On Thursday 10 January, the European Parliament's Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted, by a very large majority, its negotiating position on reforming the jurisdiction, governance and financing of the three European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) for finance, but the EU Council is not ready to adopt its own (see EUROPE 11864).
A discussion at the ministerial level with a view to a possible agreement is currently scheduled for next May.
As a reminder, at the end of December, the EU Council adopted a partial general approach concerning the European Banking Authority's new powers to combat money laundering (see EUROPE 12164).
The Romanian Presidency of the Council are expected to confirm the line taken by the Austrian Presidency and to propose that Parliament enter into negotiations only on these provisions. According to a European source, there is a problem of timing, and an agreement on comprehensive reform before the European elections does indeed seem “unrealistic”.
This is all the more so since, on the Council's side, there is still deadlock at the political level on several details. First of all, the Commission's proposal to involve industry in the budget of the European authorities raises many objections, but it is above all the new direct supervisory powers conferred on the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) that divide the Member States.
Countries such as Luxembourg are firmly opposed to it, while others, especially France, are pushing for more direct supervisory powers (see EUROPE 11899).
The provisions on combating money laundering, considered urgent by the majority of countries, ultimately served as a lever for those in favour of reforming the ESAs, explained the same source.
In December, the Austrian Presidency of the Council even considered aggressive measures, despite the reluctance of some, to reach an agreement on comprehensive reform. To save time, the Luxembourg Minister, Pierre Gramegna, asked that the topic be put on the agenda for discussion at the January ‘Ecofin’ Council. The leverage was finally lost with the adoption of the Council's partial general approach.
In procedural terms, a separation of dossiers is not so simple. In Parliament, a decision will have to be taken before the text is voted on in plenary session. In the Council, a decision by the Member States' ambassadors to the EU (Coreper) will probably be required.
The Commission, which wishes to keep its package well put together, could also have a say and ask for this decision to be taken unanimously by the Member States, if it considers that the separate negotiation of the dossiers would deviate too much from its initial proposal.
In any case, it has asked to put the subject of comprehensive reform on the table at the next Ecofin Council on 22 January, with the aim of reaching an agreement or, at the very least, having further discussions.
By accepting a separation of dossiers, Parliament could at least secure an agreement before the European elections on the ‘anti-money laundering' section, identified as a priority by the two co-legislators following recent scandals involving several European banking groups, argues this source.
But the co-rapporteur, Pervenche Berès (S&D, France), categorically rejected such a scenario. Accelerating the fight against money laundering must go hand in hand with strengthening the governance of ESAs, she said (see EUROPE 12169).
The issue of the separation of dossiers is being discussed this Friday 11 January in a Council working group. As for the question of whether or not the comprehensive reform of the ESAs will be on the agenda of the next ‘Ecofin’ Council, it will have to wait until the meeting of the Permanent Representatives (Coreper) on Wednesday 16 January. (Original version in French by Marion Fontana)