Consequently, applying the policy rate or regulatory tools as the situation requires may be the most practical path. Let me now shift the focus from monetary policy to the work on financial stability, but the issue will still to a large extent be how to achieve a balance between financial stability and monetary policy. Challenges for regulatory design Not only the regulations but also the whole area of macro-prudential surveillance aiming at financial system stability have become a highly topical issue in the aftermath of the latest crisis. Prior to the crisis, financial regulation was excessively focused upon individual institutions under the erroneous assumption that the system would remain stable as long as the individual institutions were stable. Consequently, processes that created risks on the system level were ignored. I certainly welcome the current international discussion regarding the inclusion of more explicit systemic-risk preventive regulations, or macro-prudential regulation, in the regulatory framework. An important challenge for the design of a new regulatory framework will lie in finding an appropriate balance: On the one hand, the regulations will need to be sufficient to effectively reduce the risk of financial crisis; on the other hand they should not be so stringent as to impose unnecessary costs on the financial sector. It is a matter of finding the right level of regulation. In this context it is very illuminating to read the so called MAG and LEI reports which attempt to translate various levels of Basel III-regulation into estimated higher interest costs for the end-borrower.
All of these issues are very much in line with my thoughts on what has to be done to create a truly useful central bank – to allude to the theme of this Symposium. I thank you for listening. 8  BIS central bankers’ speeches