WRITTEN QUESTION E-0761/04 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE-DE) to the Commission. European passport and the sale of financial products in Europe.
Date: 2004-03-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law - national law, consumer information, consumer protection, financial legislation, venture capital

C 84 E/874

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

(2004/C 84 E/0967)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0759/04

by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 March 2004)

Subject: General framework for ensuring European financial market stability

In view of the fact that financial
institutions becoming increasingly
integration will result in financial
involved in crossborder transactions which may significantly increase systemic risks and crossborder
financial contagion, is the Commission considering giving the national central banks and the European
Central Bank a greater role in this context, entailing more than just the existing cooperation and exchange
of information?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2004)

The integration of the EU financial sector poses new challenges with respect to financial stability, as cross-
border and cross-sector linkages intensify contagion risk.
financial
integration requires closer co-ordination between the competent national authorities that are responsible
for the regulation, supervision and crisis management of financial institutions, backed up by appropriate
regulatory and institutional arrangements at the EU level.

In consequence,

the process of

While there is a substantial EU framework of prudential legislation for the financial sector, supervision and
crisis management are mainly national competences. The involvement of national central banks in
supervision varies from Member State to Member State. Regardless of the chosen national structure,
however, the Commission shares the view of the Honourable Member that all efforts should be made to
ensure that all the relevant authorities interact efficiently at the EU level.

The two Economic and Financial Committee (EFC) reports on financial stability (April 2000) and crisis
management (April 2001) (cid:1) the so-called Brouwer reports (cid:1) assessed whether the existing regulatory and
supervisory structures in the EU could safeguard financial stability and specifically addressed issues of
cross-border and cross-sector co-ordination among national supervisors and central banks within the EU.
These reports concluded that the existing institutional arrangements for co-operation are appropriate, but
that their functioning should be enhanced. Implementation of the recommendations in these reports is
kept under regular review by the Ecofin Council and considerable progress has been made.

A Memorandum of Understanding on co-operation in crisis situations was signed between banking
supervisors and central banks, including the European Central Bank, in all of the Member States in 2003.
In addition, the Commission has proposed an extension of the Lamfalussy approach to all financial sectors.
This will provide the appropriate forums for strengthening the co-operation among national supervisors at
EU-level (cid:1) including central banks where appropriate. The new committee structure also aims at
facilitating regulatory convergence among Member States in their implementation of EU financial
regulation. The Financial Conglomerate Directive, which will be implemented in Member States in August
2004, will also improve the efficient supervision of cross-border groups by introducing a co-ordinating
supervisor.

(2004/C 84 E/0968)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0761/04

by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 March 2004)

Subject: European passport and the sale of financial products in Europe

Will it be possible for a Member State to oppose the sale of a financial instrument with a European
passport under the Prospectus Directive, in particular if it regards the instrument as too risky for the target
public among which it is to be marketed?

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/875

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 2004)

The fundamental point is that the principle of complete freedom of movement of capital is embodied in
the Treaty itself. Articles 56 to 60 of the EC Treaty established new rules on movements of capital.
Article 56, which is directly applicable, introduced the principle of complete freedom of movement of
capital and payments, both between Member States and between Member States and third countries, while
Article 58 defines the areas where Member States are allowed to retain provisions on information,
supervision and tax law provided that capital movements are not hampered.

Community law requires prior information to be provided when securities are offered to the public or
admitted to trading on a regulated market.

Directive 2003/71/EC (1) does not authorise host Member States to oppose a sale or require further
information on the grounds that documentation is incomplete or insufficient concerning the risk factor
involved in the investment if that documentation has been approved by the competent authority in the
country of origin.

On the other hand, the Directive does not prohibit host Member States from laying down specific rules on
the use of advertising when securities are offered to the public.

(1) Directive 2003/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 on the prospectus to be
published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading and amending Directive 2001/34/EC,
OJ L 345, 31.12.2003.

(2004/C 84 E/0969)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0767/04

by Brian Crowley (UEN) to the Commission

(4 March 2004)

Subject: eEurope 2005 Action Plan

Discussions are currently taking place with regard to the implementation of the eEurope 2005 Action Plan.

Will the Commission make a statement regarding the guarantees that will be included in this Plan to
ensure that cultural and linguistic diversities will be protected at all times within the framework of the
implementation of this programme, and can the Commission provide guarantees that the benefits of new
and evolving information technologies will be extended to both rural and urban areas and equally to
peripheral areas within the EU?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 2004)

The Commission would like to reaffirm the importance it attaches to maintaining linguistic and cultural
diversity. The information society can reinforce diversity and allow a wide range of services to be offered
in local languages and meeting specific local needs. The eEurope 2005 Action Plan aims to promote the
development of services applications and content and the Commission believes that this will make a major
contribution to ensuring that European culture at all levels can flourish.

The question refers to the ongoing discussions on the implementation of eEurope. This is the mid-term
review which was planned to ensure that the action plan, agreed by 15 Member States at the Seville
European Council (21/22 June 2002) is appropriate for an enlarged EU of 25 members. The Commission
undertook a survey of Member States and Acceding Countries at the end of 2003 and the general response
was that eEurope is a valuable programme and its objectives do not need to be adjusted. This represents a
vote of confidence from across Europe in the strategy and objectives of eEurope which include linguistic
and cultural diversity and ensuring an information society for all, including urban, rural and peripheral
areas.