Royal Bank of Scotland 'must do better'

 
RBS branch

There is a simple overarching message from the flurry of announcements about Royal Bank of Scotland this morning: the giant largely nationalised bank has to work harder if taxpayers are to stand a chance of getting back the £46bn they've invested in it.

As expected, the chancellor has shied away from physically extracting £38bn of toxic loans sitting on RBS's balance sheet into a new so-called bad bank owned 100% by the state.

Instead these poor quality assets will be managed separately within RBS, and re-named RBS Capital Resolution Group.

The new plan is for RBS to somehow get rid of up to 70% of this radioactive debt - which contains the worst of the bank's commercial property and Irish lending - over two years, with a hope that perhaps it can all be gone within three years.

This means selling some of it at a bigger loss than would otherwise have been the case, to the mild detriment of RBS's capital, the vital financial resources it holds to cushion depositors from shocks.

But the idea is that when it's all gone, RBS will feel liberated - since the sheer poisonous quality of these loans means they "consume" a whole fifth of RBS's capital, such that the relevant 20% of capital is not available to support new credit and healthy credit creation.

Lacking momentum

RBS's board, supported by the chancellor and the regulator, the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), has also determined that the bank doesn't have quite enough capital, for three reasons.

First, like most banks, it fears that the penalties, fines and compensation payments it faces from its sins during the boom years will escalate.

Start Quote

Mr McEwan recognises the importance of fixing SME lending, not only for the health of the bank but for the growth prospects of the British economy”

End Quote

That looks a shrewd judgement on a day when the US state-backed mortgage giant Fannie Mae is suing nine banks, including RBS and Barclays, over the manipulation of the Libor interest-rate benchmark, and RBS has suspended two currency traders connected to regulators' investigations into whether banks rigged the foreign exchange market.

Second, RBS expects to be told by the PRA in December that it needs to hold more equity capital, following completion of a review by the regulator of the specific risks each of the biggest banks poses to UK financial stability.

Third, and perhaps most embarrassingly, RBS's business in the round lacks what the bank describes as adequate "momentum" to generate the relevant capital simply by generating bigger profits.

Putting these three factors together, RBS's board has determined that by the end of 2016 it needs a 12% ratio of loss-absorbing capital to assets weighted by the riskiness of individual loans on the "fully loaded" Basel lll measure (or the new international rules for how much capital banks must hold).

That is a full third more capital than RBS currently holds. And it may seem a tall order for RBS to raise all that capital without asking taxpayers to supply more.

However, it would probably be a resigning issue for the chancellor if his stewardship of the bank required it to receive more state aid. And RBS says it can raise the relevant capital by doing two things.

Ross McEwan Ross McEwan wants RBS to concentrate on becoming a very British commercial bank

It plans to accelerate the disposal of its big US bank, Citizens, by floating it on the US stock market next year, with the ambition of getting rid of all its shares in Citizens within three years.

And the bank will work harder in general to remove from its balance sheet the loans and investments that consume most of its capital while contributing the least profit.

New focus

Does this bring the risk that RBS still won't provide the loans desperately needed by British households and businesses after many years of the bank shrinking its support for the UK economy?

Some will fear it does.

However, RBS's new chief executive, Ross McEwan, says he has the opposite plan in mind.

He says that since his bank is no longer a weapon of lethal mass wealth and economic destruction - for which he thanks his predecessor, Stephen Hester - it can now become focused as a very British commercial bank, serving the needs of British people and companies.

Mr McEwan's plans can be seen as the culmination of the rolling back of so much of the expansion of RBS that took place during the boom years, under the leadership of its tarnished former chief executive, Fred Goodwin.

First on the agenda is fixing the way RBS provides finance to small and medium sized enterprises (or SMEs), following the publication this morning of a damning report into the bank's performance in this economically vital activity, which it commissioned from the former deputy governor of the Bank of England, Sir Andrew Large.

