Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-26-Speech-1-116"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050926.15.1-116"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, when we first discussed the issue of corporate governance following the high-level group's report, it was in the context of Enron and the WorldCom scandals. Experts from the EU accounting industry said that 'it could never happen in Europe', but then we had Parmalat, which had an audit committee – as did Enron – made up of eminent independent professors. The problem was that they did not show any independence of mind in challenging culpable business partners and the executive board.
Prescriptive audit committees were never the answer under this proposal, which is more about changing audit culture and practice. Thanks to the pragmatism of our rapporteur, Bert Doorn, and good cooperation with the Commission and Presidency, we now have a flexible EU instrument that will raise the quality and consistency of audits across Europe while also respecting the good domestic company law provisions already in place.
A principles-based threats and safeguards approach will lead to a much more effective and robust EU regime. This will prove much better than the Sarbanes-Oxley rules-based system which may make it easier to lock someone up but does not improve the ethics, independence and public supervision of auditing structures.
It was sensible to remove the prescriptive obligation for mandatory audit committees and replace it with a proposal to assign those functions to a body that meets audit standards and objectives and can implement the requirements in a transparent way. I also welcome compromises around the issue of audit partner rotation and the issue of non-audit work.
However, we have to deal with the issue of comitology. The Commission and successive Presidencies, including the United Kingdom Presidency, have stepped up their efforts to achieve better regulation by improving the quality of EU laws and transposition and implementation. Parliament has to be involved in this better regulation agenda and must have the right as co-legislator to ensure that the expert laws voted through this House can be scrutinised and monitored.
It also has a role in transposition and implementation. I welcome the initiative by the Presidency and the offers to take forward the reform of the 1999 comitology procedures to ensure we can play a role in the better regulation and regulatory process, and I look forward to amendments to be put forward by Parliament being accepted in this area so that we can genuinely can play our role in the cooperation process."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples