|
|
Enron Mail |
Paul, further to our discussion last Friday. Attached is a complete copy of
Policy Statement 70 referenced in my earlier email. Paragraph PS70.50 contains the statement that authorisation under the SFA is considered to be an adequate regime for monitoring capital adequacy. The SFA oversight must apply to either the entity that is trading under the Australian Exempt Market Declaration as or its guarantor. It is also in the this paragraph that the reference to "low risk firms" is made. Once you get a response to your enquiries we look forward to hearing whether the provision of the guarantee is feasible. David Minns 16-06-2000 05:16 To: Paul Simons@ECT cc: Mark Taylor@ECT, Paul Quilkey/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Subject: Guarantee from EEFT of Enron Australia Finance Paul further to my email/voicemail on our attempts to get an Exempt Market Declaration issued to Enron Australia Finance Pty Ltd (EAF). I now have a specific request to put to you. It appears that we would qualify for such a Declaration thereby allowing EAF to use the safe harbour provisions under the Australian Corporations Law for trading through EnronOnline if EAF had get a guarantee from Enron Europe Finance and Trading Ltd. We would be able to take advantage of a specific provision in the policy guideline of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission on the grant of Declarations known as Policy Statement 70. (Below is a summary of the relevant provisions of the Policy Statement.) Would the provision of such a guarantee be possible? Clearly an issue to consider would be any possible impact on EEFT's prudential requirements under the Financial Services Act. If this were an issue perhaps could it be overcome if there was a back to back guaranty from say Enron Corp. to EEFT. This mean that effectively EEFT would have no additional exposure. < < < Paragraph 50© of Policy Statement 70 provides that persons authorised to < carry on investment business under the Financial Services Act of the < United Kingdom (other than persons who are "low risk firms" for the < purposes of the Financial Supervision Rules 1990 issued by the Securities < Investment Board) will be regulated facility providers. As a result, < unless EEFT is a "low risk firm" then it could be a regulated facility < provider. < < Paragraph 48(e) provides that organisations whose liabilities and < obligations in relation to their exempt futures market activities are < unconditionally and irrevocably guaranteed by such an organisation will < also be regulated facility providers. As a result, provided that EEFT is < not a "low risk firm" and it guarantees the obligations of EAF then the < prudential regulatory requirements of ASIC should be satisfied and EAF < could be a regulated facility provider. < < Please let me know if such a guarantee is going to be possible. < < < Scott Farrell < Senior Associate < Mallesons Stephen Jaques Sydney < Direct line (61 2) 9296 2142 < Fax (61 2) 9296 3999 <
|