Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-26-Speech-4-091"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001026.3.4-091"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, by 2002, every citizen in the euro area will have euros in their pockets and expect certain benefits from this new currency. These benefits will not just appear out of nowhere. We will need to work on those. I would like to see the Commission communication on retail payments in that light.
Moreover, volume and number of retail payments only form a small percentage of the total number of credit transfers. Your rapporteur is convinced that there should not be any objections to abolishing the report duties up to the full amount stipulated in the directive, namely EUR 50 000. The loss of data for balance of payment reporting statistics brought about by this change is minimal.
A change related to this is that the money-back guarantee must be increased to EUR 50 000. At present, banks are almost rewarded when they lose your money. If you transfer EUR 30 000 and the bank loses that money, it only has a duty to pay you back EUR 12 500. Banks should of course not lose any money at all, and they must stand surety for their organisation. This is why we propose increasing the money-back guarantee limit up to EUR 50 000, the amount stipulated in the directive. According to the banks, nothing ever gets lost, so that can never be an issue.
On a final note, I would like to give consumers more options to transfer money. I am thinking of insolvent consumers or consumers with no bank accounts. I would ask the European Commission to investigate whether companies such as Moneygram and Western Union could also fall within the scope of the second Directive on banking. As a consequence, these companies could have their base anywhere in the European Union, even though they are not banks. Needless to say, these companies will be subject to the same strict conditions in terms of security and money-laundering.
I hope that this report will encourage banks sufficiently to continue on their path of innovation towards better functioning, cross-border credit transfers. But in order to grant banks absolute certainty and clarity in their heavy investment programmes, I am expecting the Commission to change the directive by return of post.
What should we all do to ensure that the European citizen, who has relinquished his own familiar currency, will actually benefit from this new currency? We simply need to make transfers cheaper, quicker and safer. I therefore expect the Commission simply to transpose the recommendations to change the 1997 Directive, which I made in my report on behalf of Parliament, to a formal amendment to the directive without delay.
What is it about? At the heart of the matter lies the fact that transferring small amounts still leads to major frustration in SMEs and among individual citizens. This frustration is the result of the high charges and length of time involved. This leads me to conclude that the effect which the 1997 Directive had was inadequate. We need to go further. The consumer and SME do not benefit enough from the internal market which was completed following the introduction of the euro.
One solution which this report offers is that the infrastructure of these cross-border credit transfers must undergo a thorough overhaul. It appears that at present, a number of actions are still carried out manually, which leads to high charges and extended handling times. I therefore call on the banks to take all the necessary measures in the shortest possible time, so that cross-border credit transfers can be carried out fully automatically and thus become a great deal cheaper.
In my report, I have listed systems such as IBAN, SWIFT, STEP 1 and IPI. These systems can make payments between banks in different countries easier, quicker and cheaper, provided that the banks talk to their customers and make it clear to them that in addition to the permanent VAT number, their IBAN code should now also feature on their letter-headed paper.
In order for this standardisation process to work, we need coordination. That is why we have tabled an amendment which urges the European Central Bank to assume this coordinating role very quickly, based on its responsibility for payment systems, such responsibility being imposed on the Bank by the Treaty. We would ask the European Central Bank to do two things. Firstly, to develop a European standard format for data transmission. This could be done very quickly, for that format already exists. This is to replace the national format which is already widely in use.
Secondly, to create a European bank number, like the IBAN, for example. It is vital that such harmonised formats are used universally in the euro area. We might need to consider introducing them as a compulsory requirement if this is not done sufficiently promptly.
As I have stated in my report, this automation and standardisation process should be in place three months before the introduction of notes and coins. That would be ideal. However, the banks keep maintaining that this is impossible. By way of compromise, I have proposed an amendment in this respect which states that the banks must be ready by 1 January 2002. In this way, as soon as the public actually gets to handle the euro, they can straight away benefit from the change in cross-border credit transfers.
The banks alone cannot reduce the total cost of transfers more or less to the level of the cost price for domestic payments. They need the help of the Member States. After all, banks have so far been obliged by the Member States to notify their central banks of any cross-border payments over EUR 12 500, for the benefit of balance of payment reporting statistics. This notification procedure cannot be standardised and is therefore carried out manually. A very costly matter indeed which will be rendered completely redundant in one market with one currency. After all, they do not keep records in France of how many francs leave Paris for Auxerre, so why should we?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples