Jean-Paul Gauzès is a prominent French Conservative MEP who in the previous legislature steered a complex dossier on credit rating agencies through the European Parliament.
He was speaking to Francesco Guarascio.
To read a shortened version of this interview, please click here.
The announcement of your designation as rapporteur for the directive on alternative investment funds was accompanied by the unusual establishment of an informal group which will help the rapporteur to write his report. Is this a signal of the divisions triggered by this controversial text?
I was assigned the report after 50 minutes of negotiations with socialists and liberals. There were many candidates, actually eight. It's always difficult to find the right person. I proposed to be the official rapporteur, but work in a college because, as you know, there are nuances on the way to consider this directive.
But choosing a French MEP already sends out a specific signal...
Yes, maybe. But my colleagues at the economic committee designed me unanimously. Maybe, because I demonstrated in the past legislature, to be capable of negotiating agreements on difficult dossiers.
You will not have an easy task. The lobby against the new rules is very powerful, especially in the Anglo-Saxon world. On Wednesday, you met Mayor of London Boris Johnson. What did you tell him?
I told him we will take in account different positions. There is a need for regulation, but also the will to avoid demolishing the European financial industry. We should look at funds without frightening people.
But the industry wants to change the directive completely.
The fundamental idea is that we cannot forget the risks we have seen during the crisis. Hedge funds are not the origins of the crisis, but they present risks. There should be a regulation on managers as the directive foresees, but also we have to guarantee transparency and to see what happens within the funds themselves.
So, you will propose rules on managers, but also on funds?
Yes. I think we should go further. I also think many MEPs suggested an effective and pragmatic regulation. In any case, I have to respect the collegial method we choose to operate. At the moment I am one among many, although I will have the final word. Personally, I think we should go further with regulation.
Although there has been much criticism, especially from extra-EU countries, can we assume that authorisation and registration of funds will remain a pillar of the new directive?
I think so.
On Wednesday, you met a delegation of US Congressmen. Did they ask for some of the directive's rules to be changed?
We were not exactly on the same line. I had the impression we were quite distant regarding the future of financial services.
Is the private equity industry lobbying hard to underline that the directive should address hedge funds and private equity in different ways?
I think we have to look at specifics and avoid regulation that concerns everybody and nobody at the same time. We will study the issue closely.
When your text will be ready?
In November, but it is not realistic to think its adoption will happen before December.
