The single supervisory mechanism could be created through the transfer of prudential supervision attributes from national authorities to the ECB. In this context, a number of tasks such as consumer protection, fight against money laundering and supervision of banks based in non-EU countries remain at the national level. Meanwhile, the ECB takes the actual responsibility for supervising the banking system, being in charge of licensing credit institutions, ensuring compliance with capital, leverage and liquidity requirements and also supervising financial conglomerates on a consolidated basis. A gradual timetable was designed to smooth the transition to the new mechanism. Starting from 1 January 2013, the ECB may choose to take over the supervision of any credit institution in the banking union. A particular focus will be on the entities which have received or requested public funding. By 1 January 2014, all other banks should be under central supervision, with an earlier cut-off date (1 July 2013) for banks of major systemic importance. The successful implementation of the mechanism would hold considerable weight in restoring confidence and increasing transparency in banking supervision. However, a couple of downsides are worth mentioning: (i) voluntary participation of non-euro states in the banking union may result in the fragmentation of the EU single market into participating and non-participating countries, and (ii) there is still uncertainty regarding the role of these countries within the single supervisory institution. 6  BIS central bankers’ speeches  The question arises whether the decision to entrust the ECB with a banking supervision mandate was the appropriate choice.
In addition to wanting to see firms that are adequately protected against cyber-attacks and prepared to respond should they occur, we are equally as concerned with the overall safety and soundness of the financial system – as a whole. No one firm or agency is going to come up with the one and only permanent solution or protection against cyber-attacks. I see how we approach cybersecurity similar to how we approached Y2K – I’m sure you all remember that. •  We need an approach that everyone agrees to adopt. •  We need to see more public/private partnerships in the development of that approach. •  We need to come together to identify the vulnerabilities that are shared and what needs to be done. •  We need to agree on a path forward and how we test it. •  We need to acknowledge that, unlike Y2K, this does not have an expiration date. Cybersecurity is a “new normal.” It is going to become part of our vocabulary in nearly every exam we conduct, conversation we have with senior management, and conversation about the future of financial services. To be successful, we have to agree that we have common goals; although we can approach them from different angles and think creatively about solutions, we should all be working toward understanding the threats we are facing. The threat landscape is shifting constantly, and we are all responsible for keeping up with the changes and adapting our controls accordingly.