Povratak na portal Europarl

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English
  • 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
Dokument nije dostupan na vašem jeziku. Odaberite drugu jezičnu verziju iz jezične trake.

 Indeks 
 Cjeloviti tekst 
Verbatim report of proceedings
Thursday, 6 February 2014 - Strasbourg Revised edition

Uniform rules and procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Bank Resolution Fund: outcome of the negotiations (debate)
MPphoto
 

  Corien Wortmann-Kool, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, we feel a strong sense of urgency to complete the Banking Union before the European elections. That is why we have to confirm today our strong and united mandate for the negotiations on the Single Resolution Mechanism, a mandate that has already been voted through with a large majority by the competent parliamentary committee.

This plenary vote should serve as a wake-up call for the Council. It was good that the Greek Deputy Prime Minister was present at the debate on Tuesday where this broad unity was confirmed. This underlined the great importance the Greek Presidency attaches to this regulation. He clearly indicated the willingness to work constructively on a common agreement, but the Greek Presidency cannot negotiate when they do not get a substantial mandate from the Ecofin Council and there is a clear urgency – the markets are watching, so we have to get it right from the start.

When we negotiated the Stability and Growth Pact, we corrected an institutional shortcoming. We moved the supervision on commonly-agreed rules away from governments, giving more objectivity. In the end we both agreed, and this is what made the ‘six-pack’ a credible and good deal. But now the Council is suggesting the reverse: leaving crucial decisions on resolving failing banks up to the Member States. It is hard to see how this would lead to effective and efficient objective decision-making, let alone how this would work when a bank needs to be resolved within 48 hours.

It could also seriously undermine the effective application of the resolution tools. We want to ensure that bail-in will be applied to make sure that shareholders and investors have to pay, but it should be equally applied to failing banks irrespective of the Member States in which they operate. Equal treatment, where needed, with regard to access to the Fund is another area in which the Council’s position falls short, because the Fund is rigidly broken down into national compartments. This could reinforce the damaging link between Member States and banks, instead of breaking it.

The risk of reputational damage for this new resolution authority is substantial, especially in the first years. We cannot afford to let that happen. The Single Fund has to be up and running from the start of the Single Resolution Mechanism through a swift mutualisation of bank levies, instead of 10 years of national compartments. A lending facility is needed for that as well.

The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) voted in favour of a clear position for a Single Resolution Mechanism with a truly Single Fund, where a bank can be resolved within a weekend – a system where the banks have to pay. Our Group really wants to protect the taxpayers from having to pay the bill again for failing banks.

The Council introduced an intergovernmental agreement – a temporary one – but we have grave reservations about this, as we do not believe in intergovernmental solutions unless we are convinced that it is absolutely necessary in order to fulfil constitutional requirements, and also unless we are convinced that it is legal. I have some understanding for the constitutional concerns of one Member State concerning the transfer of contributions from banks to a European fund, but we cannot accept an intergovernmental agreement that takes out other crucial elements of the Single Resolution Mechanism and leaves them to the discretion of the Member States. The negotiating table is here in this House – not in the Council building.

The trialogues with the Greek Presidency are the only format for negotiating for this Parliament, and I would like to welcome the helpful contributions made by Commissioner Barnier during the debate on Tuesday. His initial proposal for a Single Resolution Mechanism is the right basis; it shows the right way. We also truly trust in his insistence on a credible and workable system. We trust that he shares our view that an agreement is urgently needed, but cannot be done at any price.

Completing the Banking Union is the number one priority for the PPE Group in the last months of this term. The Single Resolution Mechanism is the final brick we have to add in order to restore credibility, to ensure a safe and stable financial system with better access to loans for our businesses and households, and to protect our citizens and their deposits from failing banks. The Banking Union is crucial to regaining trust and speeding up economic recovery.

The EPP is aware of the great responsibility resting on us. We want a deal. We will now vote on this dossier to achieve one important purpose: to give a strong signal of unity. Our line that was agreed in the Economic and Monetary Committee will get the full backing of this House. We are not modifying our negotiated position, but repeating our views, which were expressed by ECON already in December of last year. But we are not concluding our first reading; we are keeping the door open, and this should serve as a wake-up call for the Council. Parliament is ready and open to accelerating these negotiations and achieving a deal before the European elections. We will be firm, but constructive in the negotiations. However, we cannot just accept any old agreement. Completion of the Banking Union is at stake, but we have to get it right.

 
Pravna obavijest - Politika zaštite privatnosti