EurActiv Logo
EU news & policy debates
- across languages -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Network

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

Parliament to dismiss plans for European credit ratings

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 07 June 2012

MEPs are likely to reject the idea of a European approach to credit rating and have delayed a vote on the issue, highlighting difficulties in implementing a European Commission proposal that many lawmakers argue is unrealistic.

A vote due to take place today (7 June) on rating agencies was thrown back till 19 June amidst widespread rejection by MEPs of its contents.

Leonardo Domenici, an Italian socialist MEP who is drafting the Parliament's opinion on the issue, originally tabled amendments to the Commission’s proposal in order to push for the creation of a European credit rating agency.

His idea was firmly rejected by MEPs on the Parliament’s economic and monetary affairs committee, forcing Domenici to re-think, but his compromise proposals are now also set to be thrown out by MEPs.

Under the compromise, the EU institutions could carry out a “creditworthiness assessment” of countries, and would appoint a body to carry out this task within a certain time period.

Committee is against compromise

A source close to the committee told EurActiv: “There is a clear majority against the idea.”

Exclusively European approaches to credit assessment were also rejected at a debate on the launch of an international non-profit credit rating agency (INCRA) in Brussels this week (4 June).

Annette Heuser, executive director of the Bertelsmann Foundation North America, argued that the ‘big three’ rating agencies Moody’s, Standard and Poor’s and Fitch, needed competition. 

“We believe an alternative proposal is particularly necessary for sovereign ratings," she said at a debate hosted by the European Policy Centre (EPC) think-tank in Brussels.

"As the highest asset class, they’re the elephant in the room. They affect everyone, but they’re rated in an un-transparent manner and the indicators can be improved,” she said. 

Bertelsmann has backed the publication of a new report – Blueprint for INCRA – that was discussed at the EPC debate.

Government officials lied to former Moody’s boss

Asked whether the European Economic and Social Committee could play a role by providing alternative credit ratings, Heuser said: “A European agency wouldn’t solve the problem either. It has to be international. It’s naïve to expect investors to accept ratings done in Europe when the bulk of investment is made in Wall Street or emerging markets.”

Elsewhere a former Moody’s chief laid blame for faulty ratings at the doors of governments, rather than agencies.

Vincent Truglia, formerly managing director and head of the sovereign risk unit at Moody’s Investors Service, told the meeting: “You need to be careful about all data, wherever it comes from. Look at the Greek government. It was [misreporting data]. We discounted Greek government data for years. But Eurostat just reproduces what governments say.” 

Truglia added: “I’ve been lied to by more government officials than you can possibly imagine.”

Positions: 

“We’re saying that sovereign ratings are public goods affecting all sectors of society. All key societal  actors must be integrated into the process,” said Annette Heuser, executive director of the Bertelsmann Foundation North America, suggesting  that  governments, corporates and foundations could provide financial support for the endowment, which she estimated would need to amount to $400m.

“You can have a European credit rating agency, but that wouldn’t solve the problem. You need an international one – there’s a strong demand for that in emerging markets,” Heuser claimed.

“The [INCRA] idea has a lot of merit,” said Mario Nava, acting director for financial institutions in the European Commission’s internal market department. “The Commission has issued a proposal for a new directive to reduce overreliance on credit rating agencies for investment decisions and boost competition – the market is extremely concentrated. We want an open market,” Nava said. 

“The current situation is clearly a very oligopolistic market, so having one more idea is great. Two more ideas would be fantastic. In ten years’ time, we won’t have the same market structure for credit rating agencies. It must change. Anything that changes the oligopoly is good,” Nava claimed.

Next steps: 
  • 19 June 2012: European Parliament's economic and monetary affairs committee to vote on report on credit ratings agencies
Jeremy Fleming

COMMENTS

  • Typical of a political monster that thinks that it is a law unto itself. One of the main reasons why the EU and Europeans are suffering from years of complacency, cover-up, fudging and non-compliance with its book keeping (never been signed-off by auditors). It has never kept its house in order and that is why we have now, a declining worldwide credit worthiness throughout the EU.

    If the EU countenanced such an internal credit rating scheme it would be like turkeys voting for Christmas and sound the death knell for the European Union.

    Dr David Hill
    World Innovation Foundation

    By :
    Dr David Hill - World Innovation Foundation
    - Posted on :
    07/06/2012
  • Moody's et al - that would be the same bunch that gave AAA ratings to around 90% of CDOs and related "financial instruments" that later turned out to be ZZZ rated? Just wondering. In response to Dr Hill's comment on the signing off of the EU "books" I do not see how this relates to the current soverign debt crisis which is banking related and which was triggered by the 2007 banking crisis which was a function of a group of corrupt credit rating agencies giving crooked credit ratings to "financial instruments" - the domino effect kicked in and various housing bubbles in various Eu member states collapsed. The EU is at fault for for failing (and continuing to do so) to regulate its banking sector. However, that is partly a function of the loobying by said sector. Thus to repeat I fail to see how the EU accounts are relevant to the issue of credit rating agencies.

    By :
    Mike Parr
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • Just making the point that the EU is NOT transparent in most areas of its activities and where we are dealing with an institution that does as it wants, when it wants without recourse to us mere Europeans that pay 'all' the bills. In the international corporate world there would be No trust and therefore a credit rating would be constantly negative. Note that credit rating agencies use all manner of information, not just financial and exclusively linked to the banks. All manner of things go on behind closed doors !

    Dr David Hill
    World Innovation Foundation

    By :
    Dr David Hill - World Innovation Foundation
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
Moody's by name and nature?
Background: 

Credit Rating Agencies (CRA) were among the first to be regulated at European level in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, reflecting the European Commission's view that they had failed to predict the the crisis and even helped make it worse.

These regulations, called ‘CRA I’, were adopted in 2009 and were later strengthened in May 2011 to become ‘CRA II’. CRAs are required to avoid conflicts of interest, to ensure the quality of their ratings and rating methodologies and to maintain a high level of transparency. CRAs also have to apply for registration in Europe.

In the midst of the sovereign debt crisis in November 2010, the Commission launched a public consultation which focused on over-reliance on external credit ratings, improving the speed and transparency of sovereign debt rating, making the markets for rating agencies more competitive and making agencies legally accountable in order to prevent conflicts of interest.

More on this topic

More in this section

Advertising

Sponsors

Videos

Euro & Finance News videos

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Euro & Finance Promoted videos

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising