Kapitaalmarktintegratie en Toezichtcentralisatie Pakket (KTP)

[0:00:00] Goed evening, ladies and gentlemen.

[0:00:01] Welcome to the roundtable meeting organized on behalf of the Standing Committee on Finance.

[0:00:06] Today we will be discussing two main topics.

[0:00:09] These topics are the capital market integration and the supervision centralization package.

[0:00:14] We will be discussing these topics in three consecutive panels.

[0:00:18] De eerste panelparticipanten zijn meneer Major van de Centraal Bank van Nederland, meneer Van Geest van de Nederlandse Autoriteit voor de Financiële Markets, en meneer Casanoff van de Europese Securities en Markets Autoriteit.

[0:00:32] In het Nederlands kan je de positiepapers vinden die de panelisten ontvangen om ons te helpen een productieve discussie.

[0:00:38] We gaan nu naar onze vrienden voor een brief introductie en natuurlijk wat ze in de positiepapers ontvangen.

[0:00:46] Dan ga ik naar onze komiteers.

[0:00:48] Dan krijg je de kans om een vraag te vragen.

[0:00:51] Houd je vragen kort, want we hebben only 45 minuten per round.

[0:00:55] En houd je wel, welke panel member je adressen.

[0:00:58] En natuurlijk ook een speciale welkom.

[0:01:01] Er zijn alleen drie memberen voor nu, maar ze zijn allemaal rapporteurs voor ons.

[0:01:05] Dus ik denk dat het een fantastische meeting zal zijn.

[0:01:09] Dus de vloer is jouw, meneer Srekesenhoff.

[0:01:13] Thank you very much, dear chair, honorable members.

[0:01:16] I want to start by thanking you for giving Esmaa the opportunity to join you today to discuss the market integration and supervision package, or MISP, which is part of the broader savings and investment union project.

[0:01:28] We believe that this legislation could really constitute a key milestone in the development of European markets.

[0:01:34] in general, and also of the development of the European Securities and Markets Authority that I represent today.

[0:01:39] So we very much welcome the opportunity to share our experience and insights on this package with the committee, alongside our colleagues from the Dutch Central Bank and the Dutch Authority, with whom we work very closely, obviously.

[0:01:54] The proposal covers a very broad number of topics, but I wanted to focus today on three messages.

[0:01:59] First, for us at ESMA, we welcome the misproposal as a necessary step to overcome the fragmentation that has been longstanding in the markets and has been preventing further development.

[0:02:10] Second, we believe that the proposed reform to the supervisory architecture are both targeted and proportionate.

[0:02:16] We believe it recognizes the central role of national supervision and only proposes European supervision in targeted areas where it can really deliver added value.

[0:02:26] And third, I wanted to address a question that I often get that we believe ESMA can take on these new responsibilities, building on our supervisory experience and the strong cooperation that we have also with our national supervisors.

[0:02:38] On the first point, just to say a few words, because I understand you are going to hear also from the market afterwards, so I will just be very brief.

[0:02:45] But in a nutshell, we share the Commission's diagnosis that fragmentation is a main hindrance to the development of our European markets.

[0:02:53] It creates high cost, high complexity, and it prevents having sound cross-border oversight.

[0:03:00] And that's exactly what this MISP package, so the Market Integration Supervision Package, tries to address.

[0:03:04] It removes practical barriers to integration, it improves connectivity, and it also paves the way to modernisation and the innovation that we really need in this new digital interconnected world.

[0:03:14] We very much welcome this proposal.

[0:03:17] If I move to supervision, which I understand is the topic for this particular session, what I wanted to share is that first to remind ourselves that this is not at all about having centralized EU supervision across the board, but rather really very targeted for specific entities.

[0:03:32] And that is very consistent with what the supervisory community, so the heads of the national supervisors had told us.

[0:03:38] So in the ESMA board, we had a position paper already in 2024

[0:03:42] Waar de supervisors had said, dat is right, dat is, you should explore European supervision for pan-European large financial market infrastructures.

[0:03:49] So that seems to us as coherent.

[0:03:51] What's in it in that reform?

[0:03:53] What's the benefit for public sector and private sector?

[0:03:56] I think if we look at it for the supervisors, what we believe is that this reform would allow us to have for these pan-European entities a holistic view of their activities and their footprint and risk.

[0:04:06] A large entity that operates across different member states, it's risk they don't stop at national borders.

[0:04:13] But today the supervisors, they might only have a partial picture of that entity's activity.

[0:04:17] So we would be able to have a pan-European perspective on the risk, a pan-European understanding of the footprint and what should be the supervisory priorities.

[0:04:25] That would also be more efficient and coherent in what we're trying to achieve collectively.

[0:04:29] So clear expectations for the firms.

[0:04:31] What's in it for the firms?

[0:04:32] We also think that European companies stand to benefit from that.

[0:04:36] Because they would have responses from one single authority when they have a question.

[0:04:41] So not necessarily a better answer, but a single answer to a specific question rather than having to ask multiple entities.

[0:04:47] That also removes the risk of regulatory arbitrage.

[0:04:50] So having investor confidence in the market, being able to have a true single market with clear expectations from the supervisors and reduced costs.

[0:04:59] Het brings me to my last point.

[0:05:01] As I said, I often get this question.

[0:05:03] ESMA is still a young authority.

[0:05:04] We're celebrating our 15 years this year, so we are still quite young.

[0:05:09] Nevertheless, I believe we have over the years built our experience as a supervisor.

[0:05:14] We've been supervising credit rating agencies from the very start under Stephen's leadership in 2011.

[0:05:19] And then gradually we've been entrusted over the years with new mandates of different nature, of different forms, some prudential entities, some entities of smaller size, really different shapes.

[0:05:29] And we've been able to make it work.

[0:05:31] It's been tested through different market stress periods.

[0:05:33] So we believe that that is something we can do.

[0:05:36] Is it big?

[0:05:36] Yes.

[0:05:37] But still, again, we have the maturity.

[0:05:39] And I believe that we have been able to develop a supervisory model where we've developed more maturity

[0:05:44] to be able now to be much more risk-based, much more data-driven and outcome-focused.

[0:05:49] So still a journey, but I think we can do that.

[0:05:52] I wanted to close by saying one strong element of this package is the emphasis on cooperation.

[0:05:57] So to make this work, we will have to work with the national supervisors to make sure we have the right arrangements, the right setup.

[0:06:06] And I'm confident that with our excellent colleagues, both from the Central Bank and the Securities Markets Authority here in the Netherlands,

[0:06:11] We kunnen goede uitkomen, både voor Europese lidstaten en Europese bedrijven.

[0:06:16] Bedankt weer voor het hebben me en ik ben blij om geen vragen te nemen.

[0:06:20] Dank u wel.

[0:06:21] We gaan nu op meneer Van Geest.

[0:06:23] Thank you very much, Chair.

[0:06:26] And thank you very much for the invitation to be here.

[0:06:29] The topic of today is squarely within our mandate or touches on our mandate.

[0:06:33] So very happy to be here to reflect on it.

[0:06:36] I would like to stress five points in my introduction.

[0:06:40] First...

[0:06:41] There is a need for a strong economy.

[0:06:43] The Draghi report underscored three points.

[0:06:45] A need for a strong economy, a need for deeper and less fragmented capital markets, and we could do with more centralized supervision.

[0:06:53] And even if we discuss today the capital market infrastructure and supervision, we should not lose sight of the need to build a stronger economy.

[0:07:02] Because without a strong economy, no interesting investment projects.

[0:07:07] Then we would mobilise more risk-bearing capital.

[0:07:10] We would improve the matching function of the capital market.

[0:07:13] But only to see it end up in the US, the USA, or Asia, or Africa.

[0:07:20] This requires first and foremost a true internal market.

[0:07:24] At present, the internal barriers rob us of 7% of GDP, according to the IMF.

[0:07:32] My second point would be to stay ambitious.

[0:07:34] The MIST proposal is a political project, so we as technical supervisory perspective would say that we would support the MIST proposal of the Commission.

[0:07:43] In fact, we could have envisioned an even more ambitious plan, for instance vis-à-vis the supervision of asset management.

[0:07:50] Against this background, we would regret any watering down of the various proposals in place, for instance, like limiting the number of crypto asset providers to be included.

[0:08:01] My third point focuses on the transition period, which should be short.

[0:08:05] Again, from a technical perspective, we would favour a clean-cut date of transfer, with a preparatory period as short as possible.

[0:08:15] As we all know, during reorganisations institutions become more internally focused, and in periods of uncertainty expert staff tend to look for work elsewhere.

[0:08:26] We think this is not a time to lose sight of the market.

[0:08:29] So, the briefer the period, the better it is.

[0:08:33] Fourth, effective supervision is European supervision.

[0:08:37] We are in favor of ESMA becoming the central supervisor.

[0:08:40] In our digital world, like Natascha already mentioned, consumers can buy products from across the EU.

[0:08:46] This makes it easier for criminals to evade capture and for institutions to set up shop where legislation and supervision are most permissive.

[0:08:54] In other words, markets are international, while supervision stays mainly national.

[0:09:00] It would therefore be a mistake in our view to frame this move as an additional cost burden or loss of autonomy and competences in the Netherlands.

[0:09:09] A better way to look at it in our view would be to see it as a choice between ineffective national supervision versus effective European supervision.

[0:09:18] And that is what we're interested in.

[0:09:21] Maar dan of course we would like to make ESMA into a success.

[0:09:24] And for that we have thought about enablers for success.

[0:09:29] At present, despite what Nasarasi has said, ESMA is predominantly a policy body.

[0:09:35] En we think supervision is a different ballgame.

[0:09:39] And at the AFM, we've come up with these five enablers to help ensure success, because we would like to see success.

[0:09:45] First, we think an important part is a right supervisory approach.

[0:09:49] As one needs a risk-based, adaptive supervisory philosophy, focus on impact, not rule by rule compliance.

[0:09:59] The second is enforcement.

[0:10:02] I'm happy to say it, but not all institutions in the world are well willing, just making honest mistakes.

[0:10:09] Illegal entities require different approaches.

[0:10:12] As law enforcement and prosecution remains mostly a national competence, it must be crystal clear in legal text that ESMA can coordinate with national agencies or that national supervisors can do so on behalf of ESMA.

[0:10:27] The third element is cost consciousness.

[0:10:30] Cost must be proportionate.

[0:10:31] This must be heaven to most of the members in the Netherlands.

[0:10:35] Cost must be proportionate and the funding must be transparent.

[0:10:39] ESMA may need some investment upfront, but ultimately the benefits must outweigh the costs.

[0:10:46] The new setup should not lead to higher costs in a steady state.

[0:10:51] And I think also that some budget restraint will help ensure supervisory focus and avoid unrestrained cost increases.

[0:10:58] And I'm talking like someone who enjoys the costa card in the Netherlands.

[0:11:02] The fourth element is effective, independent and accountable governance.

[0:11:08] A setup to act decisively and free of political pressure.

[0:11:13] Appointments to the executive board based on merit, supervisory experience and administrative ability.

[0:11:19] And regular independent reviews to keep supervisors on the toes.

[0:11:22] Again, a Dutch experience.

[0:11:25] And finally, but definitely important, a sound database.

[0:11:29] Data centralisation at ESMA's level is a crucial basis for data-driven supervision at the central level.

[0:11:35] High data quality, uniform definitions, 24x7 access by national authorities will decrease reporting and administrative burden for firms and will make it possible to supervise based on data.

[0:11:50] Well, to be...

[0:11:53] arriving at the end of my speech, in short, supervision plays an important but supporting role in delivering the overall ambitions of the Draghi report.

[0:12:03] Effective supervision requires European supervision.

[0:12:06] If we create the right conditions, we can create a model supervisor.

[0:12:13] Impact-minded, nimble, decisive, cost-conscious, high-tech and high-touch.

[0:12:19] In deze manier, we denken dat we het interesse van de Nederlandse lidstaten en de minister.

[0:12:25] Dank u wel.

[0:12:27] Dank u wel.

[0:12:28] En uiteindelijk, meneer Major.

[0:12:32] Thank you very much, Chair, and many thanks for inviting me to speak at this roundtable.

[0:12:39] I should say that I've been 10 years Chair of ESMA, but I'm making these remarks from the perspective of Day and Bay.

[0:12:46] I will first make a few generic remarks and then go specifically into the items that we think are important when progressing on the discussions and the negotiations of this FAO.

[0:12:57] So, first and foremost, I think it's important to emphasize is that capital markets are very important to further develop the financial system in the EU.

[0:13:05] Capital markets are especially helpful in terms of innovation, economic growth and supporting more risk bearing activities.

[0:13:14] In that sense, also from the perspective of a central bank, we would favor and although we focus on the banking sector, we would favor a bigger role for the capital markets because we think that is ultimately beneficial to

[0:13:27] de financiële system.

[0:13:29] Secondly, we think that also the Netherlands will benefit from a stronger capital market.

[0:13:34] The Netherlands already has a strong position in the area of capital markets.

[0:13:39] We have a relatively large size of the capital markets.

[0:13:43] And the evidence also in other areas is that if you would grow the market, is that there is a good chance that also the Netherlands specifically would be a successful part of that bigger capital market in the EU.

[0:13:54] I think the arguments in terms of efficiency and effectiveness of supervision are very clear and very direct.

[0:14:01] Currently, we now have somewhere between 10 and 20 CCPs, and we have more than 20 supervisors looking into these CCPs.

[0:14:11] You get to ratios between supervisors and supervised entities that are not efficient.

[0:14:18] De efficiëntie van de supervisieën zal veranderen.

[0:14:23] En ik denk dat er een klerer benefit voor marktparticipants.

[0:14:27] Want in plaats van een number van de supervisies en regulaties over de EU, ze zouden een shop kunnen stoppen en krijgen hun licens om de business over de EU te doen.

[0:14:39] Het is also been said by Laura, it is clear that getting to more efficient supervision, effective supervision is important.

[0:14:49] At the same time, it is not the silver bullet to a stronger capital market.

[0:14:53] For that is also essential that households, citizens in the EU move their savings, move away from savings.

[0:15:01] en participates more actively in the capital market.

[0:15:06] Final generic point I would like to make is that we are in favor of a system with market infrastructures where there is open access, where there is competition.

[0:15:19] We know that in some parts, some other parts, there are policies thinking where they are more kind of trying to get silos between the various parts in the

[0:15:28] We would be in favor of open access there, because ultimately we think that supports competition and giving a better deal to the users of that market infrastructure.

[0:15:40] Then a few specific points that we think is important.

[0:15:45] in de further details of the file.

[0:15:48] First of all, we think that it's important to ensure that also regulatory bodies that are not directly securities markets regulators are involved in ESMA.

[0:15:59] There needs to be an efficient way to do that.

[0:16:02] Central banks have also a strong role, for example, regarding CCPs and CSDs, and we think it's important that they also play a role in the governance of ESMA.

[0:16:13] Secondly, we also think and we would be in favor of the prudential requirements regarding the supervised entities, the market infrastructures, that that would be done by ESMA, because we think that that would be efficient and avoid

[0:16:28] duplication en fragmentation of supervision.

[0:16:33] We're also in favor of so-called macroprudential tools regarding investment funds.

[0:16:37] There are some proposals in that area regarding investment funds, and sometimes they can be relevant from a stability standpoint.

[0:16:44] So we think it's important also to have macroprudential tools regarding investment funds.

[0:16:49] And finally, and it was a point that was made extensively by Laura van Geest,

[0:16:54] Conceptually, there is a lot of efficiency and effectiveness to be achieved when you centralise supervision.

[0:17:00] But ultimately, that body on a central level needs to be efficient and effective.

[0:17:04] It needs to be risk-based.

[0:17:06] And therefore, risk-based, transparency, effective supervision will be essential for that centralised body.

[0:17:13] And indeed, that should be ESMA.

[0:17:15] Let me stop here.

[0:17:16] Thank you very much.

[0:17:18] Thank you very much.

[0:17:19] We will now switch to our members.

[0:17:21] Firstly, Mrs.

[0:17:22] van Eyck.

[0:17:22] Ja, dank je.

[0:17:23] En het is nice to hear you speak with one voice, so to say.

[0:17:26] So the support to transfer those responsibilities to ESMA is good to hear.

[0:17:33] At the same time, there are some warnings.

[0:17:36] One of them regards the effective enforcement.

[0:17:42] And Mrs.

[0:17:42] van Geest pointed that out.

[0:17:45] Maybe she can elaborate a little bit more on that, because I'm looking for where should that be?

[0:17:51] Is dat in de commission's proposal?

[0:17:55] Is dat in national law?

[0:17:57] Waar moeten we dat ook in orde maken?

[0:18:09] In our view, that this would be best addressed in the commission's proposal.

[0:18:16] And we are looking into it ourselves to come up with suggestions, more specific tax proposals in that area.

[0:18:23] I would note that in the AMLA treaty, there are already references where how you can deal with the data sharing amongst the various bodies.

[0:18:34] And so this is the example we are working from.

[0:18:37] The other thing is, of course, that you have to be very clear who does what.

[0:18:41] And that's also something you need to deliver at either level one or level two.

[0:18:46] But at least you need to do that centrally.

[0:18:50] You can't arrange those things that are dealing with collaboration between the various member states or bodies in the various member states at the national level because you

[0:18:58] You have to deal exactly cross-border.

[0:19:02] But we wanted to... So we noted that this was not a very... A topic that wasn't discussed a lot.

[0:19:09] And we think it needs proper attention.

[0:19:12] I think probably Esma would recognize this.

[0:19:15] And I think then it should be put in somewhere at the European level.

[0:19:21] Thank you.

[0:19:22] En to our guests, if you're not addressed with a question, you can of course add something if you think it will benefit.

[0:19:30] Yes, I'm happy to compliment.

[0:19:32] We actually agree very much with what has been said in terms of making sure we have a strong enforcement framework in the legislation already to make sure we can actually go all the way in the chain from the supervision to the enforcement.

[0:19:44] And there are already two aspects in the legislation that we welcome.

[0:19:48] One is all the enforcement powers that ESMA has in different areas have been brought from sectoral legislation into the founding regulations.

[0:19:55] So there is consistency on what would be the authority's ability to enforce.

[0:20:00] Dat is heel erg positief.

[0:20:02] En dan is er ook een effort om te proberen dat, waar appropriate, we zou kunnen applyen national legislatie als het complementen onze responsabiliteit.

[0:20:12] Waar we do see we moeten gaan een beetje verder is in sommige areas, voor example, in market surveillance voor cryptomarkets,

[0:20:18] There are specific responsibilities that are necessary in that type of responsibility.

[0:20:27] You need to be able to go after individuals, you need to be able to enforce in a different way.

[0:20:30] So the type of powers is different from when you apply a fine for a firm that has not complied with its conduct rules, for example.

[0:20:38] So that is one example where we believe some compliments need to be brought in.

[0:20:43] Thank you.

[0:20:44] Then we'll go to Mr. Schoonis.

[0:20:47] Dank u, meneer de voorzitter.

[0:20:51] Dank u wel voor uw woorden.

[0:20:55] Ik heb een vraag voor meneer Kassadave.

[0:21:00] Het is gezegd dat de kriteria wordt gegeven en proporcional.

[0:21:05] Mijn vraag is welke kriteria wordt gebruikt om te diversiferen of een entiteit zal onder estma of onder de nationaliteit?

[0:21:17] ...entity, let's say.

[0:21:22] Thank you very much.

[0:21:22] Actually, this is still being discussed, so it's difficult to give you a clear answer today.

[0:21:28] And we can see in the different areas the legislator has tried.

[0:21:32] What I wanted to express is that the way the Commission has come up with a proposal, it is coherent in the sense that it has tried to define significance criteria in the legislation in the different sectors.

[0:21:44] ...that would capture the largest entities.

[0:21:47] So the largest CCPs, the largest central securities depositories... ...and the largest trading venues.

[0:21:54] But that is still being discussed.

[0:21:55] And in the area of cryptoasset service providers... ...as was mentioned, they have proposed the entirety...

[0:22:00] If you look at the report that Markus Werber, als rapporteur in the European Parliament, has published, he suggests a different approach.

[0:22:09] He suggests going for all European CCP's, all European CSD's, but only the most significant cryptoasset service providers.

[0:22:16] So you see, for the moment, it's still being discussed.

[0:22:18] What we believe is positive and coherent is this idea of looking for entities where there is a true added value for moving to European level supervision.

[0:22:28] Because the entity is of significance for the whole European market in its activities.

[0:22:33] So it operates across multiple member states.

[0:22:36] It is large in terms of its activities.

[0:22:38] So it does compete in the global scale.

[0:22:40] So it does make sense to have a European perspective.

[0:22:43] Many of the entities and the majority of European firms will remain under national supervision.

[0:22:49] Dank u.

[0:22:50] En ik zie twee andere gasten die het lijkt me om iets te doen, meneer Majoor.

[0:22:55] No, and I think here it is, I think, important to also take into account simply the number of entities.

[0:23:02] So we are in favor of doing all CCPs under ESMA supervision simply because, and I had that experience when I was a chair, is that if you have only one CCP in one country, then in terms of efficiency and effectiveness and quality of supervision, it starts to be problematic.

[0:23:19] So, for example, for CCPs, we would say, let's do all of the CCPs under ESMA supervision.

[0:23:25] Voor investeringsfirmen, waar je zo veel firmen hebt, en ook veel medium-sized en smallen, moet je ervoor bestaan te distingueren tussen de larger en de smaller.

[0:23:39] I would just like to signal that we would be in favor of having all the CAASPs, so all the cryptoasset providers at the ESMA level, because it's very complicated in terms of the substance.

[0:23:52] So we think there is a benefit of just concentrating all the knowledge at one spot.

[0:23:59] Dat would be our main argument.

[0:24:03] We would have liked to have cusped at ESMA level from day one.

[0:24:07] This is something we didn't get across.

[0:24:11] I also think it's important, if you want to be cost-conscious, there's also an issue.

[0:24:15] Because if you just look at the Dutch...

[0:24:18] the Dutch situation, there are very many small CASPs who would find it difficult to exactly pay the fees.

[0:24:30] And we can't say we don't supervise, because if something goes wrong, someone is going to ask, well, where was the supervisor?

[0:24:36] So there's also concentrating the knowledge at one spot and making sure that you can then ensure that the proper people pay the

[0:24:46] Dank u.

[0:24:48] Mr. Hoogvrijn.

[0:25:02] Thank you, Chair, and thank you so much for your contributions.

[0:25:06] I would like to follow up on the previous question, actually.

[0:25:10] And I would like to focus more on the central securities depositories.

[0:25:14] The case was made that indeed, well, for example, all CCP's should fall under the ESMA supervision.

[0:25:20] But when you look at CSD's,

[0:25:23] Well, they operate, they're very much indebted in their national legal frameworks concerning settlements, concerning ownership.

[0:25:33] So, how can ESMA effectively supervise these institutions without

[0:25:41] well, I should say, weakening the role of, the important role of national supervision concerning CSDs.

[0:25:48] And wouldn't you also say that, for example, ICSDs would be a better fit in order to fall under ESMA supervision?

[0:25:59] Thank you.

[0:26:03] Let me give it a go.

[0:26:05] So first, I think it's important to really... Your question is very interesting because it does show that we're talking about very different entities.

[0:26:12] If we talk about ICSDs versus smaller CSDs or versus small cryptoasset service providers, we're not about the same entities at all.

[0:26:19] When we look at CSDs, today there are 32 CSDs in Europe.

[0:26:23] It's a very concentrated market.

[0:26:26] I think 75% of transactions are settled with three CSDs.

[0:26:29] What we see is that they are very large, very integrated, and they have multiple supervisors looking after them today.

[0:26:40] What the proposal would do is to try and consider to what extent would it make sense to have a centralized supervisor that has the full picture

[0:26:49] in one place, of what I was saying, of the risks that these entities represent, of the activities that are done in the supervisory priorities, it doesn't mean at all that there would be no role for national supervisors.

[0:26:59] That's why I was talking about the differences, because if you're looking at CSDs in that space, you would actually also need to bring in some prudential supervisors, you would also have to bring national supervisors for certain aspects.

[0:27:11] The exact framework of how you make an efficient cooperation arrangement will depend on the landing zone exactly of how it would look like.

[0:27:18] Maar er is veel efficiëntie dat kan worden gegeven van simplifie wat nu is gedaan door múltiples supervisers.

[0:27:27] De idee hier is om het beste van beide worlds te maken, maar met een clear delineering van responsabiliteit.

[0:27:33] Je zou hebben Europese supervision voor wat betekent op de Europese level, en dan je bouwt op de national expertise, waar het nodig is om te brengen op de table te maken.

[0:27:43] You would have a different setting in the CCP's, for example, where it's less necessary.

[0:27:49] You could have central supervision and you would need to have a cooperation with also central banks rather there.

[0:27:55] And then you would have cooperation arrangements to make sure there's a good understanding of the risks.

[0:27:58] En in de trading venues you really have different roles at the national level and at the European level.

[0:28:03] So what I'm saying is the European supervision is not necessarily a silver bullet in every area.

[0:28:10] It caters for specific efficiency gains and specific efficiency benefits for the entity and for the market.

[0:28:17] And then you need to cater the arrangement.

[0:28:19] In each area, depending on the actual responsibilities of the supervisor and the actual activities of the entity.

[0:28:27] The ICSDs are international entities, so you also have cooperation with international supervisors that you have to take into account.

[0:28:34] This has to be done sector by sector, entity by entity.

[0:28:44] Just very briefly, to support the points that are made by Natasha, is these are market infrastructures that are very important for cross-border activities.

[0:28:57] They are, in that sense, relevant for developing the European capital market.

[0:29:01] At the same time, there are strong links with national issues.

[0:29:06] That is also correct, but we think that can be addressed, that can be solved.

[0:29:10] To some extent, there is also, I think, the comparison with the banking supervision, where there's still also quite some significant national elements into banks and, you know, what type of products are important for banks.

[0:29:24] And so it needs to be addressed.

[0:29:26] It adds a bit to complexity.

[0:29:27] I think that is, you know, that is true in terms of trying to arrange that.

[0:29:32] It will not be purely European supervision, but at the same time, we think it will be beneficial to have European supervision for CSDs.

[0:29:41] You all say in more or less the same words that supervision should be risk-based instead of rule-based.

[0:29:53] So I think there is a risk that it will be rule-based at the end.

[0:30:00] What mechanisms

[0:30:03] can be used, so that we are sure that it really will be risk-based, as we all wish.

[0:30:10] I think it's a question for all.

[0:30:19] Het is een cultuurlijke shift om te zorgen dat je eigenlijk riske-based bent.

[0:30:29] En het is een shift dat ik probeer te naar.

[0:30:32] Als je naar ESMA's experience hebt, het had een heel strong supervisory mandate.

[0:30:39] on credit rating agencies, it was extremely important that it delivered on that mandate and that under its watch it was going well.

[0:30:46] So there were a lot of roles, there was a lot of focus on making sure we got that right.

[0:30:50] Fifteen years along, many of the mandates have been complemented.

[0:30:54] We have matured as a supervisor.

[0:30:56] We are moving away from being overly focused, overly detailed in our supervision to be much more risk-based.

[0:31:03] So it's a cultural evolution.

[0:31:05] Hoe kan ik dat?

[0:31:06] Nu hebben we tangible documenten dat we hebben gezegd met de andere national supervisors, omdat we believe we zijn een part van dat community en we drive dat samen.

[0:31:17] We hebben ontwikkeld principles voor een risk-based supervisory culture.

[0:31:20] To collectively agree, what does that mean in practice?

[0:31:24] Can we have examples of how to illustrate that?

[0:31:27] And for example, we've applied it in authorization processes recently, where we had many authorizations to process.

[0:31:33] We said, okay, instead of looking line by line at every single requirement, why don't we identify for the different entities?

[0:31:38] What are the key areas we are concerned about?

[0:31:40] We focus on those for the authorization process.

[0:31:44] How do we make sure, another element maybe to give you that maybe will be more fundamental so you understand,

[0:31:48] For every sector we are responsible for, we run a risk assessment every year, and we define two years ahead our supervisory priorities.

[0:31:57] And it is completely based on the risks.

[0:32:00] So we look at data we receive from the entity, from the market, incident reports,

[0:32:05] Onder intelligence we can collect, our supervisory experience with that entity, our own analysis.

[0:32:10] And that feeds into what do we think are the priorities for this sector?

[0:32:14] What do we think are the priorities for this entity?

[0:32:16] Two years ahead.

[0:32:17] And then we adjust.

[0:32:18] And then we tier our priorities and we have KPIs to monitor that.

[0:32:21] So it is really embedded in our supervisory model today.

[0:32:26] dat we bring in the data, we think about what we want to achieve in terms of outcome, and then we apply that in our supervisory model.

[0:32:32] But it is a journey, and that's why I was very transparent in saying we're still a young organisation, and we intend to continue that journey as an organisation and with our fellow supervisors.

[0:32:43] Thank you very much.

[0:32:45] Mrs.

[0:32:45] Van Geest.

[0:32:48] I think we stressed it so much because it is difficult to make sure that the journey ends at the desired spot, I would say, or destination.

[0:32:58] It's not like Kerouac, we're on the journey.

[0:33:00] It's the journey, not the destination.

[0:33:02] We would like to arrive there, and I think that will require work and diligence.

[0:33:07] On the positive side, I would say we started with asthma at a different spot than we started with the SSM, so the banking supervision, because there the banking centralised supervision arose because we had a big crisis.

[0:33:19] So we were all shocked.

[0:33:21] Risks were clearly there and hadn't been addressed before.

[0:33:23] We wanted to harmonise everything, and harmonisation then gets quite often the form of very detailed description.

[0:33:32] Then, because things had gone wrong, people didn't trust the national competent authorities because it had gone wrong on their watch.

[0:33:39] So it's also not a very conducive start.

[0:33:42] And I think...

[0:33:44] At this point in time, famous last words, I think we are the better place, both at ESMA and at the NCAs.

[0:33:51] There's not a big crisis we have to address, but we want to make sure that we keep up with the market developments, and that's why we move.

[0:33:58] So there is less of a reason to kind of harmonise through very detailed legislation and rule-based.

[0:34:06] I think one of the ways forward is not to try and harmonise everything, but to think again what you would like to achieve.

[0:34:14] So not to start by 27 and what's the common denominator and then everyone wants to get its piece, but to reinvent whatever you need to, the risk you want to assess and the most modern way to address those.

[0:34:26] And I think then ESMA would be the forefront as opposed to all the NCAs who have developed these ideas over time.

[0:34:35] So I think in that sense, there is a positive way.

[0:34:38] And that's the way we with ESMA and all the colleagues have to try and get to the destination we would like to do.

[0:34:46] I think it's also good to have kind of countervailing powers.

[0:34:49] And that's why I was referring to cost consciousness.

[0:34:51] Because to be true, if you're a supervisor, you always see risks.

[0:34:55] And you always want to make sure that you get more and more data, because that's your task.

[0:35:00] You're never blessed because nothing went wrong, because you didn't last that many data.

[0:35:05] You feel embarrassed the moment something goes wrong.

[0:35:09] So I think making sure you have to be cost conscious and to be held to cost consciousness is a way to make sure that you...

[0:35:16] from need have to focus on the bigger items.

[0:35:20] And I think the other thing is to have independent accountability.

[0:35:23] So to have reviews on a regular basis every five years and then not self-assessment is also nice, but to have regular reviews.

[0:35:31] And I think even though, like I said earlier, it's not like I always enjoyed at the AFM that I've got a cost ceiling and the regular ZBO evaluation, but it does keep you...

[0:35:44] It does prevent being just closed, being a closed shop, never hearing something else because you all talk the same talk.

[0:35:52] So these are the two things.

[0:35:53] These are the reasons why we have these other things.

[0:35:55] So it's getting the right culture and then having these guardrails to make sure that you don't go off track inadvertently.

[0:36:05] Thank you.

[0:36:06] Mr. Mayor.

[0:36:07] Maybe two points to add here.

[0:36:09] First, to some extent stating the obvious legal text matters.

[0:36:14] And so what you write down in terms of what is required determines also what supervisors do.

[0:36:20] So rightly what is said by Natasha and Laura is it's a supervisory culture issue.

[0:36:27] Maar to some extent, simply also what is in the law.

[0:36:29] Because if the law says, you know, this should all be done, or if the law says, you know, you can do this risk-based, that also will help directing supervisors and regulatory bodies into the right direction.

[0:36:41] Maybe a second point, which is not so much the risk-based issue, but the complexity issue of

[0:36:46] European regulation and supervision.

[0:36:49] Within banking supervision and SSM, we have made the choice of having basically two layers, where also the supervision is conducted together with national teams.

[0:36:58] I think in the area of banking, that is warranted, because there are very strong ties to the national habits.

[0:37:06] In the case of banking, there are very strong views by citizens on banks.

[0:37:11] That is very different for CCP's.

[0:37:13] CCPs, daar is a lot of citizens in the Netherlands, if you would ask, they wouldn't know what a CCP would be.

[0:37:21] And I think in that case, and also for CCPs, it is warranted that you directly go to the European level, rather than having this kind of two-tier system, where you have national supervisors working together with European supervisors.

[0:37:35] You can have that, and that is our proposal.

[0:37:37] ...to have that as an intermediate step, just to, you know, as a phase getting to a situation where it's directly supervised by ESMA.

[0:37:45] But in our view, the ultimate goal should be and objective is for CCP's to have full-time people supervising that at European level at ESMA and not having ultimately also national teams provided by the national regulators.

[0:37:59] And I think that also reduces the complexity of the supervisory system.

[0:38:04] Thank you.

[0:38:05] Ik denk dat we al een keer voor een vraag hebben.

[0:38:07] Dank u wel voor de antwoorden.

[0:38:13] Ik wil...

[0:38:15] I have another question.

[0:38:17] Totally different.

[0:38:18] But how can politicians help to get this done?

[0:38:25] Because we want to accelerate on the capital market union.

[0:38:27] We want to get this done.

[0:38:29] The supervisory board, etc.

[0:38:31] So what in the ideal world would you expect from us?

[0:38:38] I'm looking to my right side.

[0:38:40] Who wants to take up this challenge?

[0:38:44] Mrs.

[0:38:44] Van Geest.

[0:38:47] Well, like I said, I think making steps towards a more centralised supervision is in our interest and is long overdue.

[0:38:57] Not because we like to give up our mandate, but because we think there will be more effective supervision when it's done.

[0:39:06] So to the extent that you share this point of view, which of course is up to you, not...

[0:39:10] To the extent that you share this point of view, I think being supportive of the moves in the commission proposal and the moves that are being made by the E6, I think that would be useful.

[0:39:24] I think things are less useful if...

[0:39:26] En ik denk dat de Nederlanders is 1 van 27, niet een belangrijk member, maar 1 van 27.

[0:39:36] To de extent dat je altijd voor een heel nice, specific Dutch point-of-view, maar in deze type of setting, dat is niet heel erg.

[0:39:44] To de extent dat je in favor bent,

[0:39:47] Being in the enthusiastic support of the Dutch government, trying to get this further, I think that will be support.

[0:39:55] And accepting that if you go for a European solution, you can't get always your typical Dutch specific wish.

[0:40:03] And I think that's quite difficult.

[0:40:05] At least for supervisors, it's already difficult and I don't have to answer to citizens.

[0:40:11] Dus dit is mijn suggestie.

[0:40:14] En dan hebben we deze debaties, want dan wordt het ook meer een topic in de politische debaties, want anders is het een typische ivory tower type of approach, en ik denk dat we moeten proberen om dat te doen.

[0:40:27] Dank u.

[0:40:28] Meneer Majoor, zou je iets geven?

[0:40:29] No, I just want to emphasize the importance and the urgency of the matter.

[0:40:34] So I know, for example, there's now a lot of discussion also on issues like digital independence.

[0:40:41] This is also related to the fact that we have no strong capital market in the EU.

[0:40:44] Why did these firms not become successful and large in the EU?

[0:40:50] The capital markets played an important role in that.

[0:40:52] Of course, there are other issues, but you need a large capital market to have this type of innovation.

[0:40:57] So I think in terms of substance,

[0:40:59] Het is de argument for central supervision, stronger capital markets, is quite straightforward.

[0:41:06] The proposals which are on the table are strong and good.

[0:41:09] I think they should be.

[0:41:10] And so, to some extent, I would ask you, convince your European colleagues and your colleagues in Brussels to support this.

[0:41:19] Inevitably, there will be some compromises will be needed, but it's really essential that we progress.

[0:41:27] Thank you very much.

[0:41:28] We have two and a half more minutes.

[0:41:31] Well, a quick question.

[0:41:32] A very quick question to Ms.

[0:41:34] Kazenave.

[0:41:36] It may sound political, but I assure you it's not.

[0:41:39] Because exactly on this point, in this House, there is, I think, nonpartisan.

[0:41:44] We are mostly supportive of centralisation and more authority to ESMA.

[0:41:49] But obviously we have seen some member states that have been more sceptical.

[0:41:53] So...

[0:41:55] In ESMA's governance, how would you ensure that the concerns of mainly smaller financial centres or the interests are ensured that EU-level supervision is not shaped disproportionately by the priorities of larger financial centres and member states?

[0:42:16] I do hope the answer is shorter than your question.

[0:42:18] Mr Keselhoff.

[0:42:20] I'll try to be short.

[0:42:21] It's a very important question, because the Savings & Investment Union is a project for all.

[0:42:27] I think, like Steven was just saying, we will all succeed together, or we will not.

[0:42:32] In Europe, we need strong capital markets, we need a true single market for financial services, and that is to the benefit of all member states.

[0:42:40] From a governance perspective, the Board of Supervisors is and will remain the main decision-making body at ESMA, where every national authority is represented.

[0:42:49] So, all the policy work goes to the Board of Supervisors.

[0:42:53] And then for some of the maybe smaller member states, I would even argue that probably in the new setting they would be more involved, more informed of what is going on for some large pan-European financial market infrastructures, because there will be information flowing from within ESMA that will be coming up then to the Board of Supervisors, where today it's only those who have a stake in one of those entities that maybe are more informed.

[0:43:19] And maybe a final point also in terms of accountability of how this is done for member states.

[0:43:27] I wanted to share also on... What was I going to say on national supervisors as well?

[0:43:31] Yes, that the interest that will be carried by the executive board will be the European perspective.

[0:43:40] So the people who will be in charge of supervision, they will not be looking at it from any national angle.

[0:43:46] They will be there for...

[0:43:47] The EU as a whole.

[0:43:49] So it's also normally to the benefit of all that we have this project and a European perspective for our large market infrastructures that serve the interest of everyone.

[0:43:57] So hopefully they can also see what is in it also for smaller member states that are less involved today.

[0:44:06] Thank you very much.

[0:44:07] Unfortunately, we have reached our time limit, so I'd like to thank our guests for participating in this panel discussion.

[0:44:15] We're going to switch now to the second panel crew, so thank you very much.

[0:46:13] Dank u wel.

[0:46:54] Wel, welkom terug naar onze tweede paddelen.

[0:46:57] We hebben zes gasten.

[0:46:59] Ik zal het leven zelf makkelijker maken.

[0:47:01] Ik zal je niet introduceren.

[0:47:02] Je kunt dat zelf zelf doen.

[0:47:04] Als je de kans krijgt om te expresseren wie je bent, wat je representert.

[0:47:10] En natuurlijk een kleine afspraakje voor het onderwerp.

[0:47:15] Ik ga beginnen met meneer Van Vlerken.

[0:47:18] Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Commission, for having me here.

[0:47:23] Let me start by making a statement, as we say in Dutch, Eendracht maakt macht.

[0:47:28] Unity creates strength.

[0:47:30] As of today, Europe has a unique opportunity to give real meaning to that principle by ensuring that our capital market does not remain fragmented, but truly function as one capital market.

[0:47:43] The MISP stands at the heart of this ambition, we believe.

[0:47:47] Als een central pijler van de Savings & Investment Union, het reflectieft een clear en necessary objectief.

[0:47:53] Namely, om de structuurlijke barrieren te brengen de scale en de effectiviteit van de Europese kapitalmarkt.

[0:48:01] Het purpose is niet alleen technisch, maar ook strategisch.

[0:48:05] Het is om te creëren marken die meer liquide, meer efficiënt en, ultimately, meer capable van ondersteunen Europa's competitiviteit in een grondig global financierlandskap.

[0:48:17] In de view of Euronext, de Savings & Investment Union rests on three fundamental objectives, namely 1.

[0:48:22] Reducing fragmentation, 2.

[0:48:25] Improving access to finance, especially for SMEs, and 3.

[0:48:29] Increasing transparency and resilience.

[0:48:33] So the SRU should be appreciated as a full value chain project, from retail participation, to regulation and supervision, to market structure and post-trade.

[0:48:45] Every component is interconnected.

[0:48:48] Progress is one area, cannot compete for weaknesses in the other one.

[0:48:52] Now, there is positive momentum.

[0:48:54] If we look at the Listing Act, the SME Growth Market Initiatives, and the MISP, and the early progress which is being made on post-trade integration, let's say there is room for optimism.

[0:49:06] But reality is clear, the gap between ambition and delivery remains significant.

[0:49:12] Against this backdrop, the MSIP is an important step forward.

[0:49:15] to foster liquidity, strengthen competition, expand investor choice, and support consolidation of the European capital market.

[0:49:24] However, while the direction is right, the proposals must go further.

[0:49:29] More needs to be done to improve transparency and enhance liquidity.

[0:49:34] European equity markets are increasingly characterized by bilateral and off-exchange trading.

[0:49:40] Een groot deel van de activiteit plaatsvindt uit de transparante plaatsvinders, waardoor de visibiliteit van de liquidee, waardoor de prijsvorming, de markt afges en, uiteindelijk, de vijandering van de bedrijven, waardoor de publiek markt minder betreft voor de bedrijven van de bedrijven van de bedrijven.

[0:49:59] De MIP heeft deze trend genoegd, het systeem niet genoeg rebalancen.

[0:50:05] Een meer recalibration is nodig om een level playing field te maken over alle trading venues.

[0:50:11] Dit brengt ons naar een van de core objectief van de SRU, mobilisering de Europese savings.

[0:50:17] As we know, retail participation is extremely low.

[0:50:20] Only 17% of EU household assets are invested in financial assets, compared to 43% in the US.

[0:50:28] At the same time, deposits have lost real value and financial litigancy remains extremely limited.

[0:50:35] So the barriers are clear.

[0:50:36] Misaligned incentives, complex disclosures and overregulation of simple products.

[0:50:42] To our belief, three livers can unlock this.

[0:50:45] The saving and investment accounts, pension reform and simplified disclosures.

[0:50:50] But one point is critical.

[0:50:52] If markets are fragmented, complex and opaque, no tax incentive will be strong enough.

[0:50:58] This is why national debates, such as in the Netherlands, discussion on box 3 taxation are extremely relevant.

[0:51:04] Another important pillar is the regulatory burden.

[0:51:08] Today we are dealing with duplicate reporting, overlapping frameworks and excessive compliant costs.

[0:51:14] And another obstacle is the fragmented supervision.

[0:51:20] The move towards European central supervision is therefore a major step forward.

[0:51:26] Als we kijken naar Europa's post-trade landscape, het is nog steeds fragmented, resultant in hoger kosten voor issuers en investeerd.

[0:51:35] We believe dat de strengthening van Target 2 securities is daarvoor kritisch.

[0:51:39] Mandatieve connectiviteit en centralise supervision van alle CSD's zijn een sterk step forward en moeten volledig leveren.

[0:51:48] Now Euronext welkomst de MIP, taking a strong stance toward innovation, such as DLT, tokenization, and modernized settlement.

[0:51:57] Providing the market with a clear and proportionate framework will be key for maintaining Europe's competitive edge.

[0:52:04] So let me conclude, the market infrastructure package is a strong step forward, but it's not a transformational one.

[0:52:10] The truly success will be based on address market structure more decisively, move forward real supervision integration, complete post-trade integration, and unlock retail participation.

[0:52:24] And in that effort, the Netherlands has a very crucial role to play on that.

[0:52:29] Thank you.

[0:52:30] Thank you very much.

[0:52:30] And my plea to our guests is please keep your introduction as short as possible because you're with six people.

[0:52:37] We only have 45 minutes.

[0:52:38] Mr. Evertz.

[0:52:40] I'll speak more quickly.

[0:52:41] Many thanks, Chair, and honorable members.

[0:52:44] I represent the retail investor in Europe and also in the Netherlands, the VABA, 28,000 individual members.

[0:52:51] The issue is urgent, and I was very happy with the former panel that shows that all the regulators would like to go in the same direction.

[0:52:57] Also, your questions go in the same direction, so that is a very good message.

[0:53:01] We need to strengthen Europe, we need to decrease fragmentation and increase scale.

[0:53:07] Because currently only third countries benefit from our fragmentation, that is the US.

[0:53:11] So all the money, wholesale, retail flows to the US and not to the EU.

[0:53:17] En de third countries are able to play our rulebook and benefit from the fragmentation, because they have more skill, so they are more competitive.

[0:53:26] So we know the problem and many good intentions later, we are still defending nonproductive national champions.

[0:53:32] en de current institutions.

[0:53:34] En je vraag, wat politiciens kunnen doen?

[0:53:37] Dit is wat ze kunnen doen.

[0:53:38] Ze kunnen niet nemen national champions, maar nemen een meer kreative disruption dat moet gebeuren in termen van reglement, in termen van supervisie, en hence MISB is erg belangrijk.

[0:53:49] Dus we zouden niet beginnen met de current industrie en de institutions in mind, maar we moeten reflecteren hoe we ze kunnen strengthenen.

[0:53:55] also future industries and future institutions.

[0:53:59] So we need to look at the issue more fundamentally.

[0:54:03] And we should not touch consumer and investor protection.

[0:54:06] That's the key message.

[0:54:07] We should start with that.

[0:54:08] It's about consumers, it's about bringing the capital markets to the consumers and to the investors, bringing the benefits of Europe to the citizens of Europe.

[0:54:16] En we want people to invest more.

[0:54:18] We want the strengthened investment culture to really sprout.

[0:54:23] And consequently, protecting investors is a prerequisite for success.

[0:54:30] And competitiveness and resilience, this is part of resilience, must always work in tandem.

[0:54:36] We see the pendulum is swinging, and that's always with regulation.

[0:54:38] Now it's swinging in the direction of industry.

[0:54:40] This is well understood, considering geopolitical realities.

[0:54:45] But keep in mind that the financial industry and capital markets must be pushed towards more productivity.

[0:54:51] Also, it's not only competitiveness, but also more productivity and less fragmentation.

[0:54:56] So, currently we see a lot of regulatory arbitrage, misuse of European passport, and those are the legitimate loopholes there are now, and they need to be stopped.

[0:55:06] So, to introduce competitiveness elements into the rulebook of the regulators, ESMA, EBA, and IOPA, I would warn against that.

[0:55:17] It's not about more competitiveness of the current industry.

[0:55:21] Competitiveness should always be more productivity

[0:55:25] en niet alleen protecting de current interesses.

[0:55:28] Consolidation of supervision, de issue today, is a logical step in our view.

[0:55:33] We want to have that single European capital market.

[0:55:36] Consolidation ultimately benefits all investors, including retail investors.

[0:55:40] We need to strengthen regulation, but the key pillars of the lamp for lucy system need to remain in place.

[0:55:46] I think that's a crucial message as well.

[0:55:48] So, but it should have a better design, it should have a better layering of rules and better enforcement of regulation, optimizing supervisory efficiency.

[0:55:59] So we also need a better sequencing of rules, more proportionality in the rules, risk-based, of course, and more accountability.

[0:56:07] And indeed, so we are very much in favor of more central supervision of that systemic infrastructure.

[0:56:14] CSD's, indeed, the CCP's, and also the largest institutions.

[0:56:20] Exchanges, the PEMO part of it, but also listed companies and their reporting, and central supervision on auditors, perhaps.

[0:56:30] In the end, investors care about liquid markets, sound price formation, full transparency, accountability, efficient access to the most attractive markets and products through their brokers.

[0:56:40] And the latter is unlikely to be affected by the MISP, only at a limited extent.

[0:56:46] But what could make a meaningful difference, however, is the introduction of the EU saving and investment.

[0:56:52] En dat is een very good proposal, recommendation, coming from the Commission.

[0:56:58] En dat should really be also introduced in the Netherlands.

[0:57:03] Also, article 8 sub 1 of the recommendation, look at it.

[0:57:07] If you have questions, I will go in more detail.

[0:57:10] Maar dat is ook de issue.

[0:57:13] Mijn collegaal van Vlerke heeft gezegd.

[0:57:15] Box 3 is een essentieel element.

[0:57:18] Currently, de mensen die investeren zijn worse dan de mensen die save zijn.

[0:57:22] Ze zijn worse dan de pensioners met hun pensioen.

[0:57:26] En dat moet echt change.

[0:57:27] Dat is de message we'd like to get across.

[0:57:29] We're still negotiating in de eerste kamer.

[0:57:33] If we really want de capital markets to flourish,

[0:57:37] Box 3 needs to be adjusted accordingly.

[0:57:40] Let me stop here.

[0:57:46] Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this roundtable on the Savings Investment Union.

[0:57:52] I represent Umedian.

[0:57:54] That's the corporate governance and sustainability platform for institutional investors.

[0:57:59] And Umedian represents around 50 Dutch and overseas pension funds insurers and asset managers.

[0:58:07] And they are holding together approximately 25 to 30 percent of all

[0:58:12] Today's discussion is particularly timely, as the Savings & Investment Union is of great importance for Europe's future prosperity, resilience and strategic autonomy.

[0:58:30] At the same time, Europe needs significantly more private investments to finance its ambitions in competitiveness, digitalization, sustainability and security.

[0:58:43] And the investment gap runs into hundreds of billions of euros annually.

[0:58:49] And banks and governments cannot close that gap alone.

[0:58:53] A better functioning European capital market is therefore an economic necessity.

[0:59:00] And my central message tonight is straightforward.

[0:59:03] The savings and investment union will only succeed if it delivers on two conditions simultaneously.

[0:59:11] Deeper market integration and stronger investor confidence.

[0:59:17] First, market integration.

[0:59:19] European capital markets remain fragmented.

[0:59:23] Investors still face different national rules, supervisory practices and reporting requirements.

[0:59:31] And this increases costs, discourages cross-border investment and reduces the attractiveness of European markets.

[0:59:40] De market integration and supervision package, or MISP, is therefore a step in the right direction.

[0:59:47] But success should be judged by results in practice.

[0:59:53] More European supervision only adds value if it replaces national fragmentation rather than being layered on top of it.

[1:00:02] Otherwise, complexity will increase instead of decrease.

[1:00:08] The same principle applies to reporting requirements.

[1:00:11] A more integrated capital market requires a more integrated European reporting framework.

[1:00:19] Second, investor confidence.

[1:00:22] Investors will only allocate capital if they trust the system.

[1:00:27] That trust depends on strong shareholder rights, sound corporate governance and consistent enforcement.

[1:00:35] Some recent EU initiatives risk weakening that confidence.

[1:00:41] Proposals that reduce the influence of external shareholders, such as the proposed EU Inc. regulation, raise concerns for us.

[1:00:50] The same applies to shortcomings in the shareholder rights directive, which still does not ensure effective cross-border voting by shareholders.

[1:01:00] Scale and investor protection are not trade-offs.

[1:01:04] They reinforce each other.

[1:01:06] A successful savings and investment union requires both.

[1:01:11] Let me conclude.

[1:01:12] The test of success is simple.

[1:01:15] Does the savings and investment union make it easier for companies to raise capital and for investors to invest across borders?

[1:01:24] If so, Europe can turn its abundant savings into productive investment, finance innovation and strengthen its long-term competitiveness.

[1:01:37] Thank you very much and I look forward to the discussion.

[1:01:40] Thank you very much.

[1:01:42] Next is Mr Kriash.

[1:01:46] Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, dear members of the Finance Committee, dear rapporteur.

[1:01:52] Thank you very much for your invitation to contribute to this roundtable.

[1:01:54] My name is Remy Kiresh.

[1:01:55] I'm a director of the Association for Financial Market in Europe.

[1:01:59] AFMI represent over 150 leading global and European banks, as well as other key market participants, including Dutch institutions such as ING and Rabobank.

[1:02:09] Our members play a central role in Europe's financial system.

[1:02:13] They underwrite around 90% of corporate and sovereign debt, and approximately 80% of listed equities issuance in Europe.

[1:02:20] They also act as market makers, providing additive liquidity, helping to ensure that investors obtain the best possible outcomes.

[1:02:28] As the SIU moves from strategy to implementation, now is the right time to ask whether we are progressing at the necessary pace and delivering at the required scale.

[1:02:38] So, first, from our perspective, indeed, building deeper capital markets in Europe is first a demand side challenge.

[1:02:45] European households hold around 11 trillion in cash and deposit, yet far less is invested in market-based instrument than in other major economies.

[1:02:54] This limits both wealth creation for citizens and the supply of long-term capital for companies.

[1:02:59] Daarom, we strongly believe, as others are all on this table, that increasing retail participation and mobilizing household savings to productive investments are critical to deepening Europe's capital market and financing its future.

[1:03:12] Let me stress in particular the pension dimension.

[1:03:15] From our perspective, this remains one of the key structural differences compared to the U.S.

[1:03:19] system, representing a major pool of capital that can be invested over the long term.

[1:03:24] In this regard, the Netherlands provide a compelling example for Europe.

[1:03:27] Dutch person assets amount to approximately 150% of GDP, significantly higher than in France, Italy, Spain and Germany.

[1:03:35] Now turning to the market integration and supervision package.

[1:03:39] We strongly believe that this is a real opportunity to straighten the competitiveness of European capital markets and make them more attractive globally.

[1:03:45] But as we move forward, one concern should guide us all, the investor's perspective.

[1:03:50] Whether institutions or retail, investors deserve the best outcome for their savings and their pensions.

[1:03:55] And therefore, we believe that three principles should guide the discussion.

[1:03:58] A clear pan-European approach, which we believe is the only way for Europe to remain competitive on the global stage.

[1:04:03] A strong focus on competition and innovation.

[1:04:05] And a policy grounded in robust evidence.

[1:04:09] Now I would like to highlight four priorities from AFMI in regards to the Market Nation Supervision Package.

[1:04:14] One, preserving the choice of trading mechanism for investors.

[1:04:19] Two, removing barriers in the post-trade place and unlocking competition.

[1:04:23] And fourth, a cost-efficient, agile and accountable supervision.

[1:04:28] Let me focus on the three first priorities.

[1:04:30] So first, preserving choice of trading mechanism for investors.

[1:04:34] As outlined in a recent ESMA report on market structure, EU equity markets function well.

[1:04:40] We therefore strongly caution against fundamentally changing EU equity market structure.

[1:04:44] This would be counterproductive and come at the expense of investors.

[1:04:48] In this regard, we note and welcome that no changes have been proposed by the Commission, and we think it's the right approach.

[1:04:54] Let me be clear, banks are not exchanges.

[1:04:57] Banks, unlike exchanges, which match buying and saving interest, place their own capital at risk and take the other side of the trade.

[1:05:06] And therefore provide bespoke solutions to investors.

[1:05:10] Actually, European Asset Management Association supports this position.

[1:05:17] We strongly support the fact that investors, pension funds, retirement system, insurance company, who trade in large side, should

[1:05:26] should have the choice of the way they execute their trades.

[1:05:31] What is really missing in the EU is an expanded concept tape with grounded depth and venue attribution.

[1:05:39] On the post-trade side, where we really think the focus should be, we think that there is room for removing structural barriers and unlocking innovation.

[1:05:48] For instance, on clearing, we stressed that while the Commission is going in the right direction in strengthening open access provision, there is room for greater ambition, park lane views of extending interoperable arrangement between at least all significant CCPs and cash equities.

[1:06:08] That the case also we found already with CBO, established in Netherlands, which has interoperable arrangement with CICS and LCH.

[1:06:16] On the CSE side, we just wanted to flag also one element here.

[1:06:20] We think that there is an element of tension where central security depositories are characterized not only by fragmentation, by their numbers, but also by the fact that there is a tension between their role as central market utilities and their profit maximizing incentives.

[1:06:36] Therefore, the CSE landscape is also characterized by highly complex fee schedules inhibiting comparability and therefore competition.

[1:06:43] En daarvoor, hier, we see that further transparency will be helpful to be able to compare fees.

[1:06:50] Last but not least, I just want to conclude on innovation, which for us is key.

[1:06:54] In the GLT pilot regime, there are a number of elements in particular the settlement scheme proposal, which will also provide more competition in the settlement space.

[1:07:04] And here, I would be happy to elaborate further on our proposal, but for interest last time, I will stop here.

[1:07:09] Thank you.

[1:07:10] Thank you very much.

[1:07:11] We go to Mr. Kleipel.

[1:07:14] Your mic is already over.

[1:07:21] Thank you.

[1:07:22] Thank you for the opportunity to exchange views with you on this important topic.

[1:07:27] I represent the VAIO, and the VAIO represents the Dutch listed companies.

[1:07:31] And these listed companies are an important part of the capital markets and the union that we're discussing today.

[1:07:37] They invest in the Dutch economy for the long term, and they contribute to the competitiveness of the Netherlands, but also of Europe.

[1:07:44] And they are the companies that put the Netherlands and Europe on the world map.

[1:07:48] They contribute to the position of Europe as an economic powerhouse.

[1:07:52] That position, however, cannot be taken for granted.

[1:07:55] A stock market listing by a company is a choice.

[1:07:59] Just like the venue of location of a company is a choice.

[1:08:03] And we see that companies make that choice where the climate is the most favorable for those companies.

[1:08:09] Where a head office or a listing leaves, in the end, in long term, investments and jobs will eventually follow.

[1:08:17] And that's a trend that's very difficult to reverse.

[1:08:20] In our view, the task ahead is that we design a system that makes it as attractive as possible for companies to establish themselves and to list their shares here in the Netherlands and in Europe.

[1:08:32] Two factors in our view determine that attractiveness.

[1:08:35] First and foremost is the depth of the capital market.

[1:08:38] It has been said by my predecessor.

[1:08:40] Sufficient capital and liquidity is key.

[1:08:43] The second one is the scope for doing actual business.

[1:08:47] Rules that are workable, rules that are predictable, both in terms of running a business and in financing it.

[1:08:54] I think that's the crux of why we are looking at a capital markets union at the moment.

[1:08:59] Europe has the capital, and I think we are lacking the infrastructure to mobilize that capital in an efficient manner.

[1:09:06] Fragmented rules, as has been discussed, and divergent supervision are holding this back.

[1:09:12] In our view, a genuine capital markets union would resolve this, but it would also strengthen the position of the Netherlands.

[1:09:18] So in view of the value, there are three specific priorities that we would ask your attention for.

[1:09:24] The first one, it has been mentioned before, is we support a single European rulebook.

[1:09:28] One set of rules that applies uniformly throughout Europe.

[1:09:33] Either through regulations or directives, but based on maximum harmonization.

[1:09:38] And the Netherlands itself should follow that principle.

[1:09:40] No national regulatory initiatives where European legislation exists or is preparing this.

[1:09:47] Second one is, one regulator, one point of contact.

[1:09:51] Harmonization works if supervision is uniform.

[1:09:55] We currently have 27 supervisors, and I think that's just something that disperses the landscape and it creates legal uncertainty.

[1:10:03] The last one I think is also key and is that we need to make sure that the capital markets are attractive for companies also after the listing.

[1:10:11] So it's not only the journey towards listing, but remaining listed needs to be attractive.

[1:10:18] It's not only the IPOs.

[1:10:19] I think the position of already listed companies

[1:10:21] deserves attention.

[1:10:23] And we must assure that the capital market remain attractive for companies to stay on the stock market.

[1:10:28] I think that's really something that's important and we should therefore periodically review the obligations that are imposed on listed companies to assess usefulness, necessity, but also the alignment with international practice.

[1:10:40] Let me conclude.

[1:10:42] The Amsterdam stock market and the capital markets is one of the largest in Europe.

[1:10:46] It's a very strong one.

[1:10:47] And that's precisely why we as the Netherlands have so much to gain of this capital market union.

[1:10:53] A deeper, more integrated market will attract more capital, and that capital will flow to the places that already offer scale and liquidity.

[1:11:03] We think that the Netherlands will benefit from this.

[1:11:08] We think these priorities are important, and we will be happy to contribute to the discussion.

[1:11:11] Thank you.

[1:11:14] Thank you very much.

[1:11:15] Last but not least, Mrs.

[1:11:16] Molina.

[1:11:18] Thank you very much for the opportunity to join this discussion about the European capital markets and what it will mean for Dutch investors.

[1:11:26] And I'll first provide some context on what investors I'm talking about and then make my points.

[1:11:33] The Dutch Private Equity Venture Capital Association represents more than 140 investment funds that provide funding to the full lifecycle of companies.

[1:11:43] So from start-ups to established growing businesses.

[1:11:48] And together these investors invest between 6 and 8 billion euros in equity capital annually in the Dutch economy.

[1:11:57] They support around 3,000 Dutch companies employing almost 800,000 people in the Netherlands.

[1:12:06] And these companies grow faster in terms of revenue and employment than average companies.

[1:12:12] Which is because investors provide more than capital.

[1:12:17] So they provide strategic guidance, expertise...

[1:12:20] ...and active ownership.

[1:12:21] And those are key ingredients for scaling innovative businesses... ...and strengthening our competitiveness.

[1:12:28] So, that is what we do.

[1:12:30] And having said that, these fund managers are typically small organisations.

[1:12:37] So managers with more than 500 million euros under management may have fewer than 10 employees and still have to be compliant to extensive regulation to be able to do their business.

[1:12:58] My key message is today that we don't lack capital in Europe, but we suffer from this fragmented private capital markets.

[1:13:08] And the Netherlands will benefit more than other countries from further integration.

[1:13:14] Therefore, we should not only be part of the coalition of the willing, we should be really actively driving this movement.

[1:13:24] That's what we should do.

[1:13:26] First of all, why is this the case?

[1:13:29] The Netherlands is already one of Europe's most international private capital markets.

[1:13:35] Dutch funds raise capital and invest across borders.

[1:13:41] Half of the capital invested in Dutch funds comes from European investors, from other European countries.

[1:13:48] So cross-border investment is the norm, it's not the exception.

[1:13:53] That's why we benefit more than anybody else in Europe if we integrate the markets further.

[1:13:58] And secondly, investors experience consequences of fragmentation on a daily basis.

[1:14:04] So that is still the case.

[1:14:06] But that is because although they have authorizations to raise funds across Europe, they still have to navigate all those national rules.

[1:14:16] And that causes complexity, delays, and costs.

[1:14:20] So an average fund that raises funds in, let's say, four or five member states during three years pays 100,000 in fees to other supervisors in other European countries, despite the fact that they have a full license obtained in the Netherlands.

[1:14:42] So, proposals like the MISP are really meaningful steps towards a more integrated market.

[1:14:49] And they can also unlock substantial additional investment.

[1:14:55] Because, of course, this kind of fees limit the number of countries where you raise your funds.

[1:15:00] And limit the opportunities to raise funds.

[1:15:03] Reacting to discussions earlier tonight about moving towards a European supervisor, we do support this direction, but it should not distract... Discussions about this supervisor should not distract us from the real priority, and that is a well-functioning market.

[1:15:23] So breaking down all those barriers, that is the key priority.

[1:15:30] And the second point is the key for Europe to be able to grasp the opportunities of an integrated market is that we have a strong investment chain in the Netherlands.

[1:15:43] So we should not be distracted by this discussion by not looking at our own investment chain.

[1:15:51] Strengthening that remains an opportunity.

[1:15:54] If we do so, then the integrated market is a real opportunity and will contribute to mobilizing more capital for innovation and growth and competitiveness.

[1:16:08] And we are well positioned to benefit here.

[1:16:11] One concrete example where we can be at the front of building coalitions for the willing is the definition of semi-professional investors.

[1:16:25] If we look at our investment funds, they basically have institutional investors and semi-professional investors that invest in their funds.

[1:16:35] So investors that provide more than €100,000.

[1:16:40] not small retail investors.

[1:16:44] Especially this group of investors is hard to reach due to national legislations in other countries and a lack of European definition.

[1:16:52] So if we can provide this European definition, then we can approach these kind of investors and raise a lot more money from private individuals that we can consider

[1:17:08] as professionals, because they have experience in investing.

[1:17:12] That's our concrete example where the Netherlands can take a lead in building a coalition in Europe to be able to approach this type of investors.

[1:17:24] Thank you.

[1:17:25] Thank you very much.

[1:17:26] We switch to our members.

[1:17:28] Mevrouw van Eyck.

[1:17:30] Thank you.

[1:17:31] Thank you all for your contribution.

[1:17:32] I have a question to Mr. Clyde Paul.

[1:17:35] In your paper and also in your wording, you mentioned EU first test.

[1:17:46] So no national initiatives when Europe legislation is in place or is in preparation.

[1:17:53] Dat is wel een broad range.

[1:17:56] Er is altijd iets onderweg, zo te zeggen.

[1:18:02] Dus hoe gebruik je dit in de praktijk?

[1:18:08] I was very enthusiastic in answering this question.

[1:18:12] I think there is a...

[1:18:15] Let me first start, but why are we making that comment?

[1:18:17] I think what we see is that there is sometimes a tendency when we have European rules, they come to the Dutch parliaments and then we add rules on top of that.

[1:18:28] And we see that companies have difficulty dealing with that because they're dealing with a lot of rules and then these national rules make it even more difficult for them to implement these rules.

[1:18:39] I think we should be forelooking that we are not either the best jongetje van de klas sometimes, like adding more rules, and foreseeing everything that's going to happen in the future.

[1:18:49] We don't have a crystal ball, so that's indeed very difficult.

[1:18:51] But I think we should together look at where are the rules going, and that when we see a direction of travel, we shouldn't put national initiatives that go against that direction of travel.

[1:19:06] Dank u. Does any of the other members wish to add something?

[1:19:09] No?

[1:19:11] Okay, then we'll go to Mr. Schoonisch.

[1:19:14] Dank u, meneer de chair.

[1:19:15] Bedankt voor alle contribuitingen.

[1:19:17] We seem to bevindigd, allemaal van jullie ook.

[1:19:21] Maar kan ik u vragen wat u ziet als de twee hoogste risken die we niet in de kapitalmarktunieën zouden, van uw perspektief?

[1:19:31] Of misschien één, want we hebben zes mensen, maar dat is ook belangrijk.

[1:19:37] Dank u.

[1:19:38] Meneer van Vlaaggen.

[1:19:39] Ja, thank you for the question.

[1:19:42] From your next perspective, I think that the biggest risk is let's say that companies are not willing to give away certain sovereignty to the benefit of let's say Europe.

[1:19:52] En ik denk dat, wanneer we kijken naar de CSD situatie, waarom alle countries hebben een CSD?

[1:20:00] Want het is een belangrijk element om een kapitalmarkt te faciliteren.

[1:20:05] Bijvoorbeeld voor de Europese kapitalmarkt was high on de agenda.

[1:20:09] Je moet een depository hebben om de shares te maken.

[1:20:14] Maar er is ook een economische interesse om je CSD lokal te houden.

[1:20:19] En er is ook een politische element in dat.

[1:20:23] To mijn point, ik denk dat de grootste risch voor de Savings- en Investementen-Union te succederen

[1:20:30] is in detail, let's say, that there is political alignment and political commitment of each country.

[1:20:37] And that's also why I support very much, let's say, the Coalition of the Willing.

[1:20:41] Also, Mr. Heine taking the initiative to sit down with six countries and really form a small coalition to get that train in motion and then see what happens if other countries would like to join.

[1:20:53] I think that's the only way going forward.

[1:20:55] So it's really more, let's say, a political debate than anything else.

[1:20:58] And that's also why you see, let's say, quite a consensus amongst the market members.

[1:21:02] I think we all agree that, let's say, the savings and investment union is the only way going forward.

[1:21:09] Thank you very much, Mr. Evertz.

[1:21:13] Thank you, Chair.

[1:21:14] We had a real missed opportunity.

[1:21:16] A capital market has two angles.

[1:21:19] It provides companies with the investment, with the capital to flourish, to start and to scale and to be listed and to be very wealthy in terms of capitalization.

[1:21:32] En zonder dit, we won't be competitive.

[1:21:35] Not to the US in the future, not to China and Asia.

[1:21:39] So it's about the competitiveness of the EU's market.

[1:21:43] Not individual member states, but EU's market.

[1:21:46] Are we competitive or not?

[1:21:48] And do we allow our citizens to flourish from a strengthened economy, better jobs and better revenue on their investment?

[1:21:55] So that is the real challenge.

[1:21:59] What goes wrong currently, and...

[1:22:01] More of us in this room have been there.

[1:22:04] The regulators in the Board of Supervisors of ESMA work on the remit of a national mandate.

[1:22:10] So they defend their national champions, like I said in my introduction.

[1:22:14] So why would you accept an EU solution, also in terms of the composition, the way the supervisor is working, the regulation, which is constantly on the table?

[1:22:23] Why would you accept that?

[1:22:24] Only if you can show leadership.

[1:22:27] And that is not always guaranteed.

[1:22:29] And we've heard that today from the regulators.

[1:22:32] They have that leadership.

[1:22:32] And that should be, you know, that is the way to go.

[1:22:35] So if we don't go into this direction, that leadership is a false sign of prosperity in future.

[1:22:44] Thank you very much.

[1:22:47] Mr. Altmaar.

[1:22:48] Yeah, I mentioned in my introductory remarks that strategic

[1:22:52] strategic autonomy of the European Union is very important and is key.

[1:23:00] And if the European Union does not succeed with the Savings and Investment Union, I think that more companies will move to the United States with respect to their listings, maybe also with respect to their headquarters and

[1:23:21] en en legal seats, et cetera, because, yeah, the capital market is very liquid, very large in the United States.

[1:23:32] And if you want to compete and to

[1:23:34] attract and retain these companies, it is very important to make the capital market in the European Union as large as possible, as liquid as possible.

[1:23:46] And the savings and investment union is one of the safeguards in that respect to also in that respect to make the European Union more strategic autonomous.

[1:24:03] I represent pension funds and asset managers, and of course they can also invest in U.S.

[1:24:09] listed companies, but they also want to have their

[1:24:13] beneficiaries, their workers, their employees and savers, that they live in a prosperous Netherlands as part of a strong European Union.

[1:24:28] And therefore it is very important to retain the most successful companies here in the European Union.

[1:24:38] Also not to be

[1:24:40] dependent on rulemaking in other parts of the world.

[1:24:44] And that is, I think, at stake at this moment.

[1:24:49] Thank you very much.

[1:24:50] Mr. Kirsch, do you like to add something now?

[1:24:54] Mr. Kleipel.

[1:24:56] Let me just say, I fully support this point, and I think the point that Mr. Atma makes is a point, I think, the speed at which other jurisdictions, mainly the U.S., but I think also China and others are looking at it, are reforming and are making their capital markets attractive and are continuously looking at updating them.

[1:25:17] is very important.

[1:25:18] And the longer we take in making the SIU a success, I think the more difficult it will get to really retain all the companies.

[1:25:27] Because I think that is indeed a genuine worry that companies may move at a certain point.

[1:25:34] I can only agree and add it's not about capital markets as a goal per se.

[1:25:44] It is about the future of our economies and about our earning capacity.

[1:25:50] The challenges are huge.

[1:25:52] So we need a financial sector that can support that and can support our economic growth in the future.

[1:25:59] Dat is wat het allemaal is.

[1:26:00] En voor dat nodig hebben we een complete Europese alternatief voor andere kapitale markten.

[1:26:12] Om die businessen die ons helpen hier in Nederland en in Europa te houden.

[1:26:22] Thank you, Chair.

[1:26:23] Well, I think a lot of discussion towards us politicians also is all about supervision, settlement, market infrastructure.

[1:26:33] But from all the stories I've just heard, it's just it's that the fact that ultimately

[1:26:37] capital flows in the direction where investors see the best opportunity and where companies are able to grow as effectively as possible.

[1:26:47] So imagine we implement MISP, we strengthen ESMA, we further integrate capital markets.

[1:26:55] What would be needed, according to you, to further develop the European economy

[1:27:04] in terms of having these ecosystems in place, in terms of having the companies in place that are useful and necessary for our economic growth.

[1:27:13] Very broad question, and I don't know whether someone would like to take the floor, but I'm just curious.

[1:27:19] Thank you very much.

[1:27:20] I'm looking at Mr. Evert's door.

[1:27:24] I think the most important thing, apart from the content, which should be, of course, according to the preferences of the sector and of the investors, and that is not yet there, but that's the negotiations.

[1:27:36] But the most important thing is political support.

[1:27:39] This is an ambitious package, and we need to have ambitious politicians, not only here in The Hague, in the Netherlands, but also around the table in Brussels,

[1:27:48] Who together decide this is the way to go.

[1:27:51] Politicians in the Council, in Parliament.

[1:27:54] The Commission will come forward with, I think, the good proposals.

[1:27:59] At least what we've seen so far are good proposals.

[1:28:01] But politicians need to bite the bullet.

[1:28:04] And it has consequences.

[1:28:05] It has consequences for a national mandate, for defending the national champions.

[1:28:09] And, like I stated, also on taxation.

[1:28:12] If member states continue to kind of diverge and not have the taxation, which will stimulate people to invest, currently the AFM is warning against investing in risk-free products, because the taxation, current taxation, it will change, I know, will not allow a decent return.

[1:28:34] So you will lose money, especially if you include inflation and cost.

[1:28:37] Dus dat is een moeilijk discussie, ook omdat de coalitie niet heeft een majoriteit.

[1:28:46] Maar dat discussie nodig is hier.

[1:28:48] Je moet mensen om te stappen over de boundaries van taxation, dus je moet een attractief pakket er.

[1:28:55] En dat recommandatie van de commissie en de element in daar,

[1:29:01] dat je een favorable tax treatment moet hebben voor de Saving & Investment account.

[1:29:10] Currently, de ministerie van Finans, de ministerie van Finans, is quite hesitant om dat.

[1:29:15] En ik denk dat we de perfecte pensie system hebben.

[1:29:18] All de andere members zijn heel erg.

[1:29:20] Dit hebben we nog niet, om jongere mensen te stimuleren, nieuwe entranten naar de markt, om te investeren.

[1:29:26] En de zwedige voorbeeld is echt een heel goed.

[1:29:29] Het is een heel goed functieelijke economie, een goed kapitalmarkt.

[1:29:33] Mensen accepten de cultuur daar, en we kunnen dat in Nederland doen.

[1:29:38] En ik denk dat de kosten... Je moet eerst de kosten maken om de betekenen, maar hier zal je de betekenen, en ze uitweighen de kosten enorm.

[1:29:48] Dank u wel.

[1:29:49] Meneer Molenhaar.

[1:29:51] Ja, again, I think we're going to agree on the topic.

[1:29:55] So what I would say, indeed, in addition to having an integrated financial market, the other thing that's driving forces to mobilise capital is taxation.

[1:30:08] So an accommodating tax regime that provides treatment of capital gains, of employee stock appreciation rights, and also for lucrative interests.

[1:30:21] That is what we need to add.

[1:30:27] And that regime needs to be predictable and long term.

[1:30:31] So we've had regimes...

[1:30:34] pretty stable in the last 15 years.

[1:30:36] We need to come up with a broad solution for the next 15 years.

[1:30:42] And even better it would be if we have more alignment in Europe.

[1:30:47] I know that's indeed a difficult complex matter, but in the end that's also what we should strive for.

[1:30:57] Ja, a couple of remarks here.

[1:31:02] I think market fragmentation and

[1:31:07] Differences in insolvency regimes, differences in taxation, indeed, and also differences in corporate governance frameworks, in company law, etc.

[1:31:17] All these factors that is detrimental to market harmonisation is very important to solve in the near future.

[1:31:31] I think we also need to change culture, not only at the investors.

[1:31:39] So I think it is important to have more risk culture within the investment community, not only

[1:31:49] With respect to institutional investors that have more conservative approaches here in the European Union than in the United States.

[1:31:58] But also, we should stimulate retail investors to also take part in the public markets.

[1:32:07] And the third one is to increase entrepreneurship.

[1:32:10] So, many entrepreneurs are...

[1:32:15] A bit shy to be in the public spotlights, to move from a scale-up company to a listed company because of all that public scrutiny.

[1:32:28] It is important to be accountable to shareholders and the wider stakeholder community.

[1:32:37] Ja, dat also needs a step forward for real entrepreneurs to be more in the public spotlights, to make that step from a smaller company to a larger listed company.

[1:32:52] So the culture also needs improvement here in the European Union and also in the Netherlands.

[1:33:02] Thank you, Chair.

[1:33:03] I just wanted to add maybe a different color to the discussion, because there's a lot of tax issues and things that we know, or incidents that we know have been discussed for many years, are difficult to resolve.

[1:33:14] I think, from what we see at least, things are not as gloomy as it may sound.

[1:33:19] I mean, what our members told us is that EU equity markets

[1:33:25] in 2025, 2026.

[1:33:28] Strong performance of major indices.

[1:33:31] Even though we think that more can be done to attract global capital into the EU, the performance of the major equity indices last year was pretty strong.

[1:33:43] Just to bring a bit of a different color to the discussion.

[1:33:47] From our perspective, we think that how you attract investors, and we all agree that

[1:33:53] We all agree that there is some kind of symbiotic relationship between primary markets and listing and secondary markets.

[1:34:02] And one point where our members help support companies in getting listed or staying private and as well in executing their trading for asset managers.

[1:34:18] So how they sell Europe to international investors?

[1:34:23] One way to do that, and maybe one way to do that more effectively, is to show the real size of secondary market liquidity.

[1:34:29] And one way to do that is a consolidated tape.

[1:34:32] Real consolidated tape with more layers in terms of base bid and EBBO.

[1:34:39] And the trading value attribution will definitely help to show the real size of market liquidity across all trading mechanism.

[1:34:47] Als je compare het dat we zullen hebben in de EU, ik denk in de juli in de juli, de main difference, de characteristics we niet hebben, compared to US en de UK, is de trading value attribution, waar de liquidity is.

[1:34:59] Dus dat is iets dat investors, of the information dat is key for investors to have, en issuers, to facilite het voor de capital formation en de liquidity, across

[1:35:10] across the EU.

[1:35:12] Dat was on the trading side.

[1:35:13] Maybe one element on post-trade, I think also we should think, and it's outside the myth per se, but we should think of how we remobilize ourselves to leverage more marketing structure which costs millions of euros, the T2S at the ECB, and maybe think how we leverage more T2S to have more non-T2S currencies.

[1:35:32] More functionalities may be performed also by the T2S system, which is operational for the last 10 years or so.

[1:35:40] So that's maybe also other elements outside the MISP toolbox.

[1:35:44] I mean, the first one was typically in the MISP toolbox, but the second one not.

[1:35:49] That we could also think to beef up a little bit.

[1:35:53] Thank you.

[1:35:55] Thank you.

[1:35:56] I'm looking at Mr. Kleip.

[1:35:58] Can you do it very briefly?

[1:35:59] Because we reached the end of our second block.

[1:36:04] Thank you.

[1:36:04] I will be brief.

[1:36:05] I think if we bring it back to the Dutch perspective, I think one thing is very important is that we need stability in rulemaking.

[1:36:14] So I think companies are investing for the long term.

[1:36:17] They want a government.

[1:36:18] They want rules that are stable for the long term.

[1:36:20] I think they are sometimes lacking that.

[1:36:22] At least that's the feedback that we are getting.

[1:36:24] En so if we look at this package, and we are able to achieve this on a European level, I think there should also be constraint on a national level.

[1:36:33] I think it was repeated by people before me that we are then not, after a couple of years, adding layers again because we think there is the time to do that.

[1:36:42] So I think long-term planning and at a certain point constraint, when we move this to a more European level, we should also accept that in the long term.

[1:36:50] Thank you.

[1:36:52] Dank u wel.

[1:36:53] Van Vlerken.

[1:36:54] Dank u wel.

[1:36:55] Ik zal het kort en condensdelen.

[1:36:58] Dus wat kunnen de Nederlanders doen om de bedrijf te worden... ...omdat de bedrijf voor de bedrijf voor de bedrijf... ...omdat de bedrijf voor de bedrijf voor de bedrijf... ...omdat de bedrijf voor de bedrijf voor de bedrijf... ...omdat de bedrijf voor de bedrijf voor de bedrijf voor de bedrijf... ...omdat de bedrijf voor de bedrijf voor de bedrijf.

[1:37:20] Als ik de voorbeeld van Zweden gebruik, is het niet in vier jaar gebouwd.

[1:37:27] Dus als je de succes van de zweden kapitalmarkt en alle initiatiefen die erbij zijn, dat is echt over dekeningen.

[1:37:34] Dus de long-term vision en de long-term strategie is erg belangrijk.

[1:37:38] I think also the stimulation of, let's say, more retail investments by tax incentives or some kind of financial incentive to enable both institutions and retail to become more active, let's say, in investing in companies through the lifecycle.

[1:37:54] I think that those are the most important things.

[1:37:57] And if we all do that, I'm sure that we will be able to attract more companies on the public market and keep them here in Europe and to the benefit of Europe.

[1:38:06] Thank you.

[1:38:08] Bedankt heel erg, en bedankt aan alle vrienden voor de nieuws over die we ontdekken.

[1:38:14] We gaan naar het laatste bloc, en dan moeten we een live stream voor dat.

[1:38:17] Dus we hebben een paar minuten voor de volgende round.

[1:38:48] ***

[1:39:33] U zit.

[1:40:06] Good evening, can you hear us?

[1:40:08] Hello, good evening, yes.

[1:40:10] Perfectly, I was testing the sound.

[1:40:11] We will start a meeting in a few moments.

[1:40:14] You're very welcome.

[1:40:17] Thank you.

[1:43:56] Goedemorgen iedereen, we gaan onze volgende bloc beginnen.

[1:44:00] En voor dat bloc hebben we een speciale guest van

[1:44:04] Brussel, ik denk.

[1:44:06] En ik hoop dat ik het correct proberen.

[1:44:09] Meneer Cousin, is dat correct?

[1:44:12] Ja.

[1:44:12] Bedankt voor deze meeting.

[1:44:14] We gaan beginnen met een brief introductie van jou en jouw ideeën.

[1:44:19] Met een maximaal vijf minuut.

[1:44:21] Daardoor, onze komiteers vragen vragen.

[1:44:24] Je kunt jouw ideeën aan jouw ideeën.

[1:44:28] Je kan nu beginnen met jouw ideeën.

[1:44:31] Well, thanks a lot for inviting me, Mr Chair, and I need this apology for not being in Amsterdam together with you and staying in Brussels.

[1:44:45] But I'm very pleased to be in front of you tonight to discuss this important side for the Commission and for Europe.

[1:44:54] de market integration and supervision package.

[1:44:58] As you know, the MISP package is a cornerstone for the saving and investment union.

[1:45:04] It reflects a simple reality.

[1:45:08] We need a more integrated and efficient saving and investment union.

[1:45:16] We need efficient single market for capital in order for the EU to boost its growth and competitiveness.

[1:45:23] The starting point is well known.

[1:45:26] EU capital markets remain very fragmented and underdeveloped.

[1:45:30] They do not provide the scale that Europe needs.

[1:45:34] And this matters because in today's economy, competitiveness increasingly depends on innovation and scale.

[1:45:43] Europe is not short of talents, but too often we are very short of the financing conditions needed to develop those ideas and to scale them up and to keep them in Europe.

[1:45:55] That's why creating a strong European capital market is not a luxury, it's a necessity and even more in the current geopolitical circumstances.

[1:46:07] So that's against that background that the Commission propose the market and integration supervision package.

[1:46:13] with the main objective to remove the barriers to cross-border activity, to support market-driven consolidation in trading, post-trading and asset management.

[1:46:27] It also aims at addressing barriers to innovation and in particular also addressing barriers coming from divergent supervision.

[1:46:37] The package simplifies the rules, it reduces burdens,

[1:46:42] In particular, by harmonizing requirements, by going in from directive into regulation.

[1:46:49] It aims also at reducing gold plattings from member states and streamlining overlapping supervisory arrangements.

[1:46:58] So in short, it aims at making it simpler and more efficient for market participants to operate cross-border.

[1:47:08] Supervision is in this package one of the most sensitive topics.

[1:47:14] But if we are serious about having a single market for capital, we need to remove barriers and we need also to remove the supervisory barriers.

[1:47:28] Today we are having 27 different supervisory practices across member states, which create barriers, cost, complexity and opportunities for arbitrage.

[1:47:41] All the measures in the market and integration supervision package are interlinked.

[1:47:47] So that's why we consider we want to have it as a role and we want to keep the coherency in the package with high ambition.

[1:47:56] It's high ambitions in content, but it's also high ambition in the speed.

[1:48:03] The one Europe, one market roadmap agreed by the president of the European Parliament, the council and the commission made the three institutions commit to have an agreement on the market integrations and supervision package by the end of this year.

[1:48:20] The roadmap acknowledges that achieving this goal will require political will, engagement and ambition from all institutional actors at EU and national level.

[1:48:32] We are closely watched by investors from across the globe who are searching for attractive places to put their capital.

[1:48:41] Delivering on MISP gives a strong political message showing that we are really serious about integrating our market and building a true selling and investment union.

[1:48:54] We are now discussing, well, the co-legislator, the European Parliament and the Council are now discussing this package.

[1:49:02] And we hope from the Commission that the co-legislator will be also showing a high level of ambition.

[1:49:12] We'll have the key critical elements aligned with the overall objective of the Saving and Investment Union.

[1:49:21] For example, we see some elements such as the principle of centralized supervision for significant entities.

[1:49:29] The principle of keeping a short transition period or avoiding duplication in the supervision in the steady state, as well as maintaining the effectiveness of ESMA governance as a key element.

[1:49:46] We will continue and we are working very closely with both co-legislators, the parliament and the council to turn this momentum into a true single market for capital and reach an agreement on the MISP by the end of the year in line with the one market, one Europe roadmap.

[1:50:06] Thank you.

[1:50:08] Thank you very much.

[1:50:10] We will now switch to our committee members.

[1:50:12] Firstly, Mrs.

[1:50:13] van Eyck.

[1:50:14] Thank you very much for your contribution.

[1:50:17] You mentioned central supervision as one of the sensitive issues.

[1:50:26] At this moment, is there a lack of political will with some countries to make this important step forward?

[1:50:38] So there are two elements that are being discussed and of course there is no, for the moment there is no general approach or no final agreement by the Council as a general.

[1:50:53] I think they are first the scope and then when to move to EU level central supervision.

[1:51:02] We know that the Commission is proposing to have it in both trade venues, significant trades union post trading, and also all cryptoasset providers in terms of central supervision.

[1:51:19] So, depending on the market structure and market participants of the countries, there are some differences in which entities should be moving to ESMA as EU-level supervision.

[1:51:36] But I think the principle of moving to ESMA

[1:51:41] The overall principle of moving significant entities that have significant activities cross-border in the EU is a principle that is recognized by all.

[1:51:51] You may have seen, also because the Netherlands are part of the E6 statement,

[1:51:59] referring positively to moving to EU central supervision.

[1:52:05] And I think the Commission here is really taking note of this E6 common position.

[1:52:12] And we see it as a very useful contribution to advance the negotiation of the package.

[1:52:18] But again, on the scope, the discussions are taking place around the criteria.

[1:52:24] So which type of criteria

[1:52:26] in order to have ESMA being the EU-level supervision for significant activities.

[1:52:38] Then the second element is the timing.

[1:52:41] And here is a bit how short should be the transition period for National Competent Authority to give in the necessary task and responsibility to ESMA for those entities that will be moving into EU-level supervision.

[1:53:05] Naming en shaming, het is niet het moment.

[1:53:10] Het is een beetje te snel om te begrijpen.

[1:53:15] Er zijn een beetje sensitiviteit in sommige landen, omdat hun eigen marktparticipant en omdat hun kapitalmarkt is gestructured.

[1:53:29] Dank u wel.

[1:53:29] We gaan naar meneer Schoonis.

[1:53:32] Merci beaucoup, madame Cousin, voor uw contribution.

[1:53:39] Ik vraag het ook aan de andere participanten hier in Nederland.

[1:53:45] Wat is de grootste risiko van de kapitaal-marketing-unie?

[1:53:56] I think we need to deliver.

[1:53:57] We need to deliver on what we can deliver and is really the biggest risk of failure would be to not to take advantage of the political momentum and the seriousness in terms of the need to scale up capital market in Europe.

[1:54:16] We see, I mean, just by quoting example of comparing ourselves with the

[1:54:24] U.S.

[1:54:25] market, just on trading venue, we have more than 300 trading venues in Europe, we have more than a dozen of post trading venues versus three in the U.S.

[1:54:40] De grootste verhaal zouden zijn dat de politische will van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal van de verhaal

[1:55:07] Het kan niet dat, omdat van gold platen, omdat van supervisory divergences,

[1:55:14] We hebben trading venues dat zijn met veel kosten.

[1:55:21] En aan het einde van de dag, het zijn onze SMEs, het zijn onze bedrijven die niet kunnen gebruiken voor de maximale bedrijven de capital markets in Europa.

[1:55:32] En ze vliegen, ze vliegen weg, omdat ze nodig hebben, en ze nodig hebben,

[1:55:39] en tap de capital markets en de liquidity.

[1:55:45] Dus de risiko van de failure is niet om de politische momentum en de economische momentumen dat we hebben en niet om een EU-level supervision voor significant trading en post-trading.

[1:56:06] Thank you very much.

[1:56:08] You have an additional question, Ms.

[1:56:09] Gronitsch?

[1:56:10] Be my guest.

[1:56:13] So thank you very much.

[1:56:14] That's quite clear, a political will.

[1:56:17] But if we play the advocate's devil, imagine that not every country will agree.

[1:56:25] And speed is also important, also for business and also for capital market union.

[1:56:29] Would you...

[1:56:31] be against that there will be like a Schengen of Capital Market Union.

[1:56:34] So that certain countries will a Schengen of... So let's say frontrunners of the Capital Market Union.

[1:56:45] Can you give an answer on that one?

[1:56:50] So the president van der Leyen of the commission said that indeed if

[1:56:54] Er is no 27 agreement, so 27 political agreement at the full EU.

[1:57:05] One may consider to have a kind of two speeds and enhance cooperation for the market integration and supervision package.

[1:57:17] Of course, if we are talking about scale, we need

[1:57:20] to scale up, and we need 27 capital markets.

[1:57:24] So in a way, to have two small groups of countries that would go ahead in terms of finance cooperation would also be a bit of a defeat purpose in the sense that

[1:57:38] We need to be stronger together and we need the 27 member states.

[1:57:45] Now I think what we see with also the push with the bigger member states in the E6 common position is something that we need to continue having to have making sure that it's a really useful contribution to bring the 21 member states together.

[1:58:08] So we need to deliver an ambition response, but indeed if we fail 27 member states, then enhance cooperation, we will need to find solution to go for the bigger capital market union as we can have.

[1:58:30] So it's not the preferred option, not at all.

[1:58:33] We have a plan A which remains 27 member states.

[1:58:39] Again, we see the push of different group of member states useful to push for the momentum.

[1:58:47] If those member states are the biggest one, it's good, but we need to really make sure that ideally it should be capitalizing on the 27 capital markets.

[1:59:02] Thank you very much, Mr. Hoogveen.

[1:59:05] Thank you, Chair, and thank you so much for your remarks.

[1:59:08] And being a former member of European Parliament, I know how important the position of the co-legislators are after you put out the proposal.

[1:59:18] Now, the Commission has put out quite an ambitious package.

[1:59:24] But if we look realistically at the Council and the Parliament,

[1:59:27] which elements of the MISP do you consider really the core and essential aspect of the package that the European Commission has put forward?

[1:59:41] And without showing us your true negotiation tactics, what would be a bit more lenient on the aspects within the MISP?

[1:59:55] Thank you.

[2:00:01] So, as you know, the Parliament has just started, so we don't know exactly yet.

[2:00:03] We just got the first amendment from the three reporters on Monday.

[2:00:09] It was just published on Monday.

[2:00:12] And the Council is really just yet at the technical level, so there were three ecofins at ministerial level with a political orientation or political discussion.

[2:00:25] The last one of last week was on supervision and on governance of ESMA.

[2:00:34] Those are probably, as I said, the most sensitive points.

[2:00:40] But I would say that's why we approach it as a package,

[2:00:45] We have rules on asset management, on distributed ledger technology, which is very, very important to make sure that innovation is also included in this package.

[2:00:58] We have a package on trading and post-trading.

[2:01:02] But what we see in terms of supervision is that it's really... So there are two legs in this package.

[2:01:10] Single rule books, so working on the rules, and joint supervision or EU level supervision.

[2:01:19] And those are really the two legs that are really important because at the end of the day we want a better integration of the 27 capital markets.

[2:01:30] Of course, at the end of the day, it will boil down on the criteria of supervision, which entities will go into EU-level supervision, and on the governments on Desma.

[2:01:44] But all the technical rules that we allow for single rule books are as important because, again, it's a package.

[2:01:52] And without the two legs, we will not succeed in having a real integrated capital market.

[2:02:02] Because we are facing too many barriers at the stage, despite common directives on MIFID and transparency, despite two action plans on capital market union.

[2:02:18] So it's been very ambitious because we saw all these barriers.

[2:02:23] We saw that are really part of the capital market structure as it is now.

[2:02:32] Thank you very much.

[2:02:35] I'm looking at the members.

[2:02:37] Anybody has a second question?

[2:02:41] Well, thank you so much for clarifying.

[2:02:44] And I wish you well in also the trilogs, if the deadline is at the end of the year.

[2:02:52] So that would be a tight deadline, if I would say so.

[2:02:56] So, but looking at beyond the technical details of MISP, what is the, maybe you could tell a little bit about it, what's the Commission's broader theory of change?

[2:03:11] So how does this package focused on supervision and market infrastructure ultimately will lead to a more, how do I say, causal chain

[2:03:20] ...of more innovation, better movement of capital... ...more scale-ups and higher productivity.

[2:03:29] So, again, ambition is really getting rid of the barriers and making sure that we have markets that can be scaled up.

[2:03:44] Our approach in the context of the savings and investment union is really to look at all the savings that citizens have and SMEs.

[2:03:53] en hoe we het werken voor de investeringen dat we nodig hebben in Europa.

[2:04:01] We weten dat de competitiviteit van de EU is echt op scale.

[2:04:05] En ik denk dat was de grote verschillende van de twee planen van de Capital Markets Union.

[2:04:11] Nu hebben we een meer...

[2:04:13] Holistic approach and looking at the different pillars from investment from the citizen to SMEs to the buyers and to market participants.

[2:04:27] As you know, financial intermediation is currently very much underperforming in Europe, and because of the persistent fragmentation in the capital market, in the 27 capital market, we see that there is no leverage of what the single market could bring.

[2:04:52] We have, at the consequence, less developed capital market,

[2:04:56] less liquid, and not scalable compared to our international peers.

[2:05:02] So for us, tackling the fragmentation and tackling the barriers in the context of the package was really the priorities.

[2:05:11] ...to make sure that the cross-border activities... ...both on trading and post-trading... ...and asset management would be a much better increase... ...would be more efficient.

[2:05:24] So what we are doing is really to work on the cost... ...on the buyers first.

[2:05:30] So that's why we have all this pack... ...all the try to harmonise into regulation... ...try to harmonise also the type of rules...

[2:05:39] to reduce fragmentation, but we also work with this package on the cost.

[2:05:45] Because all the burden of the different national supervisory divergence practices bring a lot of cost to companies and to trading and post-trading venues.

[2:05:59] En met de tacking de barriere en de cost, we believe that all the gains we bring by the efficiency will increase in the long term the efficiency of European capital markets.

[2:06:22] Dank u wel.

[2:06:24] Ik denk dat onze memberen geen meer vragen hebben.

[2:06:28] Dus bedankt u wel voor uw antwoord.

[2:06:31] Als u een bepaalde laatste woorden heeft, dan is dit uw kans.

[2:06:37] Ja, laten we proberen om dit politieke momentum te krijgen en een real-market integratie te krijgen.

[2:06:44] Oké, heel erg bedankt.

[2:06:45] En voor iedereen die erin volgt, bedankt voor deze meeting.

[2:06:49] En iedereen, een mooie avond.

[2:06:54] Je ook.

[2:06:55] Bedankt voor me inviteren.

[2:06:56] Bedankt.

[2:06:56] Bye-bye.