 I would like to invite the Vice President of the European Commission, Mr. Validislav Roskis, to give his key speak note. I would like to thank him very much on behalf of the SRB of President Draghi. Mr. Vice President, could you take also, would you have also time to take two or three questions? Thank you very much. You have the floor. Ladies and gentlemen, it's a pleasure to be back for a second time in the ESRB annual conference. This summer marked the 10 years since the beginning of global economic and financial crisis. And at this turn, we can look back and appreciate what that we have put crisis firmly behind us. EU's GDP per capita exceeds pre-crisis levels and Europe's economy is expanding for a fifth year in the role. Today, unemployment is at its lowest level since 2008. Banks are stronger and better capitalized and public finances are in better shape. This shows that our policy mix of investment, structural reforms to strengths and competitiveness and responsible fiscal policies is working. With the help of European Fund for Strategic Investment, we have already mobilized investment corresponding to more than 225 billion euros. And we have taken decisive action to make our financial sector safer and address the shortcomings of the initial setup of our economic and monetary union. We need to continue along this path. However, challenges remain. Levels of public and private debt are still high, productivity growth is lagging and our economy needs more long-term investment. There is a warring slowdown in the momentum towards international regulatory cooperation. While major systemic risks of our financial system may have receded, dispersed problems remain. One example is high levels of non-performing loans in some member states. The Commission is working to address these risks. We want inclusive growth and economic recovery that benefits everyone. In today's speech, I would like to briefly touch on the macro-economic situation and non-performing loans in particular, then turn to yesterday's proposal for a review of European system of financial supervision, starting with macro-potential aspects and ending with macro-prudential aspects. So let me begin with macro-economic situation. As I was saying, European economy is growing steadily and many indicators are moving in the right direction. This positive outlook has now broadened to include all EU member states, which shows that our policy mix of broadly natural fiscal stance and accommodative monetary policy is delivering results. The improved regulatory and supervisory framework, as well as recent increase in bank funding, how likely contributed. That being said, we cannot afford to be complacent. First of all, the current climate for international regulatory cooperation is unpredictable. Now that the crisis has receded, we need to ensure that the progress that has been achieved in regulation is not unraveled. I'm strongly pressing this because the financial crisis illustrated the international nature of our financial system. Hopefully with a common approach to the financial regulation can we ensure a level playing field of our financial institutions and minimize the risks of regulatory arbitrage. And second, idiosyncratic risks are waiting on the recovery in certain member states. High levels of non-performing loans in certain national banking systems are a prominent example. This is particularly an issue in Greece, Cyprus, Italy and Portugal, but other member states are also affected. By increasing funding costs, these NPOs negatively affect the resilience of the banking sector to shocks and wait on the recovery of the wider economy. There is also the potential of spillovers to other countries given the high interconnectedness of EU banking system. Based on historical experience and current trends, if we do not accelerate the NPL cleanup, it would take another decade to resolve the legacy of NPL stock. With the action plan adopted by the council in July, we now have a clear political commitment to address non-performing loans. This plan comprises 14 policy actions in four key areas. Supervisory policies, structural and legal reforms including insolvency and law enforcement frameworks, fostering of the secondary market for NPLs, and support for restructuring of the banking sector. The European systemic risk board alongside these other key actors at the national and EU level will play an important role in this plan. On our side, the commission is determined to support this action plan. We now have our public consultation running on fostering secondary markets for non-performing loans and on possible legislation on secured creditors. The support of the European Parliament Council will be crucial in delivering these steps. And we are working together with ECB, European Banking Authority and ESRB to develop by the end of the year the European Blueprint for National Asset Management Companies. More financial integration and deeper capital markets will also be helpful for dealing with these scattered risks. We need to consolidate the ongoing trend of financial integration by completing EU's two flagship projects of Banking Union and Capital Markets Union. In the coming weeks, the commission will set out some ideas on the way forward for the Banking Union and with a midterm review of the Capital Markets Union in June. The commission raised its level of ambition for completing the single market for Capital Markets Union by 2019. More financial integration will support jobs and growth by increasing the pool of capital