Sir Andrew confirms what much of the world was saying about RBS since the crisis of 2008, that it was turning away too many businesses wanting finance and providing far less credit to small companies than it should have been doing, given its market leading position.

Start Quote

Perhaps most important for Mr Osborne, he believes that he, the regulator and the board of RBS now all share a common belief about the direction RBS should be taking”

End Quote

And Sir Andrew has uncovered a number of causes: the fragmentation of how SME lending was managed; unrealistic targets being set for lending; too much risk aversion by relationship managers and risk officers; and - perhaps most damningly - the inadequate skills of the lending bankers.

Mr McEwan recognises the importance of fixing SME lending, not only for the health of the bank but for the growth prospects of the British economy - as RBS's natural share of lending to small business should be about a quarter.

It will have no place to hide when trying to mend its performance, given that the Federation of Small Businesses and the British Chambers of Commerce are launching a new and supposedly authoritative annual league table of all banks' performances supporting smaller companies.

This survey will identify Britain's best small-business bank - and that would not have been RBS in recent years.

'Can do better'

But what Mr McEwan says he wants to fix goes wider.

He complains that it takes longer than should be the case for anyone to open an account at RBS. In general he thinks the bank does not serve its customers well enough.

In a letter to his tens of thousands of employees, he says: "We still receive far too many complaints, often on issues that would never arise if our systems and processes were more effective".

And he points out that the return the bank is earning on its investment capital - its "core return on equity" - has actually been falling, in spite of a revival of the British economy. And that is not a good sign.

As Mr McEwan says: "We must do better and we can do better."

As for the Chancellor, George Osborne, he takes heart from a couple of things.

First, the last of the special additional support that was provided to RBS to prop it up after the 2008 debacle has been unwound: a Treasury facility to provide £8bn of new capital to RBS in an emergency, which is costing the bank £300m a year, has gone a year earlier than planned.

But perhaps most important for Mr Osborne, he believes that he, the regulator and the board of RBS now all share a common belief about the direction RBS should be taking.

There may be another way of seeing this: all those public denials by RBS and the Treasury that they were not at loggerheads during the Hester years don't seem quite so compelling, on a morning when Mr Osborne says it's brilliant that he, RBS and the Bank of England are at last all singing the same song.

 
Robert Peston Article written by Robert Peston Robert Peston Economics editor

Richer at last?

How significant is today's confirmation that earnings are at last rising faster than inflation?

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Robert

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 188.

    So Mike Carney has 'great faith' in the abilities of the City and the financial services industry? I guess economic history was never his best subject...
    As current events show, the troubles of 2008 were but the tip of a monstrous iceberg of deceit, dishonesty and bare faced fraud. Not a million miles from his office is the site of an institution that once ensured integrity - the Tyburn Tree!

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 187.

    It was the cosy relationship between the Banks and the Markets which caused the demise of RBS - as admitted by Fred the Shred to the Commons Select Committee - 'The markets turned against us.' Well of course they did - the Markets make their money running rackets of which Al Capone would be proud - his ghost is kicking itself that it never thought of 'derivatives' or 'subprime mortgages'!

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 186.

    Economic history teaches us that Speculative Markets have no real economic value and left unregulated they can destroy any economy.
    In the 19th C we had Boom n' Bust a plenty but this was counterbalanced by massive growth in technology and the resulting productivity. Now we have technical stagnation, spiralling costs and population - yet the Markets seem oblivious to reality!

    Tax 'em - hard!

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 185.

    Once again we witness the triumph of 'Bubble Economics'. A depressed economy and zero growth, no jobs and shrinking incomes of the productive part of the labour force. At least one of the laptop lugging loons was honest - '****** people over for their money.' was how he so sweetly termed it. All markets are rigged - but some are more rigged than others!

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 184.

    As Mr McEwan says: "We must do better and we can do better."

    ++++

    Or as everyone else says:

    "You could have already done better and you should have done better by now"

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 183.

    I am rather concerned about this new BITCOIN...

