Activities of Sylvie GOULARD related to 2014/2145(INI)
Plenary speeches (3)
Review of the economic governance framework: stocktaking and challenges (debate) FR
Review of the economic governance framework: stocktaking and challenges (debate) DE
Review of the economic governance framework: stocktaking and challenges (A8-0190/2015 - Pervenche Berès) (vote)
Amendments (80)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
- having regard to the conclusions of the European Council meeting on 23rd October 2011,
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17
Citation 17
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 19
Citation 19
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 20
Citation 20
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21
Citation 21
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 22
Citation 22
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Welcomes President Juncker's proposal to create a European fund for strategic investments (EFSI) and introduce new detailed guidelines for the deduction of expenditure for the fund under the Stability and Growth Pact;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 23
Citation 23
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that it is vital to distinguish between countries' operating expenditure and their productive investments, and that it is for the Commission, with the help of Eurostat, to lay down, in advance, strict eligibility criteria that, for the durable achievement of the objective of balancing national public finances under the Treaties, it is vital for the Commission allow for more favourable treatment of national productive investments that guarantee the viability of public finances in the long term, in accordance with Article 126(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU); urges the Commission, together with Eurostat, to define the eligibility criteria in advance;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 24
Citation 24
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25
Citation 25
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 26
Citation 26
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes the view that a minor change to the Treaties, i.e. the deletion of Article 126(10) TFEU, would make it possible for the Court of Justice to penalise infringementsthe European Court of Justice is one of the pillars of the Community method; considers that a community of law requires judicial control (infringement proceedings against defaulting Member States and action for annulment against decisions of the institutions, thereby providing programme countries with a guarantee) and that the absence of the European Court of Justice, which has played an essential role in underpinning the rule of law in the Union, ais befits a community based on the rule of law. a serious shortcoming of Economic and Monetary Union; considers that the deletion of Article 126(10) TFEU would enable the Court of Justice to resume this key role.
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, according to the Commission’'s autumn forecast, after two consecutive years of unanticipated negative growth, gross domestic product (GDP) in the euro area is expected to rise by 0.8 % in 2014 and by 1.1 % in 2015, meaning that the pre-crisis growth rate will not be regained this yeareconomic recovery is slowly gaining ground;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas, according to article 2 of the TEU, the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas huge differences will continue to prevail between the Member States, also following the Troika’s intervention, with forecasted GDP growth rates in 2014 ranging between -2.8 % in Cyprus and +4.6 % in Ireland reflecting increasingly undermining growing internal divergencthe will and ambition of different Member States to reform to regain competitivenes s;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, according to the Commission’'s autumn forecast, investment in the euro area decreased by 3.4 % in 2012, by 2.4 % in 2013 and by 17 % since the pre-crisis period, with the expected rebound rate in 2014 (0.6 %) and that anticipated for 2015 (1.7 %) being very weak; whereas both a lack of future-oriented investment can be just as detrimental to future generations as excessive public debtd excessive public debt are a crippling burden for future generations;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas a European investment plan is being put in place to raise EUR 315 billion in new investments over the next three years whose success also depends on the implementation of structural reforms to create an investor-friendly environment in Member States;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Underlines, however, that since the new rules have been introduced, progress has been made in addressing fiscal consolidation, with the EU-28 average fiscal deficit falling from 4.5% of GDP in 2011 to a forecast of around 3% of GDP in 2014;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Welcomes the Commission communication (COM(2014) 905) on the application of the Six- and Two-Pack; agrees with the Commission that the ability to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of the regulations is limited by the short experience of their operation, which in addition has been characterised by a severe economic crisis and hence leaves the rules untested in normal economic times;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 b (new)
Paragraph -1 b (new)
-1b. Stresses that at the core of the economic governance system is the prevention of excessive deficit and debt levels as well as excessive macroeconomic imbalances; underlines therefore that an assessment of the application of the six- pack and two-pack at this stage remains partial as the efficiency of the system to a large extent relies on the proper working of the preventive part of it, which is precisely what remains to be proven in better economic times;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 c (new)
Paragraph -1 c (new)
-1c. Welcomes the measures taken by the EU to respond to the weaknesses in its economic governance system revealed by the economic and financial crisis, namely the six-pack and two-pack; believes these represent a necessary first step to strengthen budgetary surveillance and economic policy coordination;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the current economic situation calls for urgent, comprehensive and decisive measures to face the threat of deflation or very low inflation, lowa continuation of growth-friendly fiscal consolidation and structural reforms to modernise EU economies, restore competitiveness, foster innovation, increase growth and high unemployment prospects as well as reducing inequalities and fighting poverty;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. recalls that article 3 of the Treaty of European Union (TEU) states that the Union, based on a highly competitive social market economy, "shall combat social exclusion and discrimination"; underlines therefore that budgetary policies must also tackle the poverty and social exclusion suffered by Europe's most deprived citizens, as not wasting human resources is a crucial component of competitiveness;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the current situation calls for closer and inclusive economic coordination (to increase aggregate demand, improve fiscal sustainability and allow for fair and sustainable structural reforms and related investments) and for swift reactions so as to correct the most obvious fault lines in the economic governance framework: the fact that the Member States of the Euro area do not currently sufficiently consider the Euro area as a whole, and this lack of/or misguided implementation of the rules;
