Full text 
Procedure : 2007/0143(COD)
Document stages in plenary
Select a document: :

Texts tabled :


Debates :

PV 22/04/2009 - 4
CRE 22/04/2009 - 4

Votes :

PV 22/04/2009 - 6.35
CRE 22/04/2009 - 6.35
Explanations of votes

Texts adopted :

Wednesday, 22 April 2009 - Strasbourg OJ edition

4. Credit Rating Agencies - Reporting and documentation requirements in the case of merger and divisions - Insurance and reinsurance (Solvency II) (recast) (debate)
Video of the speeches

  Godfrey Bloom, on behalf of the IND/DEM Group . – Madam President, I have spent 40 years in financial services, so I think perhaps I know a little bit about what I am talking about here.

Let me just say a little about the UK Financial Services Authority (FSA), which will guide us onto the target of how mistakes are made. The FSA in the United Kingdom has a rule book of half a million words. Nobody understands it – least of all the FSA. The FSA interprets its own rule book in secret; they keep the fines that they impose to beef up their own salaries and pensions; there is no court of appeal. I have written to Commissioner McCreevy on this subject and it drives a coach and horses through Articles 6 and 7 of his own Human Rights Act. There is no court of appeal. There is no legal recourse at all if they get it wrong. The general public has been given the impression that if a regulation has an FSA stamp on it it cannot go wrong. There is no concept of caveat emptor .

Now it is going to be, it would appear, subsumed by some sort of EU overseer, consisting no doubt of ignorant bureaucrats, Scandinavian housewives, Bulgarian mafia and Romanian peg-makers. Frankly, I think you are going to get on really well with each other.

Last updated: 29 October 2009Legal notice