A global banking watchdog dismisses the need for change after Credit Suisse debacle. A worldwide group in banking monitoring has downplayed the Credit Suisse bailout, claiming that updating international regulations during the world financial crisis more than 15 years ago would not have been necessary to avoid such a mess.

The Financial Stability Board, a key group of central bankers, regulators, and representatives from the world’s leading economic powers, assessed “lessons to be learnt” on Tuesday and concluded that the framework was successful.

It specifically looked at the decision made by Swiss authorities to support an acquisition by bigger rival UBS rather than closing the bank using a “resolution” process put in place during the global financial crisis of 2008.

The officials concluded that Credit Suisse could have been closed down using the “resolution” criteria, even though it was still likely that public funds would be required for such wind-ups.

“This review reaches the conclusion that recent events demonstrate the soundness of the international resolution framework in that it provided the Swiss authorities with an executable alternative to the solution that they deemed preferable,” stated the FSB.

It said that modifications to the regulations’ actual content may not be necessary, but rather improvements to how they are administered.

The study jars with a flurry of criticism of the deal made earlier this year, when UBS Group (UBSG.S) overtook Credit Suisse as the largest bank in Switzerland after being hastily organized and partially financed by the government.

Officials and authorities in the nation were caught off guard by the collapse of one of the largest banks in the world and a once-symbol of Swiss financial strength. They had been battling the firm for years as it lurched from problem to controversy.

It was a trial run for laws created after the 2008 financial crisis.

Following the taxpayer-funded bank bailouts during that crisis, authorities issued guidelines on ” resolving” troubled institutions, such as writing down a bank’s debt to bolster capital or moving deposits to another bank.

The 11-year-old framework was designed to end the scenario in which banks were “too big to fail” or held governments hostage during a crisis to prevent the markets from panicking.

Even though Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey claimed the Swiss did not adhere to the “playbook,” producing “ambiguity” in the markets on the legitimacy of big bank resolution, the report refrains from criticizing Switzerland. Even though it highlighted concerns about why the resolution strategy was not selected, the FSB stated that Switzerland’s measures had maintained financial stability.

According to the FSB, the Swiss instance demonstrated the need for sufficient public sector backup, such as a central bank lifeline, deposit insurance funds, or fiscal financing, topple the resolution procedures efficiently.

The FSB stated that due to the 24/7 availability of payments, mobile banking, and social media, authorities may need to be better prepared for an accelerated speed of bank runs.