Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-06-Speech-3-214"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20101006.15.3-214"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:translated text
"Thank you, Madam President, and thank you to everyone for your proposals, your encouragement, your suggestions and your requests, which I and my team have noted carefully. Mr Lamberts, I will just mention another important point that you brought up: the payment of dividends by banks that do not put the minimum capitalisation requirements into practice. This problem has been clearly accounted for through one of the so-called buffers, in this case, the capital conservation buffer, which stipulates that a bank cannot pay out dividends if it has not fulfilled the minimum capitalisation requirements. This is one of the provisions which we will, of course, be incorporating in our legislative proposal. Mrs Ford, we do indeed need to protect taxpayers. I am sure you will be watching closely for the proposals we will be making in a few days’ time on crisis management and prevention, and on the creation of a resolution fund in every Member State, we hope, which will ensure that the banks pay for the banks, not the taxpayers. Mrs Lulling asked a very specific question. Yes, in the Basel talks, my colleagues and I were very attentive to this point and we obtained an agreement that 40% of the liquidity buffer may be made up by the or mortgage bonds, that you asked about. I feel this is a positive result, and we are totally in favour of diversification of liquid assets. Mr Klinz raised the issue of ‘too big to fail’. Here again, when this concern was raised in the United States, I replied that it was impossible to make comparisons, because the US and European banking systems are not the same, either in terms of their contribution to the economy or in their structure. However, Mr Klinz, it is an issue that is not yet settled at international level, both in the context of the G20 and that of the Financial Stability Board We are watching the situation closely, to make sure that taxpayers are not and cannot be called upon. Mr Nitras, as regards complex financial instruments, we need stronger supervision. That is why the new European authority, the ESMA, will be playing a key role, thanks largely to this Parliament, in looking into the possibility of banning certain toxic products, and you will see that we will be further reinforcing ESMA’s role in the near future. Lastly, I would like to let Mrs Podimata know that regarding the rating agencies, here again, there will be a third round of actions. What we have done so far with yourselves is not enough, and I am currently working on this third round of actions to regulate rating agencies and diversify the rating agency market, which, to put it mildly, is concentrated in too few hands. We questioned the ministers at ECOFIN last Friday, and your committee Chair, Mrs Bowles, was present. I am going to prepare a consultation aimed at strengthening this regulation. Mr Schmidt also raised the issue of a cumulative effect; however, I have answered this question in my point about the three-way balance, which is something we are going to be watching very closely. Mr Gauzès was the first to mention the issue of striking the right balance, and this was reiterated by Mr Schmidt, Mr Klinz, Mr Ludvigsson, and just now Mr Kelly. Yes, we will be aiming to ensure that we strike the right balance; in fact, the balance needs to be struck in three particular areas to which I will be paying very close attention: Striking an intelligent balance in the Basel measures themselves and the way in which we transpose them into our legislation. I will be making the best possible use of the transition periods and of the room for manoeuvre that the Basel Agreement gives us, plus you will be making your own contribution. The second area in which a balance must be struck is between the Basel measures and all the other measures that we are introducing in the context of the G20 crisis prevention and management agenda, and I will come back to these in a moment. The third area, which Mr Kelly has just mentioned, concerns the United States. Mr Kelly, I realise that Europe’s banking sector is much more involved in financing the economy than is the case in the United States, and we will be taking this difference into account. This is the transatlantic balance. We need to see to this – I am addressing Mr Lamberts in particular – without waiting for the United States. I will be going back to the United States to see Tim Geithner and the other supervisors and I am not going there to drag my heels, but to make sure that we are all moving in the same direction on Basel II, Basel II and a half, Basel III, Basel IV – I beg your pardon, Basel III and CRD 4 – and on another extremely sensitive subject, which could become a point of divergence between the Americans and Europeans, and that is the matter of accounting standards. We are not naive, therefore, in our relationship with the United States, but nor do we want to pre-judge its intentions. I can therefore reassure Mr Gauzès and all the other honourable Members that we will be paying close attention to this three-way balance. Mr Cancian has also quite rightly mentioned financial instability, which is indeed the worst enemy of growth. This is why we need to establish conditions that will promote greater financial stability and, in view of the debate we are having with China at the moment, I would add monetary stability also. I have taken careful note of Mr Bullmann’s comments urging us to conduct thorough micro-economic and macro-economic studies. We will also make productive use of the transition periods, which are not indefinite, and you are quite right, Mr Bullmann, in saying that it is here and in the Council that Europe’s laws are made, not elsewhere, not in Basel. This is where the European legislator is and this is precisely why we are going to produce a proposal for CRD 4, which will be a legislative proposal on which we will be seeking your approval, even before the debate and motion stages. Mrs Bowles, you are absolutely right in questioning us and in saying that it cannot be business as usual. I also hear certain bankers here and there, who have short memories, telling us that the economic crisis is over and that we can return to business as usual. We cannot allow ourselves to have short memories, and it will not be business as usual. We are perfectly serious about making reforms. I would also add, Madam President, that the improved capitalisation we are talking about in Basel and CRD 4 is not the only tool, or the only solution. There are many other solutions to crisis management, which I mentioned earlier on in my first speech: there is everything that we are doing to regulate hedge funds of course, which I hope we will be completing in the next few days; then there is our action on private equities, derivatives and short selling. There are other tools which are also important. A few moments ago, Mr Ludvigsson spoke about stress tests. These need to be carried out regularly. So this is our approach at the moment."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph