|Solvency II Marathon |
- no Snickering...
It wouldn't appear that the industry has performed exceptionally in their 2014 efforts, with Ms Cronin drawing attention to the following flaws in execution
- Variances in ORSA Report content between firms in similar sectors "cause for concern" - a slightly worrying comment, given that some firms will be over-elaborating with content with the help of their friendly consultancy firm.
- Boards were aggressively called out on the "ownership" front. If your Boards have been ambivalent to-date with regards to participation in the ORSA process, they will seemingly get a hard time from now on.
- ORSA Process "...as important as the document itself" - music to my ears, and still a surprisingly difficult concept to convey
- The "so called use test" is referenced around ORSA, and not in the context of internal model applicants - no idea what that is about, so will assume it was a clumsy turn of phrase, rather than a new element of legislation
- Stress testing seen to be "too benign", with firms ignoring key risks and hard-to-quantify risks. Given that the UK firms received similar feedback on their 2014 ORSA stress testing efforts, it doesn't appear to be a country-specific failing.
- 'Local' (i.e. Irish) ORSAs which filter into wider Group ORSAs have not been adapted to fit the business model of the Irish entity. Good issue to pull firms up on, if they are relying Head Office to provide them with process and reports in template format
- Business plan and forward looking time horizons not considered plausible, possibly a by-product of the lack of Board involvement in the ORSA Process
- Pillar 3 is now a "cause for concern" - decisions by firms on architecture and expenditure "now overdue".
- Only half of High or Medium PRISM firms have participated in external user testing on Pillar 3. This still feels proportionally more than the PRA have tested out, though it is still viewed as a negative by the Bank.
- Patted the Irish regulator for its "good work" putting the house back in order after the laissez-faire approach at the start of this century.
- Also reiterated that Pillar 3 preparations are light in the country, urging firms to "...devote the resources necessary"
- Dwelled heavily on the subjects of investment risk appetite and prudent person principle
- Pointed at "problematic applicants" who can now seek approvals to do business in the EU regardless of the supervisor's thoughts about their business models
- Called Solvency II's quantitative requirements "ill conceived" and "overboard" and "clearly too complex"
- Commented that SCR is "unlikely, unreliable tool to manage capital" - "...certainly the supervisor will not be using it for more than its worth".
- Gave short shrift to the abolition of prudential reserving under Solvency II, and indeed Bernadino referred glowingly to the Irish approach to reserving governance (presumably to counteract this grievance?) in his keynote speech.
A lot to be taken from these speeches if you have any dealings with Irish insurers, and with the clock ticking, I can't imagine there will be better steers than these during the preparatory phase.