Activities of Georgi PIRINSKI related to 2015/2353(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Preparation of the post-electoral revision of the MFF 2014-2020: Parliament's input ahead of the Commission's proposal (debate) BG
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on preparation of the post-electoral revision of the MFF 2014-2020: Parliament’s input ahead of the Commission’s proposal
Amendments (14)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that total recovery of funds redeployed from the Connected Europe Facility (CEF) to the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be one of the key priorities for the mid-term revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014-2020 (MFF); insists that decided priorities and designated financing are respected in future and no more reduction of CEF budget or other instruments for transport projects occur until 2020;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that the post-electoral revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) must address the new political challenges facing the EU; underlines that reallocation of funds for emergencies is not a sustainable solution; recalls that most of the challenges that the EU is facing, from social dumping to dislocation of refugees, have their roots in the inequalities between Member States and insists that the existing resource commitments for achieving the Union’s strategic objectives and greater economic, social and territorial cohesion be maintained;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that the employment rate in the EU currently stands at 69.2 %, which is well below the Europe 2020 target, that unemployment remains especially high among women, the young, the elderly and the disadvantaged groups and that more than 12 million people in Europe are long-term unemployed, representing 5% of the EU’s active population; and in this context reminds recently passed Council Recommendation on the integration of the long-term unemployed into the labour market which has demonstrated again a need for strong Union policies and much more resources and calls for increased public investment in job creation and skills;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights that the EFSI makes a worthwhile contribution to the financing of TEN-T projects, provided that grants remain a vital and necessary funding source; underlines, in particular, that grants could be combined together with innovative financial instruments and the EFSI to facilitate the implementation of additional projects and catalyse private finance (blending); is concerned however that the extended use of financial instruments may lead to increase of public debt;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Underlines also that adequate EU funding for transport infrastructure is a key requirement for territorial, economic and social cohesion and recognizes the importance of the Cohesion Fund for improvement of infrastructure and connectivity in Europe; insists therefore that adequate funding is provided for this Fund in the current programing period as well as post 2020;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Commission and the Member States to improve the coordination of national transport strategies in order to facilitate Commission approval of large infrastructure projects; calls also for better coordination of all EU instruments related to transport in order to ensure that all core TEN-T projects are completed in time and potential savings are properly utilized for supporting mature projects waiting in the pipeline;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that the resources of the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived are not sufficient to address the rise of inequality and poverty, the worst consequences of the economic crisis and of austerity policies on the labour market concerning labour exclusion of young people and long-term unemployed, and the unprecedented flow of refugees; and is concerned that competition for scarce funds may lead to social conflict; insists that the ESF share amount to 2530 % of the total cohesion budget, that no reductions in the national envelopes for ESF measures be made and that sufficient cash flow be provided annually for payments from the EU budget;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that there is a need to develop and promote more environmentally friendly modes of transportation such as railways; calls therefore for enhanced support to initiatives such as Shift to Rail;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that the policies for poverty reduction and social inclusion among vulnerable groups have failed to produce the expected results and calls for; draws attention to the fact that 24,4 % of people in the EU are at risk of poverty and social exclusion, and that their number has increased by five million after 2008; calls therefore to substantially increased the financial aid to social services and the social economy and further strengthen the commitment to act against poverty and social exclusion by introducing a compulsory minimum share of 25 % from ESF on Member State level for promotion of social inclusion;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Draws attention to the huge problem of child poverty in Europe, which is afflicting over 20 million children, and reiterates its call for the establishment of a (27,8 % in EU-28 and almost 50 % in certain Member States), living in families that suffer daily from lack of income and basic services, such as food supplies, housing, education and healthcare; reiterates its call on the Commission and Member States for the establishment of a specific fund dedicated to the Child Guarantee with dedicated special resources, together with programmes to assist parents in getting out of social exclusion and unemployment;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Takes the view that the maximum annual amount available for mobilisation through the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) should at least stay at EUR 150 million (2011 prices) as this instrument, despite underutilisation so far, has a huge potential for supporting workers affected by major economic structural changes;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that tourism is a key potential growth area of the European economy and a driver of a substantial amount of employment; recognizes the importance of the human capital for development of tourism services and underlines the role that the European Social Fund may play in this field; considers that appropriate budgetary funds should be allocated to developing a genuine European tourism policy and enhance this sector's development.
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes the increased commitment of the EU budget to various financial engineering instruments including the European Fund for Strategic Investments; is concerned however about the access to funding of various key stakeholders in social policy areas such as NGOs, education and training institutions, social partners and social economy enterprises;