Activities of Erminia MAZZONI related to 2013/2042(INI)
Plenary speeches (2)
Budgetary constraints for regional and local authorities regarding the EU's Structural Funds (A7-0269/2013 - Erminia Mazzoni) (vote)
Budgetary constraints for regional and local authorities regarding the EU's Structural Funds (short presentation)
Reports (1)
REPORT on effects of budgetary constraints for regional and local authorities regarding the EU’s Structural Funds expenditure in the Member States PDF (210 KB) DOC (103 KB)
Amendments (10)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15 a (new)
Citation 15 a (new)
– having regard to the IMF’s October 2012 World Economic Outlook,
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas the EU Structural Fund uptake arrangements are such that the Commission can reimburse interim payments only on the basis of declarations of expenditure paid out in Member States;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M b (new)
Recital M b (new)
Mb. whereas national public co-financing under the Structural Funds in EU-27 for the 2007-2013 programming period amounts to approximately EUR 132 billion, and whereas that figure constitutes a sine qua non for proper take- up of the Funds and for investment of a high quality serving to strengthen ownership and accountability in the use of EU funding;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas thenational public co-financing of the programmes supported by Cohesion Policy can be jeopardised by lack of flexibility in the application of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP), with the result that Cohesion Policy cannot be brought to bear to such useful effect to improve competitiveness and overcome the current crisis;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Strongly reiterates its opposition to the introduction of a macroeconomic conditionality in the Cohesion Policy 2014- 2020 which would penalise regions and social groups already weakened by the crisis, with a suspension of payments possibly having disproportionate effects in some Member States and especially in regions, despite their full participation in the efforts to equilibrate public budgets; is of the opinion, moreover, that a punitive approach of that kind might not be understood by the public at large and could add to public distrust at a time when people are already being hit hard by the crisis and the effects of austerity policies;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Believes that in a period of retrenchment in public financing, there has to be a rethink regarding the principle of additionality, which should be implemented in line with the European economic governance framework, and hopes that this point will be discussed in the negotiations on Cohesion Policy after 2013;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Notes the IMF’s recent comments that austerity weakens countries in which it is applied unthinkingly, the reason being that when the global economic outlook is poor, precipitate government deficit reduction hampers recovery in the short term by lowering tax receipts and hence further exacerbating the deficit; agrees with the IMF that the emphasis, instead of being confined to fiscal consolidation, should be broadened with a view to balancing consolidation with growth;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)
Paragraph 12 c (new)
12c. Welcomes the proposal from some Member States that the MFF negotiations should cover the subject of a ‘review clause’ for the years 2015 and 2016, whereby budgets could be increased while they were being implemented, in order to promote youth employment, SMEs, and other key sectors;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Invites the Commission and the Member States to exploit all margins of flexibility to exploit the possibilities inherent in the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) to balance productive public investment needs with fiscal discipline objectives, for example by excluding the aggregate volumes of national co-financing under the European Structural and Investment Funds from the limits imposed by the Stability and Growth Pact, or by basing calculations for the purposes of the Pact on a Member State’s net cash requirements, as opposed to gross requirements, that is to say, net of the taxes payable on real expenditure (most importantly VAT), or by phasing the two sources of programme financing (European and national) according to different timetables, so that the funding would be wholly European during the first years of a programme and come entirely from the national source during the final years, on the assumption that the individual Member State concerned would, by that point, have managed to achieve definite results in the policy of containing the debt-to-GDP ratio;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Is of the opinion thatCalls for public expenditure related to the implementation of programmes co- financed by the European Structural and Investment Funds should beto be completely excluded from the SPGP limitations because they are expenditures devoted to supporting competitiveness, growth and job creation;