rid of the idea that some people have of you that you ’ re investing huge sums in saving banks, money which could have been used for social policies, for example, or for investments directly benefiting citizens ’ day - to - day lives. no, that ’ s not true. first, my political opinions have nothing to do with my job as a central banker, which is not a political role. and second, the €2. 6 trillion we ’ ve invested... that ’ s political! why did we do it? we did it because we were on the brink of deflation. we brought inflation back towards 2 %, we created ten million jobs, and if it ’ s good for employment, it ’ s also good for european citizens. in the united states, the federal reserve has two mandates : inflation and full employment. yes. and if you were to add full employment? in one respect, it ’ s not up to me to discuss this. i cannot decide on my own mandate – that ’ s up to the parliament. it ’ s a political discussion. but honestly, over the last five, ten years, this wouldn ’ t have changed anything. everything we do – creating liquidity, buying securities, cutting interest rates to zero – is to support both output and inflation. so we would have done the same thing. today, this debate is largely theoretical. mr cœure, reflecting on the “ yellow vests ” movement in france – i ’ d also like your opinion on that – citizens, in italy too, have been calling for budgetary constraints to be loosened. budgetary constraints are governed by the maastricht treaty – 3 % budget deficit and maximum 60 % public debt. do these rules need to be reviewed? i don ’ t think my answer is going to make me very popular on your show. go on! 4 / 8 bis central bankers'speeches i think these are good rules. france has almost never complied with them. i find it a little strange to complain about rules you ’ ve never adhered to! france has not balanced its budget since the 1970s, as you know... yes, but when budgets are tightened, one says : “ those are the maastricht rules ”. they haven ’ t been complied with but clearly, at the moment, cuts are being made at every level... i completely understand that people feel hard done by when it comes to redistribution, and that ’ s also

that appears to be extremely far removed from citizens. you ’ re criticised for being essentially responsible for a form of “ democratic hold - up ”, an expression used by journalist jean quatremer : you ’ re taking away budgetary sovereignty ; the euro area is described as being under german sovereignty ; you ’ ve invested absolutely huge sums in saving banks and the financial system, but it ’ s european people who have paid the price, with taxes, strict policies, the list is endless. what would you say in defence of your institution, mr cœure? i ’ ve read jean quatremer ’ s book, “ il faut achever l ’ euro ”. now, when he speaks of the “ democratic hold - up ” he ’ s not talking about the ecb, but about european institutions and the way the euro functions in general. and it ’ s true, i agree with him : there ’ s a democratic deficit in the way the euro area functions. look at the discussion with greece. extremely painful measures have been discussed for the greek economy, for the greek people, and this discussion was between the greek minister and the other 18 finance ministers – it never went to the european parliament. so there is a problem. but it ’ s not the ecb. 3 / 8 bis central bankers'speeches ok, but the ecb formulates monetary policy that does not depend on governments or citizens, but considerably influences the economic policies and day - to - day lives of european citizens... that ’ s true, but what allows the ecb to be independent is its very narrow, very clear, very simple and very precise mandate, which is to bring the inflation rate back towards 2 %. this is how we are judged. and we are accountable to the european parliament. we go everywhere – i visit high schools, go to conferences, i discuss with people. we are on twitter, we ’ re in dialogue with european citizens... and with france inter! and with france inter, which is important as it allows me to explain all of these things. yes, we are bureaucrats in frankfurt, but this independence is possible... and technocrats!... and technocrats... this independence is possible because we have a very narrow mandate which can be monitored. the rest of the system is political, and requires democratic accountability. you ’ re a left - winger, mr cœure, but despite that you won ’ t get