Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-07-03-Speech-1-061"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060703.13.1-061"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, first of all, let me say that I welcome the report by Mrs Wallis. Investigations into the Equitable Life Assurance Society are becoming more and more painstaking, and the deeper we delve, the more we are compelled to recognise what a tangled web of events we are actually examining and how much has actually gone wrong at all sorts of levels.
With our resolution today we will reaffirm that governments, parliaments and the responsible authorities in the Member States, and particularly in the United Kingdom, must do more to assist the committee of inquiry in the fulfilment of its mandate, for the principle of cooperation in good faith which is enshrined in the Treaties must be upheld.
The committee of inquiry has explicit powers to request documents and to summon and question witnesses, but it is also entitled to have its questions answered. The answers given by people in positions of responsibility at the committee’s hearings, however, have been far from satisfactory. To be precise, this applies to the answers given by both the British Financial Services Authority and the Commission. The fact is that, in the case of the Equitable Life Assurance Society, no one either feels responsible or wants to accept responsibility, and the policyholders are left hanging.
Imagine policyholders in Cologne or in Galway trying in vain to obtain information. From one month to the next they are being strung along. If it comes to the point that even a committee of inquiry is being fobbed off with politically correct and legally safe answers, how much worse must it be for the woman in Cologne or the man in Galway who, as a policyholder, is personally affected, whose money is at risk, who is perhaps approaching retirement age and now has to scramble after his or her pension.
There are two things we can and must do: firstly, we must make the best possible use of the mandate given to us in the committee of inquiry to establish clarity, so that policyholders are finally shown where the faults and weaknesses lie. Secondly, all of us, and especially the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, must endeavour to ensure that the Solvency II project provides greater security in future for all concerned, so that we no longer need a committee of inquiry to discover whether the fault lies in European legislation, in the way it has been transposed by a Member State or in a company’s mismanagement."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples