APPENDIX 2: CALL FOR EVIDENCE|
Changes to the regulation and supervision of financial
markets, nationally and on a cross-border basis, have been proposed
in response to the financial crisis. The European Commission has
published three key proposals, updating capital requirements and
deposit guarantee schemes and introducing rules on rating agencies.
Sub-Committee A, under the Chairmanship of Baroness Cohen of Pimlico,
has decided to commence an inquiry examining the role of European
Union regulation in the financial sector, the effectiveness of
these proposals and further responses at a European level.
The inquiry will seek to answer the following questions:
(1) Current Commission Proposals: Will enforcing
a prudential financial regime be an effective method of preventing
a repeat of the financial turmoil? Will Commission proposals amending
the Capital Requirements Directive and introducing rules on credit
rating agencies prevent a future crisis? What dangers are presented
by these amendments? Are changes needed to International Accounting
Standards? How effective are current proposals to protect bank
(2) Further Legislative Opportunities: How can
we achieve a coherent set of rules on last resort assistance,
deposit protection and bank insolvency proceedings? Should a revised
directive on the reorganization and winding up of credit institutions
include a system of prompt corrective action, with intervention
triggers tied to a leverage or liquidity ratio? Do rules on state
aid to the banking sector need to be clarified? What other rules
are needed to ensure financial stability in Europe?
(3) EU Supervisory Reform: Do we need a European
System of Financial Supervisors or a central European authority
to supervise pan-European financial institutions? What type of
fiscal resources should such an authority have access to? How
effective would group supervision be in creating a unified system
of supervision across the single market? Would group supervision
assert the primacy of large supervisors to the detriment of the
supervising bodies of smaller Member States? Do we need a rethink
of the home-host country divide with regard to supervision and
crisis management in the EU?
(4) Working Practices: Do EU institutions need
to amend their working practices on financial services? How effective
are current working practises in providing a rapid response to
(5) Global Supervisory Reform: Does the turmoil
signal the need for a global supervisory system? If so, what role
should the EU and existing financial institutions, such as the
IMF, take in this system? Is a new Bretton Woods agreement necessary?
The aim of this inquiry is to provide an opinion
on the effectiveness of the Commission responses, inform the debate
surrounding these issues within EU institutions and examine possible
opportunities for further reform. The inquiry does not intend
to examine whether the United Kingdom should join the eurozone,
nor the effectiveness of the national Government response to the
Guidance to those submitting written evidence
Written evidence is invited in response to the questions
above, to arrive by no later than 9 February 2009.
The questions above cover a broad range of topics
and there is no need for individual submissions to deal with all
the issues. Evidence should be kept as short as possible: submissions
of not more than four sides of A4 paper of free-standing text,
excluding any supporting annexes, are preferred. Submissions longer
than this should contain a summary. Paragraphs should be numbered.
Evidence should be sent in hard copy and electronically
to the addresses below.
Evidence should be attributed and dated, with a note
of the author's name and position. Please state whether evidence
is submitted on an individual or corporate basis.
Evidence becomes the property of the Committee, and
may be printed or circulated by the Committee at any stage. You
may publicise or publish your evidence yourself, but in doing
so you must indicate that it was prepared for the Committee.
Submissions will be acknowledged. Any inquiries should
be addressed to Robert Whiteway, Clerk of Sub-Committee A, Committee
Office, House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW; telephone 020 7219 3616;
fax 020 7219 6715; e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org.
This is a public call for evidence. You are encouraged
to bring it to the attention of other groups and individuals who
may not have received a copy directly.