REPORT     ***I
PDF 581kWORD 71k
13 October 2017
PE 606.264v03-00 A8-0302/2017

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on amending Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the ranking of unsecured debt instruments in insolvency hierarchy

(COM(2016)0853 – C8-0479/2016 – 2016/0363(COD))

Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs

Rapporteur: Gunnar Hökmark

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
 PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE
 FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on amending Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the ranking of unsecured debt instruments in insolvency hierarchy

(COM(2016)0853 – C8-0479/2016 – 2016/0363(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2016)0853),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0479/2016),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A8-0302/2017),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment    1

AMENDMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT(1)*

to the Commission proposal

---------------------------------------------------------

DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on amending Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the ranking of unsecured debt instruments in insolvency hierarchy

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 114 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank(2)

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee(3),

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,

Whereas:

(1)  The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published the Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC) Term Sheet ('the TLAC standard') on 9 November 2015 which was endorsed by the G-20 in November 2015. The objective of the TLAC standard is to ensure that global systemically important banks (G-SIBs), referred to as global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) in the Union framework, have the loss-absorbing and recapitalisation capacity necessary to help ensure that, in and immediately following a resolution, critical functions can be continued without public finances or financial stability being put at risk(4). In its Communication of 24 November 2015(5), the Commission committed itself to bring forward a legislative proposal by the end of 2016 that would enable the TLAC standard to be implemented into Union law by the internationally agreed deadline of 2019.

(2)  The implementation of the TLAC standard in the Union needs to take into account the existing institution-specific minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities ('MREL') applicable to all Union ▌institutions ▌as laid down in Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (6). As TLAC and MREL pursue the same objective of ensuring that Union ▌institutions ▌have sufficient loss absorbing and recapitalisation capacity, the two requirements should be complementary elements of a common framework. Operationally, the Commission proposed that the harmonised minimum level of the TLAC standard for G-SIIs ('the TLAC minimum requirement') should be introduced in Union legislation through amendments to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (7), while the institution-specific add-on for G-SIIs and the institution-specific requirement for non-G-SIIs should be addressed through targeted amendments to Directive 2014/59/EU and Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council(8). The relevant provisions of this Directive as regards the ranking of unsecured debt instruments in insolvency hierarchy are complementary with those in the aforementioned pieces of legislation and in Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council(9).

(3)  Member States should ensure that ▌institutions ▌should have sufficient loss-absorbing and recapitalisation capacity to ensure smooth and fast absorption of losses and recapitalisation while avoiding an impact on financial stability and taxpayers. This should be achieved through constant compliance by ▌institutions ▌ with a TLAC minimum requirement that is to be implemented in Union law through an amendment of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and a requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities as provided in Directive 2014/59/EU.

(4)  The TLAC standard, which is to be implemented in Union law through an amendment of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, requires G-SIIs to meet the minimum TLAC requirement, with certain exceptions, with subordinated liabilities that rank in insolvency below liabilities excluded from TLAC ('subordination requirement'). Under the TLAC standard, subordination should be achieved through the legal effects of a contract ('contractual subordination'), the laws of a given jurisdiction ('statutory subordination') or a given corporate structure ('structural subordination'). Where required by Directive 2014/59/EU, institutions falling within the scope of that Directive should meet their firm-specific requirement with subordinated liabilities so as to minimise the risk of legal challenge by creditors on the basis that their losses in resolution are higher than the losses that they would incur under normal insolvency proceedings (the ‘no creditor worse off’ principle).

(4a)  In order to ensure legal certainty for markets and to allow a build-up of the necessary buffers, markets also need timely clarity about the eligibility criteria required for instruments to be recognised as TLAC or MREL liabilities.

(4b)  In the interests of planning and legal certainty for the markets and for individual institutions and of ensuring a level playing field for institutions, it is necessary to introduce safeguards, under existing national law, for the eligibility of debt instruments issued before the entry into force of this Directive.

(4c)  In order to avoid shortfalls and to ensure a level playing field among institutions, it is necessary to provide for a grandfathering of the eligibility of those instruments issued prior to the eligibility criteria coming into effect.

(5)  A number of Member States have amended or are in the process of amending the insolvency ranking of unsecured senior debt under their national insolvency law to allow their ▌institutions ▌to comply with the subordination requirement in a more efficient manner, thereby facilitating resolution.

(6)  The national rules adopted so far diverge significantly. The absence of harmonised Union rules creates uncertainty for issuing ▌institutions ▌ and investors alike and complicates the application of the bail-in tool for cross-border institutions▌. This also results in competitive distortions on the internal market given that the costs for ▌institutions ▌to comply with the subordination requirement ▌and the costs borne by investors when buying debt instruments issued by ▌institutions ▌may differ considerably across the Union.

(7)  In its Report on Banking Union, the European Parliament called on the Commission to present proposals to further reduce the legal risks of claims under the no-creditor-worse-off principle, and, in its conclusions of 17 June 2016(10), the Council invited the Commission to put forward a proposal on a common approach to the bank creditors' hierarchy to enhance legal certainty in case of resolution.

(8)  It is, therefore, necessary to remove the significant obstacles in the functioning of the internal market and avoid distortions of competition resulting from the absence of harmonised Union rules on bank creditors' hierarchy and to prevent such obstacles and distortions from arising in the future. Consequently, the appropriate legal basis for this Directive should be Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as interpreted in accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

(9)  In order to reduce to a minimum credit institutions and investment firms' costs of compliance with the subordination requirement and any negative impact on their funding costs, this Directive should allow Member States to keep the existing class of unsecured senior debt, which has the highest insolvency ranking among debt instruments and is less costly for credit institutions and investment firms to issue than any other subordinated liabilities. It should, nevertheless, require Member States to create a new asset class of 'non-preferred' senior debt that should only be bailed-in during resolution after other capital instruments, but before other senior liabilities. Credit institutions and investment firms should remain free to issue debt in both classes while only the 'non-preferred' senior class should be eligible to meet the subordination requirement of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and of Directive 2014/59/EU. This should allow credit institutions and investment firms to use for their funding or any other operational reasons the less costly senior debt while issuing the new 'non-preferred' senior class for compliance with the subordination requirement.

(10)  To ensure that the new 'non-preferred' senior class of debt instruments meet the eligibility criteria as described in the TLAC standard and as set out in Directive 2014/59/EU, thereby enhancing legal certainty, Member States should ensure that those debt instruments are not derivatives and contain no embedded derivatives, and that the relevant contractual documentation related to their issuance and, where applicable, the prospectus, explicitly refers to their lower ranking under normal insolvency proceedings. This Directive should be without prejudice to any requirement in national law to register debt instruments in the issuer's company registry for liabilities to meet the conditions for non-preferred senior class of debt instruments as provided for in this Directive.

(11)  To enhance legal certainty for investors, Member States should ensure that ordinary senior debt instruments and other unsecured ordinary senior liabilities that are not debt instruments have a higher priority ranking in their national insolvency laws than the new 'non-preferred' senior class of debt▐. Member States should also ensure that the new 'non-preferred' senior class of debt instruments have a higher priority ranking than the priority ranking of own funds instruments and any other subordinated liabilities ▐.

(12)  Since the objectives of this Directive, namely to lay down harmonised rules for the insolvency ranking of unsecured debt instruments for the purposes of the Union recovery and resolution framework especially with regard to ensuring a credible bail-in regime, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. In particular, this Directive should be without prejudice to other options to comply with the subordination requirement provided for in the TLAC standard.

