Bail-In Maybe Necessary to Strengthen Vital Role of Credit Unions

The Credit Union movement is under growing pressure. This pressure arises from the effects of the on-going economic crisis. Rising unemployment, falling disposable income and high levels of indebtedness are pushing up existing- and like future- payments arrears. This, in turn, is impacting on their reserves and capital. At the same time, investment income on deposits has been reduced because of developments in global stock markets and historically low interest rates.

However, in sharp contrast to the banking system there are strong reasons for believing that not alone will the credit union movement come through these difficulties but, with the right kind of leadership, may well be on the brink of a process of renewal.

To do so, the movement will have to deal with two sets of challenges. The first is how best to deal promptly and effectively with growing arrears and making provision for the increased levels of risk embedded in their loan book. The second relates to a process of fundamental regulatory form, which is part of the IMF-EU-ECB Bailout, these reforms are aimed in strengthening the internal systems and capabilities of Credit Unions; of enhancing governance at board level and also of introducing a new stabilisation regime, including, in the last resort arrangements for winding up unviable credit union and transferring both deposits and members to other stronger units. At the same time the reforms envisages a sharp reduction in the number of credit unions by more than half. All of this will, almost certainly, acquire financial support. It would be premature to put a figure on this but it is likely to be of the order of One and a half Billion.

      

 This should not be seen as a ‘Bank Bailout’ in the sense in the sense of which Ireland has become all too familiar. It would be more appropriate to call it a ‘Bail-in’. The ‘Business Model’ at the heart of the collapse of the banks was self inflicted; the banks were deaf to the warnings of many within the banks themselves and also outside of the banks. In complete contrast the model which drives credit unions is based on voluntarism. It is based on a culture of cooperation, of self-help and of encouraging savings and thrift. These were precisely the values which were’ Crowded out’ by the short term-ism of the banks and by their fixation on shareholder value and maximizing profits.

Credit Unions have retained the trust of their members and also of the wider public at a time of financial stress and economic desolation. That Trust is the platform on which credit Unions will renew their mission and their mandate of service to the communities to which they are rooted.

The regulatory reform process poses serious challenges. The time scale is far too short  and would appear to be driven not by the imperative of getting it right but rather of getting it done: Ticking the box.  The need for reform and strengthening is evident. Fracturing in public trust and confidence in the credit union movement would have the most far reaching consequences. The credit union movement with its extensive membership base, total assets of fourteen Billion which are an integral part of right across the country, are very much the ‘last man standing’. But rush legislation is usually bad legislation. There is a strong regulatory capability in the Central Bank overseen by the registrar of creditary Unions. There has, over the past two years, been a strong and proactive engagement by the department of finance by the Oireachtas as well as by the Credit Union Advisory committee with the credit union representative bodies. All of this provides a favourable environment within which to set out the conditions for a strengthening in risk management as well as putting in place new structure for ensuring the sustainability of the movement.

 Equally, a ‘One size fits all’ approach to regulation, which would involve imposing the same burden on credit unions as on banks would be unnecessary undesirable and unworkable, what is important is a proportionate regulatory and government system, based on the intrinsically sound and ethical ‘business model’.

 Equally important the credit union movement itself which is beset by historical divisions will need to come together and demonstrate the kind of leadership that reflects the enormous importance in Ireland and on the Island : and which demonstrates a conviction that, had the banking system retained the kind of values which are at the heart of Credit Union, The country would not be in the position it is in today.

 The credit union movement is the benchmark to which any sensible rebuilding of the banking system should be measured  

Abridged version of paper delivered at CUNA Mutual Conference, Dublin Castle, 15^th of June 2011

Dismantling of HSE-New Irish Health Service

First Published in The Irish Medical News May 6-2011-Ray Kinsella

The decision of the Health Minister James Reilly to dismantle the HSE and to replace it with a wholly different approach to the delivery of healthcare was signalled well before the general election. The replacement of the Board of the HSE , which it should be said had real strengths but was required to function in a dysfunctional model, was primarily about making a break with the past.
The Minister’s decision will give real visibility to the new institutional and policy architecture. It will concentrate minds. The key issue is what difference it will make in delivering on those core values that have been trumpeted in successive “institutional reforms” over the last three decades: Fairness, access, quality of care, and a participative culture at the heart of which is the “person” in all of their needs. One might also add the development of the enormous research capabilities which are latent within our healthcare facilities. The “building blocks” of the new model are potentially transformational:

• Universal healthcare;

• A greater emphasis on diagnosis and care within a primary care setting and in the community;

• Funding arrangements that, in effect, follow the patient rather than being carved up among different peers and which must then accommodate to the rationing that is now endemic within the system.

Within this new architecture, the aim is to ensure greater autonomy for hospitals. This makes enormous sense in terms of incentivising not just best practice, but also a transformational change and with no dead hand of bureaucracy looking over their shoulder. At the same time, it is proposed to reorganise hospitals into trusts along the lines of the UK.

This should help to generate economies of scale, as well as of scope: that is, financial savings together with synergies in terms of activities and outcomes. In truth, there is little to be said of the present system as it developed. It is only fair to say that it didn’t start out that way. Whatever the intentions, a culture of control seeped in and caused systemic and terminal damage – notwithstanding the efforts of those within the system (and also, it should be said, of individuals within the HSE ) to make an increasingly fragmented, under-funded and unfair system operational.

 In recent years, it has had to absorb “cuts” that were short-term, wholly counter-productive, and which have left a legacy reflected in, for example, the exigencies which have been resorted to in staffing arrangements that impact safety as well as the provision of services – and, worst of all, do so in a manner that was not immediately apparent. But staff know and the patient experience is increasingly corroded by the ‘smoke and mirrors’ that invariably characterise dysfunctionality. But it would be wrong to benchmark the new model against what is there.

It is, in principle, a wholly different approach. Attention will now focus on the nature of the universal care model; whether it should be compulsory, and the extent of coverage. It is worth pointing out that “point in time” comparisons with analogous models in EU and OECD countries can be misleading. There are also pressing challenges in integrating Ireland’s fraught, and increasingly unaffordable private health insurance system. These reflect significant regulatory and policy challenges that stretch back to the early 1990s and the third non-life insurance directive, which has never been fully implemented in Ireland. At the same time, these challenges should not detract from the fact that there is widespread popular support for setting a course for a universal healthcare system – the case which I argued for in these pages more than a decade ago.

The economic environment in which the Minister is operating is the most difficult and constrained in modern Irish history. Misconceived economic policies, reinforced by the terms of the EU/IMF “bailout”, and reflecting the interests of the large Euro zone core countries, have had a devastating effect on the public finances and on Ireland’s self-confidence and standing. They have also impacted on the lives of individuals and families and increasingly, on their health status. The reality is that, for reasons spelled out elsewhere, it is not going to get any better for as long as Ireland remains in the Euro zone under the hegemony of an orthodoxy which does not reflect the founding ideals behind European cooperation and which has confined Ireland to “cold storage”. That makes it all the more important to look for positives in the circumstances in which Ireland is now mired.............Read Full Article