BETA

29 Amendments of Marco ZANNI related to 2016/2099(INI)

Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls for a review of the EIB mandate so as to target EU resources more effectively;
2016/10/12
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Recalls that the European Investment Bank is the largest foreign financier in Turkey and that, following the opening of the accession negotiations in 2004, the EIB stepped up its lending operations to that country and some EUR 23 billion has been made available over the past decade; regrets the fact that, despite the persistent economic crisis in the EU, Turkey currently ranks first among EIB recipient countries outside the EU, with about 3.5 % of total EIB loans (2015); calls for financing to be made more conditional on respect for human rights and freedom of expression;
2016/10/12
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the EIB to establish a new, responsible taxation policy and to transpose good governance requirements in its contracts with all selected financial intermediaries in line with the ‘External Strategy for Effective Taxation’; reiterates that the EIB should improve the quality of information on ultimate beneficiaries and prevent transactions with financial intermediaries that have a negative record in terms of transparency, fraud or corruption, or are regisconsider withholding funding from financial intermediaries until effective assessment criteria have been established to avoid tax avoidance and tax evasion and the use of offshore financial centres or tax havens, bearing in mind also the numerous problems that have previously arisen in terms of transparency, fraud or corruption in this connection; calls on the EIB also to ensure bettered in offshore financial centres or tax havensformation regarding ultimate beneficiaries and introduce a suitable transparency register for that purpose.
2016/10/12
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
E. whereas the EIB, as the institution responsible for the implementation of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), should maintain solid financial results, selecting projects whose financial viability and economic and social benefits have been demonstrated in advance by means of an appropriate independent assessment, and a high quality of asset portfolio;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Deplores the involvement of the EIB in large-scale infrastructure projects with a serious environmental impact and lacking in real added economic and social value for the local population; calls on the EIB to finance only those projects whose implementation is not environmentally, financially or socially controversial, as demonstrated by a thorough prior assessment and an adequate cost-benefit analysis;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes with concern the tendency to allocate ever more EU public resources to high CO2-emitting infrastructure projects, motorways in particular; stresses, moreover, that assessments of the viability of such projects are often based on inaccurate and excessively optimistic forecasts of traffic flows and toll profits, thus resulting in significant and unexpected disbursement of public resources to ensure profit for private entities, as in the case of the EUR 700 million allocated to the project for the completion of the Brescia-Bergamo-Milan stretch of motorway, which was found to be financially unsustainable and of dubious economic and social benefit; calls on the EIB to carry out thorough advance assessments of the financial viability of the projects that it funds and to refrain from financing projects at odds with the EU’s long-term objectives of moving towards a CO2-free economy and with the principle of additionality;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that a new increase in capital deserves consideratione importance of ensuring the efficient and responsible management of resources, with the objective of safeguarding the bank’s financing capacity for the coming years;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Takes the view that an increase in EIB lending activity could be achieved through better diversification of itsand more balanced resource allocation, in the light of unsuccessful undertakings such as the Castor produject range, including greater use ofin Spain, whose financial failings forced Spanish citizens to pay back EUR 1.4 billion, or the Passante di Mestre motorway project, now under investigation for tax fraud and corruption; recalls that public- private partnerships (PPP) and other innovative instruments in order to better address market needsfor the funding of projects of public interest are often founded on poor distribution of the financial risks of the investment, to the detriment of the public sector and to the sole advantage of the private sector, and may therefore lead to considerable losses for the public coffers, but with no real added value for society;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls once again on the EIB to refrain from using the Project Bond initiative or any other financial instrument to fund the Passante di Mestre motorway project, currently under investigation for tax fraud, corruption and the infiltration of organised crime; in that connection, calls on OLAF to carry out the necessary investigations into the link between the project and the allegations;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Notes with concern that the EIB has financed the construction of Line 4 of the Milan Metro, allocating roughly EUR 300 million to the project, for which five anti-Mafia orders were issued in the subcontractor companies; calls once again on the EIB to refrain from financing in any way projects infiltrated by criminal groups and to put funding for such projects on hold as a precautionary measure while investigations are under way;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Supports the emphasis placed by the EIB on the financing of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), with 37 % of the new lending granted in 2015 (EUR 28.4 billion); welcomes in particular the fact that the EIB operations helped to create and sustain 4.1 million jobs in Europe’s SMEs and midcaps (+13 % as compared to 2014)Notes the significant increase in indirect financing operations for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which today represent one third of all the bank’s activities, with 37 % of the new lending granted in 2015 (EUR 28.4 billion); notes with concern the highly opaque character of such operations and the fact that they are carried out through speculative investment funds geared towards maximum short-term profit, which is entirely at odds with the objective of supporting the real economy and SMEs; recalls that SMEs are the backbone of Europe’s economy, that they providinge 85 % of all new jobs, and that supporting them must remain a fundamental objective of the bank; more effective, direct, and transparent funding mechanisms should therefore be identified;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Is of the opinion that the EIB should take special care to ensure that the network of financial intermediaries that it has developed remains trustworthy and is in a position to finance dynamic and competitive SMEs in an effective waye reliability and maximum transparency of the network of financial intermediaries, checking that they are not involved in tax avoidance or abuse, corruption, money laundering, organised crime or terrorism, and that they are in a position to finance SMEs in an effective way and in accordance with EU environmental and social standards;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. WelcomesTakes note of the start of the EFSI, the legislation governing which entered into force in July 2015; underlines that the success of the programme is dependent upon its swift implementationprogramme is failing to ensure the quality, additionality, economic and social benefits and sustainability of the projects financed;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Deplores the fact that the list of projects chosen to receive funding under the EFSI includes infrastructure installations with serious environmental impact and dubious additionality, such as biorefineries, steelworks, regasification and gas storage facilities and motorways; regrets that in many cases the EIB has not followed up on reports from local authorities, interested communities and civil society of violations of environmental and social legislation by funding beneficiaries and by the projects financed, disclaiming any responsibility for carrying out the necessary investigations; calls on the EIB to withdraw funding whenever suspected environmental violations and damage to society or to local communities emerge, keeping in mind the precautionary principle;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Particularly welcomes the factNotes, in particular, that total investment in EFSI approvals amounts to EUR 115.7 billion, which is equivalent to 37 % of the original target value (EUR 315 billion); notes in this connection that considerable EFSI support for energy, energy efficiency and renewable energy projects has only been made possible by cutting ordinary EIB investments in the sectors in equal measure, thus suggesting that the majority of EFSI loans have not complied with the principle of additionality; takes the view that EFSI funding should be allocated on top of normal EIB investments;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Deplores the fact that EFSI funding is largely concentrated in the transport and energy sectors, which, combined, account for more than 60 % of the total projects funded, to the detriment of other key sectors in the fields of research, development and innovation, human and environmental capital, and energy efficiency, which, combined, account for less than 20 % of the projects approved;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Deplores the fact that as much as 15 % of all EFSI investments in the energy sector have been allocated to projects involving fossil fuels, in particular to regasification and gas storage facilities; calls once again on the EIB to consider seriously the possibility of gradually withdrawing funding for projects involving the production of non- renewable energy;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Deplores the almost total lack of information and disaggregated statistical data on the 93 projects financed thus far, in particular with regard to the expected impact, benefits and additionality of each individual project; calls on the EIB to publish all information about and results of the impact assessments for operations carried out within the framework of the EFSI; calls on the EIB to provide a detailed explanation of the added value and additionality of each project financed and of how each one contributes to the achievement of EFSI objectives and the fundamental long-term strategies and objectives of the EU;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Is extremely concerned at the fact that the EIB is looking into the possibility of funding the Turin-Lyon high-speed rail link under the EFSI, despite this major project being excessively costly, unnecessary and economically, socially and environmentally unsustainable;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Deplores the fact that two thirds of EIB funding allocated to the transport sector under the EFSI has been invested in high CO2-emitting infrastructure projects, in particular motorways and airports; calls on the EIB to refrain from funding infrastructure projects which are not compatible with the EU’s key long- term climate and energy objectives;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Recalls that the external policy of the EIB, and in particular the regional technical operational guidelines, should be consistent with the external action goals of the EU as defined in Article 21 TEU on respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of law; calls for full compliance with theEU legislation, and in particular theits environmental and social standards, and with international commitments and the legislation of the beneficiary countries;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Notes with concern that Turkey is the primary beneficiary of non-EU EIB funding, itself the primary external funding institution in Turkey, which received roughly 3.5% of all EIB loans granted in 2015; stresses the need to make EIB funding conditional on the upholding of human rights and fundamental freedoms, democracy and the rule of law by beneficiary countries;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Urges the EIB to improve thereinforce the ex- ante and ex-post assessment of the impact of its projects outside the EU, in ordercluding by developing indicators to enmeasure they are successfully implemented and that they fully comply with the objective of sustainable and inclusive growth social, economic and environmental effects of its own financing operations, in order to ensure that projects generate real added value for sustainable economic, social and environmental development inclusive for local communities;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 275 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Is concerned about the EIB’s readiness to allocate EUR 2 billion to the construction of the most recent stretch of the TAP (Trans-Adriatic Pipeline); calls on the EIB to refrain from financing in any way this expensive and controversial project as a result of the considerable environmental, financial, seismic, tax and geo-political risks inherent in its construction;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Bolstering transparency, governance and the fight against tax avoidance Deplores the fact that the EIB’s transparency policy is still seriously lacking when compared to those of other international institutions, as confirmed by the 2016 Aid Transparency Index; calls on the EIB to publish a breakdown of statistical data on its website for each project financed within and outside the EU, including, in particular, lending operations carried out through financial intermediaries, and to make the results of ex-post and ex-ante impact assessments of each project fully accessible, including a detailed explanation of the indicators and selection and assessment criteria used; calls on the EIB once again to ensure regular publication of the minutes of the meetings of its management and governing bodies;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29b. Calls on the EIB to ensure public access to documents concerning the results of internal inquests, reports and audits, particularly when they relate to issues of public interest or projects in which tax abuse or fraud and corruption have been identified, and to make all information fully accessible to Parliament;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 c (new)
29c. Reiterates its request for information on the contracting and subcontracting system to be made public and easily accessible, and for Parliament access to the associated financial information and documentation to be guaranteed in all cases;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 310 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 d (new)
29d. Calls on the EIB once again to improve significantly its policies on non- cooperative jurisdictions, in line with Parliament’s earlier recommendations; stresses in particular the need to make the allocation of direct and indirect loans conditional on the publication of tax and financial data country by country, and on the sharing of beneficial ownership data for the beneficiaries and financial intermediaries involved in the financing operations; insists on the need for the EIB to establish a thorough public list of selection criteria for financial intermediaries, to step up the EU’s commitment to combating tax abuse and to prevent more effectively the risks of corruption and infiltration by criminal groups to which many EIB projects have been exposed;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON
Amendment 312 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 e (new)
29e. Welcomes the recent establishment of a Memorandum of Understanding between the EIB and the Italian Anti- Corruption Authority (ANAC), whose aim is to step up the fight against corruption through information exchange and mutual technical and operational support; urges the EIB to make the agreement operational as soon as possible in order to improve the prior assessment of the corruption and criminal infiltration risks of the projects selected and thus to prevent EIB-financed projects from becoming embroiled in corruption, as in the case of the Passante di Mestre motorway route;
2016/10/24
Committee: ECON