Also, the greater degree of risk-pooling in the euro area would contribute to aligning financial responsibility with the pan-European decision-making process, which has already been set in place in the areas of banking supervision and resolution. The current situation is such that the ultimate backing for ensuring deposits in a failed institution depends on national institutions, while the responsibility for supervision and resolution falls on other pan-European institutions. Shortly after the financial crisis broke, Mervin King ironically pointed out that international banks tended to be global in life, but national in death. This quote would appear to still be applicable in the euro area. In a genuine banking union banks should be European, both in life and in death. As you know, the debate on the EDIS was rekindled in November last year owing to an article5 by the German finance minister, Olaf Scholz, in which he advocated its implementation. This was something which, in his own words, “was no small step for a German finance minister”. The German proposal actually referred to the introduction of a European reinsurance scheme rather than a fully pooled EDIS, and it was moreover subject to various conditions. In any event, the debate clearly remains open and differences persist among the European partners. But I hope and wish that, as on previous occasions, we can forge a consensus allowing us to complete this basic third pillar, introducing a truly common and, therefore, fully pooled EDIS. European banking consolidation and integration.
Somewhat paradoxically, bearing in mind how slow progress has been, the objectives of attracting institutional investors, improving the allocation of resources, introducing a safe European asset and reinforcing the international role of the euro are more prevalent than ever. Specific progress, though limited, has at least been made. For instance, most work in terms of the EU-wide harmonisation of investment and saving products has now been agreed, including the definition of a pan-European individual pension product. 9/10  However, the complexity of the project calls for greater regulatory and fiscal harmonisation efforts, in particular regarding the taxation of capital. As a case in point, in the EU there are still more than 90 types of forms in different languages for tax refunds. This might seem rather unimportant but, often, these administrative formalities are a major obstacle to investment by market participants. Against this background, mention may be made of the report published in October 2019, during the Finnish presidency, by the so-called ´Next CMU group´8. This comprised highlevel representatives of industry who, at the request of the EU finance ministers, evaluated the progress of this project, proposing a series of measures in order to re-launch it.9 Conclusion. Allow me to conclude. Throughout its history, the EU has moved towards a greater level of economic and political integration that has provided clear social and economic benefits. Yet the pace of this movement has not been constant.