Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-23-Speech-1-150"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-10-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Implementing measures (level 2) of the "Transparency" and "Prospectus" directives (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20061023.19.1-150"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-10-23-Speech-1-1512
lpv:speaker	lp:Wolf Klinz2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway and to the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Freie Demokratische Partei - Die Liberalen (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Committee of Inquiry into the crisis of the Equitable Life Assurance Society (2006-01-19--2007-06-19)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; ALDE (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; JURI (2006-07-05--2007-01-14)3 member; ECON (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to say something about the implementing provisions of the transparency directive, which Parliament, since they are what are termed Level 2 measures, is capable of influencing only to a limited extent. That makes it all the more important that the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted, unanimously, a draft report on the basis of which the plenary will now adopt a resolution of its own. By presenting a united front, the committee has succeeded, even before tomorrow’s vote, in getting the Commission to accept some of its core demands. The first is that market makers cannot be compelled to invest the financial instruments that they keep for market-making activities in a separate account, although the supervisory authority can require a separate account if the market maker is unable to identify, at any given time, the relevant financial instruments when asked to do so. Secondly, fair competition requires that the same conditions should apply to parent companies of management companies and investment firms from third countries as do to those from the European Union. Finally, a distinction is to be drawn between transactions on stock exchanges and outside them, for, while, in the former, ownership is transferred when the contract is concluded and immediate notification is thus made not only possible but also necessary, the conclusion of the contract and the transfer of ownership may be separate when transactions are concluded off-market, and it would be wrong to require notification as soon as a contract was concluded, since a report at this juncture could, unlike in the former instance, have the effect of distorting the market. Despite Parliament’s success on this negotiating front, there are still areas – and Commissioner McCreevy has indeed referred to them – where the Commission has not yet done as Parliament would wish, including, for example, such questions as, firstly, to which authority a market maker must apply for an exemption from the notification requirement when he reaches a specific threshold value; secondly, what is the minimum content required of non-consolidated half-year accounts not drawn up in accordance with international financial reporting standards, and, thirdly, how it can be guaranteed that accountants will proceed in the same way when auditing half-yearly reports. I appeal to the Members of this House to vote ‘yes’ tomorrow, in order that we may seize our opportunity to get the Commission and the Member States to carefully examine Parliament’s demands on these outstanding items and, in due course, accede to them."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph