21 Amendments of Marco ZANNI related to 2015/2106(INI)
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas in recent years an ambitiousthe EU has launched a reform agenda for the EUits financial sector has been launched to strengthen financial regulation and supervision, in order to restore financial stability and make the financial system more resilient to shocks caused by excessive financialisation of the economy and excessive liberalisation of financial products, including very complex ones, and their promotion, without the risks being sufficiently well assessed;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas all reforms to date have been focused on resolving the problems posed by the crisis instead of concentrating on preventing further crises in the future;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomesRejects strongly the Commission’s Investment Package, including the Capital Markets Union (CMU); stresses that an efficient and effective financial services framework ensuring financial stability is a prerequisite in order to increas, firstly, the lack of a clear and precise definition of ‘capital markets union’ (CMU) and denounces, secondly, the idea underlying the CMU of greater financialisation of the EU as this is likely to undermine (long- term) investment and to foster growth in a competitive European economy; underlines the linkage between economic and financial stability economic stability; CMU cannot be seen as the solution to lack of growth in Europe;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. States that the EU should respond to the continued development of the financial sector by encouraging new business models which require fewer intermediaries or none, thereby lowering transaction costs, and which can be more transparent and more easily checked by consumers;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that the CMU would make the EU financial system even more complex owing to instruments being issued the valuation of which is too complex for both issuers and subscribers;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that a sound and robust CMU has to acknowledge the interdependencies with other financial sectors and has to be based on well-established existing structures; sStresses the need for a holistic view of EU financial services regulation;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that an effconsumer protectiveon and efficient EU financial services regulation should be coherent, consistent (also on a cross- sectoral basis), proportionate, and free of superfluous complexity; believes that it should enable intermediaries to fulfil their role in funding the real economy and serve savers and investors; considers that it should contribute to the single market and focus on goals better achievable at European leveltransparency should be the main basis for European regulation; considers that sensible regulation calls for a ban on retail customers being able to access structured and complex financial products;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that consumer protection does not necessarily entailitate large volumes of information; is concerned that the multiplicity of customer information might not ultimately serve real customer needsconsiders that excessive amounts of information and financial disclosure can produce greater complexity and confusion in investors; believes that issuers of financial instruments should make sure that disclosure is simple, transparent and self-explanatory; points to the necessity of a European initiative for more and better financial education;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the need for consistency in the risk-based approach, including sovereign exposures; supports the work of the BCBS and ESRB in this regard;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Is concerned about the lack of available, simple, appealing and attractive risk-appropriate (long-term) investments and savings products for consumers; reiterates the need for diversity in investor and consumer choices;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the achievements in establishing a banking union; stresses that the next step has to be its full implementation, including full capitalisation of national Deposit Guarantee Schemes (DGS) and the Single Resolution Fund (SRF); emphasises the aim of avoiding moral hazard and ensuring that risk-takers bear the costs when their risks materialisefailure to implement the banking union as well as its asymetric nature and its mixed results in regard to banking supervision; believes finally that on account of the failure to calculate all the chief risks present in bank balance sheets, separating core activities from trading and speculative activities is the only way a sound and resilient banking system can be established in the EU;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Acknowledges the traditional reliance of SMEs on bank funding due to their specific nature, different risk profiles and variety across Europe; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) and the ECB, to analyse the obstacles to, and benefits of, the diversification of funding channels and how to enable banks to increase SME funding; suggests that the initiatives for improved SME funding should be expanded to mid-cap companiespropose a funding model based on bank credit and on new credit models based on ICT and disintermediation (peer to peer lending and crowdfunding) instead of on excessive financialisation of the economic system through the CMU;
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Recognises the efforjects the attempts made to establish a more transparentsingle securitisation market; emphasises that stringent requirements for underlying high-quality assets and calibrations according to the actual risk profile are necessary, bearing in mind the riskiness of securitisation as shown during the crisis;calls on the Commission to define ‘high-quality securitisation’ with precise and measurable standards; emphasises that it was securitised financial products that were at the root of the financial crisis and, given their high risk profile, calls on the Commission to conduct a thorough assessmprevent of the benefits of securitisation for SMEs and the marketability of securitisation instruments as a matter of priority, and to report to Parliamentpromotion of these instruments;
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. States that, instead of excessive financialisation of the system through the CMU, issuance of bonds and securitisation, the EU should aim at an SME funding model based in part on bank credit whereby banks may serve the real economy and not vice versa and in part on new and innovative finance models enabling demand for credit to match its supply;
Amendment 310 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Believes that better financial regulation starts with Member States applying the current acquis; considers that gold-plating does not facilitate the functioning of the internal market; Stresses the importance of good regulation that acts on the causes of the crisis, and promotes both the banking model and innovative and efficient finance models that protect consumers; considers that regulation should also prohibit the use of certain instruments, when necessary;
Amendment 334 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the objectives of the better regulation agenda; underlines the role of REFIT in achieving an efficient and effective financial services Takes note of the REFIT programme in achieving an efficient and effective financial services regulation; rejects, on account of the conflicts of interest this could entail, the Commission’s proposal to create an internal board for the above which is open to independent external members and tasked with analyses and auditing; calls for the European Parliament to have a bigger role in the scrutiny process and reiterates that the focus of the decision-making process has to be better regulation and not deregulation;
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 360 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls on the Commission to make any amendment made to the draft regulatory technical standards (RTS) and implementing technical standards (ITS) submitted by the ESAs transparent to the co-legislators and stakeholders;
Amendment 364 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Emphasises that an early legal review by the Commission should not reduce the transparency of the process vis-à-vis Parliament and stakeholders; requests that during the drafting process the ESAs provide Parliament with provisional drafts;