Response to consultation on revised Guidelines on internal governance under CRD
Question 1: Are subject matter, scope of application, definitions and date of application appropriate and sufficiently clear?
Yes.
Question 2: Are the changes made in Titles I (proportionality) and II (role of the manamgnet body and committees) appropriate and sufficiently clear?
The proposed changes are generally appropriate; however, we suggest that the guidelines provide more detailed instructions regarding the process and timeline for conducting suitability assessments for individuals who, while not part of the management body, exercise significant decision-making authority. Clarifying these expectations would support institutions in implementing robust governance practices and ensure consistency in the treatment of key function holders.
Question 3: Are the changes made in Title III (governance framework) section 6 appropriate and sufficiently clear?
Yes.
Question 4: Are the changes made in Title III section 7 (third-country branches) appropriate and sufficiently clear?
The requirements for third-country branches (TCBs) are generally well-articulated, particularly with regard to documentation and role mapping. However, the concept of sufficient presence for TCB directors would benefit from further clarification. In its current form, the term lacks specificity and may be interpreted differently across Member States.
To ensure consistent implementation, it would be helpful to clarify whether presence refers to physical location, decision-making authority, or operational control. Additionally, institutions would benefit from guidance on how to demonstrate such presence - whether through contractual arrangements, reporting structures, or local infrastructure. Greater clarity in this area would support harmonized supervisory practices and reduce uncertainty for institutions operating across borders.
Question 5: Are the changes made in Title IV (risk culture) appropriate and sufficiently clear?
Yes.
Question 6: Are the changes made in Title V (internal control framework) appropriate and sufficiently clear?
Yes.
Question 7: Are the changes made in Title VI (business continuity managment) appropriate and sufficiently clear?
Yes.