of a small or medium - sized bank, supervisors need and ask for less data ; in order to analyse the risks of a large, international bank, they need and ask for more. accordingly, the reporting requirements are tailored to, among other things, the size of the institutions. bis central bankers ’ speeches for example, in anticipation of future reporting requirements, we asked the national supervisors last year, for the first time ever, to provide us with supervisory data on all small and medium - sized banks. they were asked to submit 37 separate data points, including the balance sheet total, the level of customer deposits or the trading book portfolio – so nothing complex at all. by contrast, the banks that are directly supervised by the ecb are asked to give more than 8, 000 data points – and these have to be submitted not annually but quarterly. our requests for information of course comply with the guidelines of the european banking authority. for indirect supervision, however, it is not a question of more reports. it is much more about using the experience collected within the ssm for the supervision of small and medium - sized banks. for example, we are currently working on a concept for the supervisory review and evaluation process, or srep. the srep is the most important tool of banking supervision. the supervisors analyse each institution ’ s business model and governance, as well as its capital and liquidity risks. on this basis, national supervisors determine how much capital each individual institution is required to hold. last year, for the first time ever, the srep for the large banks in the euro area was conducted in accordance with a common methodology – an important step towards genuine european banking supervision. from 2018 it is likely that, for small and medium - sized institutions, the national supervisors will use a simplified methodology that covers the key aspects. another thing that also plays an important role for small and medium - sized institutions is the system of institutional protection schemes. more than half of all euro area banks belong to an institutional protection scheme – large banks along with small and medium - sized institutions. in germany, four out of five institutions belong to such a protection scheme – measured by balance sheet size, that represents 40 % of the german banking system. institutional protection schemes are therefore highly relevant for the stability of the banking system. but they are also important to supervisors for another reason. under european law, more specifically the capital requirements regulation ( crr ), banks may be granted certain privileges if they belong to a protection

##atement of the rules to which national budgetary policies ought to be subject so as to gain credibility beyond doubt. last week ’ s summit committed to enshrine these rules in the primary legislation. they will foresee that the annual structural deficit should not exceed 0. 5 % of nominal gdp. euro area member states will implement such a rule in their national legal frameworks at a constitutional level, so that it is possible to avoid excessive deficits before they arise, rather than trying to control them after they have emerged. prevention is better than cure. bis central bankers ’ speeches rules will also foresee an automatic correction mechanism in case of deviation. moreover, the leaders agreed on a numerical benchmark for annual debt reduction to bring down debt levels. they also agreed to sanctions that will apply automatically to euro area member states in breach of the 3 % reference value for deficits. the european court of justice may be asked to verify the implementation of these rules at national level. taken together, i believe that these decisions are capable of making public finances in the euro area credibly robust. but restoring financial markets ’ confidence also requires that investors be reassured that government debt will always be repaid and timely serviced. greece will remain a unique case, and a credible stabilisation mechanism, a firewall, will be in place and can be activated when needed subject to proper conditionality. the leaders unambiguously agreed to assess the adequacy of the firewall by next march. its objective is to address the threats to financial stability, and especially the risk of contagion between different sovereign debt markets. the leaders decided to deploy the leveraging of the european financial stability facility ( efsf ) at the earliest opportunity. at the same time they agreed that the efsf ’ s successor, the european stability mechanism, should come into force by july 2012. it is crucial that the efsf be fully equipped and be made operational as soon as possible. with this goal in mind, last thursday, the governing council decided that the ecb would stand ready to act with its technical infrastructure and know - how as an agent for the efsf in carrying out its market operations. conclusion let me conclude. the decisions of the european council summit, together with the six - pack approved recently by the european parliament, are a breakthrough for clear fiscal rules in our monetary union. however, the crisis has not ended yet. it is now important not to lose momentum and to swiftly implement