Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-26-Speech-1-106"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050926.14.1-106"6
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@en4
|
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@cs1
"Hr. formand, jeg takker medlemmerne for deres meget konstruktive bemærkninger til denne meget vigtige lovgivningstekst, og som anført indledningsvis lykønsker jeg hr. Radwan og skyggeordførerne med deres arbejde og det dybtgående, intensive og meget tekniske arbejde, der er blevet gennemført af udvalget i forbindelse med dette meget komplekse spørgsmål.
Det glæder mig ligeledes at kunne meddele, at Kommissionen fuldt ud støtter kompromisændringsforslagene. De forslag, der er forelagt plenarforsamlingen, er udtryk for et rimeligt kompromis, hvor der er taget hensyn til drøftelserne mellem Rådet og Parlamentet, og banksektoren vil ligeledes støtte disse fuldt ud. Derudover er de foreslåede løsninger afbalancerede, og Kommissionens oprindelige hensigter med denne lovgivning respekteres.
Jeg er enig med de talere, der fremhævede dette direktivs betydning. Tiltag til gavn for de finansielle institutioner fremmer den økonomiske vækst, beskæftigelsen, økonomien og den finansielle stabilitet. Nogle ser misundeligt på banker og finansielle institutioner, idet de mener, at de opkræver ublu renter og oppebærer enorme fortjenester på deres bekostning. Bankerne og kreditinstitutterne er imidlertid en forudsætning for økonomisk vækst. Det er derfor i alles interesse - herunder de forskellige aktører og involverede parter - at den finansielle sektor er reguleret ordentligt, og at risikoen vurderes korrekt. Dette er også af betydning for indskyderne. Dette er långivningens andet aspekt, idet det ikke ville være muligt at låne penge ud, hvis der ikke blev indsat penge i bankerne. Af selv samme årsag er det også af betydning for aktionærerne og investorerne. Det er også af betydning for medarbejderne i de finansielle institutioner. Således er tiltag til gavn for banksektoren til gavn for os alle.
I en nylig undersøgelse anslås det, at bankernes kapitalkrav vil blive nedsat med ca. 80-120 milliarder euro som følge af det foreslåede direktiv. Det angives også, at kapitalkravene for udlån til SMV'er nedsættes med over 50 %. Parlamentet har stillet ændringsforslag til vores forslag, der indebærer en yderligere forbedring af reglerne for detailudlån og udlån til SMV'erne. Nogle talere henviste til spørgsmålet om de islamiske realkreditlån. Der er behov for regler, således at det sikres, at sådanne lån ikke falder i et hul og således unddrages enhver form for regulering.
Hr. Ryan og fru Lulling rejste spørgsmålet om kreditobligationer og dækkede obligationer. Jeg bemærker, at den yderligere fleksibilitet, der er lagt op til i Parlamentets ændringsforslag, vil medføre en yderligere nedsættelse af lovkravene til de såkaldte dækkede obligationer, og dette er godt for markederne.
Andre medlemmer - især fru Berès og hr. Purvis - rejste spørgsmålet om lige vilkår for Europa og USA. For det første ønsker jeg at understrege, at de små og mellemstore amerikanske banker har anmodet om at få adgang til Basel II-aftalens fordele, og jeg har fået at vide, at USA er på nippet til at stille forslag desangående, og at dette vil ske i løbet af den kommende måned.
For det andet, hvad angår lige vilkår, vil alle de store amerikanske banker, der konkurrerer direkte med europæiske, internationalt arbejdende banker, blive omfattet af Basel-rammeaftalen.
Jeg anerkender imidlertid de bemærkninger, som hr. Purvis og fru Berès er fremkommet med, ikke kun i denne forbindelse, men også inden for andre områder, der vedrører USA. Jeg er klar over, at fru Berès er endog meget stærkt interesseret i dette spørgsmål, hvilket jeg til stadighed er opmærksom på.
Næsten alle talerne henviste til spørgsmålet om komitologi. Især hr. Radwan kan glæde sig og være stolt over, at det er lykkedes ham at bringe dette spørgsmål i allerforreste linje under forhandlingerne, og over, at spørgsmålet ligeledes er blevet udvidet til at omfatte andre områder.
Hvad angår komitologispørgsmålet, bemærker jeg med tilfredshed, at ordføreren har stillet et relevant og konstruktivt forslag, og jeg håber, at vi kan nå frem til en løsning på dette spørgsmål i samarbejde med de forskellige aktører, ikke kun i forbindelse med dette direktiv, men også inden for andre områder."@da2
"Herr Präsident! Ich danke den Abgeordneten für ihre sehr konstruktiven Bemerkungen zu diesem sehr wichtigen Rechtsakt und gratuliere, wie ich eingangs bereits sagte, Herrn Radwan und den Schattenberichterstattern zu ihrer Arbeit und der vom Ausschuss geleisteten intensiven und fachlich sehr anspruchsvollen Auseinandersetzung mit diesem äußerst komplizierten Thema.
Ich freue mich auch, Ihnen mitteilen zu können, dass die Kommission den bei diesen Änderungsanträgen erzielten Kompromiss voll mitträgt. Das Paket, das jetzt dem Plenum vorliegt, ist ein fairer Kompromiss, der den Beratungen zwischen Rat und Parlament Rechnung trägt und auch auf die volle Unterstützung der Bankenbranche wird zählen können. Darüber hinaus sind die vorgeschlagenen Lösungen sehr ausgewogen und berücksichtigen die ursprünglichen Absichten der Kommission für diesen Rechtsakt.
Ich schließe mich den Rednern an, die die Bedeutung dieser Richtlinie hervorgehoben haben. Was gut für die Finanzinstitute ist, wird auch gut für das Wirtschaftswachstum, die Beschäftigung, die Wirtschaft und für mehr finanzielle Stabilität sein. Teile der Öffentlichkeit verfolgen die Angelegenheiten rund um Banken und Finanzinstitutionen bisweilen mit einem gewissen Misstrauen und glauben, sie würden überhöhte Zinsen verlangen und riesige Profite auf ihre Kosten erzielen. Doch ohne eben diese Banken und Kreditinstitute gäbe es keinen nennenswerten wirtschaftlichen Erfolg. Deshalb liegt es im Interesse aller – einschließlich der verschiedenen Beteiligten –, dass wir einen vernünftig regulierten Finanzsektor haben und dass Risiken korrekt bewertet werden. Das ist auch für die Anleger wichtig. Es gehört nun einmal zum Kreditgeschäft dazu, denn wenn niemand Geld bei den Banken anlegen würde, gäbe es auch kein Geld für Kredite. Aus den gleichen Gründen ist es auch wichtig für die Aktionäre und Investoren. Es ist auch für die Beschäftigten der Finanzinstitute wichtig. Was gut für den Bankensektor ist, wird deshalb auch gut für uns alle sein.
Nach Schätzungen einer jüngsten Studie würden die Kapitalanforderungen der Banken als Folge der vorgeschlagenen Richtlinie um etwa 80 bis 120 Milliarden Euro gemindert. Es heißt auch, dass mit dieser Richtlinie die Kapitalanforderungen für Darlehen an KMU um mehr als 50 % gesenkt werden. Dieses Parlament hat Änderungsanträge zu unseren Vorschlägen eingebracht, mit denen die Regeln für die Einzelhandels- und KMU-Kredite noch weiter verbessert werden. Einige Redner sind auf die Frage der islamischen Hypothekarkredite eingegangen. Wir brauchen Regeln, um sicherzustellen, dass solche Kredite nicht durch das Raster fallen und von den Rechtsvorschriften überhaupt nicht erfasst werden.
Herr Ryan und Frau Lulling haben Fragen zu den Pfandbriefen beziehungsweise gedeckten Schuldverschreibungen aufgeworfen. Ich stelle fest, dass die mit den Änderungen des Parlaments eingeführte zusätzliche Flexibilität zu einem weiteren Abbau der regulatorischen Auflagen für die gedeckten Schuldverschreibungen führen wird, und das ist für die Märkte etwas Positives.
Andere Abgeordnete – insbesondere Frau Berès und Herr Purvis – sprachen die Frage der gleichen Wettbewerbsbedingungen für Europa und die USA an. Erstens möchte ich darauf hinweisen, dass die kleinen und mittleren amerikanischen Banken darum gebeten haben, dass die Vorzüge von Basel II auch ihnen zugute kommen, und meines Wissens haben die USA die Absicht, in den nächsten Monaten entsprechende Vorschläge zu unterbreiten.
Zweitens, was die gleichen Bedingungen betrifft, werden alle großen amerikanischen Banken, die in direktem Wettbewerb mit den international agierenden europäischen Banken stehen, von der Baseler Rahmenvereinbarung erfasst.
Ich nehme jedoch zur Kenntnis, was Herr Purvis und Frau Berès nicht nur zu dieser konkreten Frage, sondern auch zu anderen die USA betreffenden Themen gesagt haben. Ich weiß, dass Frau Berès diese Angelegenheit sehr am Herzen liegt, was ich berücksichtigen werde.
Von nahezu jedem Redner ist die allgemeine Frage der Komitologie angesprochen worden. Herr Radwan kann besonders froh darüber und auch stolz darauf sein, diese Frage in den Vordergrund der Debatte gerückt und sie auch auf andere Bereiche ausgedehnt zu haben.
Hinsichtlich der Komitologie stelle ich mit Genugtuung fest, dass der Berichterstatter hier einen nützlichen und konstruktiven Vorschlag vorlegt, und ich hoffe, dass wir diese Angelegenheit nicht nur bei dieser Richtlinie, sondern auch auf anderen Gebieten unter Mitwirkung aller Akteure zu einem erfolgreichen Abschluss bringen können."@de9
"Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ευχαριστώ τους βουλευτές για τα πολύ εποικοδομητικά τους σχόλια όσον αφορά αυτό το πολύ σημαντικό νομοθέτημα και, όπως είπα στην αρχή, συγχαίρω τον κ. Radwan και τους σκιώδεις εισηγητές για το έργο τους, καθώς και την κοινοβουλευτική επιτροπή για τη βαθιά, εντατική και πολύ τεχνική εργασία της σε αυτό το
περίπλοκο θέμα.
Είμαι επίσης στην ευχάριστη θέση να σας πληροφορήσω ότι η Επιτροπή μπορεί να υποστηρίξει πλήρως τον συμβιβασμό που επιτεύχθηκε σε σχέση με αυτές τις τροπολογίες. Η δέσμη που βρίσκεται τώρα ενώπιον της Ολομέλειας αποτελεί έναν δίκαιο συμβιβασμό, λαμβάνοντας υπόψη τις συζητήσεις ανάμεσα στο Συμβούλιο και το Κοινοβούλιο, και επίσης θα λάβει την έντονη υποστήριξη της τραπεζικής βιομηχανίας. Επιπλέον, οι προτεινόμενες λύσεις είναι ισορροπημένες και σέβονται τις αρχικές προθέσεις της Επιτροπής για αυτήν τη νομοθεσία.
Συμφωνώ με εκείνους τους ομιλητές που τόνισαν τη σημασία της ιδιαίτερης αυτής οδηγίας. Ό,τι είναι καλό για τα χρηματοπιστωτικά ιδρύματα είναι καλό και για την οικονομική ανάπτυξη, την απασχόληση, την οικονομία και την αύξηση της οικονομικής σταθερότητας. Μερικές φορές οι άνθρωποι βλέπουν μάλλον αρνητικά όλα τα θέματα που αφορούν τις τράπεζες και τα χρηματοπιστωτικά ιδρύματα και θεωρούν ότι τους επιβάλλουν υπερβολικούς τόκους και ότι αποκομίζουν τεράστια κέρδη εις βάρος τους. Ωστόσο, αν δεν υπήρχαν οι τράπεζες και τα χρηματοπιστωτικά ιδρύματα, δεν θα υπήρχε μεγάλη οικονομική επιτυχία. Επομένως, είναι προς το συμφέρον όλων, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των διαφόρων παραγόντων και μετόχων, να έχουμε έναν σωστά ρυθμισμένο χρηματοπιστωτικό τομέα και να αξιολογείται σωστά ο κίνδυνος. Αυτό είναι σημαντικό και για τους καταθέτες. Είναι η άλλη όψη του δανεισμού, γιατί, αν δεν κατέθετε κανένας χρήματα στις τράπεζες, δεν θα υπήρχαν χρήματα για δανεισμό. Για τους ίδιους ακριβώς λόγους, είναι επίσης σημαντικό για τους μετόχους και τους επενδυτές. Είναι σημαντικό και για τους υπαλλήλους των χρηματοπιστωτικών ιδρυμάτων. Συνεπώς, ό,τι είναι καλό για τον τραπεζικό τομέα είναι καλό για όλους μας.
Μία πρόσφατη μελέτη υπολόγισε ότι οι τράπεζες θα μειώσουν τις κεφαλαιακές απαιτήσεις κατά περίπου 80 έως 120 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ ως αποτέλεσμα της προτεινόμενης οδηγίας. Έλεγε επίσης ότι αυτή η οδηγία θα μειώσει τις κεφαλαιακές απαιτήσεις για τα δάνεια στις ΜΜΕ κατά περισσότερο από 50%. Το Κοινοβούλιο κατέθεσε τροπολογίες στις προτάσεις μας, οι οποίες βελτιώνουν ακόμη περισσότερο τους κανόνες για τη λιανική τραπεζική και τα δάνεια στις ΜΜΕ. Ορισμένοι ομιλητές αναφέρθηκαν στο θέμα των ισλαμικών υποθηκών. Χρειαζόμαστε κανόνες που θα διασφαλίζουν ότι αυτά τα δάνεια δεν θα περάσουν απαρατήρητα και δεν θα διαφύγουν εντελώς της ρύθμισης.
Ο κ. Ryan και η κ. Lulling έθεσαν ερωτήσεις για τις ενυπόθηκες ομολογίες ή τα καλυμμένα ομόλογα. Σημειώνω ότι η περαιτέρω ευελιξία που εισάγεται με τις τροπολογίες του Κοινοβουλίου θα μειώσει ακόμα περισσότερο τους κανονιστικούς περιορισμούς για τα λεγόμενα «καλυμμένα ομόλογα» και αυτό είναι ένα καλό αποτέλεσμα για τις αγορές.
Ορισμένοι άλλοι βουλευτές –ειδικότερα η κ. Berès και ο κ. Purvis– έθιξαν το ζήτημα των ισότιμων όρων ανταγωνισμού για την Ευρώπη και τις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες. Πρώτον, θα ήθελα να επισημάνω ότι οι μικρομεσαίες αμερικανικές τράπεζες έχουν ζητήσει να επεκταθούν και σε αυτές τα οφέλη της Βασιλείας II και πληροφορούμαι ότι οι ΗΠΑ ετοιμάζονται να υποβάλουν αυτές τις προτάσεις μέσα στον επόμενο μήνα.
Δεύτερον, όσον αφορά αυτούς τους ισότιμους όρους ανταγωνισμού, όλες οι μεγάλες αμερικανικές τράπεζες που βρίσκονται σε άμεσο ανταγωνισμό με ευρωπαϊκές τράπεζες, οι οποίες δραστηριοποιούνται σε όλο τον κόσμο, θα καλύπτονται από το πλαίσιο της Βασιλείας.
Σημειώνω, ωστόσο, τα όσα δήλωσαν ο κ. Purvis και η κ. Berès, όχι μόνο σχετικά με το συγκεκριμένο θέμα αλλά και σχετικά με άλλους τομείς που αφορούν τις ΗΠΑ. Γνωρίζω ότι η κ. Berès έχει δείξει ιδιαίτερο ενδιαφέρον για το συγκεκριμένο ζήτημα και το διατηρώ κατά νου.
Σχεδόν όλοι οι ομιλητές αναφέρθηκαν στο γενικό θέμα της επιτροπολογίας. Ο κ. Radwan μπορεί να νιώθει ιδιαίτερη χαρά και υπερηφάνεια που έφερε αυτό το ζήτημα στο προσκήνιο της συζήτησης και που το επέκτεινε και σε άλλους τομείς.
Όσον αφορά την επιτροπολογία, σημειώνω με ικανοποίηση ότι ο εισηγητής κάνει μια πολύ χρήσιμη και εποικοδομητική πρόταση και ελπίζω πως θα καταφέρουμε, όχι μόνο με τη συγκεκριμένη οδηγία, αλλά επίσης και σε άλλους τομείς, να φέρουμε το ζήτημα σε αίσιο τέλος με τη συνεργασία των διαφόρων παραγόντων."@el10
".
Señor Presidente, quiero dar las gracias a los diputados a la Cámara por sus comentarios tan constructivos sobre instrumento legislativo de tanta importancia y, como ya dije al principio, felicito al señor Radwan y a los ponentes alternativos por su labor, y a la comisión parlamentaria por el trabajo tan profundo, intenso y técnico que ha realizado sobre este tema
complejo.
También me complace informar a sus Señorías de que la Comisión está en condiciones de dar su pleno apoyo al compromiso alcanzado en relación con estas enmiendas. El paquete presentado ante el Pleno es un compromiso equitativo que tiene en cuenta las deliberaciones entre el Consejo y el Parlamento, y que también gozará del firme apoyo del sector bancario. Además, las soluciones que propone son equilibradas y respetan las intenciones iniciales que la Comisión tenía para este instrumento legislativo.
Estoy de acuerdo con los oradores que han destacado la importancia de esta Directiva. Lo que será positivo para las entidades financieras, será bueno para el crecimiento económico, el empleo, la economía y una mayor estabilidad financiera. A veces algunos sectores del público ven las cuestiones relacionadas con los bancos y las entidades financieras con cierto cinismo y consideran que estos cobran intereses excesivos y hacen grandes beneficios a su costa. Sin embargo, de no ser por los bancos y las entidades de crédito, no podría haber grandes éxitos económicos. Por ello nos interesa a todos –incluidos los diversos agentes e interesados– disponer de un sector financiero bien regulado y que los riesgos se evalúen correctamente. Y también es importante para los impositores. Esta es la otra cara de la actividad crediticia, ya que si nadie depositara su dinero en los bancos, estos no tendrían dinero para prestar. Por esta misma razón es importante igualmente para los accionistas e inversores. También lo es para el personal de las entidades financieras. Por consiguiente, lo que será positivo para el sector bancario será bueno para todos nosotros.
Un estudio reciente calcula que si se aplicase la propuesta de Directiva los bancos reducirían su adecuación del capital entre 80 000 y 120 000 millones de euros. Asimismo se dice que esta Directiva reducirá más del 50 % la adecuación del capital para los préstamos a las PYME. Este Parlamento ha presentado enmiendas a nuestras propuestas que mejoran aún más las normas para los préstamos a los particulares y las PYME. Algunos oradores han mencionado el tema de las hipotecas islámicas. Necesitamos normas para asegurarnos de que ese tipo de préstamos no aprovechen las lagunas existentes y sorteen cualquier regulación.