    It goes like this...The few remaining large banks in the USA and the UK are now vulnerable to failure due to Q.E. and just the fact they are massive.
    As ,or if Bitcoin takes off and it looks like it could, these very large banks could collapse with dire consequences for all...EXCEPT those with BITCOINS.
    The value if Bitcoins is escalating...

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 182.

    Have no doubt the RBS should do so much better. The same goes for all of our Political Parties .And all of our Newspapers And all Employers. And Employees and all Trade Unions.
    Bui it is difficult to stop people wanting more and more money .when the people at the top of tree never seem to be satisfied with what they have.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 181.

    "do better?" they could hardly do worse if they tried.

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 180.

    RBS, better than anything else uncovers the lies around talent retention through monstrous pay in the city.
    For years the top levels of RBS earned a fortune and were lauded (knighthoods for heaven's sake). It is clear now they were muppets. There is no talent at the top of this industry. They need lay people and SMEs represented on the boards of these bank to bring some reality into the boardroom.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 179.

    Instead of the cumbersome title "Capital Resolution Group" could they not have called it Goodwin Bank

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 178.

    176.m."toxic debt 'holding' should be zero"

    You are ignoring one tiny (huge & insurmountable problem ) the toxic debt is far far larger than their entire value. (Otherwise the whole issue would have been settled in 2008)

    The banks (that is all of them) are irretrievably BUST. They have traded and created what have now become worthless securities. Otherwise they would not need $85Bn a month!

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 177.

    As taxpayer support for RBS amounts to £46bn and the value of the assets to be transferred to the "bad bank" come to £38bn what is the £8bn difference for - Surely not bonuses?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 176.

    We hear about banks' profits after provision for bad debt - if they have taken a revenue 'hit' for bad debt provided against their balance sheet holding of debt [incl toxic debt] then surely all the toxic debt will have been written off by now. If so, toxic debt 'holding' should be zero and they would be ring-fencing a zero value. This seems common sense - or is that too sensible for banks?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 175.

    Whether you like it or not RBS is a huge player in the UK economy.

    As such the government cannot afford to either ignore it, simply allowing it to wither on he vine, or enhance its operation as part of UK PLC, there would be shouts of foul from the other banks.

    So the RBS can carry on, on its own sweet way, which is why McEwan is smirking.

    He has it made. Can do no wrong. A made man.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 174.

    Mysterious the ways of public recovery, from bank profits at the expense of... the public

    We benefit of course from bank skill picking winners, firms that might enrich our domestic market-offering AND win export orders

    Otherwise we'd have to rely on common-sense of those with ideas for new offerings... agreeing equal partnership of course, not to be misled by desperate fear & greed

    Happy days

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 173.

    I expected more in the back-scratching interview with McEwan on Fridays BBC Today programme.

    To reduce this extremely serious issue to a regular uttering of that famous school report statement 'must do better', was a self confession that McEwan is not the pupil for the job.

    'on the same song sheet at last' says Osborne after 3 years, 3 long years, some BoE and government ?

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 172.

    All the criminals in their coats and their ties are free to drink Martine's and watch the sun rise. While Rueben sits like Buda in a six foot cell and innocent man in a living hell !

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 171.

    166.Joe

    Do you understand what that means.

    It currently means that UK taxpayers still pick up a massive bail out bill, via deposit guarantees, it also means depositors may lose massive amounts, this all has serious negative domino effect on UK economy & public expenditure.

    Government even suggesting banks can fail, is preposterous

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 170.

    My Current Account is with "The Domicile Porcine Receptacle Bank"
    My Savings Account was closed by the "Laughing Stock Exchange" many years ago - for inactivity. I am totally ignorant of any other Bank dealings and how or WHY they are allowed to make a profit - other than interest on loans (accepted) Why do Banks charge interest at a rate higher than that set by The BofE ?

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 169.

    How did RBS get this "Royal" name then? I don't think Buck House has any dealings with them.

 

Page 1 of 10

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.