TOP
BS
Not unrelated ?!
SEBI (Another roll back- of yet another impulsively introduced 'regulation'?! )
|
BL
Commoner's (common sense) Reaction:
“Many ... are lobbying to extend that allows them to maintain low provisions
against impaired or stressed assets."
Bluntly stating, is not what is being lobbied for, the most
dreaded and obnoxious practice of "window dressing”, that happens to being indulged in, with or
without forbearance by the Regulator, quite for long? On that premise, is not
the 'statutory audit' of banking sector reduced to an empty or meaningless
formality, a farce? Does not then, the report, as is the convention, expressing
the opinion, -regardless of the clumsily guarded language in which it is lately
chosen to be couched, - that the audited final accounts show a true and fair
view (picture) of the financial position , if were construed / interpreted in
actual and factual terms, and in substance, tantamount to saying it all but
really divulging nothing to the stakeholders ?
BS
|
IMPROMPTU: The narrated episode makes for ,-to rhyme with
'tale of two cities' or 'one man company' a novel idea given a legal shape
under the new company law – a tell-tale of one man with many ('RELATED', a
modern day concept that has increasingly come to be regarded as the proverbial
red rag to a BULL (-as personified by the whole lot of so called regulators ,
or semi- or self-regulators, styled/named SEBI, ICSI,
CLB, RBI, ICAI >>>) companies; and, with many
fanciful names – ANY THOUGHTS to toe the line , especially from the
expected-to-be-concerned government / its authoritative quarters AND/OR company
law experts at large?
>
>
<<<<<
]1 Administrative Reforms Commission's 9th Report titled ..
<<<<<BL
Self-regulation may work for microfinance
<....has appointed a tough self-regulatory body is
testimony to its commitment to a client-centric approach.
< In fact, the self-regulation model has traditionally been
viewed with scepticism. There would seem to be an in-built conflict between
advocating and promoting the interest of the individual member and the larger
interest of the industry.
< Globally, the model hasn’t met with much of success. Most
countries have either weak or non-existent financial consumer protection rules,
that do not touch providers of financial services at the base of the pyramid.>>>
Sporadic (with courage of conviction,
to call a spade a spade):
At best, the write-up makes
for a soliloquy; a confus-ed/-ing bag of mutually contradicting thoughts- a typical
sort of blowing/breathing hot and hold simultaneously.
E.g. 'tough
self-regulatory authority' < a patently self defeating ideology; an oxymoron, a proven
failure , if not a non-starter.
For practical clues, if not for
a clear-cut answer, recommended to mindfully look around; and look
into/through specially appointed domestic and foreign experts' committee
Reports galore. Many of them bluntly decry the poor quality, nay futility, that the
loosely called "home jurisdiction regulation" is inherently potent
with / bears on its sleeves. It is a tragedy that contrary to sane expectations,
some have been gathering dust in the nation’s archives, for years, with no follow-on.
Worth remembering
that for quite some time now, the idea of
a 'super regulator', over and above even so-believed –all- powerful and full-fledged
regulators already in place - such as SEBI and IRDA , intended to take on and tackle the idiosyncrasies of homo sapiens, has been mooted, and is being
discussed ceremoniously, off and on.
KEY: (for a SPECIMEN)
The Sarbanes–Oxley Act: Rewriting Audit
Committee Governance
Stephanie Tsacoumis, Stephanie R. Bess and
Bryn A. Sappington*
For those non-US companies that wish to access the US public capital markets, the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
1
(“SOX”) has ushered in a new regime of compliance obligations,
particularly in relation to audit committees. These compliance obligations, among other things, will impact governance practices, an area traditionally reserved for home jurisdiction regulation.
CRoss REfer >
CRoss REfer >
swamilook: Action vs Inaction; SELF REgulatory 9th Report ..
swamilook: SElf REgulation < IS IT A MISCONCEIVED idea ...
Report of the Committee on Capacity Building in Banks and ...
Master Circular on Audit System issued by Government“Why to say, NO - to semi regulatory authority (special .
S L Rao: A stronger backbone for regulators
< With due respect to the writer's views,
if one were to be guided by the history of the post-independent nation, neither
a stronger backbone , nor introducing and imbibing the American system , by
itself, may not have any salutary effect, or a fruitful outcome / result, or
even help in improving upon the extant deficiencies, being galore, particularly
in the near future. Frankly speaking,if at all, only a revolutionary change, by
inducting people with proven impregnable probity / integrity, also known for an
upright thinking, who could be trusted to act having in mind the basic
objective of any such institution in the name of 'regulator' can be expected to
help. Besides, if one remembers right, a special committee appointed years ago
(how long ago ?) for looking into and making its recommendations on the
regulatory system in place, the one important and significant change advocated
for was to do away with semi-regulatory system in certain key regimes (e.g. RBI
, ICAI and ICSI) to be replaced by inherently independent and fully fledged
regulators. That assumes greater significance and calls for priority
consideration, now that lately the idea of having an overall supervisory
institution of a super regulator has come to be mooted and is being seriously
under discussion. (Left open for views to be shared,if for or against, but
well-reasoned)
No comments:
Post a Comment