Moreover, as loose or uneven fiscal moves or reckless legislative initiatives hindered the efficiency of the overall macroeconomic policy mix in Romania, the central bank openly voiced its concerns regarding the sustainability and impact on growth potential of such populist measures, triggering harsh criticism from their promoters. The global crisis proved once again that price stability cannot be achieved in the context of  financial instability, whose resolution calls for far more than monetary policy words and deeds and by far more knowledge and confidence. Austerity measures, the recession, slower-than-expected recovery, along with the view that the  banking sector alone is to be blamed for these misfortunes – even though in Romania, unlike elsewhere, no bail-outs were resorted to – created a mood that eroded the high prestige that the National Bank of Romania had enjoyed prior to the crisis. A reputation that had been earned thanks to a more transparent, flexible, effective policy and to a greater openness to the general public. We were not alone. That sentiment became mainstream across the globe, as well. Central bankers are nowadays cornered to deliver more in their countries, to actively punish the offenders of fiduciary and prove more empathic with debtors and, why not, more compliant and tolerant with populist measures that affect the financial sector and macroeconomic stability. Otherwise their independence would be put at risk, as it is already challenged by public representatives.
3, A "353 9 33 3 3 93  9  4 4 6752 554     465477 752 -0  75  752 901 74:  2 1" 4 752 W 57  47   74752 552 712 2 1 714 552   $  6    4 53 ! 5  4 437 53  2 $ &7'1 74 " 1 +,,-.-/ %973  4  !23(%&  2 7 %3 5332 3279  +6*9 A6(4)9 1 f 34,4/.4( &9(04 (7/4*   0C')0)    T T T T  ? @ 5Z!412