should a bank fail, something that cannot be wholly precluded by supervision, the supervisory authorities can resort to other ways and means to keep it going. in the early - 1990s, the swedish government made vast amounts of funds available to the swedish banking system when a major financial crisis threatened to paralyse the entire financial sector there. if and when a central bank will actually act as lender of last resort is known only to that central bank. this is to prevent banks from engaging in “ moral hazard ” behaviour. if banks knew under what conditions liquidity support is given to the banking system, they might anticipate such action, rather than shoulder their own responsibility for the continuity of their business. this brings us back to the civil society. even though there may be an authority which supervises the functioning of the financial sector, at the end of the day it is up to banks themselves to bear responsibility at the very least for their own continuity. supervisors do not act for bankers. in other words, rules and standards - and the establishment of an agency which ensures compliance - may help to internalise externalities in the civil society ; ultimately, the participants of the civil society must shoulder their own responsibilities. key elements of the civil society : reprehensible behaviour the second constraint on the civil society is reprehensible behaviour on the part of individual participants in respect of certain standards and values. those who advocate a civil society assume that everyone is more or less concerned with the common good. everyone operates on the common ground between self - interest and the greater good. there are, however, always people who have only their own best interests at heart, and who have no qualms about sacrificing others in the process. this is considered reprehensible behaviour. in this sphere, too, there is a need for an agency to demarcate the boundaries between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour, as well as to ensure that these boundaries are not transgressed. reprehensible behaviour is completely out of the question in the financial sector. individuals entrust their money to financial institutions. abuse of that trust will damage the reputation of the bank in question, and with it possibly its continuity. that is why financial supervisors are paying increasing attention to the integrity of financial institutions. this brings us to an area of great activity. in the past, supervisors focussed notably on the prudential aspects of banks ’ operations. over the years, however, their attention has shifted to the

but we are aware that these are issues that require constant evaluation and dialogue. not only is the world around us changing, it is not black and white either. there are grey areas. dilemmas. ethical standards may clash with doing your job effectively. let me give you an example from my own experience. as governor and as fsb chair i regularly engage with people from the financial industry. it's a way for me to keep up with what's going on in the outside world. inevitably, there is often a degree of lobbying involved in these conversations. so what to do? the only way of not exposing myself to lobbying would be to cut all contacts with industry leaders. but then i would miss out on an information flow that in my view is necessary to do my job effectively. so i take a well - considered middle road. i am transparent about who i meet, i am as nondiscriminatory as my agenda allows, and i try to avoid situations in which there's too much one - way traffic. in a world that is changing and where many shades of grey exist, adapting the rules is not the only solution. you need to have an ethical culture within your organisation. i believe that an ethical culture is one where people have a properly developed ethical compass. people who understand that, especially for our types of organisations, the ethical bar is set high. you need people who are able and willing to think for themselves, based on our organisational values. moreover, in an ethical culture we 2 / 3 bis - central bankers'speeches need people to speak up when they see or hear a colleague doing something that is not ok. that can be difficult for many, because we often wish to avoid conflict or feel awkward taking the moral high ground. so that's why we as a board decided to offer training on what to do as a bystander who observes undesirable behaviour. the training was mandatory for managers. part of you will be taking this active bystander training this afternoon. in general, periodic training for all staff is important, not just to rehash what's right and what's wrong, but to boost awareness, to encourage people to ask the question : how would i deal with this situation? it is also important to know the views within your organisation on ethical issues. at dnb we recently conducted a survey on the perception of integrity among our staff. this biennial measurement gives us a good insight into our ethical