Activities of Burkhard BALZ related to 2016/2247(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Banking Union - Annual Report 2016 (debate) DE
Amendments (16)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 19 January 2016 on 'Stocktaking and challenges of the EU Financial Services Regulation: impact and the way forward towards a more efficient and effective EU framework for Financial Regulation and a Capital Markets Union',
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 24 November 2016 on the finalization of Basel III,
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 27 a (new)
Citation 27 a (new)
- having regard to the statement of the Eurogroup and the ECOFIN Ministers of 18 December 2013 on the SRM backstop,
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. NotesIs concerned about the high level of non- performing loans (NPLs) in some jurisdictions; considers that this issue is crucial and has yet to be solved; welcomes the work of the SSM and its draft guidance on this issue, but believes that more substantial progress has to be made; looks forward to the results of the work on a minimum EU insolvency framework; calls on Member States to improve their insolvency legislation and to stimulate growthimplement necessary structural reforms aiming at economic recovery in order to tackle NPLs;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. ConsidersPoints out that there are risks associated with sovereign debt; notes, however, that modifying its prudential treatment without a phasing-in approach could have a significant effect on the financial sector, which calls for cauta careful decision ion reform efforts; awaits with interest the results ofthe next steps resulting in a revision of the current framework; welcomes the international work on this issue; considers that, in the end, a better regulatory framework, be it European or international, will be needed;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that guidance provided by international fora should be used in order to avoid the risk of regulatory fragmentation with regard to the regulation and supervision of large, internationally active banks;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the ‘too-big-to-fail’ issue still needs to be addressedan effective bail-in mechanism, the transposition of TLAC for global systemically important banks in the EU and the application of a sufficiently high, binding MREL is an important part of the regulatory measures to address the ‘too-big-to-fail’ issue;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalliterates the need to ficessity to strengthen, in the development of regulation and, in the exercise of supervision, a balance between the need for proportionality and the need for a consistent approachthe application of proportionality across the rulebook, which contributes to consistency in risk-based regulation;
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Takes note of the differences between the FSB TLAC standard and the MREL; stresses, however, that both standards share the same objective; concludes therefore that a holistic approach to loss-absorption can be reached by combining the two, building on TLAC as the minimum standard; highlights that due consideration should be given to retaining the two criteria of size and risk-weighted assets;
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes the range of legal options available to ensure the subordination of TLAC-eligible debt; points out that none is preferred by the FSB; is of the view that the approach adopted should first and foremost strike a balance between effectiveness, flexibility and legal certainty;
Amendment 347 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Regrets that the Commission did not allow for morerespect the co-legislators' decision on the revision timeline set out in the DGSD and, thus, did not allow for the agreed period of time to assess the implementation of the DGSD before proposing the EDIS and; is concerned that the Commission did not conduct a proper, consultancy-based impact assessment of the proposal, thus, acting in contradiction to the Commission approach on Better Regulation; stands ready, however, to seize the opportunity generated by the proposal to discuss the DGSD and address some of the options and discretions it includes;
Amendment 363 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is aware of the potential benefits of an EDIS; is neverthelesUnderlines the benefits and the necessity of effective and fully-fledged deposit guarantee schemes in Member States and is aware of potential benefits of strengthening the existing system of schemes on EU level; is of the opinion that effective risk reduction measures are an indispensable counterparty to itsstart establishmenting an EU approach on the re- insurance of deposit guarantee schemes in order to prevent moral hazard, and that such measures should preferably precede and, in addition, accompany risk sharing;
Amendment 383 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. WelcomesStarts debating on a European approach to deposit re-insurance, which must make it possible to address outstanding DGSD implementation issues andith a strong conditionality, including the necessity to address shortcomings in the coherent DGSD implementation and application across the EU and to ensure the schemes' functionality by adhering to the requested target level as well as the necessity to establish and to phase in the risk reduction measures;
Amendment 403 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Highlights thatNotes that, in the Commission's understanding, Article 114 seems to be an appropriate legal basis for the establishment of both the EDIS and the DIF; notes that, in the understanding of the Council Legal Service, a recourse to the intergovernmental method is in parts of the proposal possible;
Amendment 419 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
Subheading 4
Amendment 426 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. WelcomesPoints to 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 andnotes that the work on a common fiscal backstop for the SRF, which should be financed by levies from the banking sector and is agreed to be fiscally neutral over the medium term, should continues step by step over the next years;