Van Den Burg über Privatkundendienstleistungen: ‚Wir sollten nicht zu ehrgeizig sein’[en] 

Um eine gekürzte Version des Interviews zu lesen, klicken Sie bitte hier.

What are the main challenges that remain in the area of retail financial services? 

The main challenge in the area of retail financial services is to make consumers, the end users of retail finance products, truly benefit from the successful integration of the wholesale financial market in the EU, which was successfully stimulated by the FSAP measures. 

This should mean better products, lower prices and where necessary, more choice. As for this choice, we should not be over-ambitious. Retail financial services are, and will continue to be, primarily domestic. Consumers will favour what is familiar to them, and what they can trust from tradition, and there is nothing wrong with that. Language, cultural aspects and domestic conditions will provide the natural limits for attempts to create a real single market in the field of retail financial services. 

In your view, what are the most crucial findings of the Green Paper consultation?

The percentage of European consumers that make use of cross-border retail services is still very limited. This underlines my position that the market is primarily nationally-oriented. A more open competition possibly increases the number of people that make use of cross-border activities but national traditions regarding consumer protection should not be put aside too easily in order to create a single market. The single market is an instrument to serve consumers, and not just an aim to strengthen the position of some financial institutions that want to enlarge their scope of activities within the European Union without adapting to all the different traditions. 

I am pleased that the European Commission has also adapted its ambitions and now speaks about a targeted approach, for example in the field of competition between different payment systems. I'm also happy that there is a more positive attitude now towards the so-called 28th regime - an optional regime next to 27 national regimes - that I have promoted for financial products that may make the lives of mobile EU citizens that work or live cross border easier. 

Should the Commission take regulatory action? 

Yes, the Commission should take appropriate regulatory action. If we want to improve the access to and the mobility of retail financial services and products, we need to develop a proper framework for regulation and supervision. Such a framework would make those products and services more portable and recognised within the European Union, and at the same time establish clear European standards for consumer protection. 

Financial institutions should meet clear requirements for their interaction and behaviour with consumers, but at the same time they should then be allowed to check the creditworthiness of clients in other member states. We should increase legal certainty for mobile consumers. We will also have to consider arrangements for collective redress without getting bogged down in American practices. 

Retail Financial Services are likely to remain a local business in most EU countries. You have argued that there should not be an opening of markets at any price and have warned against a "one size fits all" approach. Could you explain your view? What are the benefits as well as the risks of opening up the retail financial services market? 

Full harmonisation in the field of retail financial services or mutual recognition on the basis of country of origin is not desirable. It would not be good because consumers need a more focused and targeted approach. Besides this, we need to respect national traditions and competences regarding consumer protection. 

Nonetheless, it is necessary to do something. There are mobile customers that need to be protected if they make use of retail services in various member states. In my point of view, a principle based approach (like MiFID) is the most appropriate way to improve the relationship between industry and consumers. The European Union has to come up with a basic set of minimum standards for consumer protection rules and an optional 28th regime for simplified pan-European products. 

At what level of consumer protection can we ensure a balance in order to ensure an empowered consumer and preventing an information overload at the same time? 

Consumer protection is of course the central element regarding cross-border retail financial services. In order to reach an optimal level of consumer protection, an information overload is not desirable. Instead, consumers need reliable and independent, unbiased information in a comprehensible and compact way. 

Confidence is crucial. Education and financial literacy programmes can help consumers to understand the information that is necessary to make clever financial decisions. There are best practices and thorough impact assessments are necessary to analyse which information is needed and how it should best be presented to consumers. 

The Slovenian Presidency wants to promote a debate on financial education based on the forthcoming Commission Communication. What priorities are needed for further educating EU consumers on financial services matters? 

It is indeed necessary to do several things regarding financial education of consumers. Information should be objective as well as consumer friendly. Consumers need to learn how to compare financial products and services before they select, and the industry should be transparent in providing the correct and necessary information. Financial education should be an integral part of primary education. Children need to be taught how financial products work and what the consequences would be if they decide to make use of financial services. Teenagers nowadays take expensive credit engagements without being aware of all consequences. Education is important, but it can never be a complete replacement for consumer protection and regulation that prevents problems.