DNB is being asked to perform more and more tasks, while the intensity of its tasks is also increasing. One of the lessons from the credit crisis is the need for tighter controls at both a European and international level. Banks are consequently becoming subject to greater regulation, while national supervisory authorities have to ensure strict compliance with these new rules and regulations, including the introduction of Basel III.
At the same time, DNB has also made quite some changes in its own approach to supervision by adopting a broader view and examining, for example, the impact that macro-economic developments have on banks. Another fairly recent development is the focus on banks' conduct and culture, as well as stricter assessment and reassessment of executive and supervisory directors' expertise and trustworthiness. This comes on top of the fact that tasks and responsibilities traditionally become more intensified in times of crisis. DNB is now, for example, devoting far more time to the question of banks' funding.
DNB obviously aims to deploy its capacity as efficiently as possible, but that is not in itself sufficient. We have calculated how many additional people are needed to perform our tasks and came out at an increase of around 10%. The IMF had previously mentioned that DNB's staffing levels were on the under-generous side, also in comparison with other countries.
The proposal for a European banking union will shift supervision increasingly towards Frankfurt, and the practical implications of this remain to be seen. The banking union is also expected to further intensify supervisory activities, with a corresponding increase in the duties required to be performed by DNB. It should be noted that the European banking union is not intended as a means of reducing spending or local supervisory authorities' workload. Indeed the principal idea is that, as Europeans united in a banking union, we will be able to work together to protect and preserve the strength of financial institutions throughout Europe.