##holders can retain their product and their coverage. tomorrow, the dutch ministry of finance will provide more details on the bail ‐ in. the second instrument, the sale of business, enables us to sell the shares of an insurance group. or the shares of a troubled entity within the insurance group. or to sell an insurance portfolio, without the shareholders ’ consent. this was already part of dnb ’ s toolkit. however, the bridge institution is an instrument we have never used before. it allows us to transfer an insurer, or an insurance group entity, or part of that entity, to a semi public company. during this time, the insurer is not allowed to compete on the market. the bridge institution is only a temporary solution, and it buys us time for a sale of business. when setting up the bridge institution, we can also benefit from our experience in bank resolution. the last instrument is asset separation. this allows us to transfer assets, rights or liabilities to a semi ‐ publicly owned asset management vehicle. in the banking sector, this vehicle is also known as the “ bad bank ”. the toxic assets or liabilities can be removed from the balance sheet, to limit the risk and make the insurer more attractive to other buyers. this instrument is only allowed in combination with one of the other instruments, because the insurer also has to bear some of the losses. other resolution toolkit features next to the four resolution instruments, the resolution toolkit also provides another crucial feature : the possibility to conduct resolution planning. we will prepare a resolution plan for insurers that pass the public interest test. i ’ ll go into more detail about this test later on. the resolution plan identifies possible impediments to resolution. and the new resolution regime gives us powers to remove these impediments, if necessary. this contributes to a resolvable insurance sector. resolution planning ensures that any failures result in lower costs for society, and reduces the risks for financial stability. finally, it is good to point out some key differences from the bank resolution toolkit. first, the absence of loss ‐ absorbing capacity. in bank resolution, there is a major focus on loss ‐ absorbing capacity. the bank resolution experts among you will be familiar with the european and international standards in this respect ‐ mrel and tlac. however, the dutch finance ministry has decided not to require insurers to have an additional layer of loss ‐ absorbing debt. traditionally, this layer is very

yves mersch : growth potential and competition – what lies ahead for card payments? speech by mr yves mersch, member of the executive board of the european central bank, at the bank of france conference on “ card payments in europe – latest trends and challenges ”, paris, 18 january 2016. * * * introduction besides cash, cards are the most widely used payment instrument in europe. as regards electronic payment instruments as a whole, card payments have been on a strong and steady growth path, with the number of card transactions in the european union having almost quadrupled in the last 15 years. in france, card usage is well above the eu average. areas with an even stronger card usage ( and, correspondingly, a lower share of cash payments ) are the nordic countries, the netherlands and great britain. in those countries, a preference for cards over cash is often highly visible in shops, with merchants often actively encouraging card usage by means of signs or other communication. while cards are the predominant electronic payment instrument, it should be noted that cards – like cash – were initially designed for face - to - face payment situations. given the strong growth in e - commerce, the necessity of finding appropriate and innovative solutions for new payment situations, i. e. internet or mobile payments, has become apparent. the incidence of fraud related to purchases made over the internet, which involve “ card - not - present ” ( cnp ) transactions, has been a source of concern and needs to be addressed by appropriate security measures – i will discuss this in more detail later. in general, innovative payment solutions, regardless of whether they are based on cards or other payment instruments, will have an impact on payment behaviour and the usage of cards and other traditional payment instruments in the years to come. nevertheless, there is no doubt that card payments are here to stay. i still see a strong growth potential for card transactions, in particular in those countries in central and south - eastern europe where people largely rely on cash. yet, even a “ card - minded ” country such as france can realise further efficiency gains in the area of retail payments by increasing its number of card payments. migration to the single euro payments area ( sepa ) for credit transfers and direct debits was a major milestone in european retail payments integration. sepa for cards is the next logical step in that process. to this day, consumers and merchants, but also banks and other payment service providers, still encounter obstacles or experience geographical differences when making and