None of the three countries had to draw on these lines, as the FCL provided an effective backstop for these countries and strengthened market confidence during the time of elevated risks. So, in my view the primary reform of the ESM now needed is to enhance its concrete functionality and capacity to act in cases of market turbulence.
But I duly recognize there are other proposals on the table as well. One is to change the name of the ESM to European Monetary Fund, EMF. Would this be justified? To my mind the nameplate is less important than the substantive improvements in the functioning of the ESM.