El señor Ryan y la señora Lulling han preguntado sobre los bonos hipotecarios o las obligaciones garantizadas con activos. Observo que la flexibilidad que introducen las enmiendas del Parlamento reducirá aún más las restricciones obligatorias para las denominadas obligaciones garantizadas, lo que positivo para los mercados.
Otros miembros de esta Cámara –concretamente la señora Berès y el señor Purvis– han preguntado sobre la igualdad de condiciones entre Europa y los Estados Unidos. En primer lugar, me gustaría señalar que los bancos pequeños y medianos norteamericanos han solicitado que se extiendan a ellos las ventajas del Acuerdo de Basilea II, y me parece que los Estados Unidos harán durante el mes próximo propuestas a tal fin.
En segundo lugar, en lo relativo a la igualdad de condiciones, todos los grandes bancos norteamericanos que compiten directamente con los bancos europeos que operan a escala mundial quedarán incluidos en el marco de Basilea.
Tomo nota, no obstante, de lo que han dicho el señor Purvis y la señora Berès, no solo sobre este tema, sino también sobre otros ámbitos relacionados con los Estados Unidos. Sé que la señora Berès se interesa especialmente por este tema y lo tendré en cuenta.
Casi todos los oradores han mencionado la cuestión general de la comitología. Corresponde al señor Radwan el honor de haber situado este tema en la primera línea del debate y de haberlo ampliado igualmente a otros ámbitos.
Por lo que respecta la comitología, observo con satisfacción que el ponente avanza una propuesta útil y constructiva, y espero que podamos llegar a una conclusión efectiva, no solo para esta Directiva, sino también en otros ámbitos, con la cooperación de los distintos agentes."@es20
"Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@et5
".
Arvoisa puhemies, kiitän jäseniä siitä, että he ovat esittäneet hyvin rakentavia kommentteja tästä tärkeästä säädöksestä, ja kuten heti aluksi totesin, onnittelen esittelijä Radwania ja varjoesittelijöitä heidän tekemästään työstä ja valiokuntaa tämän
monimutkaisen aiheen parissa tehdystä perusteellisesta, intensiivisestä ja hyvin teknisestä työstä.
Minulle on lisäksi mieluisaa kertoa teille, että komissio tukee täysin näistä tarkistuksista saavutettua sovitteluratkaisua. Tämä parhaillaan täysistuntokäsittelyssä oleva paketti on tasapuolinen kompromissi, jossa otetaan huomioon neuvoston ja parlamentin väliset keskustelut, ja ehdotuksella on myös pankkialan vahva tuki. Lisäksi ehdotetut ratkaisut ovat tasapainoisia ja komission tälle säädökselle alun perin asettamien tavoitteiden mukaisia.
Yhdyn puhujiin, jotka korostivat tämän nimenomaisen direktiivin tärkeyttä. Mikä on hyväksi rahoituslaitoksille, on hyväksi talouskasvulle, työllisyydelle ja taloudelle sekä rahoitusmarkkinoiden vakauden lisäämiselle. Kansalaiset suhtautuvat joskus pankkeihin ja rahoituslaitoksiin varsin epäluuloisesti. He katsovat niiden perivän kohtuutonta korkoa ja tekevän suuria voittoja heidän kustannuksellaan. Ilman pankkeja ja luottolaitoksia ei olisi kuitenkaan merkittävää taloudellista menestystä. Tämän vuoksi on kaikkien – kuten eri toimijoiden ja sidosryhmien – etujen mukaista, että rahoitusalaa säännellään asianmukaisesti ja että riskit otetaan asianmukaisesti huomioon. Lisäksi tämä on tärkeää säästäjille. Tämä on rahanlainauksen kääntöpuoli, koska jos kukaan ei tallettaisi rahaa pankkiin, lainattavaa rahaa ei olisi. Tästä samasta syystä asia on tärkeä myös osakkeenomistajille ja sijoittajille. Asia on tärkeä myös rahoituslaitosten työntekijöille. Näin ollen se, mikä on hyväksi pankkialalle, on hyväksi meille kaikille.
Tuoreessa tutkimuksessa on arvioitu, että direktiiviehdotuksen seurauksena pankit laskevat pääomavaatimuksia noin 80–120 miljardin euron verran. Lisäksi on todettu, että tällä direktiivillä alennetaan pk-yrityksille myönnettävien lainojen pääomavaatimuksia yli 50 prosentilla. Parlamentti on esittänyt ehdotuksiimme tarkistuksia, joilla parannetaan entisestään vähittäislainoihin ja pk-yritysten lainoihin sovellettavia sääntöjä. Eräät puhujat mainitsivat islamilaiset kiinnitysluotot. Tarvitsemme sääntöjä, joilla varmistetaan, että nämä lainat eivät jää paitsioon ja jää kokonaan sääntelyn ulkopuolelle.
Jäsenet Ryan ja Lulling ottivat esiin kiinteistövakuudelliset joukkovelkakirjat tai omaisuudella katetut joukkovelkakirjat. Panen merkille sen, että parlamentin tarkistuksilla saavutetulla lisäjoustolla vähennetään entisestään sääntelyrajoitteita, jotka kohdistuvat niin sanottuihin katettuihin joukkolainoihin, ja tämä on hyvä tulos markkinoiden kannalta.
Eräät toiset jäsenet – erityisesti jäsenet Berès ja Purvis – ottivat esiin Euroopan ja Yhdysvaltojen yhtäläiset kilpailuedellytykset. Ensinnäkin haluan huomauttaa, että pienet ja keskisuuret amerikkalaiset pankit ovat pyytäneet, että nekin voisivat hyötyä Basel II -sääntelyn eduista, ja ymmärtääkseni Yhdysvallat on aikeissa tehdä tällaisia ehdotuksia seuraavan kuukauden kuluessa.
Toiseksi totean näistä yhtäläisistä kilpailuedellytyksistä, että kaikki suuret amerikkalaiset pankit, jotka kilpailevat suoraan eurooppalaisten maailmanlaajuisten pankkien kanssa, kuuluvat Baselin kehyksen piiriin.
Otan kuitenkin huomioon, mitä jäsenet Purvis ja Berès totesivat muistakin Yhdysvaltoja koskevista kysymyksistä, eikä pelkästään tästä asiasta. Tiedän, että jäsen Berès on erityisen kiinnostunut tästä asiasta, ja pidän tämän mielessäni.
Lähes jokainen puhuja viittasi yleisesti komitologiaan. Jäsen Radwan voi olla erityisen tyytyväinen siihen – ja ylpeä siitä – että hän on saattanut tämän kysymyksen keskustelun keskiöön ja laajentanut sitä koskemaan myös muita aloja.
Komitologian osalta panen tyytyväisenä merkille, että esittelijän tekemä ehdotus on hyödyllinen ja rakentava, ja toivon, että saatamme asian onnistuneesti päätökseen eri toimijoiden välisen yhteistyön avulla muillakin aloilla, eikä pelkästään tämän direktiivin kattamilla aloilla."@fi7
".
Monsieur le Président, je remercie les députés de leurs commentaires très constructifs concernant cet élément très important de la législation et, comme je l’ai dit au début, je félicite M. Radwan ainsi que les rapporteurs fictifs du travail approfondi, intensif et très technique accompli par la commission sur ce thème
complexe.
Je suis également heureux de vous informer que la Commission est en mesure d’apporter son soutien total au compromis qui a été obtenu sur ces amendements. L’ensemble que vous avez à présent devant vous en session plénière est un compromis équitable, qui tient compte des discussions entre le Conseil et le Parlement, et qui bénéficiera également du soutien puissant du secteur bancaire. Par ailleurs, les solutions proposées sont équilibrées et respectent les intentions initiales de la Commission concernant cette législation.
Je suis d’accord avec les orateurs qui ont souligné l’importance de cette directive particulière. Ce qui sera bon pour les institutions financières sera bon aussi pour la croissance économique, l’emploi, l’économie et une stabilité financière accrue. Parfois, le public considère les questions relatives aux banques et aux institutions financières d’un œil plutôt aigri, et estiment que celles-ci facturent des intérêts trop élevés et réalisent des profits énormes à leurs dépens. Toutefois, sans banques et établissements de crédit, il n’y aurait pas de grandes réussites économiques. Il est par conséquent dans l’intérêt de tout le monde - y compris des différents acteurs et parties prenantes - que nous disposions d’un secteur financier correctement réglementé et que les risques soient correctement évalués. C’est également important pour les déposants. C’est bien là le revers de la médaille du prêt, car en effet, si personne ne plaçait son argent dans les banques, il n’y aurait pas d’argent à prêter. Pour ces mêmes raisons, c’est également important pour les actionnaires et les investisseurs, ainsi que pour les employés des institutions financières. Par conséquent, ce qui sera bon pour le secteur bancaire sera bon pour nous tous.
Une récente étude a estimé qu’à la suite de la directive proposée, les banques bénéficieraient d’exigences réduites de fonds propres situées aux alentours de 80 à 120 milliards d’euros. On affirme également que cette directive réduira de plus de 50% les exigences de fonds propres en ce qui concerne les prêts aux PME. Cette Assemblée a déposé des amendements à nos propositions, qui améliorent encore les règles de prêt à la clientèle de détail et aux PME. Certains orateurs ont évoqué la question des hypothèques islamiques. Nous avons besoin de règles pour éviter que ces prêts ne passent entre les mailles du filet et n’échappent tout bonnement à la réglementation.
M. Ryan et Mme Lulling ont soulevé des questions concernant les obligations hypothécaires ou les obligations couvertes par des actifs. J’observe que la flexibilité accrue introduite par les amendements du Parlement réduira davantage encore les contraintes réglementaires s’appliquant aux «obligations garanties», ce qui est un bon résultat pour les marchés.
Certains autres députés - notamment Mme Berès et M. Purvis - ont soulevé la question de conditions de jeu équitables entre l’Europe et les États-Unis. Premièrement, je souhaite observer que les banques américaines de petite et moyenne envergure ont demandé que les avantages de Bâle II leur soient également appliqués et je crois savoir que les États-Unis sont sur le point d’avancer ce genre de propositions au cours du mois qui vient.
Deuxièmement, en ce qui concerne ces conditions équitables, toutes les grandes banques américaines se trouvant en concurrence directe avec les banques européennes qui opèrent dans le monde entier seront couvertes par le cadre de Bâle.
Je prends toutefois note de ce qu’ont déclaré M. Purvis et Mme Berès, non seulement dans cette perspective particulière, mais également pour ce qui est d’autres domaines liés aux États-Unis. Je sais que Mme Berès a éprouvé un intérêt particulièrement vif pour cette question, et c’est là un élément que je garde à l’esprit.
Chaque orateur ou presque a évoqué la question générale de la comitologie. M. Radwan peut tirer un plaisir particulier et une grande fierté d’avoir placé ce thème à l’avant-scène du débat et de l’avoir également étendu à d’autres domaines.
En ce qui concerne la comitologie, je note avec satisfaction que le rapporteur avance sur ce point une proposition utile et constructive et j’espère que, non seulement par cette directive, mais aussi dans d’autres domaines, nous pourrons amener ce sujet à une conclusion positive, moyennant la coopération des différents acteurs."@fr8
"Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@hu11
"Signor Presidente, ringrazio gli onorevoli deputati per i loro costruttivi commenti su questo importante strumento legislativo e, come ho detto all’inizio della discussione, mi congratulo con l’onorevole Radwan e i relatori ombra per il loro lavoro e per l’attività intensa ed estremamente tecnica svolta dalla commissione parlamentare su un tema
complesso.
Sono inoltre lieto di informarvi che la Commissione può accettare senza riserve il compromesso che è stato raggiunto su questi emendamenti. Il pacchetto che viene ora discusso dall’Assemblea plenaria costituisce un equo compromesso che tiene conto delle discussioni tenutesi tra il Consiglio e il Parlamento, e che godrà del forte sostegno del settore bancario. Inoltre, le soluzioni proposte sono ben equilibrate e rispettano le intenzioni iniziali della Commissione per questa normativa.
Condivido gli interventi tesi a sottolineare l’importanza di questa specifica direttiva. Ciò che favorirà le istituzioni finanziarie favorirà la crescita economica, l’occupazione, l’economia e una maggiore stabilità finanziaria. Talvolta l’opinione pubblica guarda con ostilità alle questioni che concernono le banche e le istituzioni finanziarie, che accusa di applicare tassi d’interesse eccessivi e di conseguire profitti enormi a spese dei clienti. Ma se non fosse per le banche e gli enti creditizi, i risultati economici sarebbero assai più limitati. E’ perciò nell’interesse di tutti – dei diversi soggetti coinvolti e delle parti in causa – disporre di un settore finanziario adeguatamente regolamentato e di una corretta valutazione dei rischi, elemento, questo, importante anche per i risparmiatori. E’ l’altra faccia della medaglia dell’attività creditizia; se nessuno depositasse il proprio denaro in banca, non ci sarebbe denaro disponibile per le operazioni di credito. Per gli stessi motivi questo elemento è importante anche per gli azionisti e per gli investitori, nonché per i dipendenti delle istituzioni finanziarie. Quindi, ciò che favorisce il settore bancario, favorirà anche noi.
