Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-07-04-Speech-1-020-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110704.19.1-020-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, my task is to report to you on the decision by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs in respect of the regulation on derivatives. Nearly three years after the collapse of Lehman Brothers and two years since the G20 decisions, we now have a regulation on over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives and money-market products that is ready for a decision.
I would first like to thank everyone who has contributed to enabling the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs to come to a unanimous decision: my fellow Members, the shadow rapporteurs, the staff of the secretariat, but above all Commissioner Barnier, whose proposal laid the foundation that enables us to pass a rational, strict and effective regulation on derivatives. I would also like to thank the Hungarian Presidency, which has worked day and night to bring the very conflicting positions in the Council closer to each other. Regrettably, it has not been possible to achieve political agreement. For that reason, the dossier will be handed on to the Polish Presidency of the Council. I am optimistic that, after the summer break, we will succeed in finding a solution relatively quickly under the Polish Presidency.
In the remainder of the procedure, the question arises as to whether we should vote on the legislative text and whether to hold the final vote. The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs will discuss this again this evening. The two rapporteurs and the chairs of the two largest political groups have indicated to me that they would like to defer the final vote until September in order to maintain room for negotiation with the Polish delegation and not bring about a second reading at the outset.
The main points of the report, which are also controversial, concern legal provisions relating to central counterparties, better collateralisation in bilateral contracts, higher initial capital requirements, greater transparency through reporting to a trade repository and the avoidance of market manipulation in connection with derivatives. These are the most important elements. If we look at the volumes concerned, at the end of June the volume of over-the-counter derivatives traded was USD 60 billion in total, while those traded via stock exchanges amounted to USD 67.9 billion. This gives us an inkling of how the issue of OTC derivatives having had no security whatsoever apart from through bilateral agreement was actually one of the main causes of the financial market crisis.
The problems that remain concern, firstly, the scope of application. There is admittedly a clear blocking minority in the Council in respect of the Commission’s proposal to restrict the regulation to over-the-counter derivatives. The proposal is also in accordance with the G20 decisions. The US finance minister, however, recently began an initiative to extend the rules to also include derivatives traded on the stock exchange. Parliament has taken a very clear position in opposition to this, and we intend to stick to this line. I believe aligning ourselves with the G20 decisions to be a sensible course of action. My request to the Commission, then, Commissioner Barnier, is that Commission officials and staff also stick very clearly to this line, even if the Council has other suggestions.
The second area is exclusions from the scope of application. In our view, these exclusions should be kept as narrow as possible. There were many requests for exclusions, including some that were absolutely justified. We have exempted only the Bank for International Settlements in Basel and allowed a transitional arrangement for pension funds in respect of bilateral clearing. Intra-group transactions between parent undertakings and their subsidiaries are to be exempted from the clearing obligation. Various associations have intervened here, wishing exemption for these too. However, let us take the German Savings Banks Association as an example – an association to which the regional banks in Germany with the greatest derivatives risk belong. LBBW is the second-largest German regional bank, and this bank alone reported a derivatives volume of EUR 2.3 billion as at 31 December 2010. This shows that we cannot treat associations in the same way as parent undertakings and their subsidiaries.
The third area is clearing thresholds for non-financial counterparties. Here we have agreed that undertakings that are only end-users are to be excluded. One outstanding matter is the recognition of third-country clearing houses. Here we demand reciprocity. I would also like to make it quite clear that where interoperability is concerned – meaning cooperation between different clearing houses – we want to restrict this to cash securities only and to require at least three years’ experience first.
I am optimistic that, following the excellent preparatory work by Hungary, the outstanding matters will be resolved under the Polish Presidency. Of the 33 amendments submitted, some are mere technicalities. These concern adaptation to the Treaty of Lisbon, as the proposal was not complete in this respect. The others are essentially amendments which will be able to be resolved when the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs makes its decision. The 13 amendments submitted by the Confederal Group of the European United Left – Nordic Green Left, which would change the scope of application completely, should be rejected. On that note I should like to express once more my very warm gratitude for the constructive cooperation we have enjoyed from all sides of this House."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples