15 Amendments of Lorenzo FONTANA related to 2017/2052(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights the impReiterates that the free movement of capital is the ideal environment for tance of completing the energy union, the digital single market, the capital markets union and the European research areax avoidance and for helping major transnational corporations to maximise their profits to the detriment of other companies and of employment-related income; rejects, therefore, the capital markets union, since it runs counter to the aims set out in Article 3 TEU, in particular the well-being of the Union's peoples, full employment and social progress and economic, social and territorial cohesion;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the structure of the new multiannual financial framework (MFF) must correspond to the top five political priorities of the EU; calls for more coherence betweebudgetary restraint in the funding of the EU budget and its objectives, if needed by breakby lowering the 1 % glass ceiling of Member State GDP contributions and/or by adapting and reducing the EU’s objectives in line with a strict interpretation of the principal of subsidiarity as enshrined in article 5.3 of the TEU;
Amendment 3 #
1. Highlights the importance of completing the energy union, the digital single market, the capital markets union and the European research areaRejects the Energy Union governance model proposed by the Commission, since it is designed to transfer to the EU the exclusive competences of the Member States as enshrined in Article 194 TFEU; further notes that this governance, modelled on the European Semester, is likely to reproduce the major political conflicts between Member States caused by the latter;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recommends separating the asylum, border and justice programmes into three comprehensive MFF headings corresponding to clear EU objectives in the framework of ‘Solidaecurity’, ‘Security’ and ‘Respect for the Rule of LawImproved Returns’ and ‘Reintroduction of Internal Border Controls by Member States’, which are understandable and identifiable by EU citizens;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to propose clear and strict rules for financially sanctioningstop interfering with Member States "failing to comply with ‘the rule of law’".
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses the need for an upgrad targeted and more effective Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) which will close the missing links in Europe’s energy and digital backbone by supporting the development of high- performance, sustainable and efficiently interconnected trans-European networks in the fields of energy and digital services;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates that, in the next MFF, financial instruments cannot replace grants in financing energy efficiency, renewable energy, - the exploitation technologies for which are not yet mature - innovative technologies for conventional energy and R&I projects, as only grants can maximise output on the ground;
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls the importance of completing the digital single market by making full use of spectrum, 5G and internet connectivity, and by making further progress on EU telecom rulesestablishing the appropriate infrastructure to ensure that Member States have genuine digital sovereignty;
Amendment 129 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls for an upgraded EFSI that would make it possible to bridge the gap between research and the market and would focuUnderlines that the EFSI has failed to guarantee growth or tackle unemployment; proposes, therefore, to stop its financing so that Member States can use this mon boosting market innovationey for the benefit of their citizens;
Amendment 169 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Points out that Union funding, because it is linked to size-based parameters and not macroeconomic fundamentals and because it is designed to address structural, not short-term, problems, cannot offer effective protection against economic shocks, such as those triggered by the financial crisis of 2007- 2008;
Amendment 175 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Notes that Union funding, although intended as an instrument to offset imbalances between Member States, in practice magnifies those imbalances, in that the provision of funding is based on the twin principles of co-financing and conditionality; points out, accordingly, that Union funding is a particularly underhand means by which the EU exercises control over Member-State spending policies;
Amendment 179 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 c (new)
Paragraph 12 c (new)
12c. Reiterates its concerns regarding Union funds and their role in supplying concrete answers to citizens' needs and to the growing difficulties they are having to face, such as unemployment, wage deflation, economic recession, deindustrialisation, poverty and security threats; underlines the need to properly evaluate which funds could be better managed at national level in order to fully respect the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;