
Leeson: risk managers should be personally liable for trades
Former rogue trader says new UK rules could "change the way people look at risk"

Former rogue trader Nick Leeson has welcomed the UK's new rules that make senior risk managers personally accountable for the positions put on by traders under their jurisdiction.
Leeson, the former Barings Bank trader whose £827 million ($1.4 billion) losses on unauthorised trades in the Singaporean and Japanese futures markets led to the collapse of the UK merchant bank in 1995, says a culture still exists within banks where traders are not sufficiently challenged to explain complex, multi-legged trades.
"The risk managers have to take more on. If a risk manager doesn't understand the trade a star trader is trying to put on, there has to be a way of stopping them. Someone on the risk committee has to say that they fully understand it, and that they're going to take responsibility for it. To this day, a lot of traders are still able to railroad certain trades through. Until that changes, there will always be a problem," said Leeson, who gave the keynote address at the Risk South Africa conference in Cape Town on March 10.
He welcomed the UK's Senior Managers Regime's attempts to tackle the issue. The regime, which entered into force this week, makes a "reckless" decision that causes a bank to fail a criminal offence carrying a maximum of seven years in prison and an unlimited fine. The rules apply to individuals at banks who fulfil 17 designated senior management functions, ranging from the chief executive and heads of risk and finance to the chairs of the risk, audit and remuneration committees.
Fines have been astronomical over the last few years and clearly haven't made any impact
Nick Leeson
"If the Senior Managers Regime is implemented in the way that it's deemed to want to work, then it has the potential to change the way people look at risk within their organisation. People will be far more focused on challenging [staff], and challenging what's going on in the organisation below them if they think there's personal responsibility there. Fines have been astronomical over the last few years and clearly haven't made any impact," said Leeson.
Leeson suggested the rules marked an evolution in the Bank of England's approach to conduct risk and were a far cry from the regime that held sway when it regulated Barings.
"The Bank of England was the regulator during my time at Barings. They weren't particularly good," he said.
Writing on Risk.net this week, Paul Fisher, executive director at the Bank of England and former deputy head of the Prudential Regulation Authority, said the rules were designed to foster a culture of personal responsibility.
"Their clear purpose is to make it clear who is accountable for what within a firm. The foremost objective of that is not so we know who to punish when things go wrong. It is to make sure someone is taking full responsibility for the right outcomes so misbehaviour becomes very much rarer," he said.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Risk management
Buy side still prefers bilateral repo despite LCH margin update
New model will cut margin faster after stresses abate, but costs still high for directional trades
Margin failings raise concern over Treasury basis trade
Opaque models at clearing houses cast doubt on calculations for concentration add-on
New developments in XVA: bank strategy in a changing world
Derivatives valuation has grown in complexity since the the financial crisis that began in 2007–08. It now encompasses a broader range of risk factors, including credit, funding, margin and capital – all of which can affect banks’ competitiveness and…
New UK clearing rules: same as the old rules?
Clearing experts doubt UK regulation can diverge significantly from Emir and global standards
Op risk data: TD Bank takes $95m pill for pyramid scheme
Also: GE settles after juicing asset manager sale; keeping conflicts of interest quiet. Data by ORX News
Europe looks to US for guidance as market braces for T+1
Operations professionals in Europe look across the pond for lessons in managing shorter settlement cycles
FSB warned not to overfill its planned CCP resolution toolbox
Network contagion could make cash calls systemically risky, but TLAC also controversial
FRAML solutions 2023: market and vendor landscape
As concerns around financial crime escalate, financial institutions and regulators are placing greater emphasis on combined FRAML solutions. For financial institutions the benefits of an integrated FRAML platform include improved capabilities,…