|
|
|
|
|
|
APRA and Regulatory Compliance ACPA/PwC Seminar
Darryl Roberts
Tuesday, 17 September 2002
|
|
Caveat
- Following is APRAs view of best practice in prudential regulation - not fully applicable yet to all our industries.
Policy objectives
Fit and Proper tests
- A strong compliance culture is set by example from the top of a regulated entity.
- Fit and Proper tests are a key element of international best practice in financial regulation, and are aimed at getting high quality personnel at the top of an entity.
- Allan Greenspan said in July: corporate governance to a very large extent reflects the character of the CEO, and lax corporate governance is a symptom of a failed CEO.
- And went on: although we may not be able to change the character of corporate officers, we can change behaviour through incentives and penalties - APRAs incentives and penalties seek to discourage secrecy, dishonesty and neglect.
- APRAs governance expectations are for directors, managers, the Auditor and Actuary, to be suitable for their role and conscious of their responsibilities, including whistle-blowing where relevant.
- Fit and Proper tests for directors, managers and advisers now go well beyond the more traditional and narrow requirements of merely not having a conviction for dishonesty or a history of bankruptcy.
- Suitability includes technical competence, personal honesty, and freedom from conflicts of interest. Also, Boards and managements should be well-balanced, team-oriented, and not subservient to a dominant personality.
- If APRA detects a failure to exercise good risk management - for example serious problems are swept under the carpet - then we will not hesitate to deem the top personnel to be unfit, and remove them.
Board attestation
- Regulated entities should provide annually to APRA a written Declaration of the Board certifying they have:
- complied with all relevant prudential requirements
- identified and managed all material risks
- monitored risk control performance on a regular basis
- verified the systems work in practice as intended, and
- spread a strong risk control culture across the entity.
- APRAs requirement for an annual Board Attestation is not to be taken lightly - Boards are accountable, and should do sufficient due diligence to satisfy themselves that their attestation is fair and accurate.
Auditor sign-off
- Certification by the Auditor is a key strand of the prudential safety net, but is working well below par in practice.
- Auditors have an obligation to report on:
- The Auditor should be testing adherence to, for example:
- internal risk controls to assess the overall adequacy of the risk control environment
- the regulators prudential requirements
- other relevant statutes & standards
- reliable statistical & financial reporting.
-
The Auditor should be cooperative in providing access to working papers, and participating constructively in tripartite discussions and targeted reviews - but regrettably, we arent always finding this in practice.
- A disturbing number of auditors seem to be ignorant of the relevant statutes & standards and failing to detect & flag weaknesses such as:
- non-compliance with APRA prudential standards
- APRA returns riddled with errors & lodged late
- lack of an independent internal audit function
- delegations set at inappropriate levels of seniority
- large exposures that breach prudential limits
- inadequate controls on related lending
- inadequate controls on risky activity, and so on.
Enforcement
- APRA is now intervening more promptly, more vigorously and more often under our existing powers than in the past, and we are developing a new comprehensive enforcement infrastructure to upgrade and standardise powers over all the regulated industries: banking, insurance and superannuation. This will require Government support to have legislative effect.
- The basic powers we would hope to be using in future in the normal course of enforcement include:
- access to records and books
- appointments of independent investigators and experts
- case-by-case increases in capital requirements
- enforceable undertakings and enforceable directions,
- cease & desist notices, if we were to get this power
- licence conditions, including vetoes on business lines
- removal of unsuitable directors, managers, auditors etc
- freezing of assets, replacing of boards, and ultimately,
- putting entities into run-off or liquidation.
Summing up
- The compliance function should be deeply embedded in an entitys everyday commercial culture, and not regarded as a mere mechanical or legalistic box-ticking exercise.
- The Auditor should be well-informed about the entitys regulatory obligations, vigilant in detecting breaches and weaknesses, and always ready to qualify sign-offs - regulated entities for their part should ensure that audit obligations are clearly established in the audit engagement.
- Finally, there is a strong likelihood that a commercially well-run company - in business for the long-term - is also by nature honest, open, professional and prudent.
|
|