BETA

Activities of Kay SWINBURNE related to 2015/2106(INI)

Plenary speeches (1)

2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2015/2106(INI)

Shadow reports (1)

2016/11/22
Committee: ECON
Dossiers: 2015/2106(INI)
Documents: PDF(400 KB) DOC(151 KB)

Amendments (37)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas in recent years an ambitious reform agenda for the EU financial sector has been launched to strengthen financial regulation and supervision, restore financial stability and make the financial system more resilient to shocks and better serve the needs of investors;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the Commission communication entitled ‘A reformed financial sector for Europe’ provides a first stocktaking of the financial sector reforms but fails to provide a full assessment or quantitative analysis of the overall effects and the interaction of the individual measures;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Is concerned about the increased complexity, reflected in the greater amount, detail and number of layers of regulation and supervision with requirements at international, European and national level especially with regards to its application to non-financial end users of financial products;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Believes that an effective and efficient EU financial services regulation should be coherent, consistent (also on a cross- sectoral basis), proportionate, and free of superfluous complexity; believes that it should enable intermediaries to fulfil their role in channelling funding to the real economy and serve savers and investors; considers that it should contribute to the single market and focus on goals better achievable at European level;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines the need to take stock of the financial services framework using both a quantitative and qualitative approach; notes that similar exercises are being undertaken in other jurisdictions, notably in the US;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Believes that a single market for financial services serves businesses, but ultimately has to benefit customers and investors; insists that barriers to cross- border access, marketing and investment have to be analysed and addressed while maintaining the highest level of investor protection;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Believes that liquid markets are a cornerstone in ensuring well-functioning secondary markets which facilitate reasonably priced capital to companies and efficient investment for investors; future and current regulatory and taxation policies should be assessed for their impact upon liquidity;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Believes that consumer protection does not necessarily entail large volumes of information; is concerned that the multiplicity of customer information might not ultimately serve real customer needs; points to the necessity of a European initiative for more and better financial education tailored to the specific needs of each Member State;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Stresses the risk that financial institutions which are operating under the same regulator approved standard risk models under the BCBS revised standardised approach (SA), could lead to similar reactions in periods of stress, exacerbating price movements; stresses that policies should explicitly take into account the interactions between both individual and endogenous risk;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Expresses concern about the interaction between markets legislation and capital requirements where new entities have been brought into scope as regulated entities in the review of MiFID but the Capital Requirements Regulation has not been calibrated to reflect more diverse types of firms;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Expresses concern that valid exemptions in EMIR for non-financial companies have been partly undone in the Capital Requirements Directive and Regulation with regards to the application of the CVA charge; calls upon the Commission to better perform its role in ensuring consistency in policy approach and outcome across different legislative proposals;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)

11c. Considers that specialised provisions in existing regulation for non-financial companies should be extended and made more proportionate so as to limit administrative burden and not reduce available capital to the economy for future investment; calls upon the Commission when reviewing EMIR to respond to difficulties in application of complex regimes by simplifying procedures but continue to recognise the purpose of the exemption to ensure that non-financial companies are not burdened by legislation aimed at financial market participants;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)

11d. Calls upon the Commission in the review of EMIR to examine the effect that lowering the quality of collateral accepted by CCPs could have upon the resilience of CCPs and consider whether certain market participants such as pension funds should be permanently exempt from central clearing should their participation decrease the stability of the overall financial system due to alternative non- cash collateral being accepted;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the diversity of business models; calls for a differentiation in regulation and supervision regarding the nature, size, riskiness and complexity of entities, calls for a level playing field should not be used to limit competition;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls for an appropriate division of competences between EU and national level, bearing in mind that national supervisors have more knowledge of local market characteristics and are closer to the entities concerned; is concerned about the effect of a one-size-fits-all supervisory approach on smaller and primarily nationally active entities within the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM);

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Notes the achievements in establishing a banking union primarily for the euro area; stresses that the next step has to be its full implementation, including full capitalisation of national Deposit Guarantee Schemes (DGS) and the Single Resolution Fund (SRF); emphasises the aim of avoiding moral hazard and ensuring that risk-takers bear the costs when their risks materialise; further changes and developments of the banking union should fully recognise the differing status of those non-euro area Member States outside of the SSM;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Reiterates the need for a level playing field within the EU, also with regard to SSM banks and the banks of non- participating Member States to ensure that the single market continues to be developed whilst recognising national specificities;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Acknowledges the traditional reliance of SMEs on bank funding due to their specific nature, different risk profiles and variety across Europe; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) and the ECB, to analyse the obstacles to, and benefits of, the diversification of funding channels and how to enable banks to increase SME funding, widening choice for companies among different methods of funding for different stages of their development; suggests that the initiatives for improved SME funding should be expanded to mid-cap companies;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Calls upon the Commission to make active use of the SME Growth Market category established within MiFID in future financial services regulation to provide specialised regimes for companies listed upon those markets to encourage high growth companies to fulfil their potential within the EU; encourages Member States to use the SME Growth Market category to provide further lessening of the regulatory and tax burden within national legislation;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Recognises the efforts made to establish a more transparent securitisation market; emphasises that stringent requirements for underlying high-quality assets and calibrations according to the actual risk profile are necessary, bearing in mind the riskiness of securitisation as shown during the crisis, although recognising the differing experiences in the EU and the US; calls on the Commission to conduct a thorough assessment of the benefits of securitisation for SMEs and the marketability of securitisation instruments as a matter of priority, and to report to Parliament;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Underlines the need to streamline the content and frequency of reporting requirements and reporting fields, also by providing entities with one point of contact, in order to avoid any duplication of requirements and reporting channels; calls on the Commission, ESAs and SSM to examine which data are actually needed, to align templates and ~~to provide simplifications and, for SMEs, exemption~~encourage the use of a single reporting standard which has the flexibility to accommodate differentiation for SMEs and non- financial entities;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Underlines that reporting data is only useful to supervisors if it can be interrogated and internationally consistent; welcomes the developments made by industry in the development of ISO 20022 and calls upon the Commission and ESMA to follow the example of the ECB and mandate its use when developing new data reporting standards and for harmonising existing data reporting standards;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Stresses that efforts for a cultural change in the financial sector have to be pursued further; welcomes the UK’s Fair and Effective Markets Review and the approach taken to tools such as codes of conduct that can facilitate that culture change; acknowledges the benefits of relationship banking for consumers and SMEs;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Underlines the importance of the international framework with respect to its scope, methodologies and implications on the EU framework; calls on the Commission and ESAs to coordinate more closely with international bodies promoting EU interests; calls upon the Commission when proposing legislation implementing internationally agreed standards to take full account of those that call for proportionality and limit the scope of regulation wherever possible;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Points to the importance of equivalence decisions in addressing obstacles regarding market access and the respective regulatory frameworks, bearing in mind that such unilateral decisions must benefit European businesses and consumers as well as facilitate easier access to the EU single market by investors from third countries to provide the capital that EU businesses need to grow;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. ~~Asks the Commission to propose a consistent and coherent framework for decisions on third-country equivalence~~Expresses concern at the number of different processes for third country jurisdictions to receive recognition under the different pieces of EU regulation; Asks the Commission to propose a consistent and coherent omnibus proposal to harmonise the procedure for decisions on third-country equivalence that would simplify the process, add transparency for third country jurisdictions and continue to allow capital to flow into the EU; demands that all equivalence decisions be adopted by means of delegated acts;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Commission to ensure balanced participation in consultations by reflecting the diversity of stakeholders and providing better conditions for small stakeholders to participate; calls on the Commission to improve the interactivity of the consultation process when drafting delegated acts so stakeholders are made aware of the reasons their views were or were not taken into account and so are better able to implement rules effectively;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Welcomes the objectives of the better regulation agenda; underlines the role of REFIT in achieving an efficient and effective financial services regulation; supports the Commission’s proposal that more impact assessments should be undertaken during or post trilogue so that significant changes introduced by the co-legislators are evidence based;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Believes that the ESAs and SSM have a crucial role to play in achieving the objectives of better regulation and supervision and are well placed to ensure coherence between differing pieces of legislation when they are drafting RTS and ITS;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Highlights that the revision of the ESA Regulations has to reflect the accountability and transparency provisions for enhanced Parliament scrutiny, as laid down in the SSM and SRM Regulations; emphasises that the independence of the ESAs from the Commission should be reinforced and their observer status not be extended to active participation in ESA meetings or working groups;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Stresses the need to respect the interplay, consistency and coherence between the basic acts and delegated and implementing acts; insists that the Commission and the ESAs, when drafting delegated and implementing acts and guidelines, stick to the empowerments laid down in the basic acts and respect the co- legislators’ agreement; it is of paramount importance that level 2 measures do not amount to policy decisions that were not envisaged by the co-legislators;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32a. Calls upon the ESAs, when drafting regulatory technical standards, to follow the same working practice for consulting the Parliament and Member States as the Commission does when drafting delegated acts, providing formal drafting and discussing changes in approach before the RTS are adopted;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Calls on the ESAs to make use of the their right to request information on how basic acts are applied by Member States and more actively use the peer review process to enhance supervisory convergence across Member States;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Calls on the Commission and ESAs to conduct regular (at least annual) coherence and consistency checks, also on a cross- sectoral basis and on every draft legislative act, using it to revise and reissue RTS and ITS where necessary and to dedicate resources to this activity;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

41. Calls on the Commission and ESAs to conduct regular (at least annual) proportionality checks, particularly with regard to the requirements applicable for small and medium-sized market participants, and new technological innovations and on every draft legislative act, and to dedicate resources to this activity;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Stresses that the impact of individual legislative measures differs from their cumulative impact; calls on the Commission services, in corporation with the ESAs, SSM and ESRB, to conduct a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative assessment every five years of the cumulative impact of the EU financial services regulation at EU and Member State level ensuring that it is not impeding the development of the economy;

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 – indent 9 a (new)

– the effect on non-financial entities,

2015/09/25
Committee: ECON