BETA

Activities of Sebastian Valentin BODU related to 2010/2302(INI)

Plenary speeches (3)

Explanations of vote
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2302(INI)
Explanations of vote
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2302(INI)
Explanations of vote
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2302(INI)

Amendments (6)

Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
B. whereas the structure of the rating industry is heavily concentrated, and whereas the business orientation of the market-leading CRAs is predominantly centred on United States business models, whilst the understanding of European business models, especially SMEs, is hardly reflected in their ratingsespecially in the United States, whilst the rest of the countries are not very well represented in this industry,
2011/02/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the CRAs fall under the provision of the Regulation EC 2009/1060, as amended in order to give ESMA supervisory attributions,
2011/02/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to encourage existing businesses to become registered as CRAs under European legislation by reducing barriers to entry or to expand in the CRA sector, especially for niche markets such as local SMEs, but also for structured credits or public debt; at all levels, considers that this would enhance competition in this sector and that, in order to be visible at European level, smallEuropean CRAs could be encouraged to merge or to establish networks;
2011/02/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Asks the Commission to establish a public European CRA whose main purpose should be to produce independent and impartialncourage European CRAs to produce ratings without being influenced or restricted by commercial considerations; consi, in orders that such a CRA should produce a mandatory second rating in response to every rating produced by a CRA registered and operating in the European Uniono issue independent and impartial ratings;
2011/02/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that at least two ratings, e.g. for calculation of capital requirements, are recommended; further considers that this would improve the accuracy of the regulatory capital calculation;deleted
2011/02/09
Committee: JURI
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that all measures should be taken in order to avoid too favourablebiased ratings being given by reducing any conflicts of interest, e.g. by disclosure of the methodologies, especially for ratings of sovereign debt, and rethinking the payment model on the basis of aof alternative to the payment model ‘payment upon request’.
2011/02/09
Committee: JURI