Secondo uno studio recente, la proposta di direttiva consentirà alle banche di ridurre i propri requisiti patrimoniali di circa 80-120 miliardi di euro; si dice anche che questa direttiva ridurrà i requisiti patrimoniali per i prestiti alle PMI di più del 50 per cento. L’Assemblea ha presentato emendamenti alle nostre proposte che migliorano ulteriormente le norme per il credito al dettaglio e alle PMI. In alcuni interventi si è fatto riferimento al problema delle ipoteche islamiche; abbiamo bisogno di norme per garantire che per tali crediti non si possa ricorrere a cavilli o scappatoie.
Gli onorevoli Ryan e Lulling hanno sollevato il problema delle obbligazioni ipotecarie e delle obbligazioni coperte da attività. Osservo che la maggiore flessibilità introdotta dagli emendamenti del Parlamento ridurrà ulteriormente i limiti normativi per le cosiddette obbligazioni coperte, il che rappresenta un buon risultato per i mercati.
Altri deputati – in particolare gli onorevoli Berès e Purvis – hanno sottolineato la necessità di garantire condizioni paritarie per l’Europa e gli Stati Uniti. Prima di tutto vorrei ricordare che le banche americane piccole e medie hanno chiesto che i benefici di Basilea II venissero estesi anche a loro, e mi risulta che gli Stati Uniti avanzeranno tali proposte entro il mese prossimo.
In secondo luogo, per quanto riguarda le condizioni paritarie, tutte le grandi banche americane che sono in diretta concorrenza con le banche europee operanti a livello mondiale rientreranno nel quadro normativo di Basilea.
Accolgo tuttavia le osservazioni fatte dagli onorevoli Purvis e Berès, non soltanto su questo tema specifico ma anche in merito ad altre questioni concernenti gli Stati Uniti. So che l’onorevole Berès nutre un particolare interesse per la questione, e ne terrò conto.
Quasi tutti gli interventi hanno fatto riferimento al tema generale della comitatologia. L’onorevole Radwan può essere soddisfatto e orgoglioso per aver portato la questione al centro del dibattito, e per averla estesa anche ad altri settori.
Per quanto riguarda la comitatologia, noto con soddisfazione che il relatore avanza una proposta utile e costruttiva e mi auguro che, non solo con questa direttiva ma anche in altri settori, potremo risolvere con successo la questione, grazie alla cooperazione dei vari soggetti interessati."@it12
"Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@lt14
"Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@lv13
"Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@mt15
"Mijnheer de Voorzitter, ik dank de afgevaardigden voor hun constructieve commentaar op dit bijzonder belangrijke wetgevingsdocument. Zoals ik ook al aan het begin zei, feliciteer ik de heer Radwan en de schaduwrapporteurs met hun werk en met de diepgaande, intensieve en buitengewoon technische analyse waaraan de commissie dit uitermate ingewikkelde dossier heeft onderworpen.
Verder heb ik het genoegen u mee te delen dat de Commissie het compromis dat over deze amendementen is bereikt, ten volle kan steunen. Gelet op de discussies tussen de Raad en het Parlement is het pakket dat thans aan de plenaire vergadering voorligt, een fair compromis. Het zal zeker ook in de banksector op ruime steun kunnen rekenen. Bovendien zijn de voorgestelde oplossingen evenwichtig en in overeenstemming met de oorspronkelijke bedoelingen van de Commissie terzake.
Ik ben het eens met de sprekers die het belang van deze specifieke richtlijn hebben onderstreept. Wat goed is voor de financiële instellingen, is ook goed voor de economische groei, de werkgelegenheid, de economie en de financiële stabiliteit. Buitenstaanders hebben het doorgaans niet zo begrepen op banken en financiële instellingen. Die zijn in hun ogen alleen maar uit op het innen van woekerrenten en het maken van enorme winsten ten koste van de klant. Zonder banken en kredietinstellingen zou de economie echter maar op een laag pitje staan. Daarom heeft iedereen – met inbegrip van de betrokken actoren en aandeelhouders – belang bij een goed gereguleerde financiële sector en een correcte risicobeoordeling. Dit geldt ook voor depositeurs. Zij vormen de andere zijde van het leenproces. Immers, als niemand geld zou deponeren bij de banken, dan zou er ook geen geld geleend kunnen worden. Om dezelfde redenen hebben ook aandeelhouders en investeerders baat bij de regulering en is zij ook belangrijk voor werknemers van financiële instellingen. Kortom, wat goed is voor de banksector, is goed voor eenieder van ons.
Uit een recente studie is gebleken dat de kapitaalbehoeften van banken ten gevolge van de voorgestelde richtlijn naar schatting met 80 à 120 miljard euro zullen dalen. Naar men zegt, zal de richtlijn bovendien ook de kapitaalbehoeften voor leningen aan kleine en middelgrote ondernemingen tot minder dan de helft terugbrengen. Dit Parlement heeft een reeks amendementen op onze voorstellen ingediend waardoor de regelgeving voor leningen aan particulieren en kleine en middelgrote ondernemingen nog verbeterd wordt. Ook de kwestie van de islamitische hypotheken is hier door verschillende sprekers aangekaart. Wij hebben regels nodig die waarborgen dat dergelijke leningen niet door de mazen van het net glippen en zodoende volledig aan de regelgeving ontsnappen.
De heer Ryan en mevrouw Lulling hebben het thema van de hypothecaire obligaties en de gedekte obligaties aan de orde gesteld. In dit verband wil ik u erop attenderen dat de amendementen van het Parlement en de daarin beoogde verhoging van de flexibiliteit de beperkingen die gelden voor de zogeheten gedekte obligaties nog verder zullen versoepelen, hetgeen ongetwijfeld de markten ten goede zal komen.
Andere afgevaardigden – met name mevrouw Berès en de heer Purvis – hebben dan weer onze aandacht gevraagd voor het creëren van gelijke voorwaarden voor Europa en de Verenigde Staten. In de eerste plaats wil ik onderstrepen dat de kleine en middelgrote Amerikaanse banken verzocht hebben om de voordelen van Bazel II ook naar hen uit te breiden en als ik het goed heb, zijn de Verenigde Staten voornemens om komende maand dergelijke voorstellen te formuleren.
Ten tweede zullen alle grote Amerikaanse banken die direct concurreren met wereldwijd actieve Europese banken, voor wat betreft de beoogde gelijke voorwaarden, onder het Bazel-kader vallen.
Desalniettemin neem ik nota van hetgeen hier door de heer Purvis en mevrouw Berès is gezegd, niet alleen met betrekking tot deze specifieke kwestie, maar ook op andere terreinen waar de Verenigde Staten een rol spelen. Ik weet dat mevrouw Berès bijzondere belangstelling voor dit soort zaken heeft. Dat vergeet ik heus niet.
Nagenoeg alle sprekers hebben allusie gemaakt op het alomtegenwoordige vraagstuk van de comitologie. De heer Radwan mag blij en trots zijn dat hij deze kwestie op de voorgrond heeft geplaatst en ook naar andere terreinen heeft uitgebreid.
Wat de comitologie betreft, stel ik met voldoening vast dat de rapporteur ons hier een nuttig en constructief voorstel presenteert. Ik hoop dan ook dat wij erin zullen slagen om deze taak samen met de verschillende actoren tot een goed einde te brengen, niet alleen in dit geval maar ook elders."@nl3
"Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@pl16
"Senhor Presidente, agradeço aos senhores deputados as suas observações muito construtivas sobre esta peça legislativa muito importante e, como disse no início do debate, felicito o senhor deputado Radwan e os relatores-sombra pelo seu trabalho e pelo trabalho profundo, intensivo e muito técnico realizado pela comissão parlamentar sobre este tema
complexo.
Congratulo-me igualmente por informar a Câmara que a Comissão pode apoiar plenamente o compromisso que foi alcançado sobre estas alterações. O pacote ora submetido à apreciação do plenário é um compromisso justo, que tem em conta os debates entre o Conselho e o Parlamento, e gozará também do forte apoio do sector bancário. Além disso, as soluções propostas são bem equilibradas e respeitam as intenções iniciais da Comissão na matéria.
Concordo com os intervenientes que salientaram a importância desta directiva específica. O que for positivo para as instituições financeiras será positivo para o crescimento económico, o emprego, a economia e para uma maior estabilidade financeira. Por vezes os cidadãos olham com uma atitude negativa para as questões relacionadas com os bancos e as instituições financeiras, considerando que estes cobram juros excessivos e que fazem lucros avultados às suas custas. Todavia, se não fossem os bancos e as instituições de crédito, não haveria um grande êxito económico. Por conseguinte, é do interesse de todos - incluindo os vários actores e os accionistas - que tenhamos um sector financeiro adequadamente regulamentado e que o risco seja adequadamente avaliado. É também importante para os depositantes. Este é o lado do empréstimo, uma vez que, se ninguém depositasse dinheiro nos bancos, não haveria dinheiro para emprestar. Exactamente pelas mesmas razões, é igualmente importante para os accionistas e para os investidores. É igualmente importante para os trabalhadores das instituições financeiras. Por conseguinte, o que for positivo para o sector bancário será positivo para todos nós.
Um estudo recente estimou que os bancos reduziram os requisitos de fundos próprios em cerca de 80 a 120 mil milhões de euros na sequência da directiva proposta. Afirma-se ainda que a presente directiva reduzirá os requisitos de fundos próprios para empréstimos às PME em mais de 50%. Este Parlamento apresentou alterações às nossas propostas que melhoram ainda mais as regras para a clientela a retalho e para empréstimos às PME. Alguns dos oradores referiram a questão das hipotecas islâmicas. Precisamos de regras que assegurem que esses empréstimos são contemplados na regulamentação.
Os senhores deputados Ryan e Lulling colocaram questões sobre as obrigações hipotecárias ou as obrigações cobertas. Devo dizer que a flexibilidade crescente introduzida pelas alterações do Parlamento irá reduzir ainda mais as restrições regulamentares das chamadas obrigações cobertas, o que é um resultado positivo para os mercados.
Outros deputados - em particular a senhora deputada Berès e o senhor deputado Purvis - suscitaram a questão da igualdade de condições entre a Europa e os Estados Unidos. Em primeiro lugar, gostaria de recordar que os bancos norte-americanos de pequena e média dimensão pediram que as vantagens de Basileia II também lhes fossem aplicadas e julgo que os Estados Unidos estão prestes a apresentar essas propostas no próximo mês.
Em segundo lugar, no que diz respeito à igualdade de condições, todos os grandes bancos norte-americanos que são concorrentes directos dos bancos europeus que operam a nível mundial estarão abrangidos pelo quadro de Basileia.
Tomarei, porém, nota do que os senhores deputados Purvis e Berès disseram, não unicamente a este respeito, mas também em relação a outros domínios relativos aos Estados Unidos. Sei que a senhora deputada Berès mostrou um interesse particular por esta matéria, o que terei em conta.
Quase todos os intervenientes referiram-se à questão geral da comitologia. O senhor deputado Radwan pode sentir-se satisfeito e orgulhoso por ter trazido esta questão para a primeira linha do debate e por a ter alargado também a outras áreas.
No que diz respeito à comitologia, é com satisfação que observo que o relator apresenta aqui uma proposta útil e construtiva e espero que, não exclusivamente em relação à directiva que nos ocupa mas também em relação a outras áreas, possamos chegar a uma conclusão positiva para esta questão, com a cooperação dos vários actores."@pt17
"Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@sk18
"Mr President, I thank the Members for their very constructive comments regarding this very important piece of legislation and, as I said at the outset, I congratulate Mr Radwan and the shadow rapporteurs for their work and the deep, intensive and very technical work done by the committee on this
complex subject.
I am also pleased to inform you that the Commission can fully support the compromise which has been reached on these amendments. The package which is now before the plenary is a fair compromise, taking into account the discussions between the Council and Parliament, and it will also enjoy the strong support of the banking industry. Furthermore, the solutions proposed are well-balanced and respect the Commission's initial intentions for this legislation.
