Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-06-Speech-3-199"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101006.15.3-199"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, with this report on Basel III, the European Parliament has a clear position on the deliberations of the Basel Committee. We would like to draw attention to the unresolved questions and problems that Europe faces, and we are putting before the Commission a collection of demands for the drawing up of the draft directive. Although – and I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs in this regard – this report was adopted by 38 votes to 0 in the committee, I nevertheless feel a need, as rapporteur, to table six additional amendments, three of which relate to developments occurring in the meetings of the Basel Committee, in order to bring the report up-to-date, and three of which relate to the leverage ratio and to the liquidity standards.
We believe that it is not propitious to automatically incorporate the leverage ratio into Pillar 1 from 2018 but that there should instead be an evaluation process first. Secondly, there are a few unresolved issues in Basel in relation to the liquidity standards that need to be addressed to keep us up-to-date.
I am a little bit amazed by the nine EU Member States in the Basel Committee, as they have allowed the process to be deemed completed despite the fact that we fail to see how there is a level playing field between the economic structure of the United States and the European economic and banking structure, and between classical retail and investment banking. Furthermore, we still do not have a definition of liquidity.
The economic crisis, of course, demonstrated that we need a change of framework. It is therefore right to get to grips with this issue and to bring forward proposals. However, the crisis also clearly demonstrated that what we had was primarily a crisis of liquidity and not one primarily of capital resources, although we do need increased capital resources – one only needs to think of Lehman Brothers, where only 11% capital was held, to see that.
From our point of view, there are five unresolved issues. The first is that there is no study into the impact of the figures that have now been agreed for growth and employment in the European Union. I would ask that the Commission produce and submit such a study as a matter of some urgency. Secondly, we have not examined in detail the cumulative effects of all the regulations that we are currently considering. Key examples here would be Basel III, deposit protection, the bank levy and the transaction tax, amongst others. Thirdly, there is no level playing field between the EU and the United States, for example, when it comes to accounting regulations, and there is still no agreement with regard to the time frame for implementation. Fourthly, there is no level playing field between retail banks and investment banks in the definition of capital. Fifthly, there are unresolved issues such as those of the leverage ratio, the definition of liquidity and the role of rating agencies in the light of the decisions the United States has made.
These issues need to be resolved before the Commission brings forward a draft directive and they should not be concluded by the G20, but clarified, before being finalised by the Basel Committee. We will stay on the ball."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples