36 Amendments of Pirkko RUOHONEN-LERNER related to 2016/2064(INI)
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls the role of Parliament as foreseen in the regulation, in particular in relation to the monitoring of EFSI implementation;, acknowledges, however, that it is too early to finalise a comprehensive assessment of the functioning of EFSI and its impact on the EU economy, but is of the opinion that a preliminary evaluation is crucial in order to identify possible areas of improvement for EFSI 2.0 and thereafternd questions the deletion of the provision linking the continuation of EFSI to the results of an independent evaluation;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Acknowledges that it is not too early to assess the functioning of EFSI and its expected impact on the EU economy, considering the absence of evidence on significant additionality effects in the independent evaluation commissioned by the Commission; acknowledges and understands that the lack of significant additionality effects means that no significant impacts with respect to growth and jobs can be expected from EFSI;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the purpose of EFSI is to ensure additionality by helping to address market failures or suboptimal investment situations and supporting operations which could not have been carried out under existing Union financial instrumentsotherwise;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that the projects supported by EFSI, while striving to create employment, sustainable growth, economic, territorial and social cohesion, are considered to provide additionality if they carry a risk corresponding to EIB special activities, as defined in Article 16 of the EIB Statute and by the credit risk policy guidelines of the EIBould not have been carried out otherwise; underlines that EIB projects carrying a risk lower than the minimum risk under EIB special activities may also be supported by EFSI only if use of the EU guarantee is required to ensure additionality;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that, while all projects approved under EFSI are presented as ‘special activities’, anthe independent evaluation hascommissioned by the Commission found that somealmost all projects could have been financed otherwise, merely not all to the same vague extent;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the EIB, to draw up an inventory of all EU-backed EIB financing falling under the additionality criteria and specify which ends have met the criteria; evaluation reports suggest that R&D in SMEs may be an exception that fulfils the additionality criteria; urges more detailed reporting to fully spell out the impacts of EFSI financing;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the EIB to comply fully with the letter and the spirit of the EFSI Regulation and to implement real additionality by restricting eligibility to those sectors where projects showed significant additionality according to the independent evaluation commissioned by the Commission;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Acknowledges that it is not clear from Annex 4 Tables 2 and 3 of the independent evaluation what the actual share of fully additional projects were in total EFSI financing; since they were SME projects, which are typically smaller than infrastructure investments and accounted for 24 % of total financings, is concerned that the actual share of fully additional project can be smaller than 2% of total EFSI financing;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Acknowledges that if the share of fully additional projects is small in total EFSI financing, and its boost to the extent of investment is negligible, the correct conclusion is that EFSI has failed to reach additionality;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Urges the Commission to comply fully with the letter and the spirit of the EFSI Regulation, and to fully report the results on EFSI additionality effects obtained by the independent evaluation by the EY; in particular, any independent evaluation commissioned by the Commission should spell out the share of EFSI financing that contributed to projects that would not have been carried out in the absence of EFSI financing at all, or specify the extent to which EFSI added to the realization of projects if there was some additional contribution;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Requests all concerned to implement the principle underscored by the European Court of Auditors that all EFSI-supported projects must address market failures or sub-optimal investment situations, and that they could not have been carried out, or not to the same extent, without EFSI support;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
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; fFears 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, and enjoys high private or social returns; 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; as pointed out by the European Court of Auditors, there is a risk that equating EFSI operations to Special Activities of the EIB may create an incentive to use unnecessarily complex financing structures or to allocate a risk profile that does not correspond to the real risk of the operation; fears that such complexity would further confound impact assessment of EFSI;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Underscores that as pointed out by the European Court of Auditors, EFSI must provide complementary financing only to projects that address market failures or sub-optimal investment situations and that could not have been carried out, or not to the same extent, without EFSI support;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Requests all parties concerned to take into account the concern of the European Court of Auditors that there is a risk that the multiplier effect is overstated; requests all parties concerned to implement the proposal of the auditors to improve the “EFSI Multiplier Methodology” and use it to produce one the key performance indicator for the EFSI, which shows how much private capital has been mobilised;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers it important to discuss whether the envisaged leverage of 15 is appropriate to enable EFSI to support high quality projects in terms of high private or social returns bearing a higher risk; invites the EIB to weigh up complementing the volume requirement with secondary goals to be achieved;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. If suitable projects that meet the agreed criteria are not found, no funding should be extended;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. If independent evaluation results suggest a potential for additionality only in the SME & RDI window, then the financing should be restricted to those purposes, regardless of the criteria set out for sectoral coverage;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Considers that data collection should be carried out hand-in-hand with project approval and implementation to allow for rapid impact evaluation of EFSI funds with respect to additionality, job creation and potential growth impacts in the short and longer run;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)
