11 Amendments of John PURVIS related to 2007/2201(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5
Citation 5
- having regard to the recent decision on Mastercard's intra-EEA multilateral interchanges fees (COMP 34/579 MasterCard),
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. Considering the need to balance a high degree of consumer protection and a proper functioning of the single market,
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that competition policy is a powerful tool for completing the internal market but that aiming for more competition should not lead to weakened risk management in the banking sector and endanger the stability of a particularly crucial and strategic sector of the world economy; emphasises that market and consumer confidence isare both essential for thea further development of financial services;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Requests the Commission to work omonitor Member States progress in facilitating customers' mobility in order for consumers to have the choicbe more easily able to change operator, thus reinforcing a healthy competition between operators; wants to see the continuity of service to be ensured even when closing a current account or changing providers and to avoid any duplication of services;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recommends low or non-existent closing costs in order to encourage mobility and competition; invites the EU banking industry to develop and requests the Commission to definmonitor and disseminate best practice on swift and efficient procedures for account switching, taking into account both the duration of the procedure and the costs associated withto it; is of the opinion that to switch current accounts should not cause any harmbring any damages to customers; is against any unon-necessary contractual links impeding customers' mobility;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Requests the Commission to work on enforctake into account existing national self-regulatory provisions when considering obligations for banks to provide consumers, before they open an account, with a single document summarising details of all costs, including closing costs;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recommends the creation of a single European prospectus for providers to describe their basic products, related costs and conditions in order to allow an easy and transparent comparison that tied products do not allow at the moment; recommends the setting up of an independent EuropeWelcomes the Commission’s study of the regulatory landscape for retail investment products and trusts that this will lead to better disclosure of costs, risks and controller to guarantee the quality of the information provided as well as a Europe-wide research engine to allow easy and freeditions and thereby provide useful cross-border comparisons;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls onWelcomes the Commission to intensify its work on credit intermediaries in order to ensure consumer protection and avoid mis-selling practices which are particularly damaging to more vulnerable populations's recent intention to publish a study analysing the EU credit intermediation market, review the regulatory framework and examine possible consumer detriments, and only thereafter to consider whether a European legal framework is appropriate;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Requests the Commission to clarify and harmonise the rights and liabilities of intermediaries, since problems often arise in the sale, administration and enforcement in the selling of financial services agreements; requests the Commission to distinguish clearly between information, which has to be clear, concise, readable and cost-free, and the provision of advisory services;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that the Commission has repeatedly qualifiedquestioned the legitimacy of multilateral interchange fees as anti-competitive and consequently requested the industry to abolish themcurrently operated in the European Union and has recently issued a negative decision; is of the opinion that the Commission should provide stakeholders with clear indications, guidelines and transparency requirements that could enable the industry to ensure a fair and transparent calculation methods, compatible with EC competition law;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes in a strong need for better clarification concerning the methodology and rules for the management of multilaterally agreed interchange fees for ATMs and non-card payments; recalls that the SEPA direct debit scheme and the SEPA credit transfer scheme are two sided networks creating economic benefits thanks to network effects; asks the Commission to providmonitor that there are balancing mechanism in order tos which distribute more evenly the costs and benefits of network membership; suggests to the Commission to define and communicate to all stakeholders the methodology to be used to calculate all multilaterally agreed interchange fees in order to and methodologies which ensure a real level playing field and the enforcementobservance of all competition rules;