I agree with those speakers who stressed the importance of this particular directive. What will be good for the financial institutions will be good for economic growth, employment, the economy and for increased financial stability. Sometimes members of the public look at matters relating to banks and financial institutions with rather a jaundiced eye and see them as charging excessive interest and making huge profits at their expense. However, if it were not for banks and credit institutions, there would be no great economic success. Therefore it is in everybody's interests – including the various actors and stakeholders – that we have a properly regulated financial sector and that risk is properly assessed. It is also important for depositors. This is the flipside of lending, since, if no one placed money in banks, there would be no money to lend. For the very same reasons, it is also important for shareholders and investors. It is also important for the employees of the financial institutions. Therefore, what will be good for the banking sector will be good for us all.
A recent study estimated that banks would have reduced capital requirements of about EUR 80 to 120 billion as a result of the proposed directive. It is also said that this directive will reduce the capital requirements for loans to SMEs by more than 50%. This Parliament has tabled amendments to our proposals that improve the rules for retail and SME lending still further. Some speakers referred to the question of Islamic mortgages. We need rules to ensure that such loans do not fall between the cracks and escape regulation altogether.
Mr Ryan and Mrs Lulling raised questions about mortgage bonds or asset-covered bonds. I note that the further flexibility introduced by Parliament's amendments will reduce regulatory constraints for so-called covered bonds still further and this is a good result for the markets.
Some other Members – in particular Mrs Berès and Mr Purvis – raised the question of a level playing field for Europe and the United States. Firstly, I would like to point out that the small and medium-sized American banks have asked for the benefits of Basle II also to be extended to them and I understand that the United States is on the verge of making such proposals within the next month.
Secondly, as regards this level playing field, all the big American banks which are in direct competition with European globally-operating banks will be covered by the Basle framework.
I take on board, however, what Mr Purvis and Mrs Berès said, not only in this particular regard, but also in other areas relating to the United States. I know that Mrs Berès has taken a particularly keen interest in this matter and it is something that I bear in mind.
Just about every speaker referred to the general question of comitology. Mr Radwan can take particular pleasure and pride in having brought this issue to the forefront of the debate and in having extended it into other areas as well.
As regards comitology, I note with satisfaction that the rapporteur is putting forward a helpful and constructive proposal here and I hope that, not only with this directive but in other areas as well, we can bring the matter to a successful conclusion, with the cooperation of the various actors."@sl19
".
Herr talman! Jag tackar ledamöterna för deras mycket konstruktiva kommentarer till denna mycket viktiga lagstiftning, och jag vill än en gång gratulera Alexander Radwan och skuggföredragandena för deras arbete och det grundliga, intensiva och mycket tekniska arbete som har utförts av utskottet i detta
komplicerade ämne.
Jag är också glad över att kunna meddela er att kommissionen fullt ut stöder den kompromiss vi har enats om kring dessa ändringsförslag. Det paket ni nu har framför er är en rättvis kompromiss, med tanke på diskussionerna mellan rådet och parlamentet, och det kommer också att få ett starkt stöd av bankbranschen. Dessutom är de föreslagna lösningarna välbalanserade och respekterar kommissionens ursprungliga avsikter med denna lagstiftning.
Jag instämmer med de talare som betonade vikten av just detta direktiv. Det som är bra för finansinstituten är också bra för den ekonomiska tillväxten, sysselsättningen, ekonomin och en ökad ekonomisk stabilitet. Ibland ser allmänheten på frågor som handlar om banker och finansinstitut med missunnsamhet och anser att de tar ut överräntor och gör enorma vinster på vanliga människors bekostnad. Men utan banker och kreditinstitut skulle vi inte kunna få någon stor ekonomisk framgång. Därför ligger det i allas intresse – även de olika aktörernas och intressenternas – att vi har en ordentligt reglerad finansiell sektor och att riskerna kan bedömas på rätt sätt. Det är också viktigt för dem som sätter in sina pengar. Detta är lånandets baksida, för om ingen satte in pengar på bankerna skulle det inte finnas några pengar att låna. Av samma skäl är det också viktigt för aktieägare och investerare. Det är också viktigt för de anställda på finansinstituten. Därför är det som är bra för banksektorn också bra för oss alla.
En färsk undersökning visar att bankerna skulle ha minskat kapitalkraven med cirka 80 till 120 miljarder euro som ett resultat av det föreslagna direktivet. Det hävdas också att genomförandet av detta direktiv skulle leda till en minskning av kapitalkraven för lån till små och medelstora företag med mer än 50 procent. Parlamentet har lagt fram ändringsförslag som gör bestämmelserna om lån till hushållen samt små och medelstora företag ännu bättre. Vissa talare har tagit upp frågan om islamiska lån. Vi behöver regler för att se till att sådana lån inte faller mellan stolarna och hamnar helt utanför regelverket.
Eoin Ryan och Astrid Lulling ställde frågor om hypoteksbanksobligationer och täckta obligationer. Jag noterar att den ytterligare flexibilitet som parlamentets ändringsförslag skulle medföra kommer att minska restriktionerna för så kallade täckta obligationer ännu mer, vilket skulle gynna marknaden.
Några andra ledamöter – i synnerhet Pervenche Berès och John Purvis – ställde frågan om lika villkor för EU och Förenta staterna. För det första vill jag påpeka att de små och medelstora amerikanska bankerna har bett om att fördelarna med Basel II ska omfatta även dem, och så vitt jag förstår är Förenta staterna på gång att lägga fram ett sådant förslag inom den närmaste månaden.
För det andra, när det gäller frågan om lika villkor, kommer alla stora amerikanska banker som konkurrerar direkt med europeiska banker som agerar på den globala marknaden att omfattas av Baselsystemet.
Jag tar dock till mig det John Purvis och Pervenche Berès hade att säga, inte enbart i just denna fråga, utan också inom andra områden som har att göra med Förenta staterna. Jag vet att Pervenche Berès har ett särskilt stort intresse i denna fråga, och det är något jag tar hänsyn till.
Nästan varje talare tog upp den allmänna frågan om utskottsförfarandet. Alexander Radwan bör känna sig särskilt nöjd med och stolt över att ha tagit denna fråga till debattens frontlinje och utökat den till andra områden också.
När det gäller utskottsförfarandet noterar jag med tillfredsställelse att föredraganden har lagt fram ett givande och konstruktivt förslag här, och jag hoppas att vi inte bara med detta direktiv utan också på andra områden kan se till att denna fråga avslutas på ett framgångsrikt sätt genom samarbete mellan de olika aktörerna."@sv21
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Charlie McCreevy,"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,11,13,4
"Member of the Commission"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,11,13,4
"very"5,19,15,1,18,14,11,16,13,4
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples