Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-13-Speech-3-334"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020313.12.3-334"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, the regulation of the stock market must be able to reconcile two objectives: firstly, to give European companies more opportunities to obtain money more cheaply, and secondly, to protect the investor. I believe that this reconciliation has been achieved in the report on market abuse and also thanks to several compromise amendments in the Directive regulating the audit or control of financial conglomerates.
Unfortunately, there are three attacks on the principle of legal protection in Mr Huhne’s report: firstly, an attack on the definition of the public offer; secondly, an attack on the choice of the authority designated to approve prospectuses; and thirdly, an attack on the obligation to inform small and medium-sized companies.
I will deal with each issue in turn. With regard to the definition of the public offer, the rapporteur proposes that this information should be provided to the investor at the final stage, immediately before the contract is signed. In my opinion, this information must be available and made public from the moment that money is requested from the investor and it is clear that my formula, which is in line with that of the Commission, does not exclude this investigation from analysing investment possibilities with professional investors.
Secondly, with regard to the proposed free election of the supervisory authority, I, who in a former reincarnation was a tax inspector, do not feel it would be a good idea for contributors to elect their tax inspector, nor does it seem a good idea for the financial institutions to elect the ultimate supervisory body. I believe that the formula proposed by the Commission is more coherent and gives greater respect to the previous Directives, and shows a greater degree of common sense – that it is the national authority which has the best knowledge of the applicable national law, of which it should inform the investor – and that, above all, it presents the least risks, because the absolute freedom formula, in my opinion, opens up a competition, a race between the supervisory authorities to make things too easy and attract investors who would be a threat to legal certainty.
I cannot agree with the rapporteur on the last point with regard to the exclusion of small and medium-sized enterprises, even more so when we bear in mind that small and medium-sized enterprises have a capital of ESP 350 million, which would mean the exclusion of 80% of companies quoted on the stock exchange.
I am sorry that I am not able to finish; I will conclude this dialogue with Mr Huhne, now by letter and I hope, later on, orally."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples