Risk.Net runs a LinkedIn discussion group on Operational Risk offers prizes for the best comment on the topics discussed. Alex Krohn, one of the Risk.Net magazine’s editors, recently announced Peter Hughes’ comment on the Risk.Net article “Nickel-and-Dimon: why bank CEOs loathe op risk capital” as the prize winner for “Top Comment”.
Mr. Krohn’s comment reads: “Congrats to Peter Hughes – he won the prize for top comment. The prize was a bumper pack of Risk magazine recent issues. Thank you to everyone who commented; it’s an important debate, and I’m sure it will rumble on!”
Peter Hughes’ comment to the article was “Banks need op risk capital to buffer material unexpected losses… Mr. Dimon won’t have yet forgotten his London Whale. In my view, the Basel Committee is requiring punitive levels of protective op risk capital due to the absence of a common framework that explicitly and dynamically identifies, quantifies and aggregates exposures to op (and enterprise) risks. BCBS 239 and 258 have set the parameters for what Basel is looking for; now it’s up to us to figure out a way of doing it. Only then can we ask Basel to scrap its arbitrary and punitive capital calculation methods.”
As difficult as the OpRisk regulation debate may be, we certainly hope that we can help in focusing it on solutions and not only problems.