BETA

9 Amendments of Alfred SANT related to 2016/2064(INI)

Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 20175/1017 of the European Parliament and of the Council1 (the EFSI regulation), _________________ 1 OJ L 169, 1.7.2015, p. 1.
2017/03/02
Committee: BUDGECON
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Takes note of the large investment gap in Europe, which the Commission estimates at a minimum of EUR 200-300 billion a year; , highlights in particular, against this backdrop, the market needs in Europe for high-risk financing, for instance in the fields of R&D, energy and ICT; is concerned by the fact that the most recent data on national accounts do not indicate any surge in investment since the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) was launched, leading to risks of continued subdued growth and continuing high unemployment rates; therefore, questions the implementation method being used for EFSI; stresses that closing this investment gap is key to reviving growth, fighting unemployment and attaining long-term EU policy objectives;
2017/03/02
Committee: BUDGECON
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. ConsiderRegrets that the criteria according to which projects are assessed are unclear and lack transparency; requests furtherll and detailed information from the EFSI governing bodies on the evaluations carried out on all projects approved under EFSI accordingly, in particular as regards their additionality and contribution to growth and job creation as defined in the Regulation;
2017/03/02
Committee: BUDGECON
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Acknowledges that it may take some years to prepare new innovative projects, that the EIB is under pressure to achieve the EUR 315 billion goal and therefore had no option but to launch EFSI activities immediately,; is concerned, however, that the EIB, when implementing EFSI, has thus far drawn on its existing project pipeline with lower risk projects to a large extent, thereby reducing its own conventional financing; fears that EFSI does not provide complementary financing for high-risk innovative projects; underlines that even though a project qualifies as a special activity, this does not necessarily imply that it is risky, however the classification as a special activity might also stem from the fact that its financing has been structured in an artificially risky fashion, implying that very low-risk projects can also easily end up as high-risk projects;
2017/03/02
Committee: BUDGECON
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes that all sectors defined in the EFSI Regulation have been covered by EFSI financing; points out, however, that certain sectors are under-represented despite their high demand for investment; notes that this might be due to the fact that certain sectors already offered better investment opportunities in terms of shovel-ready, bankable projects when EFSI started up, as well as lack of experience and technical know-how in absorbing funding through instruments such as EFSI; invites the EIB against this backdrop to discuss how to improve sectorial diversification, linking it to the goals set out in the Regulation as well as the issue of whether EFSI support should be extended to other sectors;
2017/03/02
Committee: BUDGECON
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Urges the EFSI governing bodies to pay greater attention to investment platforms with a view to maximising the benefits that the latter can bring in overcoming investment barriers, especially in EU-13; invites the EIB to provide stakeholders with more information on the platforms; recognizes the role of Local and Regional Authorities in identifying strategic projects and encourages their participation;
2017/03/02
Committee: BUDGECON
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Proposes a discussion of additional means of promoting IPs, such as by prioritising the approval of projects presented via a platform, the pooling of smaller projects and group contracts and establishing mechanisms to finance groupings of contracts; believes that transnational platforms should be promoted in particular, as many energy and digital projects have a transnational dimension;
2017/03/02
Committee: BUDGECON
Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes that by the end of 2016, all 28 countries received EFSI funding; underlines, however, that as of 30 June 2016, EU-15 had received 91% whereas EU-13 had only received 9% of EFSI support; regrets that EFSI support has mainly benefitted a limited number of countries; considers the risk of territorial concentration and, therefore, underlines the need for greater attention to less developed and isolated regions also through strengthened technical assistance;
2017/03/02
Committee: BUDGECON
Amendment 286 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Acknowledges that GDP and the number of projects approved are linked; recognises that larger Member States are able to take advantage of more developed capital markets, have stronger administrative and technical capacity and are therefore more likely to benefit from a market-driven instrument such as EFSI; underlines that lower EFSI support in EU- 13 may be attributable to other factors, such as the small size of projects, andexisting barriers to investment including excessive bureaucracy, the small size of projects, the peripheral geographical position of a given region as well as competition from the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF); observes with concern, however, the disproportionate benefit to certain countries and underlines the need to diversify geographical distribution further, especially in crucial sectors such as modernising and improving the productivity and sustainability of economies;
2017/03/02
Committee: BUDGECON