have come to a halt. therefore, for the eurosystem, it is not a case of either self - regulation or outside regulation ; rather, both should exist in parallel. the question of governance amid all our ambitions to foster a more integrated and innovative market, we must focus on the customer even more. both policy - makers and the financial services industry should be focusing on the customers ’ needs and benefits. after all, the financial industry has a legitimate interest in its products being used and accepted by its customers. in its sixth progress report on sepa in november 2008, the eurosystem emphasised that the success of sepa depends greatly on adequate governance of the project and stressed that such good governance arrangements should aim to involve different stakeholders and provide transparency. in more concrete terms, there is a difference between the governance of the epc and the governance of the overall european retail payment market. although the epc plays an important – even crucial – role in the emergence of sepa, it cannot be held accountable for the european retail payment market in general. let us first discuss the governance of the epc. so far the epc has done a good job, by publishing its rulebooks and recently also providing summaries of its industry discussions. however, more information could be provided on the epc ’ s planning and how it deals with changes requested by stakeholders. let me be clear : without a credible and decisive epc, an integrated european retail payment market is hardly imaginable. therefore, in my view, the epc should continue to play a central role. as an executive body of payment service providers, it should define the common rules and standards for the european market. in such a way, and in line with our statements in our progress reports, the epc should continue to work on improving its own governance arrangements. the epc has the power to involve stakeholders and consult them on its deliverables. the recently launched cards stakeholder forum is a step in the right direction, even if the exact structure of the group warrants further discussion. there are lessons to be learned from what happens at the national level when attention is paid to the needs of the general public. the governance of payment systems requires transparent processes. major changes to payment schemes should be subject to transparent evaluation, weighing up the costs and benefits to the banking industry and to society as a whole. this leads me directly from the governance of the epc to the governance of the overall european retail payment market.

now for the future and think beyond the borders of our current payment behaviour. all these efforts to foster harmonisation and innovation will contribute to reducing the persistent fragmentation of the european payment market. history has indicated that a tendency towards national retrenchment may increase in times of uncertainty and the recent crisis has indeed confirmed this. currently the state of our financial integration shows some signs of segmentation along national borders, particularly with regard to the interbank market. thus, it is important not to forget that integrated financial markets can help financial stability. they offer their participants a more efficient environment than a market divided by national borders ever could. integrated markets are more liquid and offer better opportunities for risk diversification, thereby reinforcing the system ’ s capacity to absorb shocks. therefore, financial integration is directly linked to our objective of improving market resilience and also contributes to financial stability in the long term. as cross - border financial risks are becoming more and more important in europe, we need to remain firmly committed to financial integration. for this, the further integration of the retail payment market is crucial. however, a persistent debate surrounds this integration process : who is the navigator on our sepa journey? barriers to self - regulation – regulatory needs retail payments have traditionally been off the radar screen of most of the central banks, except from the perspective of pure oversight. now, however, not only in europe, but also in other regions, the crucial role of retail banking and payments in an efficient overall economy has been recognised. therefore, central banks have decided to strengthen their role as a catalyst for change and the fostering of integration and innovation in this field. i have persistently emphasised that sepa continues to be a mainly self - regulated project. however, we must not underestimate the limitations of self - regulation and the thin line between cooperative and competitive space. there are elements which the market will not be able to accomplish on its own and which need more regulatory involvement. that is why the ecb has been increasingly involved as a moderator for the past few months in order to keep sepa successfully on course. take, for example, the discussion on the multilateral interchange fee for direct debits. after intensive discussions with market participants, the european commission, together with the ecb, has provided clarity on this controversial issue. the transitional provisions published by the ecb and the european commission in september 2008 have been integrated into the amended regulation on cross - border payments. beyond these transitional provisions, banks