Activities of Laura AGEA related to 2016/2064(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION Implementation of the European Fund for Strategic Investments
Amendments (27)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Investment Plan for Europe iwas conceived as part of a broader strategy aimed at reversing the negative trend observed in public and private investment by mobilising new and private financial liquidity to be injected into the real economy with a view to fostering long- term strategic and sustainable investments across the Union;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the EFSI has failed to tackle the problem of the investment gap in the EU, as the problem of the lack of investment arises from a serious lack of aggregate demand and from the impact of austerity policies; whereas the investment gap in research and development, energy, ICT, education, industry, transport and logistics, water and waste amounts to EUR 655 billion in the EU;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas it is necessary to effect a radical change in the way that investments are approached in Europe, addressing the real causes of the crisis and revising the economic governance framework so as to give a permanent boost to productive investments able to generate added value for the real economy and for society in all European countries;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas the current problem with investment arises from a serious crisis of aggregate demand, which can be tackled only by means of a genuine and massive productive public investment plan which can fund projects particularly in the sectors of R&D, innovation, education and public services;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be to create growth and a dynamic labour market in Europeinclusive growth, development and a dynamic, inclusive and non- precarious labour market in Europe that preserves the dignity of workers, and hence to enhance the well-being of EU citizens;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the EFSI ishas not proved to be a significant tool for contributing to economic, social and territorial cohesion as well as supporting job opportunities, namely by providing solid support to SMEs;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas it is important that the EFSIthe EFSI has not so far providesd appropriate contributions in order to adequately respond to market needs and successfully attract significant private sector capital;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the European Court of Auditors has published an opinion which found that 'European Commission plans to increase and extend the investment fund at the heart of the "Juncker Plan" were drawn up too soon and with little evidence that the increase is justified' and whereas the Court of Auditors has also stated that 'the Proposal was launched without a comprehensive impact assessment' and criticised 'the deletion of the provision linking the continuation of EFSI to the results of an independent evaluation';
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas the Court also emphasised ‘the risk that the multiplier effect is overstated’, and that the objectives and results cited were those expected and not ones confirmed by tangible, accurate, clear and immediate statistics;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the EFSI aims atwas conceived as a way of leveraging through the EIB a total of EUR 315 billion in extra investment and new projects in the real economy by 2018;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Deplores the fact that the EFSI increases the risk of a privatisation of profits and a socialisation of losses at the expense of society; stresses that the use of public-private partnerships (PPP) often entails an unbalanced distribution, for the public coffers, of the financial risks and costs associated with high-risk private investment, which is to the detriment of the taxpayer, as public money is being used to co-finance private returns and cover any losses on investments; notes that PPP projects should not be viewed as additional simply because of the financial mechanism used;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that more transparency and publicity on the criteria of major EFSI projects are required in order to increase the trust and attractiveness of markets for the EFSI as an efficientfor ex ante and ex post assessments used for the funding of major EFSI projects are required in order to assess their effectiveness as a funding tool;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Deplores the almost total lack of information and disaggregated statistical data on the 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 available information about, and findings of, impact assessments for operations carried out within the framework of the EFSI; calls furthermore 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;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the objective of the EFSI, unlike other current EIB financing instruments, ishould have been to identify distinct, truly additional and innovative and riskier project profiles along with new counterparts from the private sector, as well as to highlight the potential of the EFSI to fund high technology enterprises and future-looking sectors, which should behave been at the core of the funding programme; deplores the fact that no such additionality has so far been identified;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that the considerable EFSI support being provided for energy, energy efficiency and renewable energy projects has been made possible only by cutting ordinary EIB investment in those sectors by an equal amount, thus suggesting that the majority of EFSI loans have not complied with the principle of additionality; takes the view that EFSI- funded loans should be additional to ordinary EIB investment;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to help SMEs and micro- enterprises to tap into funding more easily, so as to increase their capacity to implement projects and afford them better access to advisory services and technical support; recommends that SMEs and micro-enterprises should be given access to information on the funding that is available;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes it necessary to conduct a thorough independent impact assessment on the results achieved by the EFSI in order to gauge the real economic, social and environmental impact and additionality of the projects financed, as well as the actual capacity of the Fund to achieve the stated objectives; also stresses that it would be worthwhile to improve the calibration of the various assessment criteria for the Scoreboard and considers it important to set minimum thresholds for each of the four criteria on the basis of their importance; considers it vital to monitor more precisely and using clearer and more transparent procedures that use of the EU guarantee is in line with the EFSI admissibility criteria, the additionality requirement and its strategic long-term objectives;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the EIB to simplify the application process and stresses the need to strengthen the visibility of, interest in and awareness about the EFSI, especially for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in the Member States;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Asks that complete and relevant qualitative management information be provided on the implementation of the EFSI’s stated objectives, showing their effective additionality and impact compared with benchmarks, but also with a view to extension of the EFSI beyond 2017;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Deplores the fact that the EFSI has concentrated mainly on the transport and energy sectors, which altogether have been the beneficiaries of more than 60% of the total number of projects, to the detriment of other key sectors relating to research, development and innovation, human capital and the environment and energy efficiency, which in total account for under 20% of the projects approved; deplores the fact that the list of projects chosen to receive funding under the EFSI includes infrastructure installations with high environmental impact, such as bio- refineries, steelworks, gas reclassification and storage facilities and motorways; calls on the EIB, with reference to the precautionary principle, to withdraw funding wherever there is any suspicion of environmental infringements and damage to society or to local communities;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Asks the EIB to disclose full information on how projects receiving the EFSI guarantee scored when measured against the EFSI scoreboard of indicators and related criteria and weightings, including, inter alia, their contribution to the EFSI objectives, additionality, economic and technical viability and the maximisation of private investment;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to engage more actively in consultation at local level, especially in cooperation with national investment banks; believes that the EFSI should focus in particular on business startup projects and projects to reduce unemployment, without funding only large projects, which in many cases are not a suitable means of meeting the objectives set;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Believes that transparency and tax provisions should be increased and reinforced, in particular as regards the provision on tax avoidance and on the funding of companies based in non- cooperative jurisdictions;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that the EFSI should be used primarily to fund businesses that have adopted a code of practice on safeguarding the dignity of workers and protecting the environment;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Laments the fact that the EFSI is based on an opaque governance structure lacking in transparency and accountability; recalls in this context that the Chair of the Steering Board has resigned and been replaced without the European Parliament's having been informed of the fact;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers it disappointing that the Commission’s assessment of the EFSI has failed to record the number of jobs created to date under the Fund; recommends that a careful and accurate analysis should be carried out so that the necessary changes may be made;
Amendment 95 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States to lay down more clear-cut investment priorities and to draw up projects in collaboration with the European Investment Advisory Hub; calls on the Commission to work in closer cooperation with Member States in the European Semester process in order to help them begin as soon as possible to implement the recommendations, in particular by carrying out economic and social reforms, thus removing national barriers to investmentgeared to safeguarding the social and cultural heritage and landscape of local areas, and, to this end, to draw up relevant projects in collaboration with the European Investment Advisory Hub.