11 Amendments of Sylvie GOULARD related to 2012/2234(INI)
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that 2nd pillar systems must be secure, for the sake of employeemust ensure solidarity between generations and reflect the modern work patterns;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that ensuring that European 2nd pillar systems obey to robust prudential regulation is key to achieve a high level of protection for the members and beneficiaries and to respect the G20 mandate according to which all financial institutions shall be subject to proper regulation and adequate supervision;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that all 2nd pillar pensions providers, whatever their legal form, should be under proportionate and robust regulation that takes into account the characteristics of their business, particularly long term focused;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that Commission proposals regarding quantitative and qualitative precautionary measures are only of value if they lay stress onshould takinge into account the differences between the systems and comply strictly with the principle of proportionality in terms of the financial, administrative and technical burden involved;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Considers that prior to reviewing the IORP directive with a view of ensuring a high level of protection of employees, it will be important to assess the conclusions of the ongoing Quantitative Impact Study performed by the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA);
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses that the application of quantitative Solvency II requirements poses a great risk to pillar 2 systems, since these may, as a result of increased costs, be forced in future to accept lower company pensions or to stop them altogether; emphasises that this is not in the interests of employees; therefore concludes that there must be no provisions at EU level aiming to apply Solvency II to 2nd pillar systems have to be properly assessed;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers the further development of variations to Solvency II, such as the Holistic Balance Sheet Model (HBS), to be useful only if specific national requirements are complied with and if they are presented as recommendations; categorically rejects these as components of EU-level regulations;
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 104 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Notes that, according to the OECD, there is a lack of mobility between the Member States and that only 3% of working-age EU citizens live in another Member State;* 1 OECD (2012), "Mobility and migration in Europe", p. 63. In: OECD Economic Surveys: European Union 2012, OECD Publishing. 1 believes that the lack of legal certainty for the transfer of pension rights constitutes one of the main obstacles to labour mobility in Europe;
Amendment 108 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. StressWelcomes therefore that cross-border pension tracking services are only worthwhile if they are extremely efficient, legally and administratively small-scale and highly cost-effectivee Commission's intention to promote efficient cross-border pension tracking services;