And indeed not only are restrictions still in force in some areas of activity, but it is also proving necessary to reintroduce others as a consequence of the fresh outbreaks of the disease. In this context, the euro area outlook remains highly uncertain and the risks to the area tilted to the downside. At the same time, there are already signs that the pandemic may give rise to certain structural changes, although the full extent of these is, for the time being, difficult to know. In this context, for me the key for economic policies is to strike the right balance between supporting the recovery and spurring economic adjustment to the structural changes that will emerge after the pandemic. This means first maintaining support measures and avoiding cliff-effects. Indeed, after the pandemic many euro area countries will be facing the highest level of public debt in many decades. And facing this challenge will require a gradual fiscal consolidation programme once the economy moves back onto a sound growth path. In the short run, however, the damage caused by the premature withdrawal of support measures would exceed the possible cost of maintaining them until the recovery shows signs of sufficient strength. Notwithstanding, given the significant heterogeneity of the effects of this crisis, in particular in this recovery phase, support measures should be much more focused now and their timing adjusted to the duration of the crisis. In addition, we have to adjust the specific instruments used.
We would like the guidance to be relevant not only to Basel Committee member countries, but to non-member countries as well. We would therefore value your feedback. As we take our work forward in the Basel Committee, and as the IFSB conducts its own work in preparing its exposure draft, I believe we would all benefit from keeping a sense of proportion. Clearly,  4  BIS Review 38/2005  we cannot have the same expectations for the governance of a large, complex bank that we have for a much smaller bank. When the Basel Committee issues supervisory guidance, we typically say that supervisors’ expectations should be commensurate with the size, complexity and risk profile of the institution. That applies equally here. My hope is that we can raise the bar for the governance of the banking industry as a whole, while concentrating our supervisory resources on the governance of the most complex and sophisticated institutions. Conclusion I realise that I am all that stands between you and a marvellous gala dinner, so I will keep my closing remarks very brief. I would just like to emphasise that sound corporate governance should be considered a key element of a bank’s ability to understand and manage its risks. As supervisors, we should direct our resources to helping banks improve their controls, culture and clarity in respect to risk management. In so doing, I believe that we will help achieve our objective of a stable and healthy banking system that contributes to the proper functioning of the economy.