Proposition 53K1619

Projet de loi visant à transposer diverses directives relatives au contrôle du secteur financier et portant dispositions diverses.

General information ¶

Submitted by

CD&V Leterme Ⅱ

Submission date

June 22, 2011

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

EC Directive administrative check board of management investment company fringe benefit central bank financial policy financial institution credit institution pay bonus payment insurance company

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA MR

Abstained from voting

Groen Vooruit Ecolo LDD VB

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 ¶

July 7, 2011 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mijnheer de voorzitter, ik verwijs naar het schriftelijk verslag dat door de diensten uitstekend was opgesteld. (The Applause)

The word is for mr. by Gilkinet. Will you also support your amendments?

Yes, Mr. President, even though I am afraid not to be as applauded as Mr. and Dedecker.

Mr. Minister, dear colleagues, this morning, new worrying news came to us from Portugal, whose rating has been degraded by those rating agencies that continue to make the good weather and especially the rain in the financial sector.

Beyond its internal difficulties and the mistakes that have been made over the years leading it into this bottomless budget gap, Greece continues to struggle with the appetite of speculators, notably buyers of CDS (Credit Default Swaps).

This is more than an impression: the facts show that three years after the financial crisis, the rules of finance have not been profoundly changed, beyond some peripheral decisions of improving the financial surveillance system we have supported and the promise of banks to change their shoulder rifle for the future.

However, after the crisis, everyone agreed on the need for profound reform. Working groups were established with the greatest specialists. Parliaments in different states played their role and issued recommendations. Here, in collaboration with the Senate, a commission on the monitoring of the banking and financial crisis was set up and issued considerations both courageous and visionary. It is a document as thick and precious as she has rendered and that I have in my hands.

It is perfect! But then we have to go to the act.

As it will be re-established at the request of some colleagues and with the support of everyone in this parliament, I have no doubt that this committee will focus on checking what has been implemented and will find, like me, that all this is very shy.

The text presented today aims to implement EU directives, in particular with regard to conflicts of jurisdiction between national supervisory authorities, when a banking or financial institution is active in several countries, or with regard to remuneration committees. It is minimalist both in its intentions and in its arrangement, as the State Council has also pointed out.

That’s why we tried to spark this debate in the Committee on Finance and submitted several amendments to accelerate and go beyond the EU directives; it was about implementing some of those recommendations adopted almost unanimously by this Parliament in April 2009, but still inactive today. This makes me believe, as the international financial situation shows, that good intentions have already been forgotten.

What are these amendments? I will remind them soon. There are four orders.

The first amendments aim to strengthen the own funds of banks. It is about reducing this leverage, this excessive financing by debt: it was the cause of the problems of Fortis, which led this great bank into the difficulties that this parliament knows well, and required spectacular state aid and investment.

We propose to raise the minimum capital to 5% of the balance sheet and the reserves to a minimum of 3%, which corresponds to an 8% equity and a 12.5% leverage. I would like to point out, by the way, that the ongoing reflection in the United Kingdom aims to bring these own funds and this leverage to 10 %.

The second series of amendments, ⁇ important, aims to separate banking and to distinguish between traditional deposit banks, i.e. those that collect citizens’ savings to lend it to the economic world or to individuals who want to enter into a mortgage loan, and business banks, i.e. those that speculate, who take risks. This is the other problem that Fortis experienced: having speculated with the money of the savers. The banking sector should be better segregated and speculative practices consisting of buying and then reselling securities that are not in possession are prohibited.

The third type of amendment concerns the need for different, more prudent, more reasonable remuneration practices, in particular with regard to the advantages granted to the executives of these banks. The variable portion of their remuneration should be limited to less than a quarter of the fixed portion to try to avoid the pursuit of short-term profits at the expense of the long-term balance of the banks.

The fourth type of amendment simply aims to further engage savers with strategic choices made by the banking institutions in which they have deposited their savings. This type of participatory practice is obviously the best way to prevent banks from continuing to speculate and take risks like those we have known and that have cost so much to our state and our fellow citizens.

These amendments were supported in the Finance Committee. Unfortunately, they were not supported. I hope that the few days that separated this Finance Committee from today’s plenary session will have enabled everyone to think better about it or, if not, Mr. Minister, to allow you to think about a new bill.

Will you withdraw the amendments?

I keep them longer than ever, unless you tell us that the government has filed a bill for which it calls for urgency, knowing that we still have until July 20, and beyond if necessary, to review it.

In any case, I would like to thank you for your willingness to implement the measures we have planned here and which have only been too delayed.