Inhoudsopgave van deze pagina:
Delen
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
Brussels, 6 May 2010
NOTE
from: to:
9289/10
PE 188 ECOFIN 235 UEM 163
General Secretariat of the Council Delegations
Subject : Summary of the meeting of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs,
(ECON) held in Brussels on 26 and 27 April 2010
Ms Sharon Bowles (ALDE, UK) chaired the meeting of the Committee.
1.
Adoption of agenda
The agenda was approved.
2.
Chairwoman’s announcements
There were no announcements.
-
3.Capital requirements for the trading book and for re-securitisations, and the supervisory review of remuneration policies
2009/0099(COD) COM(2009)0362 Rapporteur: Arlene Mccarthy (S&D) • Consideration of amendments
In her introductory remarks, the rapporteur, Ms Arlene McCarthy (S&D, UK) described the 4 types of proposed amendments related to:
9289/10
KM/FFF
DRI
1
EN
-
-banks’ request for a delay in the introduction of capital requirement rules and the exemption of some existing assets from it.;- remuneration
-
-special supervisory measures for complex re-securitisation;
-
-democratic oversight.
She then focused on the report's timetable. She told ECON that during the meeting of the Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) that took place in Japan on 9 April 2010 some jurisdictions expressed that they had concerns about the planned introduction date and requested a phasing in of the third Capital Requirements Directive. She said that she would only accept a change to the timetable based on a independent analysis suggesting a real impact in the economy. She also explained that the BCBS would like to review some of the measures it had previously agreed on, so as to have a phasing in of some requirements. She stressed the need to have the Directive published before the end of the year.
Ms McCarthy suggested that the ECON committee should not support broad unlimited grandfathering around re-securitisations proposal because such a measure could leave possibly toxic assets on balance sheets without sufficient capital to cover potential losses, which could expose the taxpayer to another bailout scenario.
She considered that the fact that banks were asking for the proposed measures on capital requirements to be delayed was a sign that they were undercapitalised.
Mr Othmar Karas (EPP, AT) considered the existence of an understanding between Europe and the United States of America (USA) and considered positive the involvement of the European Banking Supervisors of the Committee of European Securities Regulators in the implementation process. He supported a June vote in ECON and defended a clear European message in favour of rapid implementation of the G20 conclusions. He requested a reaction from the Commission on the Capital Requirements Directive 's substance and on all open points in the second Capital Requirements Directive and judged that clarification was needed as regards remuneration.
Ms Vicky Ford (ECR, UK), shadow rapporteur, considered that the legislation being discussed was very important in order for banks to take action to solve their balance sheet difficulties regarding securitisation, trading books and remuneration policies.
9289/10 KM/FFF 2
DRI EN
However she warned ECON that the Capital Requirements Directive should not become an obstacle to have capital available for lending. She demanded transparency in the numbers presented and found it unacceptable that certain banks and jurisdictions were pushing for further delays.
Mr Pascal Canfin (Greens/EFA, FR) also defended cooperation with the USA and considered that the EU should be careful not to send a message to its people that it was stepping back from its willingness to implement new rules on remuneration. He said that these new rules needed to be established and implemented quickly to show that the European legislator was active and to avoid another collapse.
Mr Olle Schmidt (ALDE, SE) was pleased with Ms McCarthy's new phasing-in proposals. He said that properly functioning banks were needed. He and Mr Burkhard Balz (EPP, DE) thought that not all banks were undercapitalised but that they could have problems with the implementation of the third Capital Requirements Directive.
Ms Catherine Sthiler (S&D, UK) asked when the BCBS would come to the EP to provide evidence on the delays suggested.
Ms Sharon Bowles (ALDE, UK) told the committee that there were some outstanding reviews due on re-securitisation and that no explanation had been given by the Commission on why they had not yet been provided. She informed colleagues that a letter had been sent asking for an explanation and proposed an exchange of views on 21 June 2010 and a vote in ECON on 22 June 2010.
The rapporteur said that she was in favour of a vote in July. She agreed on global cooperation and said that Europe should not have undercapitalised banks. She said that she was in favour of an impact assessment on the proposed measures in the economy but was still waiting for banks to give evidence on why they could not meet the proposed requirements. She considered that rules should be agreed by January 2011 and that implementation should be discussed afterwards to bring about an increase in capital and a decline in toxic assets. The reason for having capital requirements was to avoid the risk of having to be paid by the taxpayer, she concluded.
9289/10 KM/FFF 3
DRI EN
-
4.Basel II and revision of Capital Requirements Directive (CRD 4) ECON/7/02384
Rapporteur: Othmar Karas (PPE; AT) • First exchange of views
The rapporteur, Mr Karas, said that a quick decision on remuneration was needed, that a problem
persisted regarding the timeline of the implementation and that discussions needed to be made in
parallel with the BCBS, the G20 and the Commission to ensure the EP’s influence in the legislation
proposals.
He explained that the G20 needed to be aware of the need to strengthen capital quality and liquidity,
that relevant banks in the sector needed to be identified and that an overall impact assessment
should be made on the banking sector and on the economy.
He defended the revision of the Basel II deliberations and new definitions on capital and liquidity including a notion of risk factor. He suggested the revision of funding practicalities between the EU and the USA and argued for a balance between capital and liquidity issues. He proposed the study of different business models and the adoption of transitional measures to ensure a smooth transition to the new rules on capital requirements. He also recommended the inclusion of the latest Commission workshop conclusions in the report.
Mr Bukhard Balz (EPP - DE), shadow rapporteur, said that the Commission was moving in the wrong direction in proposing at the same time definitions on equity and capital requirements because it could lead to different legal forms of company organisations. According to him; the priority should be defining capital requirements, he said. He feared that fixed leverage ratios could encourage higher risks and agreed with Mr Karas that an overall assessment of the situation was needed.
Ms Enikö Györi (EPP, HU) raised the issue of the regional dimension and also proposed a regional impact assessment.
Ms Ford said that companies needed to hold liquid assets and defended the need for an overall leverage ratio and uniform accounting standards.
9289/10 KM/FFF 4
DRI EN
She also agreed on the importance of defining capital to avoid tax payers' money being used unnecessarily and to allow banks to restructure and raise capital. She told ECON that dynamic provisioning and counter-cyclical capital needed to be addressed as priorities to avoid bubbles in the future.
Mr Udo Bullmann (S&D, DE) defended Basel II and backed the rapporteur's approach, i.e. to act quickly without waiting for the results of international conferences.
Mr Jürgen Klute (GUE/NGL, DE) defended rapid solutions and supported Mr. Karas’ approach on pro-cyclical and counter-cyclical measures.
Mr Canfin (Greens/EFA) argued that capital requirements had to be linked to risk, that a global approach on leverage was needed and that new legislation was necessary to limit banks' exposure to risk.
Mr Gunnar Hökmark (EPP, SE) supported Mr Karas and said that the financing of SMEs shouldn’t be ignored when analysing capital requirements.
He stressed the importance of the right balance between a sufficiently capitalised banking system and a sufficiently capitalised economy and said substantial deficits in the public sector of different Member States should not be ignored.
-
5.Remuneration of directors of listed companies and remuneration policies in the financial services sector
ECON/7/01725 2010/2009(INI) Rapporteur: Saïd El Khadraoui (S&D, BE) • Consideration of draft report
The rapporteur, Mr Saïd El Khadraoui (S&D, BE), considered that there was a general consensus on the necessity of having the problem of excessive remuneration policy tackled. He explained that his report covered areas such as transparency, the establishment of remuneration policies and the decrease in the linkage between remuneration and risk.
He suggested that operational risk management should be subject to prior approval by the financial supervisors and that there should be approved procedures to avoid or settle conflicts between risk management and operational units.
9289/10 KM/FFF 5
DRI EN
He considered that the amount of compensation should be determined in the light of long-term goals so that green and sustainable criteria could be taken into consideration. He believed that there should be a limit on golden handshakes and a name-and-shame policy. He considered that the role of the financial supervisor needed to be strengthened by means of law and defended the idea of a European bonus tax.
Mr Carl Haglund (ALDE, FI) considered politicians should not legislate on issues that should be dealt with internally by companies. He defended the notion of a stability fund and did not support the presence of trade union representatives in remuneration policy discussions nor in the idea of a bonus tax.
Mr Canfin did not agree with Mr Haglund and considered that politicians should fix the rules that allow stakeholders and market players to fix the remunerations. He favoured shareholders voting, defining or rejecting directors' remunerations.
-
6.Regulation of trading in financial instruments - "dark pools" etc.
ECON/7/02409
Rapporteur: Kay Swinburne (ECR, UK)
-
•First exchange of views
In the first exchange of views, the rapporteur, Ms Kay Swinburne (ECR, UK) explained that the report would focus on the market infrastructure and especially the different trading platforms, the pre- and post-trade transparency rules and their exemptions and on an assessment of whether the best execution principles established by Markets in Financial Instruments Directive She explained that the report would investigate the use of dark pools for trading large orders and the use of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive exemptions for such actions and whether lessons could be learned from the US market as regards regulating diverse trading platforms, since the US was more advanced on pre- and post-trade transparency for dark pools than the EU market.
Mr Schmidt defended the notion of transparency without losing an instrument necessary to deal with this type of trade and Mr Canfin said that dark pools contributed to instability and needed to be reviewed
9289/10 KM/FFF 6
DRI EN
Ms Bowles wanted to know the effects of algorithmic trade in dark pools and hoped that sufficient
data was available for her to get answers.
Ms Swinburne explained that national regulators were collecting data, which would be available
soon.
The Commission representative explained that there was a need to check how dark pools affected overall share prices and market stability and that over-the-counter forms of trading needed to be further regulated. She said the Commission shared the views and objectives of the EP and a public hearing announced that a workshop would take place on 12 May 2010 and September 2010 respectively.
-
7.Authentication of euro coins and handling of euro coins unfit for circulation ECON/7/00973 2009/0128(COD) COM(2009)0459 – C7-0207/2009 Rapporteur: Slavi Binev (NI, PL) • Consideration of draft report
Mr Slavi Binev (NI, PL) said that the aim of the legislation was to lay down procedures regarding the authentication of euro coins and the handling for circulation and ensuring its effective implementation throughout the euro area. According to him, the lack of a mandatory framework for coin authentication impeded the institutions which wished to look for counterfeits which created differences in the level of protection of the currency. As rapporteur, he agreed with the approach of the Commission and the proposals of the Council. In order to improve the text, Mr Binev suggested that authorities involved in the verification process could impose fees to cover their costs. He also proposed greater transparency in the process, a transitional period of three years starting in January 2012, the training of staff for coin authentication and the verification of 25 per cent of the total amount of coins created during one year.
Mr Ivari Padar (S&D, ET) proposed the definition of the notion of coins unfit for circulation. He also suggested guidelines for the use and the disposal of machines that create euro coins and common European guidelines on the training of staff involved in the authentication process.
Ms Sylvie Goulard (ALDE, FR) considered that anything that could reinforce confidence in the euro coin was important.
9289/10 KM/FFF 7
DRI EN
The representative of the Commission expressed its general agreement with the report. He proposed a functional definition for unfit coins.
He also argued that training should not be done at European level for the time being due to disparities in the MS, and explained the committee that the Commission was creating a European authentication tool. Regarding the role of the central banks, the Commission representative said that it depended on the MS; some entrusted central banks with authenticating the currency whereas others entrusted the mints, he explained.
-
8.Developing the job potential of a new sustainable economy
ECON/7/02053 2010/2010(INI) Draftsman: Edward Scicluna (S&D, MT) • Consideration of draft report
Mr Edward Scicluna (S&D, MT) considered that emphasis should be put on economic issues, without the environmental aspect being disregarded. He explained that the financial crisis had slowed down the changes in energy use but that this should not deter MS from reducing emissions. He suggested that a European employment strategy should consider the economic effects of climate change on European labour markets and also economic activities designed to adapt to such changes. Regarding the definition of green jobs, the rapporteur considered it important to stick with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and EUROSTAT definitions and to recommend to MS the classification of those jobs according to a separate NACE code, (industrial classification), so as to measure it, assess progress and have quantifiable targets. He said there were a variety of low- and high-skilled green jobs. He proposed efficient funding for SMEs to steer towards green economic policies and to ensure green innovation and production and suggested the preparation of a framework for governments, employers and employees to adapt to such changes. Finally, he argued for the distinction within the definition of green jobs of different sectors of activity such as: water treatment activities, waste resource and waste management, recycling, pollution control, nature conservation, production of renewable energy equipment and provision of services.
Mr Philippe Lamberts (Greens/EFA) appreciated the rapporteur's distinction between the different types of green jobs. He argued that a green transformation could make the European society and economy more resilient towards climate change. In his opinion if Europe could lead the way in this transformation it would have a competitive advantage in global markets.
9289/10 KM/FFF 8
DRI EN
He proposed the setting of ambitious targets and stressed the importance of having the Committee
enhancing taxation in steering investment, rewarding good behaviour and penalising those who are
not in order to accelerate and fund the transformation.
In the context of the EU2020 strategy Mr Lamberts and Mr Jürgen Klute (GUE/NGL, DE) proposed
a focus on the quality of jobs without disregarding unemployment considering that said social
services were increasingly important.
Mr Klute defended the creation of jobs that protect people against poverty and a reference to the
International Labour Organisation statement on decent work.
Ms Sari Essayah (EPP, FI) considered that it was difficult to find common definitions of sustainable economy and sustainable jobs and defended the importance of taxation and support policies in the creation of green jobs.
-
9.ECB Annual Report for 2009 • Exchange of views
following the presentation of the Annual Report by ECB Vice-President, Lucas D. Papademos
Mr Papademos first briefly reviewed the key economic and monetary developments in 2009 and summarised the ECB’s current assessment of the macroeconomic outlook and explained its monetary policy decisions.
Regarding economic developments and monetary developments, he explained that following the severe intensification of financial market tensions in autumn 2008, euro area real GDP contracted by 4.0% in 2009, largely as a result of a sharp decline in exports and private investment.
He went on to say that average annual HICP (Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices) inflation fell sharply to 0.3% in 2009, from 3.3% in 2008. According to him, this fall was largely due to a substantial drop in oil and other commodity prices and to the impact of the severe reduction in activity, rapidly deteriorating labour market conditions and a sharp fall in profit margins over the course of 2009.
As far as interest rates were concerned, the Governing Council of the ECB lowered the rate on the ECB’s main refinancing operations in four stages between January and May 2009 by a further 150 basis points, to the historically low level of 1%.
9289/10 KM/FFF 9
DRI EN
In addition to reducing policy interest rates, the Governing Council adopted further enhanced credit support measures, in order to ensure the smooth functioning of the money market, improve financing conditions and encourage the provision of credit to the economy.
As regards budgetary positions in the euro area, he emphasized that these had deteriorated significantly in 2009 as a result of the economic contraction, fiscal policy stimulus and government support measures for the financial sector, and that out of the 16 euro area countries, 13 were already subject to an excessive deficit procedure. The deterioration in the fiscal position had been especially acute in a number of euro area countries, with Ireland, Greece and Spain having recorded double-digit deficit ratios in 2009.
Mr Papademos was of the opinion that the current ECB interest rates were appropriate and expected price stability to be maintained over the medium term. In view of the projected slow economic recovery and high unemployment, inflation was expected to remain moderate in 2010. However, he explained that according to the updated stability and growth programmes, no discernible improvement in fiscal positions was expected in most countries until 2011 or 2012.
He underlined in particular the importance of the comprehensive fiscal measures and structural reforms prepared by the European Commission, the ECB and the IMF together with the Greek authorities, which should be implemented in a timely and effective manner in order to address the root causes of Greece’s fiscal imbalances and structural weaknesses, so as to ensure the sustainability of the country’s public finances and improve its international competitiveness. In the current circumstances, he added, the Stability and Growth Pact, which had been put in place to safeguard sound and sustainable fiscal positions, was facing its biggest challenge since its adoption in 1997 and therefore it was now imperative that all euro area countries strictly adhere to the Pact’s provisions.
Mr Papademos welcomed the statement by the European Council on 25 March expressing its commitment to strengthen and complement the existing institutional framework so as to promote budgetary discipline and ensure fiscal sustainability. As regards the regulatory reform agenda defined by the G20 leaders, he believed that significant and wide-ranging work had already been carried out or was under way, but it was essential that the planned reforms actually lead to a harmonised global regulatory framework.
9289/10 KM/FFF 10
DRI EN
With reference to the establishment of the new EU financial supervisory framework, he emphasized that it was important that the legislative process concerning the proposals made by the Commission in September 2009 be completed as quickly as possible and that all relevant parties reach an agreement on the legal texts so that the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB) and the three new European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) could be operational by 1 January 2011.
In his concluding remarks Mr Papademos stressed that the primary objective of the ECB was to preserve price stability and that the timely and consistent implementation of the regulatory and supervisory reforms, and, in particular, the establishment of a new framework for macro-prudential supervision, would greatly contribute to containing systemic risks and strengthening the flexibility of the European financial system.
Several Committee members then took the floor.
Mr Wolf Klinz (ALDE, DE) wished to know if Mr Papademos was of the opinion that countries should expect a second financial crisis and whether he believed that the stability and growth measures proposed to handle Greece’s deficit problem were sufficient. Ms Anni Podimata (S&D, EL) raised the issue of the pressure put on Greek authorities by financial markets as a result of the ECB’s policy of not providing financial support to countries.
Mr Philip Lamberts (GREENS/EFA, FR) protested that the question of how best to achieve fiscal stability was a political statement and urged the ECB to respect the independence of policy makers in deciding how to achieve those targets.
Mr Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL, EL) asked for Mr Papademos’ position on IMF involvement in the euro zone while Mr Sven Giegold (GREENS/EFA, DE) criticised the ECB report as weak. Finally, Ms Catherine Stihler (P&D, UK) was concerned about the lessons to be learnt from the Greek crisis and Ms Enikı Gyıri (EPP, HU) stressed the importance of reforming surveillance mechanisms at European level.
In response, Mr Papademos said that he did not expect a second round of the banking crisis, although the system was still adjusting, but he believed that the expected recovery of the economy would help underpin positive developments. As for the market pressure on Greece, he believed that it was due to fiscal instability and the country’s inability to refinance its debts.
9289/10 KM/FFF 11
DRI EN
Mr Papademos maintained that a fiscal consolidation programme to reduce the budget deficit would have long- term positive effects on the economy owing to low- rate lending and that experience had shown that reducing public expenditure was the best way to reduce fiscal imbalances.
As regards the IMF’s involvement in the case of Greece, Mr Papademos explained that it would provide technical supervision to enable the programme to be completed in a timely manner and achieve its objectives, as the key lesson to be learnt was the need to achieve a sound fiscal position. Finally, on the European supervisory system, he advocated that it should be consistent with the provisions of the treaty and be put in place in the immediate future to strengthen the existing system by enhancing surveillance.
-
10.Motor Vehicle Block Exemption Regulation ECON/7/02561
-
•Adoption of question for oral answer
The draft oral question was adopted by a majority vote
-
11.Motor Vehicle Block Exemption Regulation
ECON/7/02562
-
•Adoption of motion for a resolution
The draft resolution was adopted by a majority vote
-
12.Broad Economic Policy Guidelines and enhanced economic governance (including the governance of the euro) in the context of the Europe 2020 Strategy Voting Time
-
•Adoption of question for oral answer
The draft oral question was adopted by a majority vote
-
13.European Banking Authority 2009/0142(COD) - COM(2009)0501
Rapporteur: José Manuel García-Margallo Y Marfil (EPP, ES)
9289/10 KM/FFF 12
DRI EN
-
14.European Securities and Markets Authority 2009/0144(COD) - COM(2009)0503 Rapporteur: Sven Giegold (Greens/ALE, DE)
-
•Consideration of amendments
-
15.European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority 2009/0143(COD) - COM(2009)0502 Rapporteur: Peter Skinner (S&D, UK)
-
•Consideration of amendments
-
16.Macro-prudential oversight of the financial system and establishment of a European Systemic Risk Board 2009/0140(COD) - COM(2009)0499 Rapporteur: Sylvie Goulard (ALDE, FR)
-
•Consideration of amendments
-
17.Specific tasks for the European Central Bank concerning the functioning of the European Systemic Risk Board 2009/0141(CNS) - 05551/2010 Rapporteur: Ramon Tremosa I Balcells (ALDE, ES)
-
•Consideration of amendments
9289/10 KM/FFF 13
DRI EN
-
18.Powers of the European Banking Authority, the European Insurance and
Occupational Pensions Authority and the European Securities and Markets Authority
(amendment of Directives 1998/26/EC, 2002/87/EC, 2003/6/EC, 2003/41/EC,
2003/71/EC, 2004/39/EC, 2004/109/EC, 2005/60/EC, 2006/48/EC, 2006/49/EC, and
2009/65/EC)
2009/0161(COD) - COM(2009)0576
Rapporteur: Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D, ES)
-
•Consideration of amendments
Mr José Manuel García-Margallo Y Marfil (EPP, ES) pointed out that all reports should be based on a firm European Parliament position when negotiating with the Council. He added that all rapporteurs had based their work on the text proposed by the Commission as the Council text was deemed by the political group coordinators to be less ambitious. He explained that the main findings of the reports centred on the need to avoid fragmentation, different standards in supervisory practices, and risks for taxpayers.
He mentioned that one problem the Committee was currently examining was supervision of systemic institutions at European level and that change needed to be made by refining the supervision profile or giving power to national institutions. In addition, he believed that Recital 4 reflected the latest developments in the situation after the G 20 meeting where emphasis was put on the financial contribution of the sector to the crisis.
Furthermore, he presented proposals to the effect that the risk profile should be included in the definition of systemic institutions, that provisions should be established on dispute settlement, and that the qualified majority voting system should be applied only to those decisions that have a regulatory objective and budget impact. Mr José Manuel García-Margallo Y Marfil concluded by reminding members that the text was provisional and negotiations would continue.
Mr Sven Giegold (Greens/ALE, DE) said that the reports on the European Banking Authority, the European Securities and Markets Authority and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority should be dealt with in a consistent manner.
He expressed his satisfaction that there had been broad consensus on the scope of action of the European Securities and Markets Authority and the attribution of stronger powers, but he was sceptical of the legitimacy of a board of appeal.
9289/10 KM/FFF 14
DRI EN
Mr Udo Bullmann (S&D, DE) spoke on behalf of Mr Peter Skinner (S&D, UK) who was unable to attend the meeting. He pointed out that the rapporteur was in favour of extending the role of European supervisory systems, using a common methodology and clarifying various regions of influence, but he disagreed with weakening IOPA as proposed by the Council.
Furthermore, he was in favour of two different stakeholder groups set up in IOPA, one on insurance and another on pension systems. As regards the safeguard clause, he believed that the Council aimed to create further barriers to the adoption of sensible policies in the area. Mr Bullmann added that the rapporteur supported majority voting on important issues but opposed the setting up of an independent expert panel because it would be unnecessarily bureaucratic. In addition, he suggested Brussels as the headquarters of the supervisory committee. As coordinator for his political group, Mr Bullmann acknowledged that the Committee’s task was difficult, as it was supposed to look after the interests of European citizens and take into account various features in the industry.
Ms Sylvie Goulard (ALDE, FR) stressed that outstanding issues included the degree of control by central banks and transparency, and that members had to decide on the criteria for national and European authorities to take action. She concluded by saying that there was a need to promote fair competition, while at the same time improving supervision.
Mr Ramon Tremosa I Balcells (ALDE, ES) informed the Committee members that his report had received 12 amendments which could be easily to incorporate in the text.
As regards Mr Antolín Sánchez Presedo’s (S&D, ES) report, 114 amendments were tabled and the rapporteur intended to present 28 compromise proposals, but did not agree with some amendments because of lack of consistency with the rest of the report.
Ms Astrid Lulling (PPE, LU) shadow rapporteur for Ms Goulard’s report, was in favour of the European Central Bank playing a predominant role in the ESRB.
9289/10 KM/FFF 15
DRI EN
Mr Gianni Pittela, (S&D, IT) pointed out that the European Parliament is invited to respond actively to the consequences of the economic crisis and maintained that, while some decisions should be left to national authorities, supranational supervision was essential.
Mr Marcus FERBER, shadow rapporteur for Mr Antolín Sánchez Presedo’s (S&D, ES) report, criticised the Commission's work and was sceptical about the procedure for reaching an agreement on the grounds that it was too fast.
Mr Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D, ES) was satisfied that financial sustainability and the need to guarantee stability.
Mr García-Margallo Y Marfil concluded the discussion by reminding members that the central issue was supervision of risk and systemic institutions and emphasized that agreement needed to be reached under the Spanish presidency.
-
20.Derivatives Markets: Future policy actions ECON/7/01724
2010/2008(INI) COM(2009)0563 Rapporteur: Werner Langen (PPE)
Mr Werner Langen (EPP, DE) gave an overview of all the amendments proposed regarding the Directives Markets.
-
22.Date of next meeting
The next meeting will take place on Monday 3 May at 15.00 in Brussels.
9289/10 KM/FFF 16
DRI EN
- 26 okt '09COM(2009)576 - Wijziging van de Richtlijnen 1998/26/EG, 2002/87/EG, 2003/6/EG, 2003/41/EG, 2003/71/EG, 2004/39/EG, 2004/109/EG, 2005/60/EG, 2006/48/EG, 2006/49/EG en 2009/65/EG wat de bevoegdheden van de Europese Bankautoriteit, de Europese Autoriteit voor verzekeringen en bedrijfspensioenen en de Europese Autoriteit voor effecten en markten betreft
- 20 okt '09COM(2009)563 - Garanderen van efficiënte, veilige en gezonde derivatenmarkten: toekomstige beleidsmaatregelen
- 23 sep '09COM(2009)501 - Europese Bankautoriteit
- 23 sep '09COM(2009)503 - Europese Autoriteit voor effecten en markten
- 23 sep '09COM(2009)502 - Europese Autoriteit voor verzekeringen en bedrijfspensioenen
- 23 sep '09COM(2009)499 - Gemeenschappelijk macroprudentieel toezicht op het financiële stelsel en tot oprichting van een Europees Comité voor systeemrisico’s
- 11 sep '09COM(2009)459 - Echtheidscontrole van euromunten en de behandeling van euromunten die ongeschikt zijn voor circulatie
- 13 jul '09COM(2009)362 - Wijziging van de Richtlijnen 2006/48/EG en 2006/49/EG wat betreft de kapitaalvereisten voor de handelsportefeuille en voor hersecuritisaties, alsook het bedrijfseconomisch toezicht op het beloningsbeleid SEC(2009) 974 final SEC(2009) 975 final
- 30 mei '01COM(2001)281 - Handel met voorkennis en marktmanipulatie (marktmisbruik)
-
Definitieve karakter van de afwikkeling van betalingen en effectentransacties in betalings- en afwikkelingssystemen
