However, Jürgen Klute stressed that the regulation should take account of the different kinds and sizes of banks. "One cannot treat a small public bank like a multinational private bank that carries out high-risk transactions," he said. "In this context we are looking forward to the Commission proposal on crisis resolution which is long overdue and the strict separation of retail and investment banking. A firewall built between the so called boring banking which is giving loans to clients and offering payment services on the one hand and highly risky investment banking on the other hand could have prevented us from a greater part of the costs of the crisis."

Regarding different business models and risk taking practices of banks, the Committee has made more precise distinctions: banks with a lower risk profile do not have to fulfill the Leverage Ratio of an institution investing in high risk products.

"Going into the details of the future capital requirements, we happily succeeded in avoiding sovereign bonds from being risk weighted - at least for the moment. A risk weight higher than 0 % would immediately lead to rising refinancing costs for public entities."
According to the proposed European harmonisation of banking standards, MEP Klute concluded: "Member States should not be limited only to setting higher standards for their banks but they should do it in a highly coordinated manner. Only with this possibility, national authorities could react to national or regional market developments as for instance housing bubbles or credit crops."

"Another objective within the framework of the regulation should be the limitation of expansion of banks to prevent them from getting too big to fail and giving them the power to blackmail sovereign states. Even though a special buffer for Systemically Relevant Institutions has been found, this is not yet addressed sufficiently."