Answers to the European Commission on the ... - Eiopa - Europa

• <strong>the</strong> development and execution of self-assessments, including as
a precursor <strong>to</strong> on-site examinations where appropriate;
• <strong>the</strong> compilation of documentation and analyses during peer
reviews;
• <strong>the</strong> organisation of meetings between <strong>the</strong> persons involved in <strong>the</strong>
peer review process;
• ensuring, on an organisational level, a consistent quality and
continuity of execution;
• preparing and analysing <strong>the</strong> resulting data and ensuring it is
forwarded <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> Review Panel.
For <strong>the</strong> permanent Review Panel, CEIOPS could also examine ways of
taking industry views in<strong>to</strong> account and also underline CEIOPS’
commitment <strong>to</strong> transparency and working with <strong>the</strong> industry.
17.30 An important part of <strong>the</strong> peer review process still <strong>to</strong> be discussed and
decided is <strong>the</strong> question of how <strong>to</strong> organise <strong>the</strong> follow-up <strong>to</strong> an
assessment. For example, one possibility could be that <strong>the</strong> assessment
teams summarise <strong>the</strong> peer review’s findings in a report. The
supervisory authorities under assessment are <strong>the</strong>n given, in writing,
<strong>the</strong> opportunity <strong>to</strong> discuss <strong>the</strong> findings of <strong>the</strong> report before <strong>the</strong> final
report is submitted <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> Review Panel.
17.31 The Review Panel collects all information generated as part of <strong>the</strong> peer
reviews in <strong>the</strong> form of self-assessment questionnaires and <strong>the</strong> final
reports of any on-site assessments that may be useful <strong>to</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r
supervisors. This information will also be fed in<strong>to</strong> a future CEIOPS
database, which will form <strong>the</strong> basis for CEIOPS <strong>to</strong> draw up or improve
its standards, guidelines and recommendations.
17.32 CEIOPS’ members are integrated in<strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> process at different levels.
Firstly, <strong>the</strong>y provide <strong>the</strong> experts for <strong>the</strong> peer review, and secondly,
<strong>the</strong>y are <strong>the</strong>mselves subject <strong>to</strong> examination.
Practical aspects of <strong>the</strong> peer review
Timeframe of peer reviews
17.33 Peer reviews can comprise a number of different elements. For <strong>the</strong>
most part, <strong>the</strong>se can be grouped as follows:
• <strong>the</strong> preparation phase: This phase involves ga<strong>the</strong>ring all <strong>the</strong>
information that does not require on-site examination, in order <strong>to</strong>
reduce <strong>the</strong> burden placed on <strong>the</strong> parties involved <strong>to</strong> a minimum.
For this reason, specific issue questionnaires in <strong>the</strong> form of selfassessments
are sent <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> candidates in advance, and <strong>the</strong>
results are evaluated. If necessary, external information sources,
such as <strong>the</strong> FSAP reports of <strong>the</strong> IMF or <strong>the</strong> reports of <strong>the</strong> 'Peer
199