6 Amendments of Ieke van den BURG related to 2007/2287(INI)
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Commends that while product innovation is key to providing the consumer with a wider choice when looking for the most suitable financial products at the most competitive price, new financial products have to be presented in a clear, objective and non-misleading way; urges the Commission to present proposals to streamline the regulatory requirements with respect to information, distribution and organisation of comparable retail products in all European legislation and regulation regarding different sectors of the financial market; particularly with respect to mixed retail products (such as unit linked life insurance or other long term savings products), this streamlining should prevent regulatory arbitrage and unfair competition between the distributors of these products and bring an end to misleading and confusing information to consumers; in this streamlining exercise, on the basis of the study and the consultation that are currently being undertaken by the Commission on competing retail investment products, basic principles that have been set in the MiFid directive such as “best advice” and “know your customer” should be made applicable cross-sector for all comparable investment products according to the degree of complexity involved;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Supports a coherent European suggestion providing consumers access to balanced forms of collective redress for the settlement of cross-border complaints related to retail financial products; asks the Commission to present detailed proposals for a European form of collective redress that is primarily focussed on real consumer interests in terms of corrective measures that may help to improve overall behaviour whilst avoiding a US-style litigation culture that is primarily driven by the financial interests of law firms.
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recognises the option of a 28th legal framework, such as the Common Reference Framework, as a possible new approach to European regulation, to enable mobile cross-border market choice to be provided tousers access to simplified pan-European financial products with a uniformly high consumer protection standard; calls on the Commission again to put forward a time-frame for developing a 28th legal framework;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Urges the Commission to initiate proposals to streamline the regulatory requirements with respect to the information, distribution and organisation of comparable retail products across European legislation and regulation in different sectors of the financial market; is of the opinion that, particularly with respect to mixed retail products (such as unit-linked life insurance or other long-term savings products) this is necessary to prevent regulatory arbitrage and an unlevel playing field for the distributors of those products and to prevent the dissemination of misleading and confusing information to (potential) consumers; proposes that on the basis of the current study and the consultation regarding competing retail investment products, it would be worthwhile considering extending the application of the basic principles that have been established in Directive 2004/39/EC on markets in financial instruments (MiFID) such as ‘best advice’ and ‘know your customer’ should apply across the board to all comparable investment products in proportion to the degree of complexity involved;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Emphasises that effective self- regulation of the financial services industry shouldmay be preferred to anyin some cases to legislative regulation; calls on the financial services industry to work steadfastly towards the aims of the above Green Paper by self- regulation and thus reduce the need for binding legal acts;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Regrets that cross-border providers of financial services incur high costs as a result of the differing legal provisions and differing practice of national supervisory authorities lead to legal uncertainty and high costs for cross- border providers of financial services; calls on the Lamfalussy committees to step up their work for uniform European standards; in particular, advocates agreement on standard forms for reporting and approval procedures;