Proposition 52K2183

Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 2 août 2002 relative à la surveillance du secteur financier et aux services financiers, et instaurant l'action en cessation des infractions à la loi du ... relative aux services de paiement.

General information ¶

Submitted by

CD&V Leterme Ⅱ

Submission date

Oct. 8, 2009

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

EC Directive administrative check payment civil procedure electronic money financial policy financial institution financial transaction appeal

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld MR

Abstained from voting

Vooruit N-VA LDD FN VB

Party dissidents ¶

• Peter Luykx (CD&V) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

Nov. 12, 2009 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Due to the technical nature of these two projects transposing a European directive, in agreement with the President and Mrs. the Secretary, I refer to the excellent written report.

Mrs. Speaker, I agree with the findings of the rapporteur who stated that it is, at first glance, a rather technical piece, with the sole aim of transposing a European directive into Belgian legislation. I only think it goes a little further than that. The average consumer with us has the impression that the payment transactions are regulated by the banks, even though this is not really true. In Belgium, we know, like the colleagues who have followed this topic, that it is mainly regulated by Athos and Maestro.

The current bill creates a new category of financial institutions, in particular payment institutions. It regulates status, access, and so on. It comes down to a bank statute light.

The uniform rules with a licensing obligation, a European passport, are very positive and represent a progression from the current system. My group absolutely agrees with the liberalization of the payment system. This legal framework represents a significant step forward towards a single payment area. Given the ambitions that Belgium has set itself within the framework of the Lisbon objectives and the competitive market, we can only welcome that.

A number of colleagues have already commented on the previous draft from the Business Committee. There are points of attention that inspire our fear. Fear is a too strong word, we must be vigilant for angels.

It is regrettable that the Directive limits a Member State in its possibility to derogate. This means that Belgium, as one of the best pupils in the classroom on payment transactions, must compromise in the smaller regulation, which today applies in a number of other European countries. We are discussing that now.

In the context of SEPA and the Belgian account number, I am pleased that the government provides sufficient guarantees for a good flow of information to consumers. Within the framework of payment systems, I would like to expressly advocate for a good flow of information to traders. Especially the fact that in the retail market there will be multiple operators deserves the necessary attention.

For the European Union as a whole and as a single market, it is ⁇ a good story. For Belgium and its duopoly it is awaiting. It was reassuring that the Minister of Finance in the Committee on Finance has assured that other players have a lot of interest in our existing duopoly, with the aim of increasing competition. That will not be a problem. That is positive.

Around the story of costs and costs of payment traffic we will have to look a little ahead. We are very cheap there. We must also say that in Belgium, and that is for once and again positive in recent times, the financial system works very cheap, even five to six times cheaper than in some Southern European countries. It will be a challenge to keep that way.

The risk lies especially in the fact that one can have multiple providers. We must avoid every trader having to work with three to four or five systems. The number of systems with which it is working works cost-increasing and we all know that those costs will eventually fall to the consumer.

In the Finance Committee, the Minister has acknowledged this problem and said he is very vigilant about it. I think this should be more than sufficient and reassuring at the moment to move on with it. In many countries, the transposition of this Directive, 2007/64, is still underway. The House must approve that draft very quickly and urgently, which we hope to do today with everyone, especially for the credibility of Brussels as the capital of the European Union and as the financial center. We have a role to fulfill in this and must absolutely approve that. I would have been very difficult if colleagues did not approve these projects from Finance: that seems incomprehensible to me.

Congratulations to.