Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
 Index 
 Full text 
Verbatim report of proceedings
Tuesday, 7 July 2015 - Strasbourg Revised edition

Long-term shareholder engagement and corporate governance statement (debate)
MPphoto
 

  Cecilia Wikström, on behalf of the ALDE Group. Mr President, allow me first of all to thank Mr Cofferati and all the other colleagues for the hard work and good cooperation in improving this important legislative proposal. I am very happy that we have been able to find a compromise, in the centre of this European Parliament, that can gather broad support among pro-European and progressive forces.

This has, of course, meant that all of us have had to make concessions and do so in a spirit of compromise on a number of points, but I believe that the end result is acceptable to all of us. For the Liberal group it has been a paramount concern that this directive should improve the ability for shareholders to exercise their rights in cross-border situations and not to add unnecessary red tape and bureaucracy, because let’s face it, European entrepreneurs and companies will not flourish because of the additional rules to comply with, but rather if we create a good business environment where they can focus on their core tasks.

We do not believe that we can generate long-term engagement in companies by investors through legislative proposals requiring various sorts of policy papers or creative tax incentives. Shareholders need access to appropriate information, but then it remains their responsibility to engage with the companies that they own. If this interest is not there, it cannot artificially be engineered by politicians or bureaucrats.

I think that the focus put to a large extent by the proposals of the Commission on requiring a detailed remuneration policy and remuneration report for the director’s remuneration is, to say the least, difficult to understand, not to say rather populist. Although I would personally have been happy to remove even more, I am happy that the compromise proposals have respected the key points that were problematic. Today I feel a lot more comfortable, and I ask my group to support the compromises and the report, and I look forward to the trilogues and the continued work on this file, fighting for a directive that is fit for purpose and focuses on shareholders’ rights rather than shareholders’ obligations.

 
Legal notice - Privacy policy