Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-23-Speech-1-157"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061023.19.1-157"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, I shall briefly touch on the two topics.
As regards the equivalence decision, it is right to postpone it. It is the most efficient way to promote the use of IFRS. It gives us leverage in our efforts to obtain the removal of reconciliation requirements for EU issuers abroad, as it ensures that EU markets remain attractive to foreign issuers. It will benefit EU investors and issuers alike.
I am aware of the concerns of Members of the European Parliament and others regarding many of these issues, but a clear roadmap has been set out. If there is goodwill on all sides we will reach a satisfactory end, but in any event if we do not reach a satisfactory outcome then, as we say in my country, nothing is lost. So I think that the prolongation of the time period is the correct decision for many reasons. First, so that we give ourselves here in Europe an opportunity to see how IFRS has been implemented in the various Member States – and we will be learning in that process as well. We have a clear commitment from our colleagues in the United States as to the roadmap and the time lines there and, all things being equal, we should reach a satisfactory conclusion. But if we do not and if we are not satisfied, then, as I say, nothing is lost. Worldwide more people are moving to the IFRS accounting standards which Europe adopted as from last year, so therefore it will be to our benefit.
Concerning the great question posed by Mr Radwan and others about this question of convergence and equivalence, let us see where we are in the few short years hence.
On the transparency directive, I shall deal with the point raised by Mr Skinner. His point relates to a provision in the recital of the level 1 directive, and this recital stipulates that payments by the extractive industries should be reported. This as such is not the subject of today’s debate, but I can confirm that the Commission will monitor this issue.
Concerning the implementing measures to the transparency directive, I should also add that I understand some of the concerns expressed in relation to future developments. In this regard, the Commission commits itself to making a declaration that will be added to the minutes of the European Securities Committee on the date of the vote on the draft implementing measures. It should state that the Commission undertakes to re-examine the issue of the auditors’ review of half-yearly financial statements once the work in relation to the international standards on auditing, currently under development, is sufficiently advanced.
The Commission will also re-examine, within two years of the final deadline for transposition, the question of the minimum content of the condensed set of half-yearly financial statements that are not prepared in accordance with international accounting standards.
The Commission also undertakes to conduct a review of how the regulated information is disseminated in practice pursuant to the obligations of the transparency directive and the future implementing directive. This could be undertaken two years after the end of the transposition period for the implementing directive. In this way we will ensure that the transparency directive tools are adapted to improvements in the market."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples