7 Amendments of Martina MICHELS related to 2016/2064(INI)
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs); underlines the importance of ensuring additionality of the EFSI with respect to other EIB initiatives and EU- funded programnotes that some of the projects completed so far do not meet the EFSI requirements of additionality, European added value and sustainability; underlines the importance of complying with these EFSI principles;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that the available data do not currently make it possible to agree with the Commission’s entirely positive interim assessment of EFSI and its proposals for extending EFSI’s duration and scope;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Asks the Commission - in order to assess the usefulness of EFSI support already granted, the prospects for EFSI support in future and the possibility of extending EFSI - to submit a comprehensive analysis of the projects supported so far, including the SME pillar; calls for any discussion of extending the duration of EFSI to take place only after such an analysis is available;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Takes the view that any extension of the duration or scope of EFSI should where appropriate be funded exclusively from additional EU budgetary resources and EIB resources, and from remittances by the Member States;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomNotes the publication of the Commission’s new guidelines of 22 of February 2016 on combining ESIFs and the EFSI; takes note, however, of the fact that the number of existing synergies between EFSI and ESIFs funds is still extremely low and calls on the Commission, the EIB, the national promotional banks and institutions (NPBI) and the managing authorities to accelerate the design and implementation of further synergi, and is likely to remain, extremely low, which is mainly due to the fundamentally different natures of EFSI and ESIF, particularly as regards criteria for support, types of funding and also objectives;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets that the regions were not appropriately involved in drawing up the project list of possible investments by the ‘Investments Taskforce’ set up in September 2014 by the Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB); Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage; stresses that the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) and the EFSI investment committee should use the expertise of regional authorities in order to promote integrated ESIF-EFSI projects; with a view to this, the EIAH should play an active role in enabling even more local and regional authorities to make the most of the EFSI;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Rejects support for nuclear energy projects;