central banks as they perform their task of ensuring safe financial transactions ( payment, delivery and settlement ). in particular, the significant growth of decentralised trading systems, driven for example by blockchain technology, could change the conditions in which central banks perform their duties. the transition to cyberspace has also left finance exposed to the increased threat of cybercrime. lastly, the rise of digital innovation could also provide an opportunity for criminals to develop new methods of laundering money and financing terrorism. in this context, the new players in this digital era must also be fully subject to all anti - money laundering and counter - terrorist financing regulations. 3. the third element needed in order to reconcile innovation and stability and construct our “ possible trinity ” for digital finance is regulation. the regulation of financial services created in the wake of the digital wave must be tailored to its specific risks. to this end, we must adhere to two principles of action. the first principle is an absolute guarantee of payment and transaction security. in the framework of its mandate to oversee the security of payment instruments, the banque de france strives to promote innovative, effective and safe payment solutions. in this respect, it ensures that the emergence of new players and new solutions does not reduce security. central banks are also trying to take a proactive approach towards the digital transition, to avoid

’ s contribution to growth. source : eurostat the effect of low rates can also be analysed according to financial profile of economic agents. households that need to borrow are winners thanks to the historically low level of borrowing rates, especially in france. their real estate assets have risen in value, as have share prices. households, including the least well - off, are benefiting from the pick - up in employment. in contrast, the returns on savings invested in fixed income products have naturally become less dynamic. there are even sometimes fears that we will see negative rates on deposits, a so - called “ tax on savings ”. in france, that remains and must remain an intellectual hypothesis. clearly, i think it is neither probable nor desirable that negative rates will be applied to private individuals – except in the case of certain large fortunes – or to smes. firms in the euro area, and especially smes and vses, ix have benefited from easier access to credit at low rates : it should be noted, however, that on the page 9 of 14 whole, they are no longer net borrowers, in other words they can completely self - finance their investments ; nonetheless, this historical, and perhaps temporary, inversion is less evident in france. last, state governments are clear winners, and alongside them the taxpayers, thanks to the savings on government interest payments. in the case of france for example – which can borrow at negative rates at maturities of up to nine years – interest payments, as a percentage of gdp, have been halved in the 20 years since 1998, x whereas the level of debt [ % of gdp ] has been multiplied by a factor of 1. 6. page 10 of 14 but this very gain has raised questions : are low rates responsible for the increase in government debt, as well as in private sector debt – that of households and firms? in france, they have undeniably facilitated the rise. but the specific nature of france ’ s situation makes it impossible to single them out as the central cause : rates are low across the euro area, and yet, on average, the levels of debt carried by households, firms and state governments have declined as a share of gdp, whereas in france they have increased. page 11 of 14 this is more a justification for greater vigilance in our country. i shall turn now to two current limits of monetary policy. 2. 2 two limits requiring vigilance financial stability the first area where vigilance is required is