Activities of Xabier BENITO ZILUAGA related to 2015/2353(INI)
Plenary speeches (2)
Preparation of the post-electoral revision of the MFF 2014-2020: Parliament's input ahead of the Commission's proposal (A8-0224/2016 - Jan Olbrycht, Isabelle Thomas) ES
Preparation of the post-electoral revision of the MFF 2014-2020: Parliament's input ahead of the Commission's proposal (debate) ES
Amendments (33)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the Commission should undertakeCalls for a comprehensive review of the functioning of the current MFF, followed by a legislative revision including an adjustment on the ceilings, in order for the EU to respond to a number of unforeseen serious crises that is faced with, and address new political priorities;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Underlines that according to the Treaty, the Parliament and the Council constitute the two arms of the budgetary authority; therefore calls for the full involvement of the Parliament in the mid- term review and revision of the MFF regulation;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that, while the MFF Regulation has to a large extent remained unchanged since its adoption, the framework conditions for its implementation have changed; highlights the fact that, following a genuine review, a legislative proposal should addres intensive recourse to MFF flexibility instruments after exhausting all available margins is not the best way to face complicated crises that are likely to continue; therefore a permanent system allowing for the mobilization of additional resources twhese challenges; points out in this regard that the new instruments, such as EFSI, that have been set up since the adoption of the MFF Regulation should be duly incorporated inton needed should be established through a genuine review, accompanied by a legislative proposal; while acknowledging the need to consolidate and further increase flexibility within MFF, points out that any new financial instrument should be set up according to the community method, in full compliance with the principle of the unity of the EU budget without any negative financial impact on the agreed programmesand on the grounds of democratic accountability and transparency;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the social, economic, environmental, migratory and terrorist crises faced by the EU provide all the more grounds for a substantial revision of the MFF, which, as it stands, has demonstrated its limitations as regards effectively addressing recent crises and the EU's new political priorities;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers, in this respect, that while a review aims at assessing and evaluating the functioning of the MFF against its implementation, new economic conditions and other new developments, and as such could maintain the legislative status quo, a revision implies a modification of the MFF Regulation, which also includes (besides the legislative provisions) the MFF ceilings, on a basis of due respect for Article 312 TFEU and the limitations on the scope of the MFF revision laid down in the last sentence of Article 2 of the MFF Regulation; recalls that this article stipulates that the pre- allocated national envelopes shall not be reduced through a revision; stresses in this context that Article 323 TFEU requires that the financial means to fulfil the Union’s legal obligations in respect of third parties are being ensuredpoints to the principle of budget unity as the sole guarantee of genuinely democratic decision-taking and oversight in connection with expenditure; stresses therefore that revision of the MFF cannot result in a reduction of envelopes for heading 1b on cohesion policy, for heading 2 on rural development and the EMFF, or for jointly managed programmes under headings 3 and 4, i.e. AMIF, ISF or the Emergency Trust Fund for Africa; stresses in this context that Article 323 TFEU requires that the financial means to fulfil the Union’s legal obligations in respect of third parties are being ensured; takes the view accordingly that the fact that, for most spending items, envelopes cannot be reduced and the imperative for the EU to honour its commitments in other sectors make it all- important to raise ceilings;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that new political priorities should not be proposed at the expense of the agreed programmes of the current MFF, in particular H2020, CEF, COSME, Galileo and Copernicus, and pre-allocated national envelopes; therefore any redeployment of funds to the benefit of new financial instruments, such as EFSI, should not have any negative financial impact on agreed programmes with proven added value, such as H2020, CEF and COSME;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for a further strengthening of coordination, and a maximising of synergies between, ESIF funds and EU programmes such as Horizon 2020, COSME and CEF;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Considers that a review of the MFF in 2016 should take stock of a number of serious crises and new political initiatives, together with their respective budgetary consequences, which were not anticipated at the time of the MFF’s adoption; notes, inter alia, the migration and refugee crisis, external emergencies, internal security issues, the crisis in agriculture, the funding of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), the persistent high level of unemployment, especially among young people, and the payment crisis in the EU budget; observes that, in order to finance the additional pressing needs, an unprecedented recourse to the MFF’s flexibility mechanisms and special instruments was deemed necessary, as the MFF ceilings proved to be too tight in some headings; considers that, over the past two years, the MFF has essentially been pushed to its limits; considers that an upward revision of MFF ceilings is warranted by the fact that flexibility instruments and margins have been fully utilised;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that Union programmes have not significantly contributed to ensuring access to finance for SMEthe majority of SMEs in the EU and especially for the ones operating in countries facing severe and persistent financial crisis; calls for further consideration to be given to ways of extendmeeting the programme to even more SMEs and meeting the various needs of SMEsvarious urgent needs of the SMEs and especially of the ones in danger of shut down, more adequately;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises that Union funding can actually trigger and catalyse actions that Member States are unable to carry out on their own and create synergies and complementarities with Member States’ activities; encourages Member States to better explore areas in which the EU is not taking action;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for the mid-term evaluation of the MFF programmes on the basis of theirNotes that given the fact of the late implementation of the current framework, the revision of the MFF is a key point in the management of EU spending in order to assess whether investment programmes performance against stipulated targets and objectives, present adequate absorption capacity and generate EU added value, taking into account the late implementation of the current framework.; underlines also that the mid-term review/revision is an opportunity for an MFF comprehensive simplification encompassing reforms in application, management, reporting and control of funds;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that the conflicts in Syria, the Middle East and several regions in Africa have had humanitarian, security and migratory consequences on an unprecedented scale; recalls that the EU has been directly impacted, with more than one million refugees reaching Europe in 2015 alone and more expected in the coming years; recalls that this crisis led to a major financial response on the EU’s part and hence, which, albeit insufficient by any standard, has had a significant impact on the EU budget, notably on headings 3 (Security and Citizenship) and 4 (Global Europe);
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that significant budgetary means have been deployed to tackle the root causes of the refugee and migration crisis by Points out that migration/refugee- related actions are inforcing specific EU programmes under Heading 4; recalls the reallocations in favour of migration/refugee-related actionssufficient by any standard despite the reallocation of EUR 170 million to them in the course of 2015, as well as the approval in 2016 of an additional EUR 130 million under Heading 4 for migration/refugee-related activities, together withfor them and the reshuffling of EUR 430 million under the Instrument for Pre- accession Assistance, the Development Cooperation Instrument and the European Neighbourhood Instrument; recalls, furthermore, that in order to address the external dimension of the migration and refugee crisis the Commission has made various additional proposals having an impact on the EU budget, such as those for the establishment of EU trust funds (the Madad Trust Fund and the Emergency Trust Fund for Africa, with an estimated initial budgetary impact of EUR 570 million and EUR 405 million respectively), as well as of the Refugee Facility for Turkey, for which EUR 1 billion is to be funded from the EU budget, not counting possible additional funding; stresses, however, that further pressure on the Union budget mightwill arise from other planned actions announced by the Commission such as the ‘London pledge’ or from events such as the EU- Turkey summit of 18 March 2016; is concerned, however, that owing to the magnitude of the problems the EU is facing further actions might still be required; points out in addition that migration/refugee-related actions must not be overly outsourced to non-EU countries and that it is the duty of the EU to mount its own response too;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls for an immigration clause to be established so as to exclude Member State spending on migrant reception and integration from excessive-deficit calculations;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Calls for stepped-up EU budget support for Member States bearing the brunt of migration flows, such as Greece and Italy;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that, since the global economic and financial crisis, the EU has suffered from low levels of investment; notes in particular that in 2014 total investment was 15 % below the 2007 level, which corresponds to an investment drop of EUR 430 billion; considers that the austerity measures imposed and weak investment have slowsed economic recovery and hasve had direct repercussions onin terms of growth, jobs, increased poverty, a fresh upsurge in inequalities, disparities between EU regions and Member States, and competitiveness;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Recalls that the main threat for the EU economy is the low level of solvency of the private banking system and the high risk of a domino effect if there are some banks "too big to fail" which finally could fall. Deplores that the debates on the changes regarding the capacity budgetary of the Eurozone are being used in order that sustaining a financial regulation and a monetary policy that are protecting rentists practices, jeopardising the investment and employment. These policies are clearly flexible for the oligopolies of the financial system, but unable accomplishing the social and productive function of credit. The integration of the European Stability Mechanism, the future European Monetary Fund, as a huge financial instrument, into the Treaties could be the financing tool to justify several consequences at the same time: the socialisation of private debt into public debt, through the higher public expenditure to restore the liabilities of the banking system, and the cuts in the field of tax collection, the progressivity of the fiscal regime and their corresponding public, social and labour policies;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Underlines that, in response to this pressing problem, the new Commission in 2014 proposed an clearly insufficient and poorly conceived investment plan for Europe and the establishment of EFSI, with the aim of mobilising EUR 315 billion in new investment in the real economy; notes that the guarantee provided by the Union for EFSI is covered by a Guarantee Fund of EUR 8 billion constituted in the EU budget;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Underlines that, in response to this pressing problem,Notes that the new Commission in 2014 proposed an investment plan for Europe and the establishment of EFSI, with the aim of mobilising EUR 315 billion in new investment in the real economy; notes that the guarantee provided by the Union for EFSI is covered by a Guarantee Fund of EUR 8 billion constituted in the EU budget;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that youth unemployment remains dramatically highhas reached an extremely worrying level and represents one of the most pressing and serious problems that the EU is currently facing; highlights the fact that 4.4 million young persons under 25 were unemployed across the Union in February 2016 and that this corresponds to a proportion of over 40 % in several Member States and over 60% in several EU regions;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Underlines the fact that the EU budget makes a signin insufficaient contribution to the fight against unemployment, especially throug and that both the European Social Fund and the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI), though they are positive actions, are not sufficient; stresses also that, despite the initial delays in the designation of national authorities and the implementation of the YEI, the current figures indicate full absorption capacity; notes that an evaluation of this initiative will soon be concluded, and expects that the necessary adjustments will be introduced to ensure its successful implementation; calls for the establishment of new programmes with a view to giving substance to a genuinely social Europe;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Is particularly concerned, however, at the lack of new commitment appropriations for the YEI as of 2016, given that its entire original envelope was frontloaded in 2014- 2015 (Article 15 of the MFF Regulation); stresses that in supporting this frontloading Parliament never intended that the initiative should be terminated after only two years of funding and that other MFF mechanisms, such as the Global Margin for Commitments, were put in place with the purpose of ensuring its continuation; also notes the frontloading of appropriations, on the basis of the same article, for Erasmus + (EUR 150 million), this being another EU programme that makes a major contribution to improving the employability of young people, which was fully implemented in the first two years of this period;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls the recent terrorist attacks in France and Belgium and the increased threat levels in other Member States, which call for more coordinated and reinforced action at EU level; underlines that the Union already has the Internal Security Fund as an appropriate instrument and has several agencies operating in this field; considers that more European action, and therefore funding, will be needed in this area to provide an adequate response to this threat, mainly taking measures in order to halting any economic and trade relationship with all those economic players who trade with the so-called Daesh, sanctioning those companies or States which take advantage of the armament selling or the purchasing of oil and gas at low price;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls for an early response to be made to the impact of the abolition of sugar quotas in 2017, which is likely to undermine the sugar cane sector in the outermost regions, and for provision to be made for support measures for small- scale sugar cane planters in those regions;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Urges the Commission, when preparing its legislative proposal, to take into consideration the following demands of Parliament regarding changes to the MFF Regulation, with respect both to the figures and to the raising of ceilings and to several provisions relating to the functioning of the MFF which need to be applicable already for the current MFF;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Points out that the specific envelopes for regions and Member States initially provided for under the MFF must simply be complementary and in no way result in a reduction in funding granted to regions and Member States in line with the criteria laid down in cohesion policy regulations; calls for any reduction in envelopes to be rectified as part of this mid-term revision;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 b (new)
Paragraph 28 b (new)
28b. Calls for stepped-up budget support for all Member States carrying out excessive-deficit reduction programmes;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 c (new)
Paragraph 28 c (new)
28c. Calls for the investment clause to be revised so that national and regional investments which co-financed ESI funds are excluded from the calculation of national deficits under the Stability and Growth Pact;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Strongly supports the continuation of the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI), as a means of ensuring an urgent response in the fight against youth unemployment, following the necessary adjustments brought about by the ongoing evaluation; considers that this can only be achieved through the provision of an adequate level of commitment appropriations for the YEI for the remaining years of the current MFF; in order to increase the utilisation rate of this funding, very low in those less developed regions, which need in a larger extent this sort of budgetary line; points out the necessity of making easier the anticipation of available funds at the outset of the programs; notes that this should entail an upwards revision of the ceilings of Subheading 1b, as no margins are available;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Considers that the magnitude of the migration and refugee crisis goes to show that additional needs with significant budgetary consequences may be expected to arise in the coming years; underlines, moreover, that the need for internal security in the EU and the fight against terrorism are expected also to necessitate additional funding to back up reinforced action at EU level; is of the firm opinion that, even with the mobilisation of the small margins available under Heading 3 (Security and Citizenship) and existing flexibility provisions, the resources available will not be sufficient to tackle the increased needs under this heading; calls, therefore, for significant reinforcements for the AMIF and the Internal Security Fund, as well as for the Union agencies operating in the field, as well as other initiatives that can be undertaken; considers that an upward revision of the ceilings under Heading 3 is required;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Expects that concerted action to effectively respond to the external dimension of the migration and refugee crisis will intensify over the coming years, and will be accompanied by increased requests for funding under Heading 4 (Global Europe); which entails implementing solutions in origin, persecuting those practices which promoting directly or indirectly the Daesh and those who are taking advantage of human traffic, guaranteeing a safe mobility for the people under refugee status, and setting the resources needed in order to provide a worthy social integration during the period of stay for this population in Europe; underlines that such requests for additional funding should not be deployed to the detriment of the EU’s existing external action, including its development policy; calls, therefore, for a significant reinforcement of appropriations under this heading;
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. AcknowledgDeplores the increased role of financial instruments in the Union budget as a complementary form of funding as compared to subsidies and grants; recognises the potential of these instruments in terms of increasing the financial, and therefore the political, impact of the Union budgetnd acknowledges that the budget must go beyond a sum of subsidies and grants, and claims for a new strategy fostering public investment in well selected sectors at European level. The financial instruments are failing in order to attract enough private capital insofar the investors are searching higher profit rates than the low interest provided; furthermore, these funds persist in concentrating investments in activities that would be likewise carried out; and, finally, integrate particular interests and private actors into public activities which detract a surplus and determine functioning conditions which prevent undertaking projects that were looking fully for the general interest; and they issue bonds backed by public guarantees, putting the risk charge into the public contributions; underlines, however, that a shift from traditional financing to more innovative instruments is not advisable in all policy areas, as not all policies are entirely market-driven; underlines that increasing use of financial instruments should not lead to a reduction in the Union budget; recalls Parliament’s repeated calls for greater transparency and democratic scrutiny regarding the implementation of financial instruments supported by the Union budget;
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Calls for the introduction of one or several new own resources, ideally with a clear link to European policies that create added value, through progressive tax figures, reinforcing the fiscal capacity to tackle the financial, economic and environmental crisis along cycles; notes that a large number of possible new own resources have already been discussed by the High Level Group, and eagerly awaits its recommendations;