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that ensuring the credibility of the framework is key to enhancing its democratic legitimacy; stresses that credibility can only be assured by a consistent and fair implementation of the framework across countries and over time;
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Warns that the accumulationcomplexity of procedures makesconcerning the economic governance framework complex and not transparent enough, which is detrimental to the ownership and acceptance by parliaments, social partners and citizens of guidelines, recommendations and reforms stemming from this frameworkas well as the lack of transparency on their implementation at national and European level makes it less efficient;
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 317 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Believes that sufficient flexibility is built in the existing provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP); stresses that the application of flexibility should solely be based on numerical criteria and quantifiable targets leaving no room for political bargaining;
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Acknowledges that progress has been made to strengthen the preventive arm of the SGP: stresses that any new flexibility in granting deviations from the Medium Term Objectives should not endanger this preventive nature of the Pact over the economic cycle and that any deviation should include a real safety margin for all Member States to reach their MTO in the given timeframe;
Amendment 319 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Requests the Commission and the Council to include an explicit reference to the required fiscal effort for the current and the upcoming year in the relevant recommendations under the preventive and corrective arm of the SGP; Requests furthermore that all underlying analysis regarding the implementation of the SGP should be published;
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. WelcomNotes the fact that in its interpretative communication on flexibility, the Commission acknowledgstates that the way in which the current fiscal rules are interpreted is crucial in bridging the investment gap in the EU and implementing growth- enhancing structural reforms;
Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that in order to ensure the long term sustainability of national public finances, it is of the utmost importance for the Commission to check the quality and relevance of public finances, in particular that national budgets are future oriented, by identifying, together with Eurostat, and encouraging the investment expenditures rather than the consumption expenditures, in accordance with Article 126(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 370 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. BelievNotes that the communication rightly broadens the scope of the investment clause, allowing for flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGP to accommodate investment programmes by the Member States, in particular as regards expenditure on projects under structural and cohesion policy, including the Youth Employment Initiative, trans- European networks and the Connecting Europe Facility, and co-financing under the EFSI; believes that this approach must be urgently reassessed to be symmetrically applied to the correcmore flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGP;
Amendment 386 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. BelievStresses that the structural reform clause under the preventive arm and the means of consideringprecondition for the application of the structural reform pclansuse under the correcpreventive arm constitute a step forward as regards ensuring the more efficient implementais the formal parliamentary adoption of a reforms by Member States; calls for further clarification as to the types of structural reforms eligible under this new scheme; believes that a direct link to the cost, timeframe impact and value of structural reforms should also be explicit in the corrective arm of the SGPcompatibility of the reinterpretation of the rules with the Treaty and secondary law;
Amendment 404 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that structural reforms should have a positive socioeconomic return and contribute to increased administrative capacitefficiency;
Amendment 416 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. DeplorNotes, however, the fact that the communication does not touch upon the nature of ‘unusual events’ falling outside the control of a Member State which could allow it to temporarily depart from the adjustment path towards achieving its MTO, recalls the general principle of law which requires that exemption rules must be applied restrictively;
Amendment 427 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that more room for flexibility and soft laws exists under the SGP and the rules as laid out in the SGP clearly define the European Semester; invites the Commission to build on this flexibility and to propose rule changes where neededremits of flexibility and calls on the Commission to ensure their strict and fair implementation;
Amendment 457 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Invites the Commission and the Council to better articulate the fiscal and macroeconomic frameworks, notably in the corrective arm of the SGP, to allow for earlier debate among stakeholders, taking into account the need to increase convergence between euro area Member States and the role of national parliaments and social partners regarding the design and implementationownership of structural reforms;
Amendment 472 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Insists that the Annual Growth Survey (AGS) and euro area recommendation must be better designed and put to better use to allow for a global economic debate, notably as regards convergence intake into account the interest of the euro area as a whole; proposes that the country- specific recommendations (CSRs) should be established on the basis of striking a better balance between the AGS and the macroeconomic imbalance procedure (MIP), and suggests that the euro area recommendation should be made compulsory following a proper debate with the European Parliament, with incentives being offered so as to encourage the implementation thereof; requests that the excessive deficit procedure (EDP) recommendation be joined together with the CSRs;
Amendment 484 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 514 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Asks the Commission to make the three-pillar strategy (investment, fiscal rules and structural reforms), presented in the AGS 2015, more concrete under the euro area recommendation and in the CSRs and to strengthen itstake into account the need for