The EESC issues between 160 and 190 opinions and information reports a year.
It also organises several annual initiatives and events with a focus on civil society and citizens’ participation such as the Civil Society Prize, the Civil Society Days, the Your Europe, Your Say youth plenary and the ECI Day.
The EESC brings together representatives from all areas of organised civil society, who give their independent advice on EU policies and legislation. The EESC's326 Members are organised into three groups: Employers, Workers and Various Interests.
The EESC has six sections, specialising in concrete topics of relevance to the citizens of the European Union, ranging from social to economic affairs, energy, environment, external relations or the internal market.
welcomes the proposed "Framework for the recovery and resolution of central counterparties (CCPs)" and underscores that it is paramount to implement the existing decision by the G20 for global governance of CCPs as well as the specific recommendations by the Financial Stability Board into a harmonised, binding legislation ensuring a sound and secure global level playing field.
would welcome flexibility to adapt the proposed regulation to the future evolution of international consensus on CCP regulation, i.e. recommendations by the Financial Stability Board (FSB).
is of the opinion that a Single CCP Supervisory Authority and a Single European Resolution Authority would ensure that the new regulation is implemented most effectively and in a standardised way.
strongly recommends considering using or extending the ECB's remit to make it both the central European CCP supervisor under the umbrella of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) as well as the central resolution authority under the umbrella of the ECB/Eurosystem.
demands that any bail-out of CCPs with tax-payers' money needs to be excluded, especially for third-country CCPs. The currently included option of extraordinary public support under certain conditions might create a moral hazard situation.
is of the opinion that close attention should be paid to how non-financial counterparties (NFC) and segregated client assets of indirect clearing participants might be impacted.