37 Amendments of Jonás FERNÁNDEZ related to 2016/2247(INI)
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 28 a (new)
Citation 28 a (new)
- having regard to the Five Presidents' Report that asks for the establishment of a European Deposit Insurance Scheme,
Amendment 35 #
A. whereas the establishment of the Banking Union has been a fundamental step taken towards the completion of a genuine Economic and Monetary Union; whereas further efforts are needed as the Banking Union remains incomplete as long as it lacks a fiscal backstop and the Third Pillar of a European Deposit Insurance scheme;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the establishment of the Banking Union has been a fundamental step taken towards the completion(BU) is an indispensable component of a monetary union and a fundamental building block of a genuine Eeconomic and Mmonetary Uunion (EMU);
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas a completed Banking Union will be an important contribution to breaking the sovereign-risk nexus;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas all Member States that have adopted the euro make up the Banking Union;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the euro is the currency of the European Union;
Amendment 48 #
Ac. whereas, in order to function properly the BU needs a risk-free financial asset, such as Union and/or Eurozone bonds;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas participation in the Banking Union is open to Member States that have not yet adopted the euro;
Amendment 74 #
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the establishment of the European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS) is necessary to provide homogenous protection of depositors and for the completion of the BU;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Encourages all Member States that have not yet adopted the euro to take all necessary steps to do so, or to join the BU, in order to progressively align the BU with the entire internal market;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Considers that the BU should be underpinned by a risk-free asset issued by the Union and/or the euro area;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that there are risks associated wiStresses the importance of the objective of the Banking Union to break the sovereign debt; notes, however,-risk nexus; notes that modifying its prudential treatment could have a significantly negative effect on the financial sector, which calls for caution in reform efforts; awaits with interest the results of the international work on this issue; considers that, in the end, a betterEU regulatory framework, be it European or international, will be neede should be consistent with the international standard;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that there are risks associated with sovereign debt; notes, however, that modifying its prudential treatment could have a significant effect on the financial sector, which calls for caution in reform efforts; awaits with interest the results of the international work on this issue; considers that, in the end, a better international regulatory framework, be it European or international, will be needed;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Insists on the importance of adequate representation of the European Union in international financial institutions and the need to coordinate positions, as stressed in its resolution of 12 April 2016 on the EU role in the framework of international financial, monetary and regulatory institutions and bodies;
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out thatWelcomes the progress made to prepare for allowing some delegation in the area of fit and proper decisions; nevertheless points out that a change in the regulations is needed to allow more and easier delegation of decision-making on some routine issues from the Supervisory Board to relevant officials c; would welcome such a change which would contribute to making ECB banking supervision more efficient;
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9d. Recalls the need to dedicate more ECB personnel to the SSM to avoid over- reliance on staff from NCAs which potentially jeopardises the ECB supervisory tasks; welcomes the ECB's cooperation with the European Parliament on staff working conditions; underlines the importance of a good working environment that fosters professional cohesion in the ECB;
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 e (new)
Paragraph 9 e (new)
9e. Welcomes that the Banking Union has widely eliminated the home-host issue in supervision by the establishment of a single supervisor and the greatly improved exchange of relevant information between supervisory authorities, enabling a more holistic supervision of cross-border banking groups; stresses that, due to the current incomplete state of the Banking Union, the CRR review on liquidity and capital waivers needs to appropriately take into account concerns of consumer protection in host countries;
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 g (new)
Paragraph 9 g (new)
9g. Encourages the Commission to propose a coherent and effective macro- prudential supervision in its overall review of the macro-prudential framework in 2017, calls on the Commission to be especially ambitious in order to enhance the current limited possibilities of the ESRB to intervene and reduce the complexity of the cooperation between ESRB, ECB/SSM and national authorities in the field of macro- prudential supervision, welcomes in this regard the progress already made on cross-border coordination by the ESRB recommendation on voluntary reciprocity;
Amendment 265 #
9h. Welcomes the ECB initiative to oblige supervised banks to report significant cyber-attacks under a real- time alert service and the SSM on-site inspections to supervise cyber-security; calls for the establishment of a legal framework which facilitates the exchange of sensitive information relevant to prevent cyber-attacks between banks;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 i (new)
Paragraph 9 i (new)
9i. Stresses the crucial role of cyber- security for banking services and the need to incentivise financial institutions to be very ambitious in protecting consumer data and guaranteeing cyber-security;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 j (new)
Paragraph 9 j (new)
9j. Points out that in the current environment non-banks are increasingly expanding their assets and, taking into account that they tend to be very sensitive to crises, encourages expanding regulation to all banking activities;
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls for a careful calibration of MREL requirements considering that a disproportionate amount would entail unnecessarily high funding costs and could reduce the capacity of banks to finance the economy;
Amendment 351 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Regrets that the Commission did not allow for more time to assess the implementation of the DGSD before proposSupports the Commission's proposal of a three stages approach towards a fully mutualised European fund, which is the most effective option to protect all depositors ing the EDIS and did not conduct a proper impact assessment of the proposal; stands ready, however, to seize the opportunity generated by the proposal to discuss the DGSD and address some of the optBanking Union; stands ready to address some of the options and discretions in the DGSD with the objective of reducing them as an important step towards a genuine level playing field; appreciates the Commission's and discretions it includesdditional effect analysis on EDIS;
Amendment 352 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Regrets thatThanks the Commission did not allow for more time to assess the implementation of the DGSD before proposing the EDIS and did not conduct a proper impact assessment of the proposal; stands ready, however, to seize the opportunity generated by the proposal to discuss the DGSD and address some of the options and discretions it includefor the EDIS proposal and its effects analysis;
Amendment 370 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is aware of the potential benefits of an EDIS; is nevertheless of the opinion that risk reduction measures are an indispensable counterparty to its establishment in order to prevent moral hazard, and that such measures should preferably precedebenefits and urgent need of an EDIS; considers that risk reduction measures shall proceed in parallel to risk sharing;
Amendment 387 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Welcomes a European approach to deposit insurance based on full mutualisation and direct risk-based contributions by banks, which must make it possible to address outstanding DGSD implementation issues and phase in the risk reduction measures;
Amendment 390 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Considers that EDIS should progressively be established starting with a reinsurance phase, to be followed by co- insurance and full insurance, thereby offering homogenous protection to depositors within the BU;
Amendment 414 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Takes the view that no limits to sovereign debt exposure can be considered as far as there is no international agreement on the matter nor a risk-free asset available within the BU;
Amendment 415 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Recalls that the role of the Commission is to guarantee a level playing field across the EU and that it should avoid any fragmentation within the internal market;
Amendment 416 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Asks the Council to swiftly adopt the EDIS Regulation once it is approved by Parliament;
Amendment 427 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the establishment of loan facility agreements between the SRF and the Banking Union Member States; is of the opinion, nevertheless, that this solution is not sufficient to do away with the bank-sovereign vicious circle and that the work on a common fiscal backstop for the SRF, which should be fiscally neutral over the medium term, should continue step by step; calls for a more robust mutualised credit line via the European Stability Mechanism (ESM); reaffirms the need to have the common backstop fiscally neutral over the medium term and fully operational at the latest by the end of 2024 as agreed within the agreement on the SRF and confirmed by the European Council in June 2016; Calls on the Council and the Commission to speed up the work on this issue;
Amendment 428 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the establishment of loan facility agreements between the SRF and the Banking Union Member States; is of the opinion, nevertheless, that this solution is not sufficient to do away with the bank-sovereign vicious circle and that the work on a common fiscal backstop based on the ESM, for the SRF and EDIS, which should be fiscally neutral over the mediumlong term, should continue step by step;
Amendment 433 #
24a. Considers that in order to ensure full credibility of the common fiscal backstop for the SRM and EDIS, the ESM should be able to borrow from the European Central Bank;
Amendment 434 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Is of the opinion that in order to restore trust, a fiscal backstop needs to work for the Banking Union as a whole;
Amendment 436 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24b. Underlines that the restrictive eligibility criteria of the ESM's direct bank recapitalisation instrument limit its effectiveness; highlights that a more easily accessible mechanism for direct bank recapitalisation would boost depositor confidence, contribute to breaking the sovereign-bank link and reinforce financial stability;