Is it incompetence? Or pure dishonesty? Sadly, probably the latter. There have been stories in the press recently (see links below) reporting suspected fraud at credit unions in Uganda. These Savings and Credit Cooperatives are set up as societies where members can deposit funds and take out loans, in essence much like any microfinance institution, but due to the law limiting its remit, the Bank of Uganda has no jurisdiction to oversee these institutions. And the body that does oversee these credit unions is reportedly understaffed and lacks expertise. Many clients are reporting that the institutions are making it difficult for them to withdraw their savings. Recent pronouncements by the Bank of Uganda indicate that some of the poor clients may well lose their savings entirely.
It behoves those in positions of authority not to lose sight of what must be one of their primary objectives, supervision. The lack thereof doesn't only exist in Uganda and sadly closer to (my current) home, there are anecdotal stories of heads of microfinance institutions (MFIs) using their loan portfolios to curry favour with friends and influential people. Sad but true. Fraud can occur even in an arena which supposedly attracts those who want to help others. No harm in helping yourself at the same time, I guess the argument runs.
There are three responsible parties when it comes to supervision. The first line of defense is the board of directors. Some may treat being invited onto a board as another line to be added to their curriculum vitae with a couple of meetings to be attended per year as the price to pay. However being on the board carries responsibility and the senior management of the institution must be held to account. Regulators have their obvious role to play and as in the Ugandan case, microfinance institutions (MFIs) of whatever kind must not be excluded from the remit of the banking regulator. These are financial institutions just like those which cater to better-heeled clients. There may be a cost burden to the MFIs of providing information and of course the resultant bureaucracy should be kept to a minimum but this is a necessary precaution. Lastly the rating agencies have an important role to play. There are a handful of agencies which specialise in providing ratings for microfinance institutions, entirely on a voluntary basis for the MFIs. It is an important function of these agencies that they adopt a hard-headed mindset and ask the difficult questions. One would hope that the development world would be immune to such human weakness as defrauding the poor, but knowing that it isn't, all necessary steps should be taken to prevent it.
Microcapital article on Ugandan credit unions
New Vision first report of problems
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This is very interesting and does rather point out clearly that advocates of otally free markets in the neo-liberal sesne, within no state intervention of any kind, disastorously miss the point that every mature captialist society has a deeply embedded system of both cultural self regualtion (which is robust although can not always be relied on) and a form of state regulation (which ought to set clear rules and intervene only lightly). Unrestrained neo-liberal theories of markets, as John Kay points out, do not operate efficiently and are often, as a consequence, unreliable.
Post a Comment