BETA

8 Amendments of Enikő GYŐRI related to 2022/2150(INI)

Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the robustness of the labour market; highlights the stabilising effect of national short-time work schemes supported by the European instrument for temporary support to mitigate unemployment risks in an emergency (SURE); welcomes the fact that the recovery and resilience facility is mitigating those consequences and contributing to the Union’s competitive sustainability; stresses that its successful implementation requires the completion of milestones and targets, in particular compliance with the rule of law and the general regime of conditionality, to be monitored transparently and thoroughly; welcomes the Commission’s proposal to include a REPowerEU chapter in the national recovery and resilience plans; insists that the financing of REPowerEU must not divert resources away from other EU priorities;
2023/01/19
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned at the economic impact of the aforementioned crises on the Union and on national budgets; stresses that crisis response has led Member States to adopt extensive economic measures; highlights the long-term impact of these measures on economic sustainability, but considers that it should be possible to return to a state of economic discipline in the long run; is also concerned at the Union’s increasing debt repayment obligations if not appropriately handled; stresses that no further Union borrowing should not increase further as long as there are no new own resources to cater for debt repaymentbe allowed.
2023/01/19
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Expresses its concerns that the EU economic governance framework as a whole is losing its original scope as over the years the European Semester has been overloaded by policies out of its original scope, leading to debates of non-economic nature.
2023/01/19
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Highlights the need for better focusing the country specific recommendations, remaining within the remit of EU competences and avoiding double standards. Emphasises the importance of pursuing genuine dialogue between the Commission and the Member States during the entire semester process. This is a pre-condition of ownership and better implementation.
2023/01/19
Committee: BUDG
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the two key features of the RRF which are intrinsically linked to its successful implementation: (a) the six-pillar structure, ensuring that Member States give adequate consideration in their reform and investment agendas to all the relevant dimensions for making EU economies and societies more prosperous, sustainable, inclusive, competitive and resilient; (b) thorough monitoring by the European Parliament, ensuring the open, transparent and democratic scrutiny of the RRF’s implementation; welcomes the extension of these features to the European Semester and other instruments used for economic coordination;deleted
2023/01/11
Committee: ECON
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Expresses its concerns that the EU economic governance framework as a whole is losing its original scope as over the years the European Semester has been overloaded by policies out of its original scope, leading to debates of non-economic nature;
2023/01/11
Committee: ECON
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Highlights the need for better focusing the country specific recommendations, remaining within the remit of EU competences and avoiding double standards. Emphasises the importance of pursuing genuine dialogue between the Commission and the Member States during the entire semester process. This is a pre-condition of ownership and better implementation;
2023/01/11
Committee: ECON
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes that lessons have been learned from the RRF process by promoting more ownership of ways of putting Member States in charge of designing their own national plans combining fiscal, reform and investment commitments within a common EU framework; greatly regrets that, unlike the RRF, the European Parliament is excluded from defining the overarching goals, guidance, criteria for the debt reduction path, investments, reforms and the underlying assumptions on which the comprehensive debt sustainability analysis is based; regrets that neither the involvement of national parliaments nor that of national stakeholders and civil society is mentioned under project design, implementation or subsequent scrutiny, which sets back ownership and democratic accountability;
2023/01/11
Committee: ECON