9 Amendments of Xabier BENITO ZILUAGA related to 2018/0212(COD)
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) At Union level, the European Semester of economic policy coordination is the framework to identify national reform priorities and monitor their implementation. Member States develop their own national multiannual investment strategies in support of those reform priorities. Those strategies should be presented alongside the yearly National Reform Programmes as a way to outline and coordinate priority investment projects to be supported by national and/or Union funding. They should also serve to use Union fundingfunding should be used in a coherent manner and to maximise the added value of the financial support to be received notably from the programmes supported by the Union under the European Regional Development Fund, the Cohesion fund, the European Social Fund, the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development,, the EISF and InvestEU, where relevant.
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) EISF support should be given in case one or several Member States whose currency is the euro or other Member States that participate in the exchange rate mechanism (ERM II) are confronted with a large asymmetric shock. Changes in unemployment rates are highly correlated with business cycle fluctuations in such Member States. Strong increases in national unemployment rates above their long-term averages are a clear indicator of a large shock in a specific Member State. Asymmetric shocks affect one or several Member States significantly more strongly than the average of Member States. It should be noted that the asymmetric shocks are caused by the Eurozone’s own economic architecture. Therefore, the stabilisation mechanism must operate in a compensatory manner to counteract the economic divergence and the tendency to deepen the unequal relationship between the centre and the periphery it causes, for example as regards the balance of payments or the intensity of the economic cycle.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Member States whose currency is the euro which benefit from financial assistance by the ESM, the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (EFSM) or the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and which are under a macro-econoopt for EISF funding, should submict adjustment programme within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 472/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council12 should not benefit from EISF support since their financing needs including for maintaining public investment are addressed via the financial assistance granted. _________________ 12 Regulation (EU) No 472/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on the strengthening of economic and budgetary surveillance of Member States in the euro area experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability, (OJ L 140, 27.5.2013, p. 1) project that favours the development of synergies and complementarity between investment projects financed, that is in accordance with a viable budget and that is liable to boost their economy in the medium term.
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The maximumideal level of eligible public investment that could be supported by EISF loan for a Member State should be automatically set on the basis of a formula which captures the ratio of public eligible investment to gross domestic product (GDP) in the Union over a period of five years before the Member State concerned requests a loan and its GDP over the same period. The maximum level of eligible public investment should also be scaled by means of scaling factor (α) towards the fixed ceiling in the Union budget. That factor is deo be granted and allocated in proportion to the needs duly indicated by the candidate countries for funding should depend on the level of deficit in their balance of payments. The purpose of this automatic shock-absorption mechanism should be to stabilise this macroeconomic parameter and create jobs by boosting economic investment, which constitutes a joint instrument for fostermined such that with hindsight of the recent crisis, all the EISF support could have been provided to the Member States concerned, had the mechanism been in placeg real demand and the improvement of the quality of supply as well as the candidate country's macroeconomic relationship with the European economic framework.
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The amount of EISF loan should also be automatically determined on the basis of a formula which firstly takes into account the maximum level of eligible public investment that can be supported under EISF and secondly the severity of the large asymmetric shock. The support determined on the basis of that formula should also be scaled in function of the severity of the shock by means of a factor (β). That factor is determined such that for a shock that increases unemployment by more than 2.5 percentage points, the maximum support is made available to the Member State concerned. An EISF loan could be increased up to the maximum level of eligible public investment in case the asymmetric shock is particularly severe as reflected by other indicators of the Member State's position in the economic cycle (e.g. confidence surveysthe effective rate of return) and a deeper analysis of the macroeconomic situation (as conducted in particular in the context of the macroeconomic forecast and the European Semester). With a view to ensure that as many Member States as possible could qualify for support under EISF, the loan to a Member State should not exceed 30 percent of the remaining available means under the ceiling set for calibrating the loans under EISF to the available means in the Union budget.
Amendment 178 #
(30) In order to increase the impact of public investment and potential EISF support the quality of Member States' public investment systems and practices should be ensured and where appropriate strengthened. An assessment by the Commission should be carried out regularly and take the form of a report and if warranted contain recommendations to improve the quality of public investment systems and practices in Member States. A Member State could request technical assistance from Commission. The latter could undertake technical missions. At any rate, within the macroeconomic parameters consistent with boosting investments, ensuring coherence and complementarity between them in programmes with a holistic approach and a medium-term perspective, technical assistance may only put forward suggestions since the economic sovereignty of the requesting country must be respected.
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) In order to give the automatic stabilisation programme coherence, it would appear necessary to operate both in countries affected negatively by asymmetric shocks and in those that benefit. Thus, along with setting criteria for boosting public investment in peripheral countries experiencing asymmetric shocks, which are the result of a balance of payments deficit, it will be necessary to establish ways to ensure that the countries with surpluses carry out measures to correct their surpluses, such as establishing an indicator for automatically increasing real wages.
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. The EISF shall provide financial assistance in the form of automatic transfers of funds, loans and interest rate subsidies for public investment to a Member State which is experiencing a large asymmetric shock.
Amendment 350 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
The outstanding amount of loans granted to Member States under this Regulation shall be limited to EUR 3100 billion in principal. Member States shall establish channels and a timetable for scheduling regular contributions to ensure that levels of public investment in terms of GDP in peripheral countries subject to asymmetric shocks do not fall below the EU average.