8 Amendments of Wolf KLINZ related to 2007/2287(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines that, while calling for EU legislation on retail financial services to always aim for thevery highest standards of consumer protection, all market operators - including consumers/investors - need to be fully aware of the basic financial market principle that any higher return opportunity is reflected by a higher risk, and that risk is an indispensable element of any functioning financial market; stresses further that a good compromise between a high level of consumer protection and flawlessly functioning internal market mechanisms should be sought;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that not only private clients but also small businesses are less inclined to take up cross-border financial services; underlines the need to ensure that the advantages of the financial single market also benefit small businesses; favours, for non-legislative measures, a definition such as that in the above- mentioned Sector Inquiry on retail banking; favours, however, a distinction between private clients and SMEs for legislative measures;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Agrees that consumers wishing to change providers of financial services must be free to do so at any time, with minimum legal barriers and reasonable costs, and that contract clauses governing such a change of provider must be formulated in transparent, easily comprehensible language and be explicitly brought to consumers' attention;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recognises, at the same time, the opportunities presented by opening up retail markets on the supply side; considers that this would enable the industry to achieve economies of scale by developing pan-European product platforms and thus offer products across Europe, resulting in more product diversity and competition in national markets for the benefits of consumers;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Supports a coherent European suggestion providing consumers access to balanced new forms of collective redress for the settlement of cross-border complaints related to retail financial products; suggests evaluating the impact of systems recently established at Member State level.
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the legislative approaches currently available, minimum harmonisation and full harmonisation, are in a state of tension between simplifying cross-border business and maintaining national standards for consumer protection; suggests targeted full harmonisation of financial services regulation to a large extent; considers that for those elements where harmonisation is not feasible, mutual recognition regarding different national rules should apply;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Reminds the Commission that effective competition between financial service providers is secured by having a large number of market participants competing under equal conditions; draws attention to its resolution on consolidation in the financial services industry, in which it averredstates that the pluralistic structure of the European banking market, where financial institutions could take on diverse legal forms in accordance with their diverse business aims, wais an asset to the European social market economy;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Regrets that cross-border providers of financial services incur high costs as a result of the differing legal provisions and differing practice of national supervisory authorities; calls on the Lamfalussy committees to step up their work for uniform standards; in particular, advocates agreement on simple and practical standard forms for reporting and approval procedures;