focused and concise to draw the attention of the policy makers and the broader public to the emergence of macroeconomic imbalances at an early point in time. let me be frank : the governance package is an important step forward. but, and this is unfortunately a big “ but ”, it still leaves a large room for discretion in the execution and enforcement of the surveillance procedures. the effectiveness of tools and measures that are thankfully contained in the six pack, is contingent on their implementation, not just in letter, but also in spirit. the track record on implementing the surveillance mechanisms is less than stellar. this applies to both the commission in presenting sufficiently strong proposals and recommendations, and the council in exerting peer pressure. i see, therefore, high “ implementation risks ”. the many exceptions and relevant or special factors that need to be bis central bankers ’ speeches taken into account at different stages of the procedure unfortunately reinforce these doubts. therefore, the ecb regrets that one of the key aspects of the quantum leap in economic governance that it was advocating – greater automaticity in decision - making through the use of reverse qualified majority voting to the maximum extent possible – was only partly achieved. i call also on this committee to use the new tools that are at its disposal, such as the “ economic dialogue ”, to enhance transparency and promote peer pressure and market discipline. equally, the european semester should be improved further, to make a useful tool of ex ante surveillance, and the ongoing discussion parliament can exert pressure in this regard. ultimately, however, what really needs to change is the mindset of all parties involved in surveillance : they have to assume the full responsibility for the smooth functioning of emu. this means internalising what it means to be part of monetary union, exerting strong peer pressure when necessary, and being ready to take the guidance received from their peers or the supranational institutions. the real question is whether this more fundamental change can come about without some more fundamental shifts in competencies. as jean monnet, who is probably often cited in this house, said “ i have too often observed the limits of coordination. it is a method which promotes discussion, but it does not lead to a decision. ” and yet the management of the euro area economy needs effective decisions, and not just inconsequential discussions. this leads me to my second point. 2. longer term reforms in the economic governance framework current developments clearly show the need to reach a new

yves mersch : productivity in the financial services sector opening remarks by mr yves mersch, governor of the central bank of luxembourg, at the bcl - suerf conference on “ productivity in the financial services sector ”, luxembourg, 11 - 12 november 2008. * * * it is my pleasure to welcome you on behalf of the banque centrale du luxembourg. you probably know that ours is a relatively young institution and hat we are hosting this conference as part of the celebrations for our 10th anniversary. you are here to discuss productivity in financial services, and you re probably aware that tomorrow evening ( following the end of this conference ) here will be a high - level panel where three senior central bankers will provide heir perspective on the challenges for monetary policy represented by financial sector growth and productivity. we hope this will give you a chance to see how some of the issues raised in your research are implemented in practice and also how new issues appear in the policy context requiring further study. in any case, you are warmly invited and i hope at least some of you will be able to stay with s for this interesting discussion. the subject today is productivity in the financial sector, and as a central banker, i o not need to remind you that this sector is going through what are sometimes called “ interesting times ”. during the recent financial turmoil, central banks responded to short - term tensions and contributed to stabilising conditions for borrowers and lenders. the focus until now has been on liquidity and financial stability issues ; however, as light appears at the end of the tunnel, policymakers are asking themselves how to avoid repeating the same mistakes next time. an overhaul of the regulatory framework seems inevitable and in this context, it is crucial to understand the structural issues in the sector behind the short - term volatility. this is why i believe that careful study of financial sector productivity is required to improve our understanding of the current situation and to shape our long - term response to recent events. i will organise my remarks around three inter - related questions : first, to measure productivity, how should we measure the level of production in financial services? second, what do existing measures of financial sector productivity tell us about its sources of productivity growth? finally, i will attempt to identify which aspects of productivity in financial services have been given new urgency by recent events. let me begin with the measurement of financial services output. not long ago, national accounts methodology underwent a significant improvement in evaluating and allocating financial services indirectly measured (