Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-26-Speech-4-101"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001026.3.4-101"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I would like to start by extending a warm thanks to Mrs Peijs for her excellent report on the establishment of a unified, uniform area for payments. Upon completion of the internal market and the introduction of the single currency, we need a unified area for payments more than ever. Borders should no longer play a role in future. In fact, in time, there should not be a discrepancy at all between cross-border and domestic payments. Both the Commission and Parliament will need to invest many more years of work in order to realise this objective.
In this context, I would like to draw your attention to the date of 1 January 2002. That date must be considered as an extremely important and symbolic milestone in the construction of the European Union – and I am also addressing Mrs Villiers with this observation. After all, on that fateful day, 1 January 2002, all citizens of the euro area will have the same coins and notes in their purses and wallets. After the European passport, this is the second concrete proof, which will actually make a tangible difference on a day-to-day basis, that we all belong to the European Union. We therefore need to pull out all the stops to turn this new phase into a success. After all, if the systems for making cross-border payments remain as expensive as they are today, the credibility of the new system of coins and notes will be called into question. This is why it is crucial that well before 1 January 2002, a whole host of measures are taken, so that these are in place when the new coins and notes are introduced.
The Commission will take a very close look at all the proposals made in the report. We will especially study the problems in the field of competition. In this respect, I would like to say in response to the observations made by Mrs Kauppi and Mrs Randzio-Plath, who unfortunately had to leave the Chamber, that the Commission has looked into possible agreements between banks. This investigation took place in February 1999. The Commission has sent declarations of objection to banks in six Member States. That was done in July of this year and the Member States involved are Portugal, Ireland, Belgium, Finland, the Netherlands and Germany. The relevant procedures and the investigation into the costs charged for cross-border payments is now under way.
In more general terms, the Commission is of the opinion that technological development enables the competition in this field of credit transfers to intensify, for competition will of course lead to lower costs. We will be exchanging ideas on this topic during the large round-table conference to be held on 9 November next in Brussels.
In the summer of 2001, the Commission will also be presenting a report on the improvement of cross-border credit transfers. That report – and I am turning to Mrs Peijs in particular – will contain legislative proposals amending the 1997 Directive which entered into effect last year. I am addressing Mrs Peijs directly because I know she appreciates a clear response in this matter. Once that report has been drafted – and that will not be by return of post as Mrs Peijs requested, but in any event reasonably promptly – I can promise Mrs Peijs that the Commission will produce legislative proposals in this respect. On that occasion, we will also be looking into reducing the implementation period for cross-border transfers, which Mrs Peijs calls for in her report. Even now, transfers take place within three days in 85% of the cases. It is, of course, our aim to increase this to 100%. The Commission is trying to exert pressure on the banks with this aim in mind. Once again, it will be some time before this becomes reality, but next summer, the Commission intends to make a statement on Mrs Peijs’ proposal to reduce the period by half. It will attempt to meet the requirements of the House.
The rapporteur’s report also focuses on the declarations of statistical data which banks need to produce for each cross-border transfer. These declarations are imposed by the Member States and not by the Commission. We are of the opinion that this form of collecting statistical data on the Union’s internal credit transfers is a vestige of the past which can no longer be justified in an integrated, unified area and which forms an obstruction to the proper running of the market. I therefore hope that the Member States too will take prompt action to update their systems for collecting statistical data.
In addition, the Commission fully backs Parliament’s proposals to encourage electronic payment. It is important, however, that technical and legal security are guaranteed, especially with regard to direct debiting.
We cannot, on the other hand, endorse the report by the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, because this Committee is asking us to take a legislative initiative to bring the costs of cross-border payments in line with those for domestic payments. We can, of course, agree on the principle of this proposal, but not on the proposed working method. As you know, we are in favour of free competition, but not of administrative price regulation. Furthermore, as Mr Blokland was quite right to point out, such a measure could immediately have the opposite effect, because the costs of domestic payments could then immediately increase. I do not believe that that news would be well-received by consumers who never make cross-border transfer payments.
This brings me to the end of my brief clarification on the action the Commission intends to take on the report by Mrs Peijs. I hope that the appeals you have made, particularly those directed at the banking world, will be heard. The Commission and European Central Bank are in constant, and often difficult, dialogue with the banking world to achieve tangible results, and your support in this is much appreciated."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples