16 Amendments of Manuel dos SANTOS related to 2017/2253(INI)
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas equivalence decisions cannot be considered merelyare technical in nature andthey should thereforenonetheless be subject to a greater degree of scrutiny by Parliament;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that, in many cases, the granting of equivalence is a unilateral decision taken by the EU and is not applied in a reciprocal manner by third countries; considers that international cooperation could be better advanced by dint of international agreements negotiated between the EU and third countries; notes that, unlike equivalence, international agreements can provide mutual access between the EU and third countries for financial institutions and for the mutual recognition of rules;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Emphasises that one of the key objectives for equivalence is to promote regulatory convergence on the basis of internationalEuropean standards;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that, as it stands, the EU’s process for granting equivalence lacks certainty and sufficient transparencyis heterogeneous, and requires a structured and practical framework outlining clear proceduresand transparent procedures with a leading role for ESAs in making assessments and recommendations to the Commission;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Questions the rationale behind eEquivalence decisions are typically taking the form of implementing actsechnical in nature; insists that the process for granting equivalence to a third country in the area of financial services should always be scrutinised by Parliament and that, owing to their political nature, and for the purposes of greater transparency, these decisions should be taken by means of delegated actsfor the purposes of greater transparency;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that the Commission has the right to withdraw equivalence decisions, and believes that Parliament should be consulted in a timely manner before such a withdrawal decision is taken; cCalls for the introduction of clear procedures and timelines governing the adoption, withdrawal or suspension of equivalence decisions;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to adopt a legislative act establishing a clear framework for a transparent, coherent and consistent application of equivalence procedures which introduces a standardised process for the determination of equivalence;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission to consider, in the definition of a framework for equivalence, the possibility of introducing an application process for granting equivalence which could be opened to third countries on a date specified in a given piece of legislation;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth review of all equivalence decisions taken, in order to determine the successes and failureappropriateness of the current equivalence regime;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that close consideration should be given to thCalls on the Commission to access if a more proportionate equivalence regime between the EU and high-impact third countries in order to develop stable and resilient regulatory relationships with those countries which have close financial links with the Unions on the interest of the EU;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Stresses the fact that the UK decision to leave the EU and not remain a EEA Member has huge implications on the relationship between the EU and the UK concerning financial services;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recalls the importance of National Competent Authorities (NCAs) in the authorisation process for financial institutions that wish to delegate part of their portfolio management or risk management to service providers in third countries where the regulatory regime is comparable to that of the EU; considers that NCAs have sufficient technical knowledge and expertise to properly assess delegation approval requests; encourages the ESAs to develop further cooperation between NCAsand the ESAs should fully cooperate in order to share best practice concerning regulatory cooperation and activities with third countries;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for active involvement from the Commission, the Member States and ESAs in global standard-setting bodies in financial services; stresses the need for the consistent implementation of international standards in order to achieve better regulatory cooperation with other jurisdictions and to improve global financial stability;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23