Indradhanush framework is not "sanjivini booti" for govt banks

Aug 20, 2015

- By Vivek Kaul

Vivek Kaul
On August 14, 2015, the ministry of finance released the Indradhanush framework for transforming the government owned public sector banks (PSBs), which are currently in a bad shape primarily due the bad loans that have piled up over the years.

In fact, the press release accompanying the announcement was extremely self-congratulatory in nature and pointed out: "Indradhanush framework for transforming the PSBs represents the most comprehensive reform effort undertaken since banking nationalisation in the year 1970. Our PSBs are now ready to compete and flourish in a fast-evolving financial services landscape."

The framework has seven steps, and hence has been named Indradhanush or rainbow (which has seven colours). Enough has been written in the mainstream media regarding what these steps are. Hence, in this column I will concentrate on what is missing in the Indradhanush framework and why it is unlikely to help the public sector banks in a major way.

The third step in the Indradhanush framework talks about the government putting in Rs 70,000 crore into these banks over the next four years. Of this Rs 50,000 crore will be invested in the current and the next financial year.

  Vivek Kaul's  
  "Easy Money"  
  Get This Trilogy Worth Rs 1,215 For FREE!  
  Vivek Kaul's Easy Money Book sets Vivek Kaul, Editor of the Daily Reckoning, is a master storyteller. And in this trilogy, he tells us probably one of the most important stories that has yet been told... the story of Money.

A highly recommended read that teaches you lessons that could help you avoid the next global meltdown. Don't Miss It!

Claim your Free set worth Rs 1,215 now...

Hurry! We only have limited copies of Vivek Kaul's "Easy Money" Trilogy books to give away.

There are a number of questions that crop here. The first question is whether this is going to enough? The PJ Nayak committee report released in May 2014 estimated that between January 2014 and March 2018 "public sector banks would need Rs. 5.87 lakh crores of tier-I capital." The committee further said that: "assuming that the Government puts in 60 per cent (though it will be challenging to raise the remaining 40 per cent from the capital markets), the Government would need to invest over Rs. 3.50 lakh crores."

The government on the other hand estimates that "the capital requirement of extra capital for the next four years up to FY 2019 is likely to be about Rs.1,80,000 crore." Of this amount it proposes to invest Rs 70,000 crore. In a research note titled A Growing Need for Indian TARP, Anil Agarwal, Sumeet Kariwala and Subramanian Iyer, analysts at Morgan Stanley, estimate that an immediate infusion of around $15 billion (or Rs 97,500 crore assuming $1 = Rs 65) is needed in these banks.

The international rating agency Standard & Poor's said: "The Central government's planned capital infusions come at a good time for public sector banks. But they don't go far enough."

So, the government is clearly not investing as much as the public sector banks really need to get out of the current mess that they are in. Further, as I have pointed out in the past, the government putting in more money into public sector banks goes totally against the "minimum government maximum governance" philosophy that Narendra Modi had espoused in the run-up to the Lok Sabha elections that happened last year.

This does not mean that the government should abandon these banks. But there is no reason that it should own 25 public sector banks, especially given that they require a massive amount of money to continue functioning. It is best to own five or six big banks and sell out of the others. In this way it will be able to concentrate its efforts on managing the big banks. At the same time, it will get more bang for the buck on the money that it is putting into the public sector banks.

This brings me to the next point I want to make. There is nothing in the Indradhanush framework that talks about the government trying to sell its stake in the public sector banks. Many public sector banks have a very good branch network in place and hence, will be attractive buys despite their balance sheets being in a mess.

This non-reference to disinvestment is not surprising given that it will be a politically very difficult thing to do. And from whatever evidence we have had from the Modi government up until now, it has shown no zeal to push through politically difficult reform. Given this, the government will continue to own 25 banks and hence, it is likely to pump more tax payer money into these banks in the days to come, because Rs 70,000 crore is clearly not going to be enough.

