5 Amendments of Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS related to 2016/2302(INI)
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. AcknowledgNotes that both the volume and the qualityypes of financial instruments (in the form of microcredit, loans, guarantees, equity and venture capital) under Cohesion Policy’s shared management increased; highlights the two main reasons for this trend – the 2007-2013 period provided valuable experience and lessons regarding ESI Funds implementation through grants and financial instruments, while the 2014- 2020 MFF reflects the post-crisis need for more financial instruments owing to fiscal limitationsfiscal limitations and massive cutbacks in public funding for cohesion policy grants owing to austerity policy ;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recognises that grants have some strengths as compared to financial instruments: supporting projects that do not necessarily generate revenue, providing funding to projects that for various reasons cannot attract private or public funding, targeting specific beneficiaries, issues and regional priorities, and lower complexity of use owing to existing experience and capacity; acknowledges that in some cases grants are bound to limitations: difficulties in achieving project quality and sustainability, risk of substituting public funding in the long-run and a crowding- out effect for potential private investment even when projects may have a revolving naturerisk of substituting national or regional public funding, complexity of implementation, deadweight effects in the private sector;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that the partly positive experience of using financial instruments in the 2007- 2013 programming period whas accompanied byto be seen in contrast to a number of performance issues: late start of operations, inaccurate market assessment, diverging regional uptake to the advantage of more developed regions, overall low disbursement rates, low leverage effect, problematicunsuccessful revolving, high management costs and fees that were high in relation to the support provided and significantly higher than for private-sector funds and inadequately large endowments;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Highlights that financial instruments perform better in well- developed regions and metropolitan areas, while grants address regional structural issues; notes that increasing the sharunderlines that the subsidy system plays an important role in fostering territorial development in particular in areas where the market has failed and where territorial cohesion challenges are a real issue and points at the complementary nature of subsidies and financial instruments; emphasizes that an increasing volume of financial instruments should not influencenegatively affect the grant appropriations as this would hinder the balanceor lead to a crowding out effect on the EU's budget allocated to cohesion policy as this could further territorial disparities; emphasiszes that in a number of public policies grants have to dominate, while financial instruments can play complementary roles;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Points out that financial instruments must be accessible for possible users on more advantageous terms compared to standard commercial loans;