Blog Post

The Irish shadow in the Spanish deadend

The Spanish government has taken two important decisions this week. The first is to forcefully recapitalize Bankia, an important source of uncertainty in the banking system, and change its leadership. The second is to agree to a neutral and private sector led audit of a large portion of bank assets in order to credibly assess […]

By: Date: May 14, 2012 European Macroeconomics & Governance Tags & Topics

The Spanish government has taken two important decisions this week. The first is to forcefully recapitalize Bankia, an important source of uncertainty in the banking system, and change its leadership. The second is to agree to a neutral and private sector led audit of a large portion of bank assets in order to credibly assess potential additional losses. The implicit reasoning behind these two decisions is that even with recognition of more losses, Spain will be able to absorb them and/or stretch them over time and restructure its banking system on its own.

This is essentially the strategy that was pursued in Ireland in 2010 and that produced the results we know so well: cumulative banking sector losses in excess of 35% GDP and the resulting dramatic fiscal cuts. Arguably the banking system in Spain is different, total banks’ assets as a percentage of GDP is significantly smaller (330% in Spain vs. 979% for Ireland in 2010) and asset quality might be better. But the heart of the problem is the same: the euro area has a single market for financial services, a single monetary policy but national banking supervision, national guarantee of deposits and no European mechanism for banking sector resolution. The Spanish banking crisis is really a European banking crisis and in this sense cannot be solved alone by the Spanish government regardless of its merit and good intentions.

This solitary strategy has been tried and tested before and everywhere produced similar catastrophic results for taxpayers. There is no reason to believe that Spain could be different. In fact, solving together the Spanish banking crisis would not only be better for Spain because it would allow sharing the associated fiscal risks but it could also set Europe on a path towards a real pan European banking policy that would preserve taxpayers resources in the event of crises, improve financial stability and contribute to restart credit supply and economic growth. This is all within reach and should be an integral part of the “growth compact” that European Heads of State and Government will negotiate in June because the single biggest risk to growth in Europe today is that of prolonged financial distress.

The Kingdom of Spain should then formally request a financial assistance program specifically and only designed to address, recapitalize and restructure its banking system. Ideally, it should be accompanied by a precautionary program that would secure Spain’s access to financial markets and allow Spanish authorities to carry out their current fiscal adjustment without additional austerity measures. In practice, the ECB and the European Commision assisted by financial sector experts would propose a restructuring plan endorsed by the eurogroup that would be binding to Spanish authorities and the EFSF/ESM would provide the necessary capital.

For the banking system, this would necessarily involve further mergers, restructuring and possibly bankruptcy of some banks, which Spanish authorities alone, would have certainly found unpalatable. The European oversight and provision of capital would ensure that this restructuring process is taking place swiftly and in the best interest of the European financial system as whole outside of potential capture by regional, national, financial and political interests. More importantly, this process would create a precedent and the embryo of a real federal banking resolution framework along the line of the US FDIC, whose absence in Europe has been so costly to growth, employment and European taxpayers. Spain holds in its hands an historical opportunity to both solve its domestic banking crisis with its partners while planting the seed of a more stable European financial system, it should not waste this chance and risk more economic hardship for its people and for Europe at large.

A version of this column was also published in Spanish in La Razon


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

View comments
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

Lessons for the euro from early US monetary and financial history

The United States has a monetary union that many look to when considering the future of the EU. But how easy was it really to create such a union and what can Europe learn from the US process?

Speakers: Jeffry Frieden and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: May 25, 2016
Read article Download PDF More by this author

Parliamentary Testimony

The European Deposit Insurance SchemeEuropean Parliament

The European Deposit Insurance Scheme

Statement prepared for the European Parliament’s ECON Committee Public Hearing of 23 May.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament, Parliamentary Testimonies Date: May 23, 2016
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Pia Hüttl
Silvia Merler

Sovereign bond holdings in the euro area - the impact of QE

Since the announcement of the QE programme by the European Central Bank (ECB) on 22 January 2015, national central banks have been buying government and national agency bonds. In this post we look at the effect of QE on sectoral holdings of government bonds, based on our recently updated dataset.

By: Pia Hüttl and Silvia Merler Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 19, 2016
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Grégory Claeys
Alvaro Leandro

Assessing the Juncker Plan after one year

With the Juncker Plan, the European Commission intends to support valuable risky projects by expanding the risk capacity of the EIB. But has the new European Fund for Strategic Investments really been used to finance 'additional' projects?

By: Grégory Claeys and Alvaro Leandro Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 17, 2016
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

Jun
27
08:30

Britain and the EU after the referendum

No matter the result, the UK's referendum on EU membership will be an important moment for Britain and Europe. The days after the result will offer an opportunity to reflect on what has happened, and what has changed.

Speakers: Sylvie Goulard, André Sapir, Philipp Steinberg and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Guntram B. Wolff

European financing for the European refugee crisis

Protecting the EU's external borders is a shared task, which can be most effectively carried out if paid for with common funding. A tax on carbon combined with borrowing could fund refugee policy and also help the EU achieve its climate goals.

By: Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 11, 2016
Read article

Blog Post

Zsolt Darvas
Pia Hüttl

Is Greek public debt unsustainable?

Greek public debt does not look sustainable if the country has to return to market borrowing at the end of the third bail-out programme, but could be sustainable if preferential ESM funding continues in the long-term. Our advice is to offer hope for Greece in the form of delayed fiscal adjustment toward a target of 2.5% of GDP primary balance and adopt various measures to ease the debt burden, for the benefit of both Greece and its official lenders.

By: Zsolt Darvas and Pia Hüttl Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 7, 2016
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Pia Hüttl
jaume

Northern Ireland and EU funds

EU funding for the UK has risen considerably since 2000, but funding predominantly goes to rural and less developed areas, meaning that Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales receive more funding relative to their GDP than England.

By: Pia Hüttl and Jaume Martí Romero Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: May 3, 2016
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

Fighting corruption: from headlines to real impact

Despite recent efforts to tackle corruption there is not much evidence that these strategies are producing results. Why is this the case and what can we do to improve the situation?

Speakers: Carl Dolan, Mihaly Fazekas, Alina Mungiu-Pippidi and Alessio Terzi Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: April 28, 2016
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

Active labour market policies, what works?

How are Europe's labour markets performing, and what policies can best help them function?

Speakers: Alfonso Arpaia, Clyde Caruana, Grégory Claeys, Dan Finn, Regina Konle-Seidl, Alfred Mifsud, Godwin Mifsud, Edward Scicluna and Paul Swaim Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Location: Mediterranean Conference Centre Triq l-Isptar, Valletta, Malta Date: April 27, 2016
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Jérémie Cohen-Setton

Understanding HM Treasury’s Brexit analysis

What’s at stake: The UK will hold a referendum on its membership of the EU on June 23rd 2016. Her Majesty’s Treasury released an assessment of the impact of Brexit finding that the economy would be between 3 and 7% smaller in 2030 if the UK left the EU than it would be if it stayed in.

By: Jérémie Cohen-Setton Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: April 25, 2016
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

jaume

Are regional governments causing deficit overshooting in Spain?

Spain once again missed its deficit target in 2015 and it seems unlikely that 2016 will be any better. The central government has pointed to regional deficits as being the cause of the fiscal slippage. However, regional governments claim that their deficit is due to under-financing and overly strict deficit targets.

By: Jaume Martí Romero Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: April 19, 2016
Load more posts