Professor Philip Lane:

There is zero basis for that, with respect. The banks are subject to our extensive supervisory powers, which today are reinforced by being part of the single supervisory mechanism. The banks, from which the committee will have heard in recent weeks when they have been before it, are under an extremely intrusive regulatory regime, which I think has involved a sea change. What is probably true is that, essentially, under this new approach where we and the SSM in general are much more intrusive in regulating the banks, this is a new process. This tracker examination is a very good example of the banks essentially being compelled by us to undertake very extensive, quite expensive review mechanisms under our prompting.

We have no reason, as supervisors or regulators, to go lightly on the banks. We have a legal mandate, which we take seriously. We have a financial stability mandate and a consumer protection mandate-----