9 Amendments of Jiří POSPÍŠIL related to 2017/2066(INI)
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that the Action Plan aims to tackle a number of important issues and that in some of the areas it sets out specific actions to be taken by the Commission, with a clear timetable; regrets, however, that in some of the identified areas, the proposals on how to solve the identified problems remain rather vague;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that the Action Plan aims to tackle a number of important issues and that in some of the areas it sets out specific actions to be taken by the Commission, with a clear timetable; regrets, however, that in some of the identified areas, the proposals on how to solve the identified problems remain rather vague; points out that the EU legislative authority has already taken important steps to establish a more competitive and more secure EU market for retail financial services; stresses that some items of EU legislation have still to be properly transposed and applied across the EU; accordingly welcomes the fact that the Action Plan focuses first of all on non-legislative action intended to ensure that existing legislation gives EU consumers maximum benefits;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2a (new)
Paragraph 2a (new)
2 a. Therefore calls for the Commission first to review and evaluate the regulation on national markets before taking action to implement the Action Plan; these steps should respect the principle of subsidiarity and should reflect national experience so far and the specific features of national legislation.
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that consumers need to be able to choose the best rates and be aware of fees and other associated costs when making transactions or payments abroad, including when using dynamic currency conversion (DCC); asks the Commission to requireo require, wherever possible and expedient, that the value of a transaction be displayed both in local currency and in the consumer’'s home currency at the time of the transaction, without incurring an unreasonable increase in the cost of the service provider, and that rates offered by different financial service providers be displayed in a transparent manner, and calls for a neutral reference rate provided by a non-business actor;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the review and cutback of national trade barriers but cautions that this should not result in lower consumer protection standards; stresses that a high standard of consumer protection and consumer confidence are essential for a genuine internal market in retail financial services, in particular as regards loans by new digital actors whose lending practices these days are possibly not always adequately covered by existing EU legislation; therefore welcomes the Commission's aim of checking that existing EU legislation is appropriate;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the review and cutback of national trade barriers such as, for example, discrimination based on the place of residence of a shop, but cautions that this should not result in lower consumer protection standards; this could include facilitating the portability of retail financial products, such as life and property insurance or the cross-border recognition of non-life insurance;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates its view that online comparison tools can substantially improve comparability between various financial products and help consumers to make an informed decision, for example through benchmarking of consumer organizations and digital solutions; asks the Commission to monitor the rollout and uptake of the stakeholders’ initiative ‘Key principles for comparison tools’, including voluntary certification schemes, and to evaluate the need for compulsory certification;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the potential of e-signature for easier transactions; underlines the importance of system cybersecurity to combat potential identity theft and the need for financial non-discrimination of persons unable or unwilling to use e-signature.
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6a (new)
Paragraph 6a (new)
6a. Points out that Parliament has already called on the Commission to take account of cybersecurity issues during the planning phase for all finance technology initiatives; regrets the fact that the Commission does not address that in its Action Plan, especially since suitable safeguards against cyber-risks are conducive to consumer confidence; calls therefore on the Commission to do so as part of the work of its task force;