Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-07-04-Speech-1-104-000"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20110704.22.1-104-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:translated text
"− Madam President, I would like very briefly to express my view on that point too to Mr Bodu, and to voice my concern with regard to a number of issues he raised. Objectively speaking, there are, Mr Bodu, differences between Deposit Guarantees on the one hand and investor compensation on the other. However, as I said earlier, if sufficient funding was available, I would be in favour of the alignment that both you and Mrs Berès mentioned. Mr Gauzès, I confirm that we will examine the extension of cover to include UCITS. I am aware of Parliament’s reservations on this matter. However, I believe, Mr Gauzès, that it would be useful to plan its inclusion in the scope of the directive. We will nevertheless try to convince one another mutually and debate this issue. I also think, Mr Gauzès, that all investors should be put on an equal footing. In any case, I would like to thank you for having again highlighted the need to protect investors properly, as Mr Mölzer also reminded us in his speech a few moments ago. As Mrs Berès herself said, I was pressing for the adoption of the comprehensive package to which this text belongs. Therefore, we have not yet come to the end of the road, and investors and insurance holders are both affected. I would like to point out, Mrs Berès, that the future text on central securities depositories will provide a further opportunity to learn a number of lessons from the Madoff affair. I have also taken note of two points which captured my attention and which I believe to be important, even though they involve technical aspects. The first one concerns the inclusion of insurance contracts. I think that is a good question; I am going to look into it and also study the difficulties and technical problems that it may entail. Secondly, there is an issue to which I am obviously sensitive, that is the excessive, or in some cases exorbitant, debt into which some local authorities have managed to get themselves. I will follow your debate closely on that too, and we will look at how we can deal with this issue. Finally, Mrs Berès, you raised the issue of ‘bad advice’, as did Mr Giegold; I think it is a legitimate issue. I too want people to be safeguarded or protected. I ask though, is this the appropriate legal instrument to achieve that? This is a technical legal issue which may lead to divergence, and that would require us, in particular, Mr Giegold, to have a consistent and harmonised definition of what should be considered as ‘bad advice’. However, I sensed your insistence. I see that there is broad agreement on this issue, and we are therefore going to look into it in light of your debate today and your objections, which I have duly noted."@en1
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph