4 Amendments of Alexander RADWAN related to 2007/2239(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Observes that a lack of due diligence byon the part of investors cannot be counteracted by more transparencyd transparency on the part of service providers are necessary in order to ensure the stability of the financial markets;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. States that purposive transparency is a prime tool for managing risk: for the general public, openness about objectives is important, for investors it is the detail of the nature, valuation and risk of investments and for supervisors a full view of positions and strategies, whilst observing the confidentiality of that information; the effects of transparency can be negative, such as herding where investment strategies are revearansparency is of the greatest usefulness to all stakeholders, since it makes availabled to competitors, and positive, including preventing the assumption of worse-than- actual scenarmarket participants the information needed to justify their decisions;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that public attention was drawn to hedge funds and private equity following high-profile cases and activity in the context of well-known companies; recognises that both hedge funds and private equity are responding to criticism by way of self-regulatory proposals incorporating a 'comply or explain' principle; considers that those codes need to be allowed sufficient time to operate, spread globally and for their effects be analysed, which exist as an autonomous supplement to legislation, need to be taken into account as soon as possible and to prove their effectiveness rapidly;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Asserts that the costs of additional, especially frequent, reporting requirements can induce pressure for short-term returns rathershould be defensible in proportion to their benefits, but thant long-termasting stability justifies additional efforts;