Volledige tekst 
Procedure : 2013/0306(COD)
Stadium plenaire behandeling
Documentencyclus : A8-0041/2015

Ingediende teksten :


Debatten :

PV 28/04/2015 - 15
CRE 28/04/2015 - 15
PV 04/04/2017 - 16
CRE 04/04/2017 - 16

Stemmingen :

PV 29/04/2015 - 10.61
CRE 29/04/2015 - 10.61
PV 05/04/2017 - 9.7

Aangenomen teksten :


Volledig verslag van de vergaderingen
Dinsdag 4 april 2017 - Straatsburg Herziene uitgave

16. Geldmarktfondsen (debat)
Video van de redevoeringen

  Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest sprawozdanie sporządzone przez Neenę Gill w imieniu Komisji Gospodarczej i Monetarnej w sprawie wniosku dotyczącego rozporządzenia Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady w sprawie funduszy rynku pieniężnego (COM(2013)0615 – C7-0263/2013 – 2013/0306(COD)) (A8-0041/2015).


  Neena Gill, rapporteur. – Mr President, 1 310 is the number of days between the publication of the proposal on the money market funds regulation and when we will actually have the final vote on this matter – tomorrow. This must be close to a record: money market funds (MMFs) have been held up for more than three years and four Council presidencies, because it is one of the most contentious and complex pieces of legislation we have ever dealt with. It has been a long journey, but I am delighted we have reached the right destination, an overall agreement between Parliament and the Council. I believe this is a win-win, both for the European money market fund sector and for the European taxpayer, who will be better protected.

With assets under management of around EUR 1 trillion, MMFs are an important source of short-term financing for financial institutions, corporations and governments. In Europe, around 22% of short-term debt securities issued by governments or by the corporate sector are held by MMFs. Money market funds hold 38% of the short debt issued by the banking sector.

Because of the systemic inter-connectedness between MMFs, the banking sector and corporate and government finance, their operation has been at the core of international work on shadow banking. As a result, MMFs have been scrutinised by various regulators and supervisors. Indeed, the financial crisis of 2007-2008 showed that MMFs can be vulnerable to shocks and may even spread or amplify risks. This can fuel an investor run and liquidity crisis, foreign MMFs potentially triggering negative effects on other parts of the financial system.

The agreement we have reached under the Slovak Presidency that we will vote on tomorrow addresses these systemic concerns, in particular through the following measures: liquidity and diversification requirements are strengthened, with strict daily and weekly liquidity requirements to fulfil potential redemption requests, and furthermore, the MMF portfolio will be more diversified, with stringent concentration requirements to reduce risks; assets in which MMFs can invest, including government debt, have been more strictly regulated; sponsored support to these funds is forbidden, to avoid any contagion risk; we have addressed provisions for transparency in more detail; a review clause for government CNAVs has been introduced; after five years, the Commission will report on the feasibility of establishing an 80% EU public debt quota; the report will look at the availability of short—term EU public debt instruments... I could go on – a stringent regime of fees and gates in the case of shortfalls in liquidity will address the question of run risk, and we will limit the use of the amortised accounting method for the valuation of assets.

I am particularly pleased that, apart from existing MMF models, a viable operation model for LVNAV MMFs has been introduced at Parliament’s initiative, and I believe that the run risk compared to the CNAV is significantly lower. The LVNAV cannot deviate by more than 20 points from the NAV and is far stricter than 50 basis points. This is a compromise, and I prefer a compromise which regulates the sector over no agreement and leaving an unregulated MMF sector, and it is in line with the international commitments we have made.

Colleagues, politics is a team sport, and you cannot make agreements in isolation. Let me therefore say a word of thanks to the shadow rapporteurs, Brian Hayes, Petr Ježek, Syed Kamall, Eva Joly and Fabio De Masi, and to the President of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, Roberto Gualtieri, for his political support and to Kamil Sasko, who led the negotiations on behalf of the Council. I would also like to thank the ECON secretariat and the S&D secretariat and the policy advisers.

I believe this agreement is an important step forward in ensuring the long—term stability of our financial markets. The EU has been lagging behind, as I have said, on international commitments that we have, which the US already implemented 18 months ago.

I hope, colleagues, I can rely on your overwhelming support tomorrow and that would send a clear signal and a welcome political signal that we are capable of adopting a strong, harmonised, regulatory framework ensuring financial stability and that investors get well protected all over the EU.


  Valdis Dombrovskis, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, money market funds have been at the core of international work on shadow banking due to their vulnerability to investor runs on redemptions and the interconnectedness to their issuers and sponsor banks. So your vote tomorrow will be an important in finalising one of the last dossiers relating to the post-crisis reform agenda.

It is an important achievement that took more than three years of very difficult and contentious negotiations. I would therefore like to thank the European Parliament, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and in particular rapporteur Neena Gill on their ongoing commitment to achieving these results.

In our view the compromise reached on most of the contentious issues is well balanced. I am talking about the removal of the sunset clause on low volatility net asset value (LVNAV) MMFs, the inclusion of the public debt in the liquidity buckets, and the non-automaticity of the review of the feasibility of the EU debt quota for public debt constant net asset value (CNAV) MMFs which will be taking place in five years.

We think that the proposed framework strikes an appropriate balance between addressing the vulnerabilities of money market funds while maintaining them as a viable product. Money market funds can therefore continue to play their important role of on the one hand providing short-term funding to companies, in particular SMEs, and on the other hand diversifying portfolios for investors.

We also welcome the co-legislators’ decision to further strengthen the Commission’s proposal by banning sponsor support entirely, therefore further reducing the contagion risk between money market funds and the banking sector.

On balance the regulation offers a viable, robust and safe framework for both investors and asset managers that would improve the resilience of our economy.


  Brian Hayes, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, can I join in congratulating the rapporteur, Neena Gill, on this file, and indeed all the other shadows for the work over the course of the last three years in what has proved to be a very controversial and difficult file.

I am glad that we have achieved what I regard as a balanced agreement, on the one hand recognising the potential systemic risk and threat that can in a worst-case scenario come from money market funds, while at the same time, recognising the intrinsic value of these short-term financial instruments to businesses up and down the European Union. I think we have come along way from the original Commission proposal which essentially proposed a 3% buffer, which could at one glance have knocked out, in my own country, EUR 400 billion worth of domiciled funds as a consequence of that very harsh proposal.

We have all compromised in this proposal. We recognise the importance of money market funds for businesses in terms of short-term financing needs, and we also recognise that we are behind the United States, who have already put in place a regulation to deal with this issue. But I should say, as I said in the course of the trilogues, the problem was not in Europe, it was in the United States of America.

I think great political skill was shown by the rapporteur and her team, with my own team, and indeed the team from the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) in devising this particular solution. We have a framework that allows CNAVs, VNAVs and LVNAVs to coexist together. We have liquidity buffers in place, we have diversification, we have escalated procedures in place, improved transparency, the sunset clause is gone which I am delighted about, and we also have a very strong review when it comes to the question of government CNAVs, but the government CNAVs remain in place.

I believe we now have in place a good package which we can present to the entire financial industry and to the citizens of Europe to make sure that this industry, which is so important to the future growth and development of Europe, remains in place.


  Pervenche Berès, au nom du groupe S&D. – Monsieur le Président, sous l’aspect d’un dossier technique, il s’agit en réalité d’une législation à mettre en place pour réguler l’un des aspects les plus caractéristiques de ce qu’on appelle le système bancaire parallèle. C’est la raison pour laquelle dès 2012 et 2013, le Conseil de stabilité financière et l’Organisation internationale des commissions de valeurs (OICV) avaient indiqué que nous devions légiférer dans ce domaine au sujet des fonds monétaires à valeur constante (CNAV), qui ont joué un rôle systémique dans la contribution de la finance parallèle à la crise.

Je fais partie de ceux qui auraient préféré l’interdiction de ces fameux CNAV compte tenu du risque systémique et de ce qu’ils représentent pour ce système bancaire de l’ombre. Mais après deux tentatives dans ce Parlement, au cours de la législature précédente et de l’actuelle, et compte tenu de la situation de blocage au Conseil, je préférais une situation qui permettait de trouver un compromis et d’avancer plutôt qu’un cas de figure où nous n’aurions pu adopter aucune législation, car au bout du compte, les plus heureux auraient été les gestionnaires de ces fameux fonds monétaires à valeur constante qu’il s’agit, à tout le moins, d’encadrer.