available for productive investments. It will benefit market users thanks to increased choice and competition, and it will help guard against the effects of financial shocks, thereby reducing the need for public intervention. This is a key for a more resilient economic and monetary union. Now moving to the review of European supervisory authorities. Yesterday's proposals linked directly into this. We have put forward targeted amendments to improve the ability of European supervisory authorities to monitor cross-border risks, ensure supervisory convergence and adapt to the new developments on financial sector. The proposals we have made fall under four broad categories. First of all, we are upgrading the supervisory convergence tools of the SS and giving new responsibilities to the EU-wide supervisor for securities and capital markets, ESMA. Today there is almost no EU-level supervision of capital markets. Our proposal would expand EU-level supervision in areas where common supervision is either for firms operating cross-border and more effective for supervisors. This includes certain new prospectuses, EU-labeled cross-border investment funds and services of systemic informant importance such as critical benchmarks and data reporting service providers. Second, we are improving the governance and funding of all three ESAs. Our proposal will create new executive boards with permanent members for quicker and more EU-oriented decision-making and it will make the ESAs financially independent of national supervisors by introducing proportional contributions from the financial industry. Third, we are proposing changes to improve the coordination of supervisory authorities and minimize the barriers to cross-border financial services. This would be achieved by having the ESAs to set out EU-wide priorities for supervision and perform rigorous and independent reviews of the national supervisors. We are also reviewing supervisory relations with the third countries to ensure proper management of all financial sector risks. And last but not least, we want the ESAs to promote sustainable and green finance and FinTech. This is why we want to require them to take these areas into account in their work. In my speech at the last year's ESMB conference, I highlighted the major progress we have made in establishing an institutional and regulatory framework for macro-potential policy in Europe. Today, the evidence shows that the ESMB is already playing an important role in safeguarding financial stability in Europe. For example, last year the ESMB issued public warning about vulnerabilities in the residential real estate markets in eight member states. These warnings contributed to discussions and improved knowledge on the topic. On the commission's side, we are integrating ESMB's analysis and recommendations within our work in the context of the European semester. The ESMB has also done substantial work to coordinate macro-potential policies and their consistent implementation. Together with yesterday's proposals to strengthen the three ESAs, we also proposed to amend ESMB regulation. Overall, the commission is satisfied with the functioning of the ESMB and its contribution to the financial stability in the EU. The ESMB is a relatively young body and its work has been improving since its creation. In particular, it has managed to effectively use resources and expertise provided by its broad institutional membership. In this work, ESMB has acted as a hub, supporting the balance of centralized oversight and decentralized implementation of macro-potential measures. In reviewing the ESMB, our objective has been to maintain this balance, we want to preserve and build on the existing framework. Accordingly, our proposal is one of targeted changes to the ESMB's governance. As ESMB chair, the president of the European Central Bank has conferred authority and credibility of ESMB and ensures that ESMB can effectively build and rely on ECB's expertise in the area of financial stability. We therefore proposed that the ECB president serves as ESMB chair on the permanent basis. At the same time, we propose to enhance the standing of the head of the ESMB secretariat by making the appointment procedure more transparent and by specifying and clarifying his or her tasks, including the possibility for the chair to delegate the task of representing ESMB externally. As a large assembly, the ESMB general board benefits from being inclusive and combining a range of cross-country and cross-sectoral expertise. To reflect the establishment of the banking union, we propose adding the SSM and SRB as voting members on the general board and on the steering committee. We also propose to ensure that ESMB can issue warnings to the ECB when it comes to banking supervision. This would correct the current asymmetry between national and the banking union level in this regard. Our proposal also ensures that European Parliament and the ESAS would be systematically notified about the use of these tools. We trust that these changes will allow ESMB to carry out its mission even better than it has done since its establishment in 2010. So let me conclude. The package of proposals that we proposed yesterday seeks to make improvements were necessary without upsetting the balance that proved to be functioning. At the same time, it's ambitious in seeking to enhance the ability of the ESFS and ESSE in particular to play a key role going forward. So we are looking forward for constructive discussions on those proposals. Thank you very much.