Activities of Judith SARGENTINI related to 2014/2075(DEC)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, Section III - Commission and executive agencies
Amendments (5)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Notes with concern that the use of blending in energy sector primarily focuses on large projects with less emphasis on local energy solutions; urges the EU to refrain from developing a top- down approach on developing energy infrastructure to ensure universal access to energy for all by 2030, bearing in mind that large scale infrastructures may not suit the economic and social structure of the country and fail to provide energy access to the poor, for whom smaller, decentralised and off-grid energy sources are usually more appropriate and effective;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Points out that the European Court of Auditors Special Report 16 (2014) on the use of blending concludes that for nearly half of the projects examined, there was insufficient evidence to conclude that the grants were justified, while for a number of these cases, there were indications that the investments would have been made without the EU contribution; in addition, points out that blending risks leading to a debt bubble in some third world countries with limited revenues to service their debt, notably in Sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean; accordingly, urges the European Commission, in a context where it has indicated its wishes to extend considerably the use of blending in future years, to implement the recommendations made by the European Court of Auditors Special Report on the use of blending and to evaluate the mechanism of blending loans and grants, particularly in terms of development and financial additionality, transparency and accountability;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes that the Commission's expenses on action grants for setting-up national Passenger Name Record (PNR) schemes, in execution of the 2012 Working programme on the prevention of and fight against crime, have been made without the approval of the Parliament regarding the related proposal for an EU PNR Directive, whereas the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs rejected that proposal on 24 April 2013; questions the legality of Commission grants which are allocated ahead of, or against the spirit of, Parliamentary legislative decision;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. WRecalls that EU blending should in no circumstances constitute an excuse for diminishing ODA; welcomes the participation of the Parliament in the EU Platform for Blending in External Cooperation (EUBEC) to provide recommendations and guidance with a view to further increase the effectiveness of aid delivered by the EU through blending operations; recommends in line with the internationally agreed objectives of the aid effectiveness agenda, particularly the key principles of ownership, alignment, harmonisation and mutual accountability; in particular, recommends, in a context where blending provides an opportunity to support the activities of big EU corporations operating abroad (thereby departing from development objectives), that the Parliament should be duly informed on the project proposals financed by the blending facilities before decisions are taken by the operational boards; recalls that projects financed through blending should truly contribute to poverty reduction and respect development effectiveness principles; calls on the Commission to use blending only where its added value is demonstrated as highlighted by the Court2; __________________ 2 European Court of Auditors, The effectiveness of blending regional investment facility grants with financial institution loans to support EU external policies, Special Report 16, 2014.
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Notes that the Commission allocated a grant of EUR 5,7 million to the Netherlands for setting-up a national PNR scheme in execution of the 2012 Working programme on the prevention of and fight against crime, supposing that the relevant national legal requirements to set-up the PNR project would be adopted in due time; notes that the Dutch parliament rejected the introduction of a national PNR scheme on 4 September 2014; questions the legality of Commission grants allocated to Member States ahead of the adoption of the relevant national legal provisions;