J’invite tous mes collègues à faire ce pas, même si je partage avec eux cette frustration de ne pas avoir pu aller jusqu’au bout, car au Conseil, certains États membres, qui abritent la plus grande partie de cette activité financière contreproductive, ont refusé toute autre solution que celle à laquelle nous sommes parvenus, en dépit de l’intelligence déployée par nos rapporteurs pour trouver des voies, des moyens et un système qui permette d’encadrer ces fonds.


  Stanisław Ożóg, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Fundusze rynku pieniężnego są dużą szansą dla małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw oraz przedsiębiorstw rozpoczynających swoją działalność. Biorąc pod uwagę widoczną rolę funduszy rynku pieniężnego w kryzysie finansowym, regulacje były bardzo potrzebne. ECR nie mógł poprzeć pierwotnego wniosku, ponieważ zbyt mocno obciążał on stałą wartość aktywów przedsiębiorstwa. Po osiągnięciu porozumienia w ramach rozmów, które mimo że nie do końca satysfakcjonujące, przyniosły wiele pozytywnych zmian, na jakich zależało w grupie ECR – przede wszystkim dla małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw, zapewniających przecież około trzech czwartych wszystkich miejsc pracy w Unii Europejskiej – deklarujemy swoje poparcie.


  Petr Ježek, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, the money market fund sector is split roughly evenly into constant net asset value and variable net asset value funds. Therefore it is crucial that our framework takes account of the specificities of each type of fund, allowing each fund to continue to function and to finance the real economy, while addressing the objective of the regulation, namely to ensure money market funds are robust and secure in the case of systemic financial events.

The text we will vote on tomorrow strikes the right balance in this respect. We will ensure that CNAV funds in particular are more closely linked to the variations in market value of their assets, through conversion into low volatility NAV funds. This will increase investor protection and reduce the risk of a systemic impact in the event of another crisis.

At the same time LVNAVs will maintain those characteristics which make the currency most attractive to certain types of investors, such as same-day settlement and simplicity of tax treatment. There are many further measure us in the text which will help ensure that money market funds continue to serve their purpose in markets while being subject to a strong regulatory regime.

These negotiations were not easy, yet we should be proud that the final outcome is based on an innovative approach taken here in the Parliament in order to break the deadlock between the groups in the Parliament and also between Member States in the Council. Thanks to the rapporteur, the shadow rapporteurs and all involved.


  Matt Carthy, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Mr President, this proposal which began as an attempt to reduce systemic risk in the shadow banking sector is now deeply disappointing. Let us not forget the role that money market funds played in sparking panic and fire sales in the US during the financial crisis. We had an opportunity to reduce the risk of a future crisis in the global economy and we have failed to take it.

These changes will be largely cosmetic and the address of CNAVs has not been agreed. Systemic risk, in other words, remains fully in place. As Mr Hayes has said, certain funds in Ireland and indeed Luxembourg will benefit from this outcome, but what is the cost? Last year the Financial Stability Board warned that shadow banking in Ireland was, unbelievably, 10 times the size of our economy.

We have already lived through a financial crisis in Ireland that was caused by a banking sector that was actually formally regulated but wholly inadequately so. We need to take the dangers posed by the huge and unregulated shadow banking sector very seriously and we need to act accordingly.


  Eva Joly, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, il y a dix ans, la crise des subprimes plongeait l’économie mondiale dans la tourmente et mettait en lumière les dérives du secteur financier. Nous étions alors nombreux à souhaiter davantage de régulation financière. Où sont passées les bonnes intentions d’alors? Aux oubliettes!

Une majorité de députés a préféré s’aligner sur les demandes des lobbies financiers plutôt que d’agir dans l’intérêt des citoyens en encadrant mieux les fonds monétaire à risque. Nous partions d’un projet qui visait à améliorer la stabilité des systèmes financiers. Nous nous retrouvons avec un texte qui préserve largement le fonctionnement des fonds monétaire exposés aux risques du marché.

N’ayons pas la mémoire si courte. Sachons tirer les leçons du passé. Le risque d’une nouvelle crise est réel. Soyons à la hauteur de nos responsabilités. Les citoyens ont suffisamment souffert des risques pris par les banques et de l’austérité qui en a découlé.


  Bernard Monot, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, la réforme des Fonds monétaires est enfantée dans la douleur après quatre ans d’atermoiements.

Nous sommes tous d’accord sur la nécessité de contenir le risque systémique des fonds à valeur liquidative constante. Mais l’Union européenne pond, encore une fois, un texte complexe. Je souhaite bonne chance aux gérants d’actifs pour mettre en œuvre cette réforme et respecter la panoplie des nouvelles règles.

Quant aux investisseurs, la clarification tant attendue n’a pas eu lieu. Les intérêts de l’industrie financière irlandaise sont protégés, mais il aurait sans doute fallu des décisions plus ambitieuses pour sécuriser le système financier tout entier. Comme je le répète souvent, l’onde d’un choc systémique viendra de l’économie spéculative, comme en 2008. Tout annonce un prochain cataclysme financier: la progression du système bancaire parallèle et des engagements hors bilan des banques ainsi que les prêts non performants.

La protection de l’économie réelle passe par une séparation stricte des activités de banque. Or, c’est précisément ce que l’Union européenne ne veut pas faire. Enfin, le secteur financier français n’a pas attendu Union européenne pour sécuriser ses fonds monétaires. C’est pour cette raison que nous voterons contre cette réforme.


  Dariusz Rosati (PPE). – Mr President, tomorrow we will finally approve a crucial piece of financial legislation, which is the Money Market Funds Regulation. We are talking about EUR 1 trillion of money market funds investment in Europe. These funds have become a vital cash management tool for many types of businesses, local authorities, NGOs and universities. Therefore they benefit all of us. Unfortunately, the financial crisis revealed that this short-term investment instrument can pose some systemic risks.

Therefore, I welcome the fact that the European Parliament and the Council, after very long and difficult negotiations, have created for the first time a European regulatory framework for money market funds. In congratulating Neena Gill and the shadow rapporteurs on their work, I want to underline that this highly important piece of legislation that we will now have will make money market funds more resilient to crisis and more transparent, money market funds which can contribute to bridging the investment gap in Europe which is something we, together with the Commission, are striving to achieve. Moreover, stable money market funds will be helpful in creating the Capital Market Union.

To name only a few of the various positive aspects of this document, I do appreciate that this regulation ensures that in the future there will be no run risk. Thanks to the uniform rules on the portfolio of money market funds, we will be protected from the situations when investors would withdraw their money simultaneously. Money market funds will be obliged to invest in higher quality assets and will not be able to rely on external support. It is crucial for money market funds to avoid over-reliance on external ratings and introduce the internal risk credit assessment by managers. The legislation protects investors and gives not only large multinationals, but also small companies, the opportunities to grow.


  Theodor Dumitru Stolojan (PPE). – Domnule președinte, într-adevăr, aceste fonduri monetare de pe piețele monetare reprezentau, până nu demult, o parte extrem de importantă a ceea ce noi denumeam sistemul financiar din umbră și ele au un rol deosebit în gestionarea disponibilităților bănești pe termen scurt pe care le au nu numai firmele, dar și alte instituții financiare și cetățenii. Aceste fonduri trebuie să îndeplinească, în principal, trei condiții: să asigure valoarea banilor, să o mențină, să aibă un grad de lichiditate ridicat și o volatilitate scăzută.

Din păcate, așa cum unii colegi deja au arătat, criza a scos în evidență că este necesar un cadru de reglementare și în acest domeniu, pentru a întări protecția investitorilor, pentru a evita riscul de contagiune și pentru a mări rezistența la schimbările adverse de pe piețe.

Prin acest proiect de reglementare pe care îl voi vota mâine, se introduc măsuri obligatorii pentru aceste fonduri mutuale și se face un pas înainte în construcția pieței unice a capitalului.


  Seán Kelly (PPE). – A Uachtaráin, mar a dúirt mo comhghleacaí Brian Ó hAodha, is ábhar fíorchonspóideach, casta, deacair é seo, agus i ndáiríre tá moladh mór tuillte ag Brian agus ag daoine cosúil le Valdis Dombrovskis, an Coimisinéir, agus an Rapóirtéir as ucht an obair a chuir siad isteach ag déileáil leis.

Tá an t-ádh linn go bhfuil saineolaithe mar sin sa Pharlaimint agus go bhfuil siad sásta a bheith ag obair ar ár son agus a bheith obair ar son ár saoránach. I ndeireadh na dála, mar a dúirt Brian, táimid tagtha ar chomhréiteach an-chiallmhar agus an-phraiticiúil.

Dá bhrí sin tá mé sásta go bhfuil comhréiteach an-chiallmhar againn agus tá súil agam go nglacfar leis amárach.


Catch-the-eye procedure


  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, νομίζω ότι το βασικό συμπέρασμα που βγάζουμε από τη συζήτηση είναι ότι χρειάζεται φως και διαφάνεια στο σκιώδες αυτό τραπεζικό σύστημα, ένα σύστημα το οποίο διαθέτει 1 τρισεκατομμύριο ευρώ, ένα σύστημα που λειτουργεί περισσότερο ως οικονομία-καζίνο, ένα σύστημα που πρέπει να δώσει μεγαλύτερη έμφαση στην πραγματική οικονομία και να ενισχύσει το ρόλο των μικρομεσαίων επιχειρήσεων για να μπορούν να στηρίξουν την ανάπτυξη. Κρίσιμα ζητήματα σε σχέση με τα κριτήρια ρευστότητας. Θεωρώ ότι κάναμε πολύ μικρά βήματα σε σχέση με το τι έπρεπε να γίνει.

Επιπλέον, παραμένουν, φαίνεται, πάρα πολλά κεφάλαια στο Λουξεμβούργο, ενδεχομένως και στην Ιρλανδία, τα οποία πρέπει να ελεγχθούν ακόμη περισσότερο. Ένα βασικό θέμα αφορά τους οίκους αξιολόγησης, διότι οι επενδυτές στηρίζονται, κατά κύριο λόγο, σε αξιολογήσεις πιστοληπτικής ικανότητας από οίκους αξιολόγησης αμφίβολης ποιότητας, που παίζουν τα δικά τους παιχνίδια στο πλαίσιο της παγκοσμιοποίησης και ήταν υπεύθυνοι, σε μεγάλο βαθμό, και για τη χρηματοπιστωτική κρίση.


  Miguel Viegas (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, mais uma vez estamos a legislar tendo como pano de fundo a crise financeira e o reconhecido papel que os fundos monetários tiveram e continuam a poder ter na multiplicação do risco e das perdas colocando em risco todo o sistema financeiro. Todos recordamos o encerramento de vários fundos monetários nas últimas décadas. Todos conhecemos que estes fundos representam uma das faces visíveis da chamada “banca-sombra”. A História veio ensinar-nos que a especulação está no genoma da finança.

Esta proposta pretende iludir as populações e os trabalhadores de que é possível regular esta atividade criando novas categorias de fundos, ditos de baixa volatilidade, ao ditar regras em termos de diversificação ou mesmo escolhas entre as carteiras de investimento. Estamos, portanto, perante uma regulamentação minimalista e complexa que não responde aos verdadeiros problemas do sistema financeiro e demonstra, mais uma vez, quem manda nesta União Europeia.


(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


  Valdis Dombrovskis, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you very much for this debate. I think this debate showed very clearly that the negotiations were very complicated and what we have reached is a compromise decision. Indeed it took a long time, it probably does not keep all sides entirely happy, but it still allows us to move forward. Once again, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Neena Gill, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, and all the colleagues who have been working on this dossier for their efforts and constructive approach during the trilogue negotiations.


  Neena Gill, rapporteur. – Mr President, Vice-President Dombrovskis, thank you for your words and also for the constructive engagement we had with the Commission throughout these negotiations, and particularly to our friend Tilman over there in terms of finding the eventual solution.

I would just like to take this opportunity to speak to colleagues who have been, let us say, less than optimistic about this, especially the ones in the Greens and GUE/NGL who were involved at every level in these negotiations, but did not always apply themselves or come up with any concrete alternative way forward. The only way forward was to go back and suggest that we stick with a proposal that could not actually get any kind of agreement in Parliament itself. I think it is important that we recognise that the way we could move forward was to find some kind of compromise, and compromises are difficult, they do not tick all the boxes, but they do mean that we find a solution that basically works for most parts of the sector.

I do believe we have some strong improvements in the proposal that we are going to vote on tomorrow, which many of my colleagues have highlighted and mentioned and I will not repeat them, but I hope that tomorrow we will vote for this in a big way, because it is important that the European Parliament can demonstrate that we are able to overcome our differences within this House, and we are not just a replica of the Council. We make that judgment to ensure that a money market fund sector can thrive and meet many of our objectives either in the Capital Markets Union that the Commission has set itself, or through making sure that we do not have any recourse to the taxpayer in future. Once again I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs, the Commission and my coordinator here, for making sure we have final agreement on this.


  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się w środę 5 kwietnia 2017 r.

Juridische mededeling - Privacybeleid