|
|
He did not support the creation of a public European credit rating agency, such as the European Court of Auditors, because its full independence could not be ensured and because there was no legal basis within the treaties to allow the European Court of Auditors to be a de facto CRA, nor to rate sovereign debt. He agreed with the idea of having regional CRAs coalescing into an international CRA in order to stimulate competition. He also supported the proposal to have two ratings for certain asset clashes and particularly for structured products.
He explained that the issuer would choose one CRA, whereas the European Securities and Market Authority (ESMA) would be responsible for the second CRA, thus removing any potential conflict of interest.
According to Mr Klinz, ESMA could also be responsible for looking at cases of gross negligence.
He suggested that the Commission should look into the issue of liability to ensure that CRAs worked at the highest level. Unlike Ms Podimata (S&D, EL) and Mr Portas (GUE/NGL, PT), Mr Gauzès (EPP, FR) was against the notion of a public CRA. Ms Podimata called for the creation of an independent public European CRA, with expertise in all areas. Ms Swinburne (ECR, UK), on behalf of Mr Fox (ECR, UK), explained that her group would support a public CRA if it had guaranteed political independence and was economically self-sufficient. She said ESMA should be more involved in stimulating competition.
Mr Klinz suggested that the markets should fund a public European CRA in order to ensure its autonomy.
Next Steps:
Vote at ECON: 16 March 2011.
Vote at plenary: April 2011.