Most often, reports prepared by the RBI’s internal working groups barely draw much attention beyond the relevant circles in the banking and financial services industries and rarely ever evoke protest. But the strong reactions to an internal panel’s report on November 20, almost a full month since the group of central bank officials had submitted their recommendations on October 26, come as no surprise. The panel, which was tasked with reviewing ownership norms and corporate structure for private sector banks, has made worthwhile suggestions including ways to harmonise licensing norms for all banks including older legacy lenders and newer entrants. While the panel’s appointment in June — at a time when the country was in the throes of coping with the severe economic fallout of the COVID-19 lockdown — got little attention, its suggestion that corporate or industrial houses be allowed to promote banks has triggered widespread concern. And among those with reservations are at least three former senior central bankers and a global credit rating agency. Most intriguing is that the panel, which consulted with experts ranging from former RBI officials to legal and finance professionals, clearly acknowledges that all but one of these outside experts were unequivocal in their opinion that given the prevailing far-from-ideal corporate governance culture, corporates ought to be barred from promoting banks.

The difficulty in ring-fencing “the non-financial activities of the promoters with that of the bank”, was flagged by these experts as the central concern, a fear that was echoed by S&P Global Ratings too. Former RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan and former Deputy Governor Viral Acharya — who was appointed by the Modi government after Mr. Rajan had left the central bank — in a joint article on LinkedIn have termed the proposal a ‘bad idea’ and questioned its rationale. Acknowledging the RBI group’s caveats including its assertion that corporates only be allowed as promoters after “necessary amendments to the Banking Regulation Act, 1949” are enacted to safeguard against connected lending, the two economists have, however, pointed to the bailouts of Yes Bank and Lakshmi Vilas Bank as examples of the heightened risk posed by any move to loosen bank licensing norms. For all its regulatory powers and supervisory capabilities, the RBI failed to spot the build-up of troubled exposures at Yes Bank in time. The dangers posed to overall financial stability by letting industrial houses have access to relatively inexpensive capital in the form of household savings through banks, howsoever legally regulated, are far too great to risk at the altar of liberalisation of ownership norms. The RBI’s decision makers need to reject this suggestion outright and place it where it belongs — the shelf.

You have reached your limit for free articles this month.

To get full access, please subscribe.

Already have an account ? Sign in

Start your 14 days free trial. Sign Up

Dear reader,

We have been keeping you up-to-date with information on the developments in India and the world that have a bearing on our health and wellbeing, our lives and livelihoods, during these difficult times. To enable wide dissemination of news that is in public interest, we have increased the number of articles that can be read free, and extended free trial periods. However, we have a request for those who can afford to subscribe: please do. As we fight disinformation and misinformation, and keep apace with the happenings, we need to commit greater resources to news gathering operations. We promise to deliver quality journalism that stays away from vested interest and political propaganda.

Dear subscriber,

Thank you!

Your support for our journalism is invaluable. It’s a support for truth and fairness in journalism. It has helped us keep apace with events and happenings.

The Hindu has always stood for journalism that is in the public interest. At this difficult time, it becomes even more important that we have access to information that has a bearing on our health and well-being, our lives, and livelihoods. As a subscriber, you are not only a beneficiary of our work but also its enabler.

We also reiterate here the promise that our team of reporters, copy editors, fact-checkers, designers, and photographers will deliver quality journalism that stays away from vested interest and political propaganda.

Suresh Nambath

Please enter a valid email address.

From the abrogation of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir, to the landmark Ayodhya verdict, 2019 proved to be an eventful year.

Subscribe to The Hindu now and get unlimited access.

Already have an account? Sign In

Start your 14 days free trial Sign Up