“NPLs are high, as the recovery mechanism had stopped. Banks were tardy and, to some extent, soft on recovery. We have failing companies and prosperous promoters. We have to recover these loans,” Chidambaram said at a panel discussion organised by the National Stock Exchange (NSE) on the occasion of its 20th anniversary.
“Now, bankers have been told in no uncertain terms, by both the government and the regulator, that they have to get cracking on recovery,” he added.
The finance minister said the NPL figures appeared exaggerated compared to 10 years ago, as banks had moved to system-based NPL detection. “2004 (NPL) numbers don’t compare with 2013 numbers. These are the true numbers; these are not exaggerated. The earlier numbers were suppressed numbers,” he said. “From the 2004 NPL identified by managements of banks, we now have moved to system-detected NPL. Bank manager can no longer hide NPLs.”
“At least, we now know the size of the problems. We have to tackle these,” he said.
“Banks and corporates have entered into a very cozy relationship. It’s very convenient for corporates to go to a bank, even for working capital. It is unheard of in any other developed economy. It is very convenient for a bank manager to lend working capital to a highly rated corporate...The corporate bond market is not developed because corporates think banks are ready to give money to them. It is only when the banks say no to corporates, will they be forced to go to a bond market. Today, (lenders) are happy to lend,” he said.
The finance minister suggested the existing infrastructure of the stock market be used more effectively to develop the corporate bond market.
Earlier this year, the three stock exchanges in India had set up a separate debt segment for trading in corporate bonds. However, volumes in this segment haven’t seen a pick-up yet.
On whether the government, which is the promoter of several big banks in the country, should be blamed for bank behaviour, Chidambaram said the government didn’t interfere in banks' affairs. “Ask any bank managers whether I have, in eight years of being FM, ever told them to lend to somebody. And, even if I told them, (ask) whether they listened,” he said.
He said the blame should fall on the bank's board, not on the government. “On the board, the government has one nominee. But there are also independent directors, a chairman and a managing director; there is a regulator. If the banks and bank boards have not performed their duties, the blame should stop at bank boards, not the government.”
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
)