The SME Finance Monitor has at last been published with the sub-title: 'To what extent do SMEs have issues accessing bank finance?'. This report, which will be undertaken quarterly, is said to be the largest and most detailed study of SME's views of bank finance ever undertaken in the UK. It stems from the Business Finance Taskforce, comprising the BBA, Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds, RBS and Santander. It is independent and the banks have no editorial control.
The report was on the agenda of the BIS Small Business Economic Forum that I attended on Monday, and which was chaired by Mark Prisk. Mike Young, the independent chair of the Survey Steering Group gave us a fascinating insight. What has been even more fascinating, however, is the variety of interpretations and responses since its publication.
The BBA said that: "most businesses are able to get the credit they need." The Labour party was quoted as saying that: "it showed that a significant minority of small businesses seeking loans are failing to get the credit they seek." Richard Tyler, from The Daily Telegraph, said: "that banks are much more selective about which firms they back and are unlikely to change their minds."
All of these are factual and - in a week when the integrity of newspapers is under scrutiny - I am not suggesting that there is anything misleading. However, few will read the full 126 page report (available here: http://www.bdrc.co.uk/business-issues/sme-finance-monitor/) so one's understanding of the report will be heavily influenced by the headlines they read.
The truth, of course, is that this is not a simple issue. Mike says in his introduction: "This report does not provide quick and easy answers to the claims and counter-claims swirling around in the debate about SMEs and banks. That is because it is an extremely complex issue, incaple of easy summary into 'guilty' or 'not guilty'. So, the report eschews glib answers and focuses on bringing out the evidence. It is for others to draw conclusions from it." The conclusions drawn by journalists and politicians will steer our thinking too, I suspect.
The one report I really liked though was in the Telegraphs piece on Tuesday quoting Manos Schizas, a senior policy advisor at the Association of Certified Accountants, who I know well and have worked with a number of times recently. It highlighted one key message of the report: "that it is vital for firms to produce accurate information." Businesses with a low external risk rating were far more likely to be offered an overdraft (93%) or loan (81%), than those with a worse than average risk rating where the 'offered what they wanted' category percentage was only 61% and 41% respectively. No surprise here and you will indulge me while I once again bang on about the 'information' debate.
In many cases, the categorisation as 'worse than average risk' will not be because the business's numbers are bad but because there aren't any numbers to go by at all!. Information facilitates the flow of credit and the current proposals to exempt micro businesses from filing accounts will simply make things worse, not better. Our petition on this subject is still open at http://bit.ly/mliWbY and I urge you to add your name to the growing list of signatories. This isn't just about credit professionals wanting more information available from Companies House or credit reference agencies so they can make better decisions more easily; it's also about helping the economy back on to its feet.
http://www.icm.org.uk/
No comments:
Post a Comment