Skip to main content

Arguments on artificial volatility dampeners must focus on fundamentals, warns Skinner

Debate on matching and counter-cyclical premiums must not remain linked to needs of specific countries if political consensus is to be reached

peter-skinner

The debate on the mechanisms to remove artificial volatility caused by Solvency II has become too aligned to certain countries and product lines, according to Peter Skinner MEP, the European Parliament’s rapporteur for Solvency II. The argument must focus on the fundamental purpose of these tools if support for them is to be achieved within the European Parliament, he warns.

Skinner’s comments

Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.

To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe

You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to Risk.net? View our subscription options

Want to know what’s included in our free membership? Click here

Show password
Hide password

Most read articles loading...