财新传媒
位置:博客 > 杨再平 > 访罗银行业协会两重点问答录音整理稿

访罗银行业协会两重点问答录音整理稿

以下为本人5月29日访问罗马尼亚银行业协会
两重点问答录音整理稿,也请群友分享。

                             关于罗马尼亚银行体系中外资占比过高
                               High Percentage of Foreign Capital
                                    in Romanian Banking Sector

问:正如您所介绍的,罗马尼亚银行体系中,外资占比高达90%。对于中国来说,这一比重太高。在我国,外资银行资产总额占中国银行业资产总额的比重仅仅略高于2%。90%的高占比对于我国而言十分难以理解。因此,我想知道您对于罗马尼亚银行体系中外资占比过高作何评论?您认为这一占比是否合适?

Question: As you introduced, foreign capital assets accounted for 90% in Romanian banking sector. This percentage is so large for China. In China, foreign banks assets account for only a little bit more than 2% of the whole banking industry’s assets. 90% is too large to be understandable for our country. So I wonder what’s your comment on this proportion. Do you think this proportion is ok or not?
 
答:这个问题不错。危机之前,可以说罗马尼亚经济受益于银行业的外资投资,因为那时外资投资有助于银行业的整体发展。所以说当时来看,还是不错的。

危机期间,我们意识到外资占比过高是一个错误,并且当时也很多人纷纷谈论大幅提高罗马尼亚本国资本在银行体系中比重的必要性。当然,罗马尼亚本国资本和外国资本各自达到一定的累积水平,是一种经济方法。然而,在罗马尼亚却并不是这种情况。2000年以前,罗马尼亚有4家大型国有银行;不幸地是,现在大部分都私有化了,仅剩CEC这一家大型国有银行了。如今,罗马尼亚正在讨论开设一家新的罗马尼亚银行,可能是开发银行,以便于更好地服务罗马尼亚经济和罗马尼亚人民。从技术层面来讲,我认为这是不可能的,因为在同样的监管制度下服务一个完全不同的市场是不可能的。

无论如何,这就是我们目前面临的一个实际情况,目前外资占比就是这么一个水平。对此,我们获得了一些好处,但同时这一高占比也带来了诸多不利因素。不过,罗马尼亚经济目前可能还没有足够强大到可以开设罗马尼亚国有银行的程度。

Answered by Executive President Florin Danescu: This is a good question. Before the crisis, we can say the Romanian economy was really helped by the banking investment foreign capital because the banking was built at that moment helped by the foreign investment. So it was good.

During the crisis, we understood that it was a mistake having   such a big figure and also at that moment many voices talked about the need to have a big Romanian capital in the banking system. Of course it is an economic approach to have an accumulated level in Romania capital and foreign capital. But it was not the case in Romania. Before 2000, we had 4 big state banks in Romania.   Unfortunately, today they are privatized and at the moment only CEC remains a big Romanian bank today. Today they are speaking about opening a new Romanian bank, maybe the development bank, i.e. transforming another one to serve better the Romania economy and the Romania people. Technically speaking, it’s not possible from my perception because if they want to serve a different market with the same regulations, it is impossible.

Anyway, this is the response. But this is a level today. We had pluses for this but there are also big minuses on this level. And Romania economy was not so strong maybe to open Romania banks.
 
关于过往计划经济对当前罗马尼亚经济的影响The Influence of Planned Economy on Current Romanian Economy

问:1989年前,罗马尼亚是计划经济体制。请问您认为先前的计划经济体制对罗马尼亚当前的经济、金融及银行业有什么影响?

Question: Before 1989, Romania is also planned economy. In your opinion, what’s the influence or impact of previous planned economy on your current economy, finance, or banking industry if any?

回:这个问题值得探讨。从银行体系角度来看,罗马尼亚最初是单一银行体系,由罗马尼亚国家银行和其他银行机构构成,其他银行机构包括农业银行、开发银行、出口银行等在众多不同领域运营的机构。罗马尼亚当时共有4家大型国有银行。之后,罗马尼亚开始由计划经济向市场经济过渡,逐步向欧洲市场开放。
当然,如今其实也十分需要计划经济,只是市场不会像在社会主义经济中一样监管严格、纪律严明。这是我作为罗马尼亚人的观点和看法,同时我也理解社会主义时代和资本主义时代的差异。

对于银行来说,在没有危机的时期,在市场经济下运行相对而言更简单容易些。然而,如今罗马尼亚人越来越多地谈论计划经济。有这样一个玩笑,在您到访之前我还刚和我的同事讲过。1989年以前,罗马尼亚各个行业总是汇报他们如何超额完成了计划指标,5倍、3倍等等。那时就好像是一场关于宣告各自超出计划多少额度的竞赛。当然这并不是一种好现象,因为汇报情况并不属实,数据并不真实。然而,现在我们有时会开玩笑说我们如今甚至无法成功达到当年那些真实的数据水平。例如,那时10亿欧元往往会被汇报成50亿欧元。如今,我们甚至连那10亿欧元都达不到。因此,从这一角度来说,计划经济如今在罗马尼亚并没有得到很好的体现。

谈到计划经济,我们认为国家战略、区域发展方案、行业发展策略等都应该与国家项目的资源和需求水平等密切相连。我们需要重新考虑计划经济。在我看来,自由市场对于大部分类似于罗马尼亚这样的仍在发展中而尚未达到发达国家标准的国家而言,有一些不利因素。因此,当我们在自身尚未足够发达的情况下将自身置于自由市场环境和资源下,我们就要为此付出高昂的代价。这样反而容易加大差距而不是缩小差距。因此,当务之急应该是努力缩小罗马尼亚与其他欧洲国家之间的差距,而不是增大差距。

但是这对于银行体系而言十分困难,因为尽管罗马尼亚自身的发达程度不及其他欧洲国家,但是罗马尼亚银行业必须遵循欧洲银行业的监管规则和制度。罗马尼亚的购买力也不如其他欧洲国家。欧洲银行总资产与GDP 的比值为360%,也就是说银行总资产是GDP的3.5倍还多。然而,在罗马尼亚,这一数据仅为0.6。所以说罗马尼亚的银行资产低于GDP。如果遵循欧洲的银行业监管规则和制度,那么罗马尼亚银行体系规模小、不成熟并且无法执行这些制度则很容易被发现。与此同时,我预计罗马尼亚则会获取越来越多的贷款,并通过贷款乘数效应努力达到欧洲国家的水平。

 Answered by Executive President Florin Danescu: It is a nice discussion about this question. Taking from the perspective of the banking system, we started from a mono banking system. So the national bank was above the other banks, and the other banks practically run out as branch or something in several fields, such as agriculture, development, export, etc. 4 big banks are national banks. After that, of course we came to the free market, open to Europe, which was very difficult to connect. Of course it’s a need also today to have a planned economy, but not having the advantage of a market so disciplined as it is in a socialist market. It is my belief as a Romanian people which I understood also the differences between the socialist era and capitalist era.

For banks maybe these are easier approaches in such a market without the crisis of course. But for Romania today we are speaking more and more about the planned economy. It’s a joke. I joked already with my colleagues before you came here. Before 1989, the Romania industry reported all the time that they exceeded their plan 5 times more, 3 times more. It’s like a competition declaring how much they exceeded the plan. It was not good of course because it was not true and not real figures. But now we are joking that today we are even not able to succeed reaching the real figures at the moment. For example, that figure at that time is 10 billion euro was reported to be 50 billion euro. But today we are not able to reach that 10 billion euro. So this is about planned economy Romania today are maybe not planned.

Speaking of planned economy, of course we think national strategy, regional approach,industrial approach should be connected to the resources and needs of the level of national projects. We are rethinking about the planned economy. It’s a big minus of free market in my opinion almost for countries like Romania which is still developing not a developed already country. So when we are taking instruments from the free market but not being so well developed, you are paying a high price. Then it might be to increase the gap not to decrease the gap. So this is our big project now to see how to do to decrease the gap between the European countries and Romania instead of increasing it. But it is so difficult also for banking system because in a single banking union, we are taking the European rules from the banking applying in Romania while the market is not so well developed. The parity power is not so high as it is in other countries. The total bank assets in Europe to GDP are 360 percent, i.e. banking assets 3.5 times of GDP. But in Romania it is 0.6. So lower assets than GDP. If we take their rules, they will find us being very small, very young and not able to implement their rules. Also in Romania society, which I expect what: more and more loans to capture to reach the level of European countries through the loans multipliers effect.
 

 



推荐 0