The working group has identified numerous conclusions and recommendations which it believes could usefully supplement the Minimum Standards. The recommendations below are submitted to the ICBS for participants' endorsement, bearing in mind that they need to be considered in the context of the sections of the paper from which they are drawn.
1. Improving the access of home supervisors to information necessary for effective consolidated supervision
(i) In order to exercise comprehensive consolidated supervision of the global activities of their banking organisations, home supervisors must be able to make an assessment of all significant aspects of their banks' operations that bear on safety and soundness, wherever those operations are conducted and using whatever evaluative techniques are central to their supervisory process (paragraph 16 and 18).
(ii) Home supervisors need to be able to verify that quantitative information received from banking organisations in respect of subsidiaries and branches in other jurisdictions is accurate and to reassure themselves that there are no supervisory gaps (paragraph 7).
(iii) While recognising that there are legitimate reasons for protecting customer privacy, the working group believes that secrecy laws should not impede the ability of supervisors to ensure safety and soundness in the international banking system (paragraph 5).
(iv) If the home supervisor needs information about non-deposit operations, host supervisors are encouraged to assist in providing the requisite information to home supervisors if this is not provided through other supervisory means. The working group believes it is essential that national legislation that in any way obstructs the passage of non-deposit supervisory information be amended (paragraph 8).
(v) Where the liabilities side of the balance sheet is concerned, home supervisors do not routinely need to know the identity of individual depositors. However, in certain well-defined circumstances, home supervisors would need access to individual depositors' names and to deposit account information (paragraph 9).
(vi) It should not normally be necessary for the home supervisor to know the identity of investors for whom a bank in a host country is managing investments at the customer's risk. However, in certain exceptional circumstances, home supervisors would need access to individual investors' names and to investment account information subject to the safeguards in paragraph 10 (paragraph 13).
(vii) The working group recommends that host supervisors whose legislation does not allow a home supervisor to have access to depositor information use their best endeavours to have their legislation reviewed and if necessary amended to provide for a mechanism whereby in exceptional cases a home supervisor, with the consent of the host supervisor, will gain access to depositor information subject to the same conditions as outlined in (viii) below (paragraph 12).
(viii) In order to provide legitimate protection for bank customers, it is important that the information obtained by home supervisors, especially that relating to depositors' or investors' names, is subject to strict confidentiality. The working group recommends that those host jurisdictions whose legislation allows foreign supervisors to have access to banks' depositor or investor information should subject such access (at the host country's discretion) to the following conditions (paragraph 10):
- the purpose for which the information is sought should be specific and supervisory in nature; (ix) If a host supervisor has good cause to doubt a home supervisor's ability to limit the use of information obtained in confidence solely for supervisory purposes, the host would retain the right not to provide such information (paragraph 11).
- information received should be restricted solely to officials engaged in prudential supervision and not be passed to third parties without the host supervisor's prior consent;
- there is assurance that all possible steps will be taken to preserve the confidentiality of information received by a home supervisor in the absence of the explicit consent of the customer;
- there should be a two-way flow of information between the host and home supervisors, though perfect reciprocity should not be demanded;
- before taking consequential action, those receiving information will undertake to consult with those supplying it.
(x) Subject to appropriate protection for the identity of customers, home supervisors should be able at their discretion, and following consultation with the host supervisor, to carry out on-site inspections in other jurisdictions for the purposes of carrying out effective comprehensive consolidated supervision. This ability should include, with the consent of the host supervisor and within the laws of the host country, the right to look at individual depositors' names and relevant deposit account information if the home supervisor suspects serious crime as defined in section (d). If a host supervisor has reason to believe that the visit is for non-supervisory purposes, it should have the right to prevent the visit taking place or to terminate the inspection (paragraph 19).
(xi) It would avoid potential misunderstandings if a standard routine were laid down for conducting cross-border inspections along the lines recommended in Annex A (paragraph 20).
(xii) In those countries where laws do not allow for on-site inspections by supervisors from other jurisdictions, the working group advocates that host supervisors use their best endeavours to have their legislation amended. In the meantime, host supervisors should, within the limits of their laws, be willing to cooperate with any home supervisor that wishes to make an inspection. The working group believes that the host supervisor should have the option to accompany the home supervisor throughout the inspection (paragraph 21).
(xiii) It is important that the confidentiality of information obtained during the course of an inspection be maintained. Home supervisors should use their best endeavours to have their legislation modified if it does not offer sufficient protection that information obtained for the purposes of effective consolidated supervision is limited to that use (paragraph 22).