The fourth point in the Indradhanush framework talks about de-stressing public sector banks. The press release has a long-winded paragraph written in a fine bureaucratic way which comes up with practically every possible reason to explain the bad loans that have piled up with public sector banks.

Here it goes (you won't miss much if you decide to skip it): "Due to several factors, projects are increasingly stalled/stressed thus leading to non-performing assets(NPAs) burden on banks. In a recent review, problems causing stress in the power, steel and road sectors were examined. It was observed that the major reasons affecting these projects were delay in obtaining permits / approvals from various governmental and regulatory agencies, and land acquisition, delaying Commercial Operation Date (COD); lack of availability of fuel, both coal and gas; cancellation of coal blocks; closure of Iron Ore mines affecting project viability; lack of transmission capacity; limited off-take of power by Discoms given their reducing purchasing capacity; funding gap faced by limited capacity of promoters to raise additional equity and reluctance on part of banks to increase their exposure given the high leverage ratio; inability of banks to restructure projects even when found viable due to regulatory constraints. In case of steel sector the prevailing market conditions, viz. global over-capacity coupled with reduction in demand led to substantial reduction in global prices, and softening in domestic prices added to the woes."

There is no mention of how the banks are going to go about recovering the loans that they have given out and which are not being repaid. As an editorial in The Financial Express points out: "The lack of a concrete plan to tackle NPAs is worrying. There is no mention of how the debt of state electricity boards (SEBs), running into several lakh crore rupees, is going to be recovered or that from wilful defaulters or highly-leveraged promoters."

Further, many measures that the government has listed out as a part of the Indradhanush framework have already been around for a while now, having been put in place by the Reserve Bank of India.

The fifth point in the Indradhanush framework talks about "no interference from government," in the functioning of banks. It further states that "banks are encouraged to take their decision independently keeping the commercial interest of the organisation in mind."

How are banks supposed to interpret this point given that in his Independence Day speech Prime Minister Narendra Modi talked about "Start-Up India, Stand-Up India". The idea, as Modi explained during the speech, is that each of the 1.25 lakh bank branches all across India "should encourage at least one Dalit or Adivasi entrepreneur, and at least one woman entrepreneur".

So how independent does this make the banks, given that they have to follow diktats like these from the government? Also, it is worth mentioning here that lending to start-ups is a very high risk kind of lending. Further, do public sector banks have the capability to analyse the loan proposals of start-ups, is a question worth asking here.

To conclude, it is safe to say that the Indradhanush framework is essentially a clever repackaging of steps and processes that are already in place. It is not the sanjivini booti that it is being made out to be.

Vivek Kaul is the Editor of the Diary and The Vivek Kaul Letter. Vivek is a writer who has worked at senior positions with the Daily News and Analysis (DNA) and The Economic Times, in the past. He is the author of the Easy Money trilogy. The latest book in the trilogy Easy Money: The Greatest Ponzi Scheme Ever and How It Is Set to Destroy the Global Financial System was published in March 2015. The books were bestsellers on Amazon. His writing has also appeared in The Times of India, The Hindu, The Hindu Business Line, Business World, Business Today, India Today, Business Standard, Forbes India, Deccan Chronicle, The Asian Age, Mutual Fund Insight, Wealth Insight, Swarajya, Bangalore Mirror among others.

Disclaimer: The views mentioned above are of the author only. Data and charts, if used, in the article have been sourced from available information and have not been authenticated by any statutory authority. The author and Equitymaster do not claim it to be accurate nor accept any responsibility for the same. The views constitute only the opinions and do not constitute any guidelines or recommendation on any course of action to be followed by the reader. Please read the detailed Terms of Use of the web site.

