10 Amendments of Marian-Jean MARINESCU related to 2016/2064(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the investment mobilised by EFSI to dateEFSI expected mobilised investment of the approved operations by EIB and EIF, which amounts to over EUR 169.90 billion and accounts for 52over 50 % of the total target investment to be mobilised by 2018; notes however that the difference between signatures and disbursements should be taken into consideration; furthermore it should be taken also into consideration that only around 60% of the expected total investment mobilised by EFSI derives from private finance, the rest being from EIB (20-25% on average), and a combination of resources from National Promotional Banks, public authorities, EU funds (ESIF, CEF);
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that for the transparency of data provided by EIB and the Commission the publication of the disbursed amount would be very important;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Reminds that all information available shows the expected mobilization of EFSI investment and stresses that for the decision-making it is crucial to know the volumes that already are transferred to companies; considers that calculating the percent of the private investment disbursed is key when assessing the EFSI performance;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the main beneficiaries are, per volume: the UKItaly, Spain, France, UK, Germany and Italy (73(65% of the total mobilised investment), per capita: Finland, Ireland, Estonia, Spain, Italy and Luxembourg, and, per share of GDP: Estonia, Bulgaria, Spain, Portugal, Italy and GreeceLithuania, Portugal;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that, according to the EY 2016 independent evaluation, EU-15 received overmore than 90 % of EFSI support and the 13 new Member States received about 9less than 10 %; recalls that three Member States should not account for more than 45 % of total EFSI funding and therefore calls on the EFSI Steering Board to continuously monitor sectoral and geographical spread;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that 310 % of the EFSI funding was used for SMEs, 223 % for energy projects, 21 % for RDI and 10 % for the digital sector; regrets, however, the lack of information regarding the additionality of the projects funded;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Regrets that despite the fact that the characteristics of investments in sectors such as space or emission reductions technologies should match the requirements of EFSI, very few projects have been financed under EFSI umbrella in these sectors so far and considers that EFSI should be adapted to the constraints of these sectors;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the need to revise the current definition of additionality by addmaking new factors; recalls that the current regulation enabled the possibility of projects with lower-than-minimum risk than EIB Special Activitieit more clear and effective; considers that additionality could be assessed if the risk profile of each EFSI project should be made available by the Investment Committee; recalls that the current regulation enabled the possibility of projects with lower-than-minimum risk than EIB Special Activities; considers that it should be made clear that EFSI should take on board projects that BEI would consider as unacceptable due to the risky nature of the project; calls for the transparency of decision-taking by ensuring public disclosure of aggregated financial data related to EIB funded projects;
Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Deplores the fact that, on account of EFSI, a series of budgetary lines were reduced for the period 2015-2020, negatively affecting programmes like Horizon 2020 and the Connecting Europe Facility; considers that in the context of MFF revision this budgetary deficit should be redressed and that EFSI should be financed from sources independent from EU programmes that have already been approved; reiterates the importance of focusing on the financial instruments for feeding EFSI II on one hand, and for avoiding that CEF-eligible projects for instance, are financed by EFSI on the other hand;
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Regrets that investment platforms are slow to emerge and not yet operational, hampering the development of cross- border projects; considers that the EFSI instrument should be promoted on the field in order to improve the EFSI visibility;