The FSA's Report Into the Failure of RBS
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
House of Commons Treasury Committee The FSA's report into the failure of RBS Fifth Report of Session 2012–13 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 16 October 2012 HC 640 Incorporating HC 1780, Session 2010–12 Published on 19 October 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Treasury Committee The Treasury Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of HM Treasury, HM Revenue and Customs and associated public bodies. Current membership Mr Andrew Tyrie MP (Conservative, Chichester) (Chairman) Michael Fallon MP (Conservative, Sevenoaks) Mark Garnier MP (Conservative, Wyre Forest) Stewart Hosie MP (Scottish National Party, Dundee East) Andrea Leadsom MP (Conservative, South Northamptonshire) Mr Andy Love MP (Labour, Edmonton) John Mann MP (Labour, Bassetlaw) Rt Hon Pat Mcfadden MP (Labour, Wolverhampton South West) Mr George Mudie MP (Labour, Leeds East) Jesse Norman MP (Conservative, Hereford and South Herefordshire) Teresa Pearce MP (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead) David Ruffley MP, (Conservative, Bury St Edmunds) John Thurso MP (Liberal Democrat, Caithness, Sutherland, and Easter Ross) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/treascom. The Reports of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral evidence taken and some or all written evidence are available in printed volume(s). Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Chris Stanton (Clerk), Lydia Menzies (Second Clerk), Jay Sheth, Adam Wales and Mathew Manning (on secondment from the FSA) (Committee Specialists), Alison Game (Senior Committee Assistant), Steven Price and Lisa Stead (Committee Assistants) and James Abbott (Media Officer). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Treasury Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 5769; the Committee’s email address is [email protected] The FSA’s report into the failure of RBS 1 Contents Report Page Summary 3 1 Introduction 5 Box 1: Extract from the Executive Summary of the FSA Report outlining the key explanatory factors in RBS’s failure 7 Box 2: Key events in RBS’s failure and the financial crisis 8 Box 3: Extract from the FSA Report Executive Summary: RBS’s management, governance and culture 9 2 The future of prudential regulation 11 Regulatory and supervisory failure 11 The FSA as shadow directors 14 Ability of the FSA to take action on acquisitions 15 Changes at the FSA since the crisis 21 Making the FSA/PRA Board effective 23 Need for higher quality people to deliver higher quality regulation 25 3 Lessons for legislation and regulation 28 The timing of legislation 28 Enforcement 28 The SIF screening process 30 Future regulation on sanctions against directors 32 4 Report approach and value 36 The need for transparency and accountability 36 The review process: efficiency, value for money and objectivity 38 Value for money and efficiency 38 Objectivity and the role of specialist advisers 39 The value of further reports from the FSA into the crisis 42 Reports from other bodies 45 Conclusions and recommendations 47 Formal Minutes 52 Witnesses 53 List of printed written evidence 53 List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 54 The FSA’s report into the failure of RBS 3 Summary At the end of 2008, with total assets of over $3.5 trillion, the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) was the largest bank in the world by assets and the fifth largest by market capitalisation.1 The failure of RBS in October 2008 gave rise to what HM Treasury (HMT) has described as “the biggest bail-out in history.”2 The Government injected £45.5 billion of equity capital and £282 billion of taxpayers’ money was exposed via the Asset Protection Scheme. Following an enforcement process that began in March 2009, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) concluded in December 2010 that the issues investigated did not warrant it taking any enforcement action. It announced this in a one-page press release. The FSA, following pressure from the Treasury Committee, produced The failure of the Royal bank of Scotland: Financial Services Authority Board Report in December 2011. The focus of the Treasury Committee’s Report has been to identify areas that may merit further legislative or regulatory change. Our Report also considers the value of the reporting process for understanding the causes of RBS’s failure and for ensuring that appropriate lessons have been learnt. The FSA Report describes a series of failures and misjudgements in supervision ranging from the failure to analyse and understand balance sheet risks relating to capital, liquidity and asset quality, to the decision not to intervene in RBS’s calamitous acquisition of parts of ABN AMRO. The failures described in the FSA’s Report amount to a serious indictment of senior management not only at RBS but also at the FSA. The FSA argues that since 2008 it has radically reformed its approach to supervision of large firms. It points to the significant increase in resources devoted to the supervision of high impact firms, a much greater focus than previously on capital and liquidity adequacy and asset quality, and the employment of a more intensive and intrusive style of supervision.3 The Government and Bank of England should closely examine the changes made at the FSA since 2008 and endeavour to preserve positive features of the post-crisis reforms at the FSA when transferring responsibility for prudential regulation to the Prudential Regulation Authority. In the absence of pressure from the Treasury Committee the FSA would not have produced this Report into the failure of RBS. This should not have been the case. The Board, and especially the non-executive Directors of the FSA, should have ensured that a comprehensive Report on the failure of RBS was produced without the need for Parliamentary intervention. We expect the non-executive Directors of its successor regulators, the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Financial Conduct Authority, to 1 ‘World’s biggest banks 2009’, Global Finance Magazine 2 HM Treasury & Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, The Government response to the Independent Commission on Banking, December 2011, p 12 3 The Financial Services Authority, The failure of the Royal Bank of Scotland: Financial Services Authority Board Report, December 2011, pp 29-30 4 The FSA’s report into the failure of RBS play a more robust role in ensuring that the two bodies review their own decisions and fulfil their duty to assume accountability for their actions to the public and to Parliament, consistent with the Treasury Committee’s previous recommendations in our Reports on Accountability of the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority. The FSA’s report into the failure of RBS 5 1 Introduction 1. On 2 December 2010, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) released a 298-word statement announcing that it had completed its supervisory inquiry into Royal Bank of Scotland Group (RBS). It said that: The issues we investigated do not warrant us taking any enforcement action, either against the firm or against individuals. [...] The FSA cannot publish the content of the RBS review as information gathered from the bank during the course of the review remains confidential under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA).4 2. In the light of the scale of the failure of RBS and the widespread public interest in understanding the reasons for that failure, the Treasury Committee regarded the statement of the FSA as wholly inadequate. On 13 December 2010, the Chairman of the Treasury Committee wrote to Lord Turner, Chairman of the FSA to request that the FSA reconsider its decision not to publish the findings of its investigation.5 3. In response, Lord Turner wrote to the Chairman of the Committee on 15 December and agreed that the FSA would prepare a report for publication.6 In March 2011 the Committee requested that this report by the FSA, summarising RBS’s failure and the FSA’s actions in relation to it, be subject to independent external review. Lord Turner, in a letter on 28 March, confirmed that the FSA accepted the need for such a review which would “add value to this process, specifically by providing external assurance that the FSA is being brutally honest about any of its own failings.”7 Sir David Walker and Bill Knight were appointed as specialist advisers to the Committee to undertake independent external review of the FSA’s Report in May 2011.8 4. On 25 May, the Treasury Committee published a Statement of the Purposes of the Committee and Terms of Reference relating to the independent review of the FSA’s 4 “FSA closes supervisory investigation of RBS”, FSA Press Notice, 2 December 2010 5 Letter from Chairman of the Treasury Committee to Chairman of the FSA, 13 December 2010 6 Letter from Chairman of the FSA to Chairman of the Treasury Committee, 15 December 2010 7 Letter from Chairman of the FSA to Chairman of the Treasury Committee, 28 March 2011 8 Relevant interests of specialist advisers are as follows: Bill Knight: Chairman, Financial Reporting Review Panel Director, Financial Reporting Council.