Recent Articles

A New Infrastructure Boom March 26, 2019
Selva Freigedo talks about the potential in 5G network and how it could transform the way we communicate.
A 40 Somethings Guide to YouTube Hits March 20, 2019
Vivek dwells into a new YouTube phenomenon.
As the Economy Slows Down, Maruti and Two-Wheeler Companies Cut Production March 19, 2019
The country's largest car maker has cut production by more than a fourth.
In Supporting Demonetisation, RBI Behaved Like an Old Uncle Not Willing to Take a Stand March 13, 2019
The minutes of the meeting of the RBI Board which happened before demonetisation have been released.

Equitymaster requests your view! Post a comment on "Indradhanush framework is not "sanjivini booti" for govt banks". Click here!

7 Responses to "Indradhanush framework is not "sanjivini booti" for govt banks"

K Sengupto

Aug 21, 2015

The last sentence aptly says it is not Sanjivini booti as the government is trying to make out.
The stressed loans of the banks are piling up and we the common people whose money the banks are serving to the defaulters have no plan to recover.
Hence I want to know if there is any forum which is active and pulls the ears of the those officers who do not do all those things required to recover the loans (ample laws are in place for them to invoke), so that we can register our concern and actions are taken.


krishnan vc

Aug 20, 2015

I am not in line with your comment that the PM has given a diktat. he has only encouraged the banks to take a look at it. Coming to the aspect of refinancing the banks; I would like to support your thought as to why 25 PSB's at all. Each one competing with one another which serves no purpose. My two peeny thoughts would be to identify these NPA"s most of which relate to Infrastructure and mainly Power and Housing. May be the GOI may lift these out of the books consolidate them and issue secured bonds. This will relieve the stress and also provide a escape route for the banks and the GOI as regards refinancing.



Aug 20, 2015

Sir, PM spoke of loan to a Dalit/Advasi or for an women entrepreneur, not an software or any high end technology start up, a bank manager is expected, least understand the business proposal which mostly will be of so basic.


r k nagpal

Aug 20, 2015

I fully agree with the view that the step is not Sanjivini Booti but may be a little step to distress in a small manner . majority of PSU bank are in a very very bad shape and possibly best way if possible to privatize atleast 15 banks or be encouraged /merged with bigger professionally better PSU bank ( SBI-BOB-SBI Subsdiaries -Union Bank -PNB etc ) or private sector to merge let private sector banks . thanks rk nagpal ex banker



Aug 20, 2015

Ultimately health of banking industry indicates on the health of the economy itself . If banks are not doing well ,it means that the new projects that are coming up or recently that have come up are not doing well as the term loan component of NPA shows the health of the projects and Working Capital component of NPA indicates the health of commerce and industry . Unless the industry and government do not take care of proper implementation of the projects , banks continue to suffer whether they are in private banks or PSBs . Only PSBs are added burden of catering to the fancies of the ruling governments which do not have commercial interests of banks . Hence it becomes duty of the government to compensate PSBS for the expenses / losses incurred in implementing govt schemes . The present government is also fulfilling the same duty .


Chintan Patel

Aug 20, 2015

I went through your article you have raised few valid points but The below one is exactly opposite to your views on startup of your previous article.following is quote from your article.

"So how independent does this make the banks, given that they have to follow diktats like these from the government? Also, it is worth mentioning here that lending to start-ups is a very high risk kind of lending. Further, do public sector banks have the capability to analyse the loan proposals of start-ups, is a question worth asking here."

You could not say to both side, looks like you are not following yourself

Like (1)

Lakshman Kumar

Aug 20, 2015

Mr. Vivek has put up the points of so called 'Indradhanush', the hidden agenda of the present government in a crisp way. It's maddening to put the tax payer's money without understanding the root cause of the mess and resolve it suitably. Rather, government can pursue this new gimmick in small way limited some banks than wholesome. I agree with the suggestion of 'disinvestment'

Hope Modi government will take bold steps in pushing these reforms in the interest of our fellow Indians in a professional way than political way..

Like (1)
Equitymaster requests your view! Post a comment on "Indradhanush framework is not "sanjivini booti" for govt banks". Click here!