Contents
From bonuses to an equity ratio to a separate banking system: in the “Arena” the party leaders put their demands on the table so that a case of CS cannot be repeated. There was no difference that the former leadership of Credit Suisse should be held accountable.
Rarely have the party presidents pulled together in the same direction: After the takeover of Credit Suisse by UBS, repayments of bonuses that the CS top managers have bagged over the past few years are being demanded from left to right.
“The profit always belongs to the private sector, but the taxpayers must now be responsible for the losses,” said SP co-president Mattea Meyer in the “Arena” the CS manager. That’s not fair.
“The current CS leadership, which wanted to pay out bonuses two days after the rescue by the state, also shows how boundless the greed is.” Meyer therefore calls for a fundamental ban on bonuses for systemically important banks in order to counteract the “irresponsibility of managers”.
FDP President Thierry Burkart also advocates that top management and thus those whose decisions led to the demise of CS should be held accountable. “But a branch manager who receives a bonus like a 13th month’s wages shouldn’t have it canceled.” In addition, other banks should not be punished with a general bonus ban for the misconduct of the CS top.
Big banks that can pull the country into the abyss do not belong in Switzerland.
Bonuses should be related to performance, said GLP President Jürg Grossen. “If an SME makes a loss, there are no special payments because the capital is not available.” However, bonuses would still be paid out at the banks, especially in the top management, where major mistakes would be made negligently: “As in the casino, they gambled away money with risky transactions.”
It’s not just individual bankers who should be held accountable, said Greens President Balthasar Glättli. “If such a risk for the functioning of our economy means that individual misconduct can lead to a total catastrophe, then we as legislators have to draw up rules.”
Therefore, one must discuss a size limit of banks. Banks that could drag the whole country into the abyss do not belong in Switzerland. “If things go wrong with the new UBS, then a hundred times the economic output of Switzerland is at stake.”
The high-risk parts must now be split off or restricted.
Thomas Aeschi, a member of the SVP party leadership, also said: “There must be no more banks that are too big to fail, i.e. too big to go bankrupt.” Every company must also be able to go under. That is why the SVP supported the separate banking system together with the Greens and the SP during the 2008 financial crisis: the investment business should be separated from the commercial bank. “Without the American banking culture with its quick, risky deals, we wouldn’t be in this situation today.”
Aeschi also locates the failure at the Financial Market Authority (Finma), which reacted too late and intervened. The Federal Council had also looked on for too long, Jürg Grossen objected and criticized the Federal Council’s risk management. Recently, the Federal Council has applied emergency law all too often, for example with Covid or Axpo.
It is important to regulate the right thing, said Center President Gerhard Pfister. The new UBS should not become a third bank that needs to be rescued. A possible solution could be a higher equity ratio for systemically important banks in order to strengthen confidence.
Pfister also has confidence in UBS boss Sergio Ermotti: “After the financial crisis in 2008, Ermotti achieved a cultural change at UBS. Today it is solid and has become more risk-averse. In that respect, he’s a good choice.”
Whether it’s a ban on bonuses, the forced division of the mega-bank, a higher equity ratio or more powers for Finma: After a review by a parliamentary commission of inquiry, everyone agreed that the controls needed to prevent a state bailout in the future should be shown.