9 Amendments of João PIMENTA LOPES related to 2016/2101(INI)
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the country-specific recommendations (CSRs) demonstrate the differences that exist between Member Stat- a form of unacceptable anti-democratic interference - demonstrate that the policies imposed on the Member States in the context of economic governance mechanisms are strangling investment and development capacities; argues that the Member States should continue to give priority to reforms that will strethe implementation of urgent measures regarding then their economic recovery, making a commitment to investment, implementing structural reforms and taking an approach based on fiscal and budgetary responsibility; productive sectors that are vital to each economy and therefore play an essential role in the potential development of each country; calls for the creation of investment policies and policies to promote public projects and support micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, cooperatives and local government, and for Community funds to be reinforced and oriented in that direction; argues that these measures should promote an increase in the number of jobs, based on collective bargaining, labour protection, higher wages and action to combat precarious employment;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that economic growth should guarantee a positive social impact; welcomes the introduction of the three new headline social indicators in the macroeconomic imbalances procedure, through effective redistributive policies that will counter the worsening inequalities seen in recent years; reiterates the callneed for these to be placed on an equal footing with existing economic indicators, thereby guaranteeing that internal imbalances are better assessed and making structural reforms more effective; calls, in this connection, for a social imbalances procedure to be introducedeffective compensation mechanisms to deal with private debt and persistent and systemic macroeconomic imbalances in the EU; calls for the Stability and Growth Pact to be revoked as a brake on public investment, since it is clear that it has been the countries with fiscal margins of manoeuvre that have best withstood the crisis and the worsening social indicators, through increased public investment;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Reiterates that the introduction of social indicators, the construction of new pillars to support policies or more human statements of intent do not alter the austerity-based, federalist and antidemocratic nature of the policies advocated as part of the European Semester;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls for the creation of an emergency plan to support the economy of those countries that were under the Troika’s intervention;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for a strong commitment to promoting the Juncker Plan (EFSI) in Member States with a low level of n assessment to be made of the Juncker Plan (EFSI); points out that this Plan will benefit the financial system and large multinationals, taking EUR 16 billion away from other EU programmes that could offer structural benefits for the Member States; points out, in this connection, that for the purposes of eligibility for EFSI funding, SMEs are lumped together with mid-cap companies with up to 3 000 employees, and this creates dispariticipation; es when it comes to competing for funds that companies with fewer resources (which are those that create most jobs) find it impossible to overcome;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recognises the signiPoints out that the structural reforms and pro-cyclical fiscant progress made by the Member States in implementing structural reforms, while nevertheless taking the view that further progl retrenchment required in the European Semester are a major contributing factor to the social and economic crisis; stresses that the consequence of the austerity promoted by the EU institutions has been a general increase in levels of poverty (125 million in the EU-28), increasing inequality, lower wages, unemployment and precarious employment, attacks on workers’ rights and the destruction and privatisation of public services, above all in the aresas is necessaryof health and education;
Amendment 122 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for account to be takenArgues that solutions must be found ofn the challenges that have been emerging in the EU since 2015, which have required serious adaptation efforts; calls on the Commission not to apply any sanctions to thebasis of full respect for national sovereignty, equal rights and the safeguarding of each Member State’s specificities; rejects, accordingly, the application of any sanctions and use of blackmail against Member States in 2016;
Amendment 139 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Points out, in this context, that it is the very people who never questioned the fact that the Treaties were not put to a popular vote and the consequent lack of democratic legitimacy, or the failure to respect the outcome of the referendums that were held, who are now calling for the democratic legitimacy of the economic governance framework and the European Semester to be strengthened by involving the European Parliament, with the aim of deepening economic governance and EMU, and in short continuing and intensifying the policies of austerity, exploitation and impoverishment;
Amendment 145 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls for the European Semester to be revoked and an intergovernmental conference convened with the aim of establishing an institutional basis for the reversibility of the treaties, the immediate suspension of the budget treaty and its repeal, and the repeal of the Lisbon Treaty;