Sultan Bin Nasser Al-Suwaidi: Recent policy developments for
strengthening the resilience of the financial sector
Welcoming remarks by H E Sultan Bin Nasser Al-Suwaidi, Governor of the Central Bank of
the United Arab Emirates, at the 8th High-Level Meeting for the Middle East & North Africa
Region on "Recent policy developments for strengthening the resilience of the financial
sector", organized by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), the Financial
Stability Institute (FSI) and the Arab Monetary Fund (AMF), Abu Dhabi, 27 November 2012.
* * *
Good morning,
Excellencies,
Ladies & gentlemen,
Y.E. Mar Gudmundsson, Governor of Central Bank of Iceland,
The Honorable, Josef Tošovský, Chairman of the Financial Stability Institute of the
BIS,
Y.E. Dr. Jassim Al Mannai, General Manager & Chairman of the Arab Monetary Fund,
The Distinguished Speakers,
It gives me great pleasure to welcome you to the UAE, especially those who
travelled a long way to be here with us at the outset of this important high level meeting.
The subjects that would be discussed today are familiar and current, and very much
relevant to stability of the financial systems. The financial system's stability in all
countries, and this region is no exception, are very important for economic stability.
I will start by giving you an idea about the UAE financial system, which falls under
the Central Bank supervision.
I. Overview of the UAE banking system
If I may switch now to talk about one of the subjects this meeting will discuss
namely: SIBs or D-SIBs, it will be worthwhile to work on a framework to identify
D-SIBs in the region at the first stage. The framework should take into account: (a) the
size of the bank (based on simple indicators such as total assets and the bank's reliance
on specific sectors, like the real estate sector and the GREs and counter parties), (b)
the interconnectedness between banks (as indicated by deposits from and loans to), and
(d) the degree of complexity, even though this does not play a significant role in the UAE,
as banks do not trade or invest in sophisticated financial products. Also, cross-border
activities by banks in the region can't be used to determine if they qualify as D-SIBs, as
these activities are insignificant.
II. Issues for consideration
1. The BCBS assessment framework suggests that Local regulators are entrusted
with the task to set up their own methodology for the process of identifying
which banks to be considered as D-SIBs. Nonetheless, some general guidelines
on the subject from BCBS would be helpful, and they will make the exercise more
consistent region-wide.
2. Central Banks in our region could develop a peer-group approach for this
exercise so they could learn from each other.
3. It seems that the D-SIBs proposal is restricted to banks. Would Non-bank
Financial Institutions (NBSFIs) be considered? Would the assessment of systemic
importance cover subsidiaries (and not branches) of banking groups.
4. The assessment framework also suggest there will be a mix of qualitative and
quantitative judgments for each D-SIB. With the general guidelines from BCBS,
it would be the responsibility of the local authority to assign the appropriate
weights to the qualitative vs. the quantitative judgments.
5. While waiting for the final version of BCBS document, Central Banks in our
region could start working on the identification exercise of D-SIBs, taking into
account local considerations, learning from countries of similar financial systems,
and benefiting from peer-reviews.
III. Higher loss absorbency (HLA)
1. As in the G-SIBs framework, D-SIBs will be required to hold additional Common
Equity Tier 1
Capital (CET1) to meet their HLA requirements, which eventually support
capital conservation of the Basel III capital framework. It is a positive development
that national regulators are given the authority to decide on the appropriate level
of additional CET1, consistent with each bank's systemic importance. However
there is some concern that the proposed HLA would just duplicate the already in
place country-specific prudential measures implemented in the region, which
would mean that the D-SIB's cost of doing business will go up.
For example, in the UAE we impose the following capital ratios:
- Tier 1 core capital: a minimum of 8% (actual is: 14.5%)
- Tier 1 and other tiers: a minimum of 12% (actual is: 20.5%)
2. However, it is suggested that local regulators should allow identified D-SIBs a
comprehensive grace period to fully comply with the HLA requirements.
3. As local debt markets are at an infancy stage in many countries in the
region, this would make it difficult for potential D-SIBs to hold high-quality liquid
debt instruments as "pre-emptive" liquidity buffers against early signs of stress.
Hence, there is a need to find an appropriate way to deal with this issue, until
debt markets in the region witness significant improvements.
To conclude, it should be stressed that strengthening the banking supervision exercise in
our countries is key to tackling systemic risk in D-SIBs and other financial institutions.
Excellencies
Ladies & gentlemen
With this I come to the end of my speech, but before I close, I would like to thank
the FSI of BIS and the AMF, for holding this important high level meeting here in Abu
Dhabi, UAE.
I wish you all a successful meeting.
Thank you for your attention.