Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-07-06-Speech-3-458"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050706.34.3-458"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, clearing and settlement is a subject that looms large in the European debate, although its actual economic importance and its true structural effect on the markets are sometimes overestimated. It is certainly a good thing that our Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs has reached a sound compromise on this subject and I would like to thank Mrs Villiers and also my colleague, Mrs Kauppi, for that.
This compromise relies above all on market players finding solutions to the problems that arise. This is a good approach because this sector has not broken down: it is operating effectively. Let us therefore retain free competition as a basic principle, so that this sector can evolve, innovate and, above all, remain competitive at international level.
We know that the Commission is in the process of assessing the need for legislation in this field. I would strongly encourage it to use the impact assessment to demonstrate the necessity, the costs and the benefits of each measure. At this stage of the debate, the Commission has a duty to go beyond general explanations and to show all the stakeholders that its actions are resulting in real progress. I do not need to remind you that publishing this impact assessment before proposing a text seems to me to be the only valid way of ensuring an open discussion on this topic.
For its part, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs agrees that priority should be given to removing the barriers defined in the Giovannini reports. This aspect is worth emphasising, since the Commission, in its communication, showed very little enthusiasm for attacking the legal barriers that are responsible for the excessive expense of cross-border transactions.
In contrast, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs is not convinced of the benefits of greater regulation and rejects the concept of public utility for this sector. The report itself prefers the concepts of non-discriminatory access and transparency of pricing structures. This too is a good balance and Parliament has a duty to accept it.
My final point, Mr President, is that the additional amendments tabled in the plenary seek primarily to distort competition between the various different types of institutions and, in fact, to reduce competition in the sector, which must not be the aim. In my view, these amendments should therefore be rejected."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples