Q1 Do market participants support removing the special process of collection and distribution of penalties by CCPs for cleared transactions? Please provide justifications, if possible supported by quantitative data.

As a Market Participant, I do no support removing the special process of collection and distribution of penalties. I even suggest increasing the amount of data collected and increase the penalties amount. 
Cash penalties became a cost of business for many businesses running on daily fails to deliver goods market participants expected to get. Removing penalties is an open ended opportunity for crime equal to allowing 
a seller to sell an item he does not actually possess, and by removing mandetory buy ins has no intentnion of possessing. Not being able to meet one's trading obligations and getting no penalty for it is a terrible and morally corrupt idea. 
For more data, observe spikes in failures to deliver securities during market downturns, 2008 being a prime example. Failing to deliver an obligation should not be permissable in the 21st Century where reasonable tracking of securities is a given.

Q2 Do market participants support amending Article 19 of the CDR on Settlement Discipline as suggested in Annex IV? Please provide justifications, if possible, supported by quantitative data.

As a Market Participant, I do not support amending Article 19 of the CDR on Settlement Discipline as suggested in Annex IV. As stated in the Consultation Paper: preliminary discussions with market participants showed that imbalances may appear when 
the delivery of securities by a clearing member to the CCP is too close to the CSD cut-off time for Delivery versus Payment (DvP) settlement instructions. Or in short, the time CCP and CSD have is long, but they still often fail to deliver a share in a timely manner. 
When purchasing a security or selling it short the underlying asset should and must in my view be confirmed to exist before conducting the transaction, anything other than this is market manipulation that can ultimately only lead to hurt the Global Markets.

Q3 Do market participants support delaying the application of the envisaged amendment by six months after the publication of the amending RTS in the Official Journal of the EU? If not, what would be appropriate implementation period in your view? Please provide explanations.

As a Market Participant, I do not support delaying the application of the envisaged amendment by six months after the publication of the amending RTS in the Official Journal of the EU. I believe that such changes can take place on a much shorter timetable however that
criminal or complicit organisations wish to extend the time they have available to them to conduct what is by any basic metric crime of the most morally bankrupt degree. Failures to deliver should not exist and i believe the current regime of fining institutions
that initiate them is a terrible standard, rather i believe that Institutions benefiting from failing to deliver on their obligations should be fined the entire amount of profit they acquired while conducting this criminal act in addition to additional punishments such
as being barred from the Market for varying amounts of time based on severity. As a young Investor in both the European and American Markets i urge the European Securities and Markets Authority not to deviate from the course of creating fair and regulated markets,
which would be the case by removing Mandetory buy ins.