Activities of Christine REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY related to 2016/2148(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on Investing in Jobs and Growth – maximising the contribution of European Structural and Investment Funds: an evaluation of the report under Article 16(3) of the Common Provision Regulation (CPR)
Amendments (12)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the significant contribution made by the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI funds) to the construction of an efficient and safe European transport network; Stresses the importance of synergies between the various funds;need for better synergies in implementing EU funds to promote combined funding and to increase the leverage effect of EU financial instruments in the transport sector. Draws the attention to the possibility of establishing joint monitoring committees to strengthen the synergies between the ESI Funds, the Connecting Europe Facility, the European fund for strategic investments and the H2020 program in the transport sector.
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that ESI funds should focus on sustainable transport infrastructures. Underlines that Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans play a significant role in implementing ESI funds and achieving objective 4 of the Common Strategic Framework (CSC), "Supporting the shıft towards a low- carbon economy in all sectors".
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the Commission to earmark appropriate funding for sustainable urban mobility under the European Regional and Development Fund.
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to take into account the main features of long- term investments in transport infrastructures. Underlines that investments in sustainable transport infrastructures require a substantial public intervention and might be less attractive for the private sector as they yield too low or uncertain return on investment.
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Recalls that the leverage effect of the EU financial instruments is very low, or non-existent in the transport sector. Therefore, stresses that grants are the most appropriate instruments for supporting transport infrastructures under ESI funds.
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that funds allocated to financing the 'Connecting Europe' facility were depleted in order to recapitalise the European Fund for Strategic Investments; expresses hope that these funds will be used to finance infrastructurrecalls that transport remains a top priority of the European Fund for Strategic Investments. Draws the attention to the possibility of combining EFSI financial instruments with ESI funds on one projects;.
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that funding under the cohesion policy is exceptionally important for the development of transport infrastructure in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, as well as in other countries; calls for the necessary resources to be secured and for the level of financing to be maintained in the next multiannual financial framework for the entire EU;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that major administrative barriers to accessing European Structural and Investment Funds exist, particularly for SMEs; Underlines that excluding ESI funds from the state aid rules will significantly facilitate the access to ESI funds for SMEs and local entrepreneurships which are facing major administrative barriers.
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Underlines that the thematic concentration establishing ESI funds' investments priorities might limit the capacity of local authorities to invest in transport infrastructures, especially in the more developed regions where at least 80 % of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) resources at national level shall be allocated to two or more of the thematic objectives 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Common Strategic Framework. Therefore calls on the Commission to allow more flexibilities for regions to decide on which priorities they want to focus. Stresses that objective 7 of the CSC, "Promoting sustainable transport and removing bottlenecks in key network infrastructures", should be taken into account as key action of the ERDF.
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Takes the view that countries with economic problems find it very hard to cofinance European projects owing to the strict manner in which the Stability and Growth Pact is applied when calculating the government deficit; urges the Commission to be more flexible in assessing national investment for the cofinancing of European TEN-T transport project commitments when it comes to calculating the government deficit;
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls for neutralisation in the calculation of debt and deficit in public investment carried out by Member States' public operators under the ESI funds, particularly with regard to the impact of the new ESA 2010 system of accounts, which prevents Member States from excluding their co-financing share to the ESI Funds in the calculation of their budgetary deficit and thus using these funds to escape from the economic crisis and re-launch growth and employment;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Member States to improve coordination between their national transport plans and the TEN-T targets and deadlines; urges the Commission to bring in a specific mechanism to step up the coordination between EU planning and the national plans; suggests the inclusion in the European Semester of a chapter to monitor coherence between national investment in transport infrastructure and the TEN-T objectives;