PUBLIC
Workshop on Corporate Governance
(Case study: Parmalat and HIH)
Yoshi Kawai
Secretary General, IAIS
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
Buenos Aires, Argentina, 22-24 November 2011
Parmalat - Background I
All relevant information can be found in the handout
• Founded by Calisto Tanzi in 1961
• Italy’s largest food company
– Dairy products (UHT process milk)
• In 1990s, business expansion and acquisition
– TV business, football business, tourism business
• In early 2000s, asset of €10 billion with over 36,000
employees in 139 plants. More than 200 companies
• Bankrupt in 2003 (€4 billion cash and €8 billion bond
disappeared)
– Enron of Europe
*case based on the public sources
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
1
Parmalat - Background II
All relevant information can be found in the handout
• Calisto Tanzi, dominant CEO
– Insert his people in powerful positions
• Board Member with “conflicts of interest”
– Tanzi was Chair of BoD, not many non-exec. directors
• Family-owned Committees (Executive, Internal Control)
• External Auditor employees in 139 plants. More than 200
companies
– Grant Thornton and Deloitte both had issues
• Hiding losses through various subsidiaries, fictitious trades
and securitisation schemes (€14 billion debt, 8x reported)
• Financing through issuance of debt which resulted in
downgrading
*case based on the public sources
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
2
Parmalat - Background III
All relevant information can be found in the handout
• Ownership structure
(the diagram is a
simplified version!)
*case based on the public sources
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
3
HIH – Background I
All relevant information can be found in the handout
• Founded by Ray Williams in 1968
• Australia’s 2nd largest non-life insurer
– Workers comp., liability and indemnity
– In Australia, UK and California (USA)
• In late 1990s, asset of A$7 billion, revenue of A$4 billion
and operating profit of A$60 million
• Bankrupt in 2001
– Largest corporate failure
*case based on the report of the HIH Royal Commission (www.hihroyalcom.gov.au)
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
4
HIH – Background II
All relevant information can be found in the handout
• Ray Williams, dominant CEO
– CEO had no limits on authority, had much discretion
• Powerless Board
– Ready to accept, lack of critical analysis or challenge
– Such a degree of respect to Williams
• Lack of strategy, BoD not understand business or strategy
– No involvement when entering or retreating from overseas
• Other Senior Management without accountability
– Performance review not tied to remuneration process
• Reckless underwriting and fictitious financial reporting
• Very dependant on consulting actuary when setting the
amount of reserve
• External auditor with conflicts of interest, lack of actuarial
knowledge to monitor the sufficiency of reserves
*case based on the report of the HIH Royal Commission (www.hihroyalcom.gov.au)
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
5
Question
• What were the problems?
• Which ICPs are relevant?
• How should the supervisors acted?
* Assume that your authority is supervising Parmalat
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
6
Instructions
• Please divide up in to 4 separate groups (up to
10 member in a group)
• You will be given certain time amongst your
group members to discuss the case and address
the questions
• Each group will be given certain time to present
their answers to the questions
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
7
Discussion
Discuss the following questions in
your group
• What were the problems?
• Which ICPs are relevant?
• How should the supervisors have
acted?
* Assume that your authority is supervising Parmalat
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
8
Group Presentation
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
9
Possible Solution - What were the problems?
• They were poorly governed or mismanaged.
– Epitomised by a lack of accountability for performance
– Lack of integrity in the company’s internal processes
and systems and a lack of attention to detail
– Led to a series of business decisions that were poorly
conceived and even more poorly executed
• There was blind faith in a strong leader
– Insufficient ability and independence to see what was
being done or had to be done, etc.
– Risks were not properly identified and managed
– Unpleasant information was hidden, filtered or sanitised
– Lack of sceptical questioning and analysis
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
10
Possible Solution - Which ICPs are relevant?
• ICP 5 Suitability
 Board Members, Senior Management and Key Persons in Control Functions
must possess competence and integrity to fulfil their roles (Standard 5.2)
 The insurer must demonstrate the suitability of Board Members, Senior
Management, Key Persons in Control Functions and Significant Owners
(Standard 5.3)
• ICP 7 Corporate Governance
Requirements to implement a corporate governance framework:
 The Board shall set and oversee objectives and strategies (Standard 7.1) 
 Structure and governance of the Board (Standard 7.3)

 Duties of individual Board members (Standard 7.4)

 Board oversight of risk management and control systems and functions 
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
 Remuneration policy and practices (strategy and oversight) (St 7.6)

 Reliable and transparent financial reporting (Standard 7.7)

