Luncheon-Debate with Antonio Carrascosa, Director of Resolution Planning and Decisions of the Single Resolution Board (SRB)
On May 28, the Official Spanish Chamber of Commerce in Belgium and Luxembourg organized a luncheon-debate at Cercle Münster in Luxembourg with Antonio Carrascosa, Director of Resolution Planning and Decisions of the Single Resolution Board (SRB), under the topic “The role of the SRB within the Banking Union”.
The event was attended by the Ambassador of Spain in Luxembourg and a score of representatives of financial institutions, European institutions and business executives.José Luis Rodríguez Álvarez, Vice President of the Chamber, gave a few words of welcome and introduced the speaker, Antonio Carrascosa, highlighting his recognized professional career.
Then, Carrascosa began his speech by presenting the SRB and explaining its main functions, such as avoiding the contagion effect in the case of a bank with problems, determining if it should be liquidated or trying to resolve it and, in this case, avoid that the taxpayer ends up carrying the cost of said resolution. The main tools to solve a banking entity consist of: “BAIL-IN“, cut the value of liabilities, and the sale of less profitable business lines to improve the general solvency and liquidity position.
The rest of the intervention was about reflecting on the lessons he learned in cases in which the SRB had to decide a resolution.
He stressed as a first lesson that the resolution model collides with the so-called “medium” banking because its financing model is not compatible with the current regulatory reality. Under this new paradigm, banks that have only capital and deposits in their liabilities are difficult to solve. The only alternatives are to merge or disappear.
Managing liquidity before resolution is also important. It may be the case of entities without solvency problems, but due to a trust problem, a crisis is triggered, and a resolution must be made. Carrascosa highlighted the purchase by Banco Santander of Banco Popular, injecting double the amount that the SRB could have provided. The absence of a buyer may pose a serious problem of credibility and liquidity.
Some of the alternatives considered as SRB’s liquidity backstop, which is access to financing of last resort, are the European Stability Mechanism and the European Central Bank, with which the ideal would be to have an agreement to deal with the problem of liquidity after a resolution.
There are two currents in Europe when it comes to managing bank risk. On one hand, there are the countries that propose the risk mutualization through a line of credit guaranteed by a European public institution. On the other hand, there are countries that prefer the reduction of risk exposure over mutualization. They are not two opposite currents, but complementary. The difference of both approaches is more about which one should be applied first.
The SRB exists as a European resolution institution and it is related to the European Central Bank and the European Commission. Everything that favors, such cooperation between institutions to make decisions quickly, is fundamental. Its representatives are from the Council and the European Parliament. This regulatory framework reassures the citizen. Carrascosa, highlighted as fundamental the role of national authorities, executors of the decisions taken, with the capacity and experience to face a resolution.
It has been shown that the information provided by banks is very important. To be able to take decisions, they try to move forward so that in an online way banks provide all the necessary information to assess an entity or do a bail-in if necessary.
As a final point, Antonio defended the transparency of the Institutions towards citizens, although, clarifying that before a resolution, confidentiality must be absolute.
After the intervention, the participants had the opportunity to ask their questions to Antonio Carrascosa. Once the event was over, the president of the Chamber, Juan Rodríguez Villa-Matons, awarded the Director in gratitude for his participation in the Luncheon-Debate
[AFG_gallery id=’97’]
David Luengo, the director of Indra office in Brussels, was in charge of the presentation. He expressed the concerns of the company to face the new global challenges and thanked the speaker for his effective work in his different responsibilities through the years in Brussels. Juan Rodríguez Villa-Matons, the President of the Chamber, expressed his satisfaction about being able to count on an experienced diplomat as Nicolás Pascual de la Parte. As for the speaker, he reminded having taken part in previous events organized by the Chamber and reminded that he was willing to take part to future events.


Regarding competition policies, he expressed the will to continue along the same lines, adapting to the new technologies and economies, such as ITC, IT and e-commerce. Regulations need to go hand in hand with the changes in the market and the economy, so the justice is done in a way that is fair to all parties.
The President of the Chamber Juan Rodríguez-Villa Matons reviewed the career path of the Commissioner and thanked for his participation in the event, as well as his interest for the Spanish economy.
Juan Rodríguez-Villa Matons, President of the Spanish Chamber of Commerce in Belgium and Luxembourg pronounced some welcome words and introduced the speaker, bringing to light his recognized professional career.
r issue which have to be taken into account is how the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU will be administrated, since Spain is one of the main beneficiaries of such funds, and so negotiations will be necessary to meet the best conditions.

Juan Rodriguez-Villa Matons, President of the Official Spanish Chamber of Commerce in Belgium and Luxembourg said a welcome word and expressed his recognition to ONCE team and its Foundation for the humanitarian and business work developed in favor to people with disabilities.


Juan Rodríguez-Villa Matons, President of the Chamber, said a welcome word, introduced the Commissioner, highlighting her professional career and thanked her for her collaboration with the luncheon-debate.
About data protection, she expressed the need of investing more money on new measures and tools that allow institutions to know what companies actually do with consumer’s personal data. On the other hand, she stressed the need of making a bigger effort on explaining the EU citizens about their new rights concerning data protection and privacy and how to use those rights.

small debate to encourage the attendees’ participation. The main goal of this short discussion was to clarify some concepts related to the different organisms of the European Union and its roles.
anged at global level since 1989. During this period of time, three different revolutions have occurred: democratic, ideological and technological, which have allowed that the world is a better place than two decades ago.





