This is explained by the fact that we are supplying liquidity on an unlimited basis and that we have allowed collateral in a way which is more forthcoming. And this is true for all central banks. But for us, our weekly balance sheet in comparison with that of one year ago has increased by around 55 % [from around 1.3 trillion to 2 trillion euro]. Of course, this increase does not imply an increase in net liquidity, because a significant part of the liquidity we provide comes back in the central bank through the deposit facility. FT: That’s less than the Fed. Trichet: Yes, true. For the ECB part of it comes also from the fact that we have the counterparts of the dollar that we are supplying ourselves, and a counterpart of the dollar is our own collateral. The central banks are in a situation where they are playing a much more quantitative role than they used to play, and it is true for all of us. FT: Should there be more centralised supervision within the Eurozone, and should the ECB take responsibility? Is the ECB willing to take that responsibility if the politicians so desire? 6  BIS Review 159/2008  Trichet: As you know, we have always been in favour of a very close relationship between the central bank and the banking surveillance authorities. We said that long, long before any new problems, any new difficulties. We had a Governing Council position close to the start of the ECB, which we made public.
 My point is that the analysis would benefit from having a broader perspective. We should look beyond the household stretch to household strain, which encompasses more structural factors.  I would refer to two dimensions of the household strain: quality of living and inequality of income, savings, and access to credit.  1. Quality of living: - overcrowding – CEE countries have the highest concentration of dependent children, and the lowest number of rooms per person (Figure 4 and 5); - poor living conditions – CEE countries have the largest share of population living in poor conditions (Figure 6); - high risk of poverty or social exclusion (Figure 7) – despite having high ownership rates, CEE countries have high shares of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion (slightly declining after EU integration); 2  - To partially compensate for the low quality of living, and given the social pressure of a high ownership rate, property taxes are relatively low in CEE countries (Figure 8); - Low quality of living creates pressure for new housing, despite financial difficulties to service new loans. It also creates pressure for migration, with longterm implications for financial stability.  2. Inequality: - Income inequality: Romania, Bulgaria and Czech Republic have the highest Gini coefficient in the EU (Figure 9); -  Housing cost overburden: If we adjust for rent-related costs (as CEE countries  have high ownership), many CEE countries are on top.