Paragraph 15 d (new)
15d. Impact evaluation should follow the state-of-the art methodology allowing for causal inference on the impact of EFSI funds on growth and employment; if current data collection and procedures do not allow for this, they are to be immediately amended respectively;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 e (new)
Paragraph 15 e (new)
15e. All impact evaluations are to publish all results with respect to additionality, growth and jobs in detail with respect to the nature of the project, its location, type of location, its riskiness relative to expected returns, and the project’s innovativeness relative to similar projects, to allow for improved the allocation of funds;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises that EFSI is a demand- driven instrument, which should, however, be guided by the political objectives extend financing only to ends where there is genuine demand, and where the projects meet additionality and other strict criteria set out in the regulation and defined by the Steering Board;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
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; notes that this might be due to the fact that certain sectors already offered better investment opportunities in terms of shovel-ready, bankable projects wdistribution of the demand for financing may differ from then EFSI started upRegulation; invites the EIB against this backdrop to discuss how to improve sectorial diversification,better meet effective demand, while 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;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Considers that data collection should be carried out hand-in-hand with project approval and implementation to allow for rapid impact evaluation of EFSI funds with respect to additionality, growth and job creation in the short and longer run;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Impact evaluation should follow the state-of-the art methodology allowing for causal inference on the impact of EFSI funds on growth and employment; if current data collection and procedures do not allow for this, they are to be immediately amended respectively;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. All impact evaluations are to publish all results with respect to additionality, growth and jobs in detail with respect to the nature of the project, its location, type of location, its riskiness relative to expected returns, and the project’s innovativeness relative to similar projects;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Invites the EIB to reflect on the ways in which data collection could be carried out hand-in-hand with project approval and implementation, to allow for rapid impact evaluation of EFSI funds with respect to additionality, growth and job creation in the short and longer run;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Invites the EIB to reflect on the ways in which impact evaluation could follow state-of-the art methodology allowing for causal inference on the impact of EFSI funds on growth and employment;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Invites the EIB to reflect on the ways in which data collection could be carried out hand-in-hand with project approval and implementation, to allow for rapid impact evaluation of EFSI funds with respect to additionality, growth and job creation in the short and longer run;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
21b. Invites the EIB to reflect on the ways in which impact evaluation could follow state-of-the art methodology allowing for causal inference on the impact of EFSI funds on growth and employment;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Urges the EIB to publish all results with respect to additionality, growth and jobs in detail with respect to the nature of the project, its location, type of location, its riskiness relative to expected returns, and the project’s innovativeness relative to similar projects;
Amendment 328 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Notes that the Commission has proposed an extension of EFSI, both in terms of duration and financial capacity, and that this would have an impact on the EU budget; expresses its intention to put forward alternative financing proposalcalls on the Commission to postpone this suggestion until it can produce reliable evidence on real returns in terms of growth and jobs;
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
Amendment 340 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Notes that awareness of overlaps and competition betweene overlap of EFSI and financial instruments of the EU budget on the part of the Commission and the EIB has led to the adoption of guidelines recommending the combination of EFSI and ESI financing; points, however, to persistent differences in the eligibility criteria, regulations, timeframe for reporting and competition and failure to generate real returns in terms of growthe application of state aid rules, which hinder combined usage; welcomes the fact that the Commission has begun to address these in its proposal for a revision of the Financial Regulation; believes that further efforts are required and that the second and third pillars of the investment plan are key to this nd jobs; calls for reorienting EFSI to purposes only with real demand, additionality and contribution to growth and employmendt;
Amendment 353 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 14
Subheading 14
Taxation avoidance
Amendment 383 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Acknowledges that EFSI alone - and on a limited scale- will probably not be able to close the investment gap in Europe, but that it neverthelessIn line with the European Court of Auditors, questions the deletion of the provision linking the constitutes a central pillar of the EU’s investment plan and signals the EU’s determination to tackle this issue; calls for further proposals to be made on how to permanently boost investment in Europenuation of EFSI to the results of an independent evaluation; urges the Commission to take into account the concern of the European Court of Auditors that there is little evidence that the proposed increase is justified, except with respect to investments for SMEs where high budgetary consumption is observed;
Amendment 388 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)
Paragraph 49 a (new)
49a. Acknowledges that based on the independent (EY) evaluation of EFSI’s first year, there is no lack of financing in Europe, with the possible exception of the SME research and development niche; acknowledges that there is no need to double EFSI financing, but redirect its funding to fields where real additionality can be found and consequently real impacts on growth and jobs can be expected; calls for effective proposals that could actually work and boost investment and growth in Europe;