(13)  It is appropriate for the amendments to Directive 2014/59/EU provided for in this Directive to apply to unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments issued on or after the date of application of this Directive▐. However, for legal certainty purposes and to mitigate transitional costs in as much as possible, Member State should ensure that the insolvency ranking of all outstanding unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments that institutions have issued before that date is governed by the laws of the Member States as they were adopted on 31 December 2016. To the extent that certain national laws as adopted on 31 December 2016 could have already addressed the objective of allowing institutions to issue subordinated liabilities, part or all of the outstanding unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments issued prior to the date of application of this Directive should be able to have the same insolvency ranking as the 'non-preferred' senior debt instruments issued under the conditions of this Directive. In addition, after 31 December 2016 and before the date of entry into force of this Directive, Member States should be able to adapt their national laws governing the ranking in normal insolvency proceedings of unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments issued after the date of application of such laws in order to comply with the conditions laid down in this Directive. In such cases, only the unsecured claims resulting from the debt instruments issued before the application of that new national law should continue to be governed by the laws of the Member States as they were adopted on 31 December 2016.

(13a)  This Directive should not prevent Member States from providing that this Directive should continue to apply when the issuing entities are no longer subject to the Union resolution framework due, in particular, to the divestment of their credit or investment activities to a third party.

(13b)  This Directive harmonises the ranking under normal insolvency proceedings of unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments and does not cover the insolvency ranking of deposits beyond the existing applicable provisions of Directive 2014/59/EU. Therefore, this Directive is without prejudice to national laws of Member States governing normal insolvency proceedings that cover the insolvency ranking of deposits not harmonised by Directive 2014/59/EU, irrespective of how deposits rank in the insolvency proceedings and of their dates.

(13c)  This Directive harmonises the ranking under normal insolvency proceedings of unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments and does not cover the insolvency ranking of deposits beyond the existing applicable provisions of Directive 2014/59/EU. Therefore, this Directive is without prejudice to national laws of Member States governing normal insolvency proceedings that cover the insolvency ranking of deposits not harmonised by Directive 2014/59/EU. By ... [three years after the date of entry into force of this Directive], the Commission should review the application of Directive 2014/59/EC with regard to the ranking of deposits in insolvency and assess in particular the need for any further amendments thereof,

HAVE ADOPED THIS DIRECTIVE:

Article 1

Amendments to Directive 2014/59/EU

-1.  In Article 2(1), point (48) is replaced by the following:

(48) ‘debt instruments’:

(i)  for the purpose of points (g) and (j) of Article 63(1), means bonds and other forms of transferrable debt, instruments creating or acknowledging a debt, and instruments giving rights to acquire debt instruments; and

(ii)  for the purpose of Article 108, means bonds and other forms of transferrable debt and instruments creating or acknowledging a debt.

  ▐

1a.  In Article 108, the title is replaced by the following:

“Ranking ▐ in insolvency hierarchy”

1b.  In Article 108, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

“1.  Member States shall ensure that in national law governing normal insolvency proceedings:

(a)  the following have the same priority ranking which is higher than the ranking provided for the claims of ordinary unsecured ▐ creditors:

(i)  that part of eligible deposits from natural persons and micro, small and medium-sized enterprises which exceeds the coverage level provided for in Article 6 of Directive 2014/49/EU;

(ii)  deposits that would be eligible deposits from natural persons, micro, small and medium–sized enterprises were they not made through branches located outside the Union of institutions established within the Union.

(b)  the following have the same priority ranking which is higher than the ranking provided for under point (a) and the ranking of all other ordinary unsecured liabilities:

(i)  covered deposits;

(ii)  deposit guarantee schemes subrogating to the rights and obligations of covered depositors in insolvency.”

2.  The following paragraphs are added after the end of Article 108:

"2.  Member States shall ensure that, for entities referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Article 1(1), ordinary unsecured claims shall, in national law governing normal insolvency proceedings, have a higher priority ranking than that of unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments which meet the following conditions:

(a)  the initial contractual maturity of debt instruments is of at least one year;

(b)  they contain no embedded derivatives and are not derivatives themselves;

(c)  the relevant contractual documentation and, where applicable, the prospectus related to the issuance explicitly refers to the lower ranking under this paragraph.

3.  Member States shall ensure that ▐ unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments that meet the conditions laid down in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 shall have a higher priority ranking in national law governing normal insolvency proceedings than the priority ranking of claims resulting from instruments referred to in points (a) to (d) of Article 48(1).

4.  Without prejudice to paragraphs 4b and 4c, Member States shall ensure that their national laws governing normal insolvency proceedings as they were adopted at [31 December 2016] apply to the ranking in normal insolvency proceedings of unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments issued by entities referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Article 1(1) prior to the date of entry into force of measures under national law transposing [this Directive ▌].

4a.  The EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify what constitutes embedded derivatives as referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2.

The EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by [6 months from the date of entry into force of this Directive].

The Commission is empowered to supplement this Directive by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.

4b.  Where, after 31 December 2016 and before the [date of entry into force of this Directive], a Member State has adopted a national law governing the ranking in normal insolvency proceedings of unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments issued after the date of application of such national law, paragraph 4 of this Article shall not apply to claims resulting from debt instruments issued after the entry into force of that national law, provided that all of the following conditions are met:

(a)  under that national law, and for entities referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Article 1(1), ordinary unsecured claims have, in normal insolvency proceedings, a higher priority ranking than that of unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments which meet the following conditions:

(i)  the initial contractual maturity of debt instruments is of at least one year;

(ii)  the debt instruments contain no embedded derivatives and are not derivatives themselves; and

(iii)  the relevant contractual documentation and, where applicable, the prospectus, related to the issuance explicitly refers to the lower ranking under the applicable law;

(b)  under that national law, unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments that meet the conditions laid down in point (a) of this paragraph have, in normal insolvency proceedings, a higher priority ranking than the priority ranking of claims resulting from instruments referred to in points (a) to (d) of Article 48(1).

On the [date of entry into force of measures under national law transposing this Directive], the unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments referred to in point (b), shall have the same priority ranking as that referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 and in paragraph 3.

4c.  Member States which, prior to 31 December 2016, have adopted a national law governing normal insolvency proceedings whereby unsecured claims resulting from debt instruments issued by entities referred to in points (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Article 1(1) are split into two or more different priority rankings or whereby the priority ranking of unsecured claims resulting from such debt instruments is changed in relation to all other ordinary unsecured claims of the same ranking, may provide that debt instruments with the lowest priority ranking among those ordinary unsecured claims have the same ranking as that of claims that meet the conditions of points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 and of paragraph 3.”

Article 2Transposition

1.  Member States shall bring into force by ... [12 months from the date of entry into force of this Directive] the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall communicate the text of those measures to the Commission forthwith.

Member States shall apply those measures from the date of their entry into force in the national law that shall occur no later than on ... [12 months from the date of entry into force of this Directive].

2.  When Member States adopt the measures referred to in paragraph 1, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such a reference is to be made.

2a.  Paragraph 2 shall not apply where the national measures of Member States, in force before the date of entry into force of this Directive, comply with this Directive. In such cases, Member States shall notify the Commission accordingly.

3.  Member States shall communicate to the Commission and to the EBA the text of the main measures of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive▐.

Article 2 aReview

By ... [three years after the date of entry into force of this Directive], the Commission shall review the application of Article 108(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU. The Commission shall assess in particular the need for any further amendments with regard to the ranking of deposits in insolvency. The Commission shall submit a report thereon to the European Parliament and to the Council.

Article 3Entry into force

This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Article 4Addressees

This Directive is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels,

For the European Parliament  For the Council

The President  The President

(1)

* Amendments: new or amended text is highlighted in bold italics; deletions are indicated by the symbol ▌.

(2)

  OJ C , , p. .

(3)

  OJ C , , p. .

(4)

  Principles on Loss-absorbing and Recapitalisation Capacity of G-SIBs in Resolution, Financial Stability Board, 9 November 2015

(5)

  Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, "Towards the completion of the Banking Union", 24.11.2015, COM(2015) 587 final

(6)

  Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment firms and amending Council Directive 82/891/EEC, and Directives 2001/24/EC, 2002/47/EC, 2004/25/EC, 2005/56/EC, 2007/36/EC, 2011/35/EU, 2012/30/EU and 2013/36/EU, and Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010 and (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 173, 12.6.2014, p. 190

(7)

  Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p.1

(8)

  Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, OJ L 225, 30.7.2014, p. 1

(9)

  Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC, OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 338

(10)

  Council conclusions of 17 June 2016 on a roadmap to complete the Banking Union: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/press-releases-pdf/2016/6/47244642837_en.pdf


PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title

Ranking of unsecured debt instruments in insolvency hierarchy

References

COM(2016)0853 – C8-0479/2016 – 2016/0363(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

23.11.2016

 

 

 

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

ECON

16.1.2017

 

 

 

Committees asked for opinions

       Date announced in plenary

BUDG

16.1.2017

JURI

16.1.2017

 

 

Not delivering opinions

       Date of decision

BUDG

8.12.2016

JURI

31.1.2017

 

 

Rapporteurs

       Date appointed

Gunnar Hökmark

24.11.2016

 

 

 

Discussed in committee

28.2.2017

25.4.2017

3.5.2017

11.7.2017

 

25.9.2017

 

 

 

Date adopted

10.10.2017

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

48

6

0

Members present for the final vote

Burkhard Balz, Pervenche Berès, Udo Bullmann, Thierry Cornillet, Esther de Lange, Fabio De Masi, Markus Ferber, Jonás Fernández, Neena Gill, Roberto Gualtieri, Brian Hayes, Gunnar Hökmark, Danuta Maria Hübner, Cătălin Sorin Ivan, Petr Ježek, Barbara Kappel, Wajid Khan, Georgios Kyrtsos, Werner Langen, Sander Loones, Olle Ludvigsson, Ivana Maletić, Fulvio Martusciello, Marisa Matias, Gabriel Mato, Costas Mavrides, Bernard Monot, Luděk Niedermayer, Stanisław Ożóg, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Pirkko Ruohonen-Lerner, Anne Sander, Alfred Sant, Molly Scott Cato, Pedro Silva Pereira, Peter Simon, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Kay Swinburne, Ernest Urtasun, Marco Valli, Tom Vandenkendelaere, Miguel Viegas, Jakob von Weizsäcker, Marco Zanni

Substitutes present for the final vote

Alain Cadec, Andrea Cozzolino, Ashley Fox, Doru-Claudian Frunzulică, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Thomas Mann, Luigi Morgano, Michel Reimon, Lieve Wierinck

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote

Judith Sargentini

Date tabled

13.10.2017


FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

48

+

ALDE

Thierry Cornillet, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Petr Ježek, Lieve Wierinck

ECR

Ashley Fox, Sander Loones, Stanisław Ożóg, Pirkko Ruohonen-Lerner, Kay Swinburne,

ENF

Barbara Kappel

PPE

Burkhard Balz, Alain Cadec, Markus Ferber, Brian Hayes, Gunnar Hökmark, Danuta Maria Hübner, Georgios Kyrtsos, Werner Langen, Ivana Maletić, Thomas Mann, Fulvio Martusciello, Gabriel Mato, Luděk Niedermayer, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Anne Sander, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Tom Vandenkendelaere, Esther de Lange

S&D

Pervenche Berès, Udo Bullmann, Andrea Cozzolino, Jonás Fernández, Doru-Claudian Frunzulică, Neena Gill, Roberto Gualtieri, Cătălin Sorin Ivan, Wajid Khan, Olle Ludvigsson, Costas Mavrides, Luigi Morgano, Alfred Sant, Pedro Silva Pereira, Peter Simon, Jakob von Weizsäcker

VERTS/ALE

Michel Reimon, Judith Sargentini, Molly Scott Cato, Ernest Urtasun

6

-

EFDD

Marco Valli

ENF

Bernard Monot, Marco Zanni

GUE/NGL

Fabio De Masi, Marisa Matias, Miguel Viegas

0

0

 

 

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

Last updated: 23 October 2017Legal notice