 Transparency about the governance

IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
11
Possible Solution - Which ICPs are relevant?
ICP 7 Corporate Governance, Standard 7.9:
 The Board shall have policies and procedures to ensure that Senior
Management:
 carries out the day-to-day operations effectively and in accordance
with the insurer’s strategies, policies and procedures

 promotes a culture of sound risk management, compliance and fair
treatment of customers

22-24 November
Buenos Aires
 provides the Board adequate and timely information

 provides to the relevant stakeholders and the supervisor the
information required

IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
12
Possible Solution - Which ICPs are relevant?
• ICP 8 Risk Management and Internal Controls
The supervisor requires an insurer to:
 establish, and operate within, effective systems of risk management and
internal controls
 have effective internal control functions with the necessary authority,
independence and resources
 have an effective risk management function capable of assisting the insurer to
identify, assess, monitor, manage and report on its key risks in a timely way
 have an effective compliance function capable of assisting the insurer to meet
its legal and regulatory obligations and promote and sustain a corporate culture
of compliance and integrity.
 have an effective actuarial function capable of evaluating and providing advice
to the insurer regarding technical provisions, premium and pricing activities
(etc), and compliance with related statutory and regulatory requirements
 have an effective internal audit function capable of providing the Board with
independent assurance in respect of the insurer’s governance, including its risk
management and internal controls.
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
13
Possible Solution
-
How should the supervisors have
acted?
Prerequisite for Action:
ICP 1 Objectives, Powers and Responsibilities of the Supervisor
 Primary legislation clearly defines the objectives of insurance supervision and
the mandate and responsibilities of the supervisor and gives the supervisor
adequate powers to conduct insurance supervision, including powers to issue
and enforce rules by administrative means and take immediate action
(Standard 1.2)
ICP 4 Licensing (Standard 4.3)
Licensing requirements and procedures are clear, objective and public, and are
consistently applied, requiring:
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
•
the applicant’s Board Members, Senior Management, both individually and
collectively, Significant Owners and Key Persons in Control Functions to be
suitable;
•
the applicant to satisfy capital requirements;
•
the applicant to have a sound corporate or group structure and governance
framework that does not hinder effective supervision; and
•
the applicant to have sound business and financial plans.
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
14
Possible Solution
-
How should the supervisors have
acted?
Supervisory Review / Preventive Measures
ICP 9:
The supervisor has an integrated, risk-based system of
supervision that uses both off-site monitoring and on-site
inspections to examine the business of each insurer, evaluate its
condition, the quality and effectiveness of its Board and Senior
Management and compliance with legislation and supervisory
requirements. The supervisor obtains the necessary information to
conduct effective supervision of insurers and evaluate the
insurance market.
ICP 10:
The supervisor takes preventive and corrective measures that are
timely, suitable and necessary to achieve the objectives of
insurance supervision.
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
15
Possible Solution
-
How should the supervisors have
acted?
Enforcement
ICP 11:
The supervisor enforces corrective action and, where needed,
imposes sanctions based on clear and objective criteria that are
publicly disclosed.
 The supervisor should have used its power to enforce corrective
action in a timely manner (Standard 11.1)
 The supervisor should have used its means to address management
and governance problems, including the power to require the insurer
to replace or restrict the power of Board Members, Senior
Management, Key Persons in Control Functions, significant owners
and external auditors (Standard 11.4)
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
16
Possible Solution
-
How should the supervisors have
acted?
 The supervisor should have required the insurer to demonstrate the
adequacy and effectiveness of its corporate governance framework
(Standard 7.10)
 The supervisor should have required that Board Members, Senior
Management and Key Persons in Control Functions possess
competence and integrity to fulfil their roles (Standard 5.2) and should
have required the insurer to demonstrate their suitability (Standard
5.3)
 The supervisor should have taken appropriate action to rectify the
situation with regard to the lack of suitability of Board and Senior
Management and Key Persons in Control Functions (Standard 5.5),
e.g. suspended Board members, Senior Management or Key Persons
in Control Functions
 The supervisor could have imposed sanctions or threatened to revoke
the license if they did not comply
 Ultimately, the supervisor could have revoked the license (ICP 4
Licensing).
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
17
Conclusion
• Good governance structures and
processes are the foundation for all
business activity and supervisors need to
address issues of governance and internal
controls at an early stage (in the licensing
process) and on a continuous basis.
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
18
Thank you very much!
Any questions?
www.iaisweb.org
yoshihiro.kawai@bis.org
22-24 November
Buenos Aires
IAIS-ASSAL Regional Seminar
19