Projet de loi relatif au statut et au contrôle des entreprises d'assurance ou de réassurance.
General information ¶
- Submitted by
- MR Swedish coalition
- Submission date
- Jan. 13, 2016
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- EC Directive financial management financial solvency reinsurance insurance insurance company insurance law
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR PVDA | PTB PP 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 ¶
Feb. 18, 2016 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
Rapporteur Griet Smaers ⚙
The present draft law consists of three large files. This was explained and dealt with in the business committee almost two hours ago. For a design of that size, that is fairly fast.
The proposal provides for the transposition of the prudential provisions of the Solvency II Directive, or Solvency II Directive, of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the entry into and exercise of insurance and reinsurance undertakings. As a result of the financial crisis and the European rules for the banking sector, that Directive introduces new rules to strengthen the solvency and supervision of insurance undertakings.
The current solvency system has been criticized on a number of points. This included insufficient accounting for the actual risks to which insurance or reinsurance undertakings are exposed. That system also lacked the necessary harmonisation of the rules on technical provisions, resulting in distortions of competition between undertakings established in different Member States. You know that also during the banking crisis, this was one of the elements that required more effective supervision. This is also the case in the insurance sector. That harmonisation was lacking in terms of governance and supervision of groups of insurance undertakings, in particular in the cooperation between national authorities.
The aim of the strengthened supervision of groups of insurance undertakings is to better protect consumers by providing them with the assurance that each undertaking will meet its obligations, thus ⁇ ining confidence in the insurance sector.
It also aims to ⁇ maximum harmonisation at European level, which will enhance the competitiveness of companies. The transposition of that European Directive will allow both the supervisory authority and the undertaking themselves to have a better understanding of the risks and to adapt them to reality.
Minister Peeters, in his explanation of the bill in the committee using a clear PowerPoint, formulated a number of specific technical questions. So he formulated the questions himself and then gave some answers to better explain the technical nature of the design and the matter. Minister Peeters showed in that explanation that in the national transposition of the Directive, a number of adjustments, specific national adjustments from our Belgian context, have already been effectively taken into account. Therefore, there was no full transposition of the Directive. We were able to make effective adjustments. In particular, the principle of proportionality is of great importance. For small enterprises, a system of supervision and governance has been developed that is more proportionate to the size of the enterprise. For example, a risk committee will not be an obligation for every insurance company in the same way. Therefore, there will be a possibility of fragmentation.
In the general discussion of the bill, the N-VA group stressed that the government has not done gold-plating, which is very positive. The translation of proportionality is also a positive point, according to the N-VA fraction. However, it was of the view that the risk of increased concentration of market players was increased. Therefore, it is necessary to be vigilant with regard to degradation in the insurance landscape, as far as the companies themselves are concerned. Finally, the N-VA noted that there is a distinction between guarantees provided by the federal government and guarantees provided by the regional government. According to the N-VA, this is an aberration.
On behalf of the CD&V Group, I myself stressed that I am pleased that the smaller undertakings are taken into account and that specific regulations are provided for in this regard. Therefore, all supervision and governance obligations are not simply implemented for all companies. There are possible differences between companies. We also stressed that the Minister has taken into account a reduction in the burden. The size of the company was taken into account.
The MR group expressed its support for the draft, a translation of the lessons drawn from the 2008 financial crisis.
From the opposition, the PS group also took the floor to express its support for the bill. The design benefits a better protection of consumers, according to the PS.
After the general discussion of the bill, two amendments were submitted by a majority.
After the full reading, both the bill and the two majority amendments were unanimously adopted.