(xiv) In the event that a home supervisor, during an on-site inspection in a host country, detects a serious criminal violation of home country law, the home supervisor may be under a strict legal obligation to pass the information immediately to the appropriate law enforcement authorities in its home country. In these circumstances, the home supervisor should inform the host supervisor of the action he intends to take (paragraph 26).
(xv) In order to carry out effective comprehensive consolidated supervision, home supervisors also need information on certain qualitative aspects of the business undertaken in other jurisdictions by branches and subsidiaries of banking organisations for which they are the home supervisor. All members of the working group agree that it is essential for effective consolidated supervision that there are no impediments to the passing of such qualitative information to the home supervisor (paragraphs 14 and 15).
2. Improving the access of host supervisors to information necessary for effective host supervision
(xvi) In the case of information which is specific to the local entity, an early sharing of information may be important in enabling a potential problem to be resolved before it becomes serious. The home supervisor should therefore consult the host supervisor in such cases and the latter should report back on its findings. In particular, it is essential that the home supervisor inform the host supervisor immediately if the former has reason to suspect the integrity of the local operation, the quality of its management or the quality of internal controls being exercised by the parent bank (paragraph 28).
(xvii) A home supervisor should have on its regular mailing list for relevant material all foreign supervisors which act as hosts to its banks (paragraph 29).
(xviii) While the working group agrees that home supervisors should endeavour to keep host supervisors appraised of material adverse changes in the global condition of banking groups, the Group recognises that this will typically be a highly sensitive issue and that decisions on information-sharing necessarily will have to be made on a case-by-case basis (paragraph 30).
3. Ensuring that all cross-border banking operations are subject to effective home and host supervision
(xix) The working group has formulated a set of principles of effective consolidated supervision (see Annex B) which could be used by host supervisors as a checklist to assist in determining whether a home supervisor is meeting the Minimum Standards (paragraph 31).
(xx) Regional group procedures might be used to support the implementation of the Minimum Standards, as the Offshore Group is now doing (paragraph 33).
(xxi) The working group recommends that other regional groups consider the possibility of using a checklist similar to the one used by the Offshore Group (see Annex C) as a means of establishing which of their members might be certified as meeting certain general criteria (paragraph 34).
(xxii) The Basle Committee encourages its member countries to assist the Offshore Group or another regional group in the fact-finding verification process, but any decision-making regarding membership of a regional group should be left to that group alone. The Committee has asked its Secretariat to maintain a list of competent persons (for example, retired supervisors) who are available to undertake exercises of this nature (paragraph 37).
(xxiii) The supervisor that licenses a so-called shell branch has responsibility for ensuring that there is effective supervision of that shell branch. No banking operation should be permitted without a licence, and no shell office should be licensed without ascertaining that it will be subject to effective supervision. In the event that any host supervisor receives an application to license a new shell branch that will be managed in another jurisdiction, that supervisor should take steps to notify both the home supervisor and the appropriate host supervisor in the other jurisdiction in order to establish that there will be appropriate supervision of the branch before approving the application (paragraph 39).
(xxiv) Home supervisors should not authorise their banks to establish or acquire offices in any host jurisdiction without satisfying themselves in advance that such offices will be subject to appropriate supervision (paragraph 40).
(xxv) Where the home authority wishes to inspect on-site, they should be permitted to examine the books of the shell branch wherever they are kept. The working group believes that in no case should access to these books be protected by secrecy requirements in the country that licenses the shell branch (paragraph 40).
(xxvi) The working group recommends that home or host supervisors be vigilant to ensure that parallel-owned banks (where a bank in one jurisdiction has the same ownership as a bank in another jurisdiction, where one is not a subsidiary of the other) become subject to consolidated supervision, if necessary by enforcing a change in group structure as indicated by the Minimum Standards (paragraph 41).
(xxvii) Any home supervisor that licenses a banking entity has a responsibility to monitor its operations on a worldwide basis (paragraph 42).
(xxviii) No entity should be allowed to use the word "bank" in its name if it is not conducting banking activities and being supervised as a bank (paragraph 42).
(xxix) The working group believes the Basle Committee should advise all host countries to be extremely cautious about approving the establishment of cross-border operations by banks incorporated in under-regulated financial centres, and even more cautious about accepting other financial institutions conducting banking activities from those centres (paragraph 42).