Academic

I study international regulators like the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision because they matter today and will matter even more in the future.  But there's no question that it means that I have to consume a lot of sonorous nostrums.  The Committee just issued a paper on supervision during the current financial crisis.  It recommended more stress testing, possibly additional liquidity insurance, and noted that domestic banking regulators take quite different views on safe levels of liquidity, delegation of risk assessment to banks, and so on.  Okay, fine.  But there's also recommendations like this:

Members highlighted the importance of a nimble approach by supervisors that allowed for the rapid collection and analysis of additional information once stresses had been identified. Many members found that regular reporting frameworks for monitoring liquidity risk were inadequate in content (eg often missing off-balance sheet items and funding pressure points), comparability and timeliness. Other members were satisfied with their ability to gather more comprehensive data quickly during times of stress to supplement information gathered routinely.

So: The Basel Committee recommends that supervisors be "nimble," and notes that some supervisors were nimble enough, but others think they could be even more nimble.  It clears up everything, really!

ps.  You also won't believe this, but the supervisors have concluded that regulated industry needs their help: "Market disclosure did not always meet the needs of market participants, and in some cases, financial markets sought additional information on the liquidity positions of banks."