Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-01-Speech-1-088"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030901.6.1-088"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I am happy to express my satisfaction with Mr Radwan's report concerning the forthcoming Basel II accord. Developing a new framework for capital adequacy will maximise the effectiveness of the capital rules in ensuring overall financial stability, maintaining confidence in financial institutions and protecting consumers' and depositors' interests. This would benefit not only the banking industry but the whole EU economy.
However, structured dialogue between supervisors, regulators and bank and investment firm representatives is crucial for creating a viable capital framework. A central element – that of democratic control – has been lacking. Therefore, Mr Radwan's objective to involve the European Parliament in the capital adequacy debate and to add democratising elements to the decision-making process is most welcome.
The principle of taking into account corporate risks in loan pricing is a sound one. Risks should be treated the same, regardless of the legal nature and level of complicity of the institution in question. Nevertheless, concerns relating to SME lending, highlighted in the report and by many colleagues, are well-based. For example, in Finland only the larger banks and a dozen companies have external ratings. Therefore the exclusive re-use of external ratings is not a viable solution for us in the short term. Instead internal ratings based on some agreed key ratio criteria could be developed in order to avoid unreasonable costs for SMEs.
I am worried about a large number of national options. I fear that there might be divergences in the interpretation and application of the new framework by national supervisors. These national discrepancies could give rise to competitive inequalities in the single market.
I should also like to mention mutual recognition with the US. EU banks and investment firms operating in non-EU countries should not be penalised by the potential burden arising from divergent requirements between their home and host supervisory authorities. This is a question of the utmost importance for us, especially in the US delegation of the European Parliament, where we have debated these financial security rules."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples