|
Financial Conglomerates
In his statement on the Council Common Position EP’s rapporteur Allain Lipietz welcomed the fact that the Council of Ministers has taken on board almost all the points contained in the amendments adopted by the European Parliament at first reading.
Although there are a small number of points where the Common Position still could be improved, Lipietz proposed to approve the Common Position without amendment.
There was common agreement among Parliamentarians that the main points raised by the Parliament are sufficiently covered by the Common Position. Mrs Villiers also was content with regard to the clearer definition of financial conglomerates and the simplified procedure in dealing with third countries. Amendments to the Common Position are not expected.
Draft Recommendation for second reading
Deadlines:
Amendments: 23 October, Committee vote: 5 November, EP Vote: end November
Market Abuse
In his statement EP’s rapporteur Robert Goebbels pointed out that 60 of the 77 parliaments amendments have been incorporated fully and 10 partially.
Goebbels therefore supported the common position and does not wish to see the second reading become excessively drawn out. He himself placed some three amendments to which the Commission is content with.
Although there was common agreement that the Directive – as the first one operating under the new Lamfalussy procedure - should be adopted as soon as possible, there is some concern about the incorporation of journalists into the Directive (article 6.5).
As some Parliamentarians want to exclude journalists at all, Mr. Mann and others stated that the fears were exaggerated by the relevant associations and that he cannot support the amendments to that point. However, there are clear signs that a compromise might be reached with regard to a modified amendment (no.13) made by Mrs Kauppi.
Mrs Villiers also stated that there are several overlaps between the Market Abuse Directive and the forthcoming Investment Services Directive and that certain parts could be better dealt with in the ISD. But there was not much support to delay decisions that could be dealt with now.
Another point of concern was dealing with the role of CESR and the consultation process that already started. Many Parliamentarians were quite upset and it is planned to invite CESR to the Committee give their statement on it.
Deadlines:
The vote in Committee is planned for Tuesday 08 October
Prudential Supervision
The reaction on the EP report on ‘the rules of prudential supervision in the EU’ of the rapporteur Mrs van den Burg was mixed among Committee members.
Although Mr Herzog was content with a free choice of the competent authority on an international basis he pointed out that even on a bilateral basis the cooperation among these institutions is rather weak. Furthermore he criticised that:
A rather different view on the report was expressed by Chris Huhne talking of a well balanced report aiming towards a common culture of basking supervision.
Mrs Randzio-Plath stated that regulatory aspects should be excluded as long as there is no clear evidence how the new Lamfalussy procedures are working.
Deadlines:
Amendments: 22 October, Committee vote: 5 November, Plenary: end November
Hearing on Prospectuses
There was a common agreement among the experts invited to the hearing on Prospectuses that:
A third factor which was critisized was the introduction of special EU rules for securities with an minimum denomination of 50 000.
The Committee has now to decide if a new first reading is needed.