Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-06-Speech-3-215"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101006.15.3-215"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, The debate was lucid, clear, competent and responsible. We put out a very good image of ourselves as both cohesive and determined. Commissioner, I would also like to thank everyone who participated, you included. We are not putting the process in doubt, but it is not concluded. We have also brought up a painful subject. The sore point in question consists, above all, of the differences in banking and economic structures between Europe and the United States. We need to say one thing clearly at this point, and that is that, while the legislative process has not started yet, the Basel process does prejudice and limit our freedom to manoeuvre in political decision making. What would have happened if we had not produced an own-initiative report off our own bats? There would not have been a debate today. We therefore need to bring democracy and parliamentarianism into the Basel process, the G20 process, the new global institutions that are being created, and, at the same time, we need to be involved in the process so as not to always be presented with
.
Basel III and deposit protection need to be connected, as there is a connection between the two. We need a link between our decision making and global implementation, particularly in the United States. We need the definition of liquidity before we get the draft directive. Meanwhile, the Dodd-Frank Act in the United States presents us with another problem. Because the Americans are going to have problems implementing the liquidity standard, they are now attempting, once again, to introduce additional criteria alongside the external ratings. Our maxim must be that either external ratings or alternative criteria such as price stability should act as the basis of evaluation. Yet we absolutely should not have both for Europe and only one for the United States.
We need to be vigilant and let us also together ensure, Commissioner, that the national finance and economic ministers pass on to their national parliaments what the Commission is now reporting in its impact study. There is less awareness in the national parliaments about what we are doing here and what the impact and causes are in the Member States than there is in this House. We also need to begin an offensive here. Let us involve the national parliaments in this communication process."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples