The governments\u2019 proposal prevails; the states rejoice<\/h4>\n
\n
The agreement follows the model adopted when the EU launched the banking union process, with direct supervision by the ECB of only the largest banks, the “systemically important” ones, which are therefore more difficult to rescue in the event of a liquidity shock. Italy and its Minister for the Economy, Giancarlo Giorgetti, welcome the solution<\/strong>: \u201cCentralisation must focus on the activities and infrastructure for which a European dimension to supervision delivers real added value,\u201d to have an architecture that is \u201cproportionate\u201d and capable of \u201ctaking national specificities into account.\u201d In this regard, the Finance Minister stressed, \u201cI believe the compromise is a great political success,\u201d during the public session of the proceedings. <\/p>\n The package, Giorgetti goes on to explain, \u201cstrengthens the integration of European markets and provides ESMA with broader responsibilities and a governance structure better suited to exercising them\u201d. As for Italy, he continues, \u201cwe are in favour of a functional governance structure that gives adequate weight to the Executive Board without, however, requiring us to relinquish the powers currently held at the national level.<\/strong>\u201d Now, he warns, \u201cthe quality of European supervision will also depend on the ability to incorporate, in a structured manner, knowledge of local markets and the experience of national authorities.\u201d <\/p>\n The Dutch Finance Minister, Eelco Heinen<\/strong>, is also pleased: \u201cWith this agreement, we are moving in the right direction.\u201d Meanwhile, the German Finance Minister, Lars Klingbeil<\/strong>, has no doubts: \u201cThis agreement is a game-changer.\u201d The French Finance Minister, Roland Lescure<\/strong>, spoke of \u201cgood work.\u201d Austria is not entirely satisfied, but \u201cin the spirit of compromise, we support this text,\u201d conceded Minister Markus Marterbauer<\/strong>. Belgium<\/strong> did not endorse the compromise, abstaining due to doubts that remain unaddressed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \n The issue of national competences was at the heart of a debate that drew resistance from virtually all sides. The group of countries calling for national safeguards against pan-European centralisation was large (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, the Czech Republic and Sweden, with reservations also expressed by the Netherlands, Romania, and France). The Irish Presidency of the Council of the EU had to devise a compromise proposal to make an agreement possible.<\/p>\n Based on the agreed-upon general approach, the text ensures a role for national authorities while maintaining a separate Board of Supervisors,<\/strong> which would remain ESMA\u2019s primary body for regulatory decisions, strategy, the budget, and supervisory convergence. The Management Board would also make recommendations on the decisions of the Board of Supervisors addressed to the competent authorities, including in relation to the resolution of disputes and infringements of Union law.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.eunews.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/giorgetti-250311.jpeg\")
<\/a>National competence preserved, Commission “deplores” the compromise<\/h4>\n