Brussels, 08/01/2015 (Agence Europe) - The report by the MEP Cora van Nieuwenhuizen, who is heading up the work at the European Parliament on the proposed regulation to reinforce governance in calculating financial benchmarks, was generally well received by the economic committee of the EP, on 8 January.
The Czech MEP Ludek Niedermayer (EPP), shadow rapporteur on the dossier, said that the Commission's proposal was not “a good proposal” and was “particularly heavy”, and welcomed the rapporteur's work. He particularly praised the clear distinction she had drawn between critical and non-critical benchmarks, but questioned the regime for third countries. “We want more regulation in Europe, but we do not want to be prevented from using foreign benchmarks”, he said. Van Nieuwenhuizen stressed that there are no similar rules anywhere else, even in draft form. She argued that European efforts should focus on international competitiveness by “keeping in place a very wide range of benchmarks, including those from outside the EU”. On this point, she feels that the Commission's proposal is insufficient.
Speaking on behalf of the S&D group, Spain's Jonas Fernandez pledged to table amendments to ensure the correct proportionality. Van Nieuwenhuizen also laid emphasis on this point, stating that additional proportionality is needed, over and above what the Commission's text provides for. The aim is to maintain the stability of the financial system, but also to look at the impact in terms of costs for benchmark administrators. If these are too high, they could prove prohibitive, she said.
Lastly, on the scope of application, van Nieuwenhuizen is against excluding certain categories of industry, as manipulation has been seen in many different sectors. Kay Swinburne (ECR, UK) argued in favour of excluding raw materials from the text, whilst calling for a separate Commission proposal to procure stability for this market. Supported by Molly Scott Cato (Greens/EFA, UK), Swinburne questioned the quantitative threshold to determine a critical indicator. Scott Cato felt that it was too high (with a reference value of upwards of €500 billion). The Greens/EFA MEP explained that the group supported the rapporteur's general approach and the introduction of quantitative criteria, although they still had a number of reservations about the wording of the amendment.
Van Nieuwenhuizen feels that it will be possible to resolve all the problems raised in the next few weeks. The dates set for the examination of the amendments, 23 January, and for the ECON committee's vote, 5 March, can therefore be met. (EL)