12 Amendments of Maria SPYRAKI related to 2016/2064(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments, which as of July 2016 totalled to 20.4 billion euros of EFSI financing that will trigger an expected 115.7 billion of euros in investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs); underlines the importance of ensuring additionality of the EFSI with respect to other EIB initiatives and EU- funded programs by addressing market failures or suboptimal investment situations;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs); underlines the importance of ensuring additionality of the EFSI with respect to other EIB initiatives and EU- funded programs, as this aspect is frequently overlooked in the hitherto implementation process, which constitutes a serious distortion of the perception of EFSI;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the publication of the Commission’s new guidelines of 22 of February 2016 on combining ESIFs and the EFSI as well as the publication of the Commission's and EIB's of 18 of March on EFSI rules related to investment platforms; takes note, however, that the number of existing synergies between EFSI and ESIFs funds is still extremely low and calls on the Commission, the EIB, the national promotional banks and institutions (NPBI) and the managing authorities to accelerate the design and implementation of further synergies in order to ensure a wider geographical coverage of the EFSI;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that, according to the EY 2016 independent evaluation, which covers the period until June 30 2016, EU-15 received over 90 % of EFSI support and the 13 new Member States received about 9 %; although EFSI investment volume has significantly evolved since 30 June 2016, recalls that three Member States should not account for more than 45 % of total EFSI funding and therefore calls on the EFSI Steering Board to continuously monitor and facilitate sectoral and geographical spread;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB, the Committee of the Regions, and the managing authorities should better cooperate to ensure that more integrated ESIF-EFSI projects are put forward to boost territorial development and cohesion policies; notes that projects in the circular economy could provide an example of integrated ESIF-EFSI projects since they promote the role of local and regional authorities in enabling a transition to a sustainable, resource efficient and competitive economy, while fitting in the investment profile of EFSI fundable projects;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that 310 % of the EFSI funding was used for SMEs, 223 % for energy projects, 21 % for RDI and 10 % for the digital sector; regrets, however, the lack of information regarding the additionality of the projects funded; and calls for a streamlined and standardized methodology to be applied in the additionality assessment of all projects.
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, takingtake into account of the different economic development of the regions and the territorial diversity of the Member States recalling that EFSI was meant to address market failure or suboptimal investment situations; points to the success of the SME Window and urges the Commission to scale it up by enhancing communication especially in countries where the EFSI deal flow is slow; highlights the importance of also developing thematic or cross-border projects that could deliver a high European added value; encourages all Member States to nominate National Promotional Banks, which are essential in the establishment of investment platforms of either thematic or regional concentration;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage, where necessary; stresses that the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) and the EFSI investment committee should use the expertise of local and regional authorities in order to promote integrated ESIF-EFSI projects; with a view to this, the EIAH should play an active role in enabling even more local and regional authorities to make the most of the EFSI by offering advice to all languages and with knowledge of the business environment in each Member State; encourages Member States as well as local and regional authorities to present projects that could be complementarily funded by EFSI and ESIF in the European Investment Project Portal in order to attract investments in their territory;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that National Promotional Banks are not well established in all Member States, whereas in some Member States there are no National Promotional Banks at all, and that their limited geographical spread poses additional barriers to the EFSI geographical coverage; considers that the establishment of National Promotional Banks should be a high EFSI priority in order to address regions where support is needed; calls on the EIB and the Commission to ensure that National Promotional Banks are high in the priorities of the European Advisory Investment Hub; calls on the Commission to encourage and support the establishment of National Promotional Banks in regions where their presence is limited;
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Requests the Commission to avoid double targeting, whereby EFSI funding is targeted at projects which can equally well be financed by ESI Funds; calls, in light of the importance of additionality and complementarity, for better visibility of and communication on the ESI Funds instead of the current, somewhat one- sided highlighting of the EFSI by the Commission;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Regrets that investment platforms are slow to emerge and not yet operational, hamperingNotes the establishment of several investment platforms and the important role played by National Promotional Banks in setting them up; notes that cross-border projects are slow to emerge and not yet operational, and calls on Member States to enhance cooperation with the EIB and the Commission for the development of cross- border and multi- sector projects;