Indian
Economy in last 68 years has seen substantial growth post independence. The
Economy got boost in 1991 by way of liberalization. This growth was further
fuelled by various political and economical steps taken by Government India
under different political parties.
Public Sector Banks have played very crucial
role in this growth . The trust and patience displayed by banking authorities
in Indian Entrepreneurs has been remarkable. Government has continuously
supported PSBs by way of infusion of capital from time to time. Without
this support, Indian banking would not have been in such a healthy position.
Recently GOI announced infusion of Rs. 70 K Crs. in next 4 years. In past GOI has infused huge money into Banking system to keep them live and flourishing. There is nothing wrong to support the Banks owned by GOI but it should also look into certain issues which may be real causes of concern and may be strategic fault lines. In my view GOI should seriously look into these issues:
1. Subsidiary Companies: Most of the PSBs are having one or more wholly
owned subsidiaries in the field of advisory services, ARCs, housing finance,
Insurance, Asset Management, Factoring, Broking etc. Some of the Banks are
having key share in rating agencies too. Most of the Rating agencies and Asset
Reconstruction Companies are owned by the Banks only. These subsidiaries are
surviving on mostly fees from the assignments created by parent company. In my
view this is serious issue of conflict of interest.
Let
me explain the issue: ‘A’ Bank who is a major Bank of the country has advisory
firm engaged in capital market, Restructuring, Debt Syndication,
CDR, TEV Study etc. This advisory firm will take the assignment for loan
syndication. Generally assignments are given out of pressure. Being a
subsidiary company parent bank will be soft in lending to the client sourced by
it. In my view this activity falls into conflict of interest and
probability of wrong decision in lending becomes very high. Similarly, when an
account gets stressed and need restructuring, parent bank will give this
assignment to this advisory firm. Again this firm will charge heftily to liaise
with parent bank on behalf of the client. Again this is conflict of
interest and right decision may severely get affected as there is conflict of
interest. In the greed of earning fees, the chance of mistake becomes very
high. Other side, if some one does not give the assignment to this subsidiary,
parent bank may not appreciate and take wrong decision . In both the cases
parent bank and client are sufferer. Same principle applies for Insurance
and Mutual Fund activities. Further there is frequent transfers from
parent to subsidiary and vice versa.
2. Investment in ARCs and Rating Agencies: Most of the PSBs are shareholders/promoters of
Asset Reconstruction companies and Rating agencies. As it is well known that
ARCs play major role in case of stressed accounts, the conflict of interest is
quite apparent. If the stressed accounts are being assigned to an ARC,
irrespective to whatever level of transparency, the role of a company promoted
by a Bank is highly objectionable. Same bank lending and post NPA, being
assigned to own company can not be justified and the chances of injustice to
either Bank or the Client can not be ruled out.
Suggestions: To make the Banks sustainable and stronger for long time, GOI should look into following suggestions:
1.
PSBs should not be allowed to enter into various different
activities mainly those of conflicting interest i.e. Capital Advisory
Services, Syndication Services, Restructuring Advisory, Insurance , ARCs
and Rating Agencies. Those already into these activities should be instructed
to scrap these business in near future;
2.
Fund utilisation by Banks should be monitored
by a separate committee of experts, other than RBI, regularly;
3.
Transfer from parent bank to subsidiary and vice versa should be
immediately stopped as this makes the institution
vulnerable to losses;
4.
Till the PSBs are out of these subsidiaries, Same Bank should
not do any business with subsidiaries to bring in better decisions
and transparency.
5.
Subsidiary Companies should be immediately headed by GOI
nominees and designated team.
6.
Any business generated by Subsidiaries by way of using the
office of parent bank or pressure should be treated as
misuse of office.
No comments:
Post a Comment