Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-02-12-Speech-4-108"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040212.6.4-108"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, may I say straight away that while I recognise that there is some disagreement between the Commission and the honourable Member on this enormously important matter, we recognise the exemplary diligence with which he has pursued an issue of considerable importance to so many people. He has pursued the case with great conscientiousness and I am sure he has and should enjoy the gratitude of a large number of Lloyd's names.
Let me say a few words on the background to this very complex issue. As the House knows, following several petitions to the European Parliament complaining about the United Kingdom regulation and the supervision of the Lloyd's market and a number of individual complaints, the Commission decided to open infringement proceedings against the United Kingdom in December 2001. As a result of these proceedings, the United Kingdom changed the legal framework for the supervision and regulation of Lloyd's, which is now governed by the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.
After issuing a supplementary letter of formal notice in January 2003, whose purpose was to clarify the concrete functioning of the new regime, the Commission concluded in October 2003 that all aspects of the Lloyd's regime under examination now comply with the requirements of the relevant European Union insurance directives. More specifically, in a press release issued on 15 October 2003, the Commission confirmed the compatibility of the regulatory and supervisory regime for Lloyd's, as established under the Financial Service and Markets Act, with the requirements of Articles 8(1)(e), 13(2) and (3), 15(1), 16(1), 19(1) and 19(2) of Directive 73/239/EEC, as amended.
As regards the regime applicable to Lloyd's prior to the entry into force of the Financial Services and Markets Act, the Commission has consistently maintained, in full accordance with ECJ case law, that the objective of infringement proceedings under European Union law is to establish or restore the compatibility of existing national law with European Union law and
to rule on the possible past incompatibility of national law, which has been in the meantime brought into compliance with European law.
I think my honourable friend would accept that the Ombudsman agrees with the legal interpretation that I have set out and that we have set out in the past. To borrow from my honourable friend's anecdote about the examination question at a university with which I am familiar, I would only ask whether this is a proper answer and would say that it is a proper answer if you want an answer that is in compliance with the relevant case law.
In its resolution of 25 September 2003, Parliament called for access to the Commission's file under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 – that is under the general public access provisions – and for a Commission statement on the compatibility of Lloyd's regulation and supervision in the period 1978 to 2001 – that is before the implementation of the 2000 Act. Since the infringement proceedings had in the meantime been closed, the College of Commissioners mandated my colleague and friend, Commissioner Bolkestein, to forward the relevant documents to President Cox, and this was done by letter dated 15 December 2003.
As regards the assessment of the UK's former regime, the Commission's views are detailed in the first letter of formal notice, sent in December 2001, which is part of the file forwarded to Parliament. Following the UK Government's reply which indicated the entry into force of the 2000 Act in December 2001, the Commission's inquiry dealt exclusively with the new United Kingdom regime. Therefore, since the regime, which was applicable between 1978 and 2001, no longer applies, the Commission sees no scope for further action.
Let me repeat that I recognise the dedication with which my honourable friend has pursued this matter and I am sorry that, for the reasons which I have adduced, I am not able to give him on this occasion a reply which will, I suspect, satisfy him wholly or in part."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples