Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2015-05-18-Speech-1-107-500"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20150518.16.1-107-500"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"I welcome this regulation: the benchmark scandals in the recent past clearly demonstrate what unregulated benchmarks can lead to. Manipulating benchmarks amounts to stealing from investors and consumers and undermines confidence in markets. The Commission fined the banks EUR 1.7 billion.
This regulation impacts consumersʼ daily lives as financial benchmarks determine the level of mortgage payments of millions of households in the EU. Banks stating they cannot invest in the real economy had made buffers to pay fines amounting to billions for the benchmark manipulation.
The agreement we voted upon in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) is a balanced and proportional outcome: transparency and supervision on the benchmark process have been increased and conflicts of interest are tackled.
The difference between critical and non-critical benchmarks is key for me. The principal agreement on this that we reached in the ECON Committee is a first step, which still needs to be fine-tuned in the trilogues.
However, I have to say that the process where one national competent authority (NCA) can nominate a benchmark in another NCA’s jurisdiction is critical; the process could set a detrimental precedent concerning the jurisdictional rights of an NCA."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples