Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-13-Speech-2-391"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011113.16.2-391"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, I should like to begin by thanking Parliament for the efforts to complete its first reading of the proposal for a directive on insurance mediation. I would like to thank in particular the rapporteur, Mr Berenguer, and also Mr Ferri, for the quality of their work which has resulted in the recommendation submitted to this plenary.
Amendment No 33, 34 and 54 would affect the overall coherence of the proposal which is based on the principle of home country control. Amendment No 35 and 36 concern complaint schemes and out-of-court redress mechanisms of the proposal. Amendment No 35 is already implicit in the text of the proposal and is not necessary. Amendment No 36 does not seem appropriate in the context of a directive since it contains a specific reference to a Commission recommendation which is not legally binding on the Member States.
Thirdly there are amendments referring to information requirements. A key element of the Commission proposal is to ensure a high level of protection of consumers through the provision of appropriate information and advice. Amendment Nos 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 55, 60 and 61 would compromise considerably this objective.
Finally, Amendment Nos 6, 45 and 48 which provide that non-registered persons excluded from the scope of the directive should comply with information requirements, would be extremely difficult for the Member States to implement in practice.
I am sorry to have talked so long about these amendments, but Parliament has a right to know what the Commission thinks.
The proposal for a directive on insurance mediation, scheduled in the action plan for financial services, is a key text to achieve a true internal market in insurance, in particular as regards retail markets. Insurance intermediaries play a fundamental role in the sale of insurance in the Community and their importance would increase with the emergence of more complex and sophisticated insurance products.
Although the internal market in insurance has been completed as regards insurance undertakings, especially concerning the prudential rules, insurance intermediaries continue to be confronted with several obstacles which prevent them from taking full advantage of the freedoms of the Treaty. The proper functioning of the internal market is therefore hindered.
I am particularly pleased that Parliament agrees with the essential objectives of the Commission's proposals. It seeks to ensure that insurance intermediaries possess a high level of professional competence and that an intermediary, duly registered in his home Member State, may conduct his activities throughout the internal market. The proposal also aims to guarantee the protection of customers by setting appropriate information requirements.
I now turn to the amendments submitted to the plenary session. The Commission can accept the following amendments: Nos 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 17, 28, 30, 37 and the second part of No 58. It can also accept either partially or in their spirit the following amendments: 3, 7, 11, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 32, 44 and 51. Amendment Nos 15 and 16 may also be accepted in part.
The Commission is not, however, in a position to accept the other amendments tabled for the following reasons. Amendment Nos 2, 10, 13, 14, 46, 47, 49, 52 and 57 aim to exclude from the scope of the proposal some activities such as those of travel agencies, veterinarians and persons acting on an occasional basis, and therefore these amendments cannot be accepted. These exclusions would affect the sale of insurance products involving important risks and are therefore rejected. The same reasons explain the non-acceptance of Amendment Nos 12 and 50.
The Commission considers that the term "insurance intermediary" is defined in an appropriate manner. The scope of the directive is well balanced. Amendment Nos 15 and 16 are therefore not necessary since the definition covers all intermediation activities, including those carried out by electronic means. The same applies to Amendment Nos 19 and 25 which relate to sub-agents and also to Amendment Nos 20 and 58.
As regards the issue of "bancassurance", all forms of "bancassurance" activities should fall within the scope of the proposal. It is an increasingly important way of distributing insurance. Amendment Nos 18 and 22 propose a definition of "bancassurance" activities which only takes account of one of the possible forms that "bancassurance" may take. They are therefore rejected.
There are amendments relating to registration and professional requirements of insurance intermediaries. Amendment Nos 31 and 56 would imply less strict rules to cover professional negligence of insurance intermediaries. They would jeopardise the objective of ensuring an appropriate level of professional liability cover for insurance intermediaries in the internal market."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples