8 Amendments of Sabine VERHEYEN related to 2012/2028(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that Stability Bonds could do much to consolidate the internal market and stimulate the economy, especially by boostinvolve more risks than opportunities and obscure the problem of indebtedness ing the development of small and medium-sized enterpriseseuro area, rather than eliminating it;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that common Stability Bonds represent a communitarisation of interest rate exposure and increase the typical problems of moral hazard for the insured party because they protect the indebted states from the disciplinary pressure of the markets and eliminate the economic incentive for sound state finances. The communitarisation of debt could tempt the Member States to reduce their efforts in terms of budgetary discipline;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that the introduction of common Stability Bonds must necessarily go hand- in-hand with measures that involve a permanent reduction of government indebtedness and structural reforms in the Member States, as well as sound budgetary policies;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Sees common Stability Bonds as the final result of a process of convergence in relation to economic and fiscal policy, but believes that the hasty issue of common bonds will not meaningfully help overcome the present debt crisis and that other financial policy instruments are more suitable for supporting small and medium-sized enterprises and increasing their liquidity;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that, as regards possible Stability Bond systems, a range of options have been put forwardis under analysis, but believes that it is necessary to assess all of the existing proposals, as listed in Annex 2 of the Green Paper, and the recent proposal by the German Council of Economic Experts; considers that it is important to knowexamine further how far the high degree of moral hazard attributed to option 1 could be counteracted by varying the interest rates to be charged to countries, or whether the higher interest rates on ‘red bonds’ would quickly become unsustainable for countries using that source of finance;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to clarify under what circumstances non-compliant Member States could be put under European Union ‘administration’ and what powers of intervention would be conferred upon the EU; calls on the Commission to initiate the necessary political discussion and public consultation on the feasibility of Stability Bonds, while pointing out that the measures necessary to avoid moral hazard can have an influence on the fiscal sovereignty of the Member States;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Commission to explain how the introduction of common Stability Bonds would work in view of the contractual disclaimer contained in Article 125 of the TFEU and the extent to which changes to national law would be required in the Member States;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recommends that, with a view to harmonising the conditions of access for Member States to these bonds the Commission, twhe Commission take into account the context of crisis and fiscal difficulties in a number of euro area countries when laying down the ‘strong fiscal conditions’ for entry to the Stability Bond system.n laying down the ‘strong fiscal conditions’ for entry to the Stability Bond system, should define in detail the conditions of access for Member States to these bonds;