Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2015-04-28-Speech-2-909-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20150428.41.2-909-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, firstly can I congratulate Neena Gill for her work as rapporteur on this very important file, and I would also thank other shadow rapporteurs who worked with me on what has been a difficult and contentious file – not just during this mandate but also under the previous mandate. I think we have a workable compromise that we can now bring forward to the Council in intense trilogue negotiations. I also think it was very important that in the compromise on this file, two distinct parts of this industry are reflected – the CNAV and the VNAV industries. It is crucially important for Europe that we keep the EUR 1 trillion MMF investment in Europe at a time when we are trying to make sure that we have long-term investment in our companies and businesses, big and small, here within the European Union. So that was crucial.
It is also crucially important that we are behind the curve by comparison to the United States which has already regulated in this area. So we do need to get our act together, we do need to regulate, but we need to do it in a proportionate and a reasonable way to ensure that these funds remain within the euro system. In the LVNAV proposal I think we have many new features, additional safeguards, daily and weekly liquidity requirements, regular reporting transparency, fees and gates. A totally new system, a transparent system is now put in place to deal with the systemic shock issues that Commissioner Hill spoke of.
There is one outstanding issue and it concerns the review/sunset clause which I know has been the cause of some contention. In conclusion, I would be interested in hearing the views of Commissioner Hill as he responds to this debate as to the viability of a sunset clause for the new LVNAV product. If we want the LVNAV product to work, to sustain itself, to move forward, we do need to ensure that there is a review after a few years. I would be interested in his view on the sunset proposal contained within the current compromise and the Commission’s position on this issue. Congratulations again to Neena Gill for her work in this area."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples