The Development Bank represents a significant opportunity for the Montenegrin economy, and the law establishing it is aligned with EU legal frameworks, as noted by Vasilije Čarapić, head of the parliamentary club of Europe Now. On the other hand, MP Miloš Konatar from the GP URA pointed out that the law does not comply with EU directives, there was no public discussion, and the European Commission was excluded from the process. Aleksandra Popović from the Ministry of Finance stated that European integration necessitated strengthening financial institutions, while Bratislav Pejaković from the Banking Association expressed no concerns about the establishment of the Development Bank.
The program focused on the need for a Development Bank in Montenegro, whether the law governing this institution would undergo amendments or be reapproved in the Assembly, what benefits it would bring to the economy, and the concerns of commercial banks.
Aleksandra Popović mentioned that there are numerous examples from the region and the EU supporting the transformation of the Investment and Development Fund (IRF) into a Development Bank. She emphasized that European integration has necessitated the strengthening of financial institutions, supported by comparative analyses.
Pejaković noted that bankers generally do not oppose the establishment of a Development Bank, as it has different objectives compared to commercial banks. He explained that the domestic market has 11 banks, which have shown profitability. The banking system’s assets amount to around 6.9 billion euros, and he welcomed the introduction of another player, provided banking standards are respected. He was confident that the European Commission would give a positive opinion on the matter.
Konatar emphasized that there is broad support for the idea of a Development Bank, particularly now as needs exceed the capacities of the IRF. However, he raised concerns about the process, stating that there are no precedents in the region or beyond for a Development Bank being established in the manner proposed in Montenegro. He pointed out that no group of MPs has previously proposed such a law without the involvement of the government or the Ministry of Finance. He highlighted that, had the government been the proposer, public consultation would have included broader input, including from the Central Bank and commercial banks.
He also stressed the importance of including the European Commission’s opinion on the establishment of an institution that could guide the country’s development for decades. Čarapić explained that the law was submitted by a group of MPs because the procedure allowed for it, choosing a faster route to bring the law to the assembly. He claimed that there is a general consensus on the need for a Development Bank and that the government supports the transformation of the IRF into one.
He asserted that the proposed law is fully compliant with EU legal frameworks, highlighting that every economy has its specifics. He added that while the IRF targeted short-term goals, the Development Bank would focus on a long-term strategy.
Pejaković remarked that the Central Bank had previously stated its support for the Development Bank’s concept. However, he highlighted that the law’s provisions raise concerns regarding its compliance with EU directives, especially regarding the operational regulations for credit institutions.
Popović indicated that the establishment of the Development Bank must ensure stability in the financial market and mentioned potential state deposits as a solution. She noted that the total deposits amount to nearly five billion euros, of which over 90% are guaranteed deposits from individuals and legal entities.
Pejaković warned that the founding capital of the Development Bank is substantial, requiring strict oversight. He underscored the necessity of consulting the European Commission to ensure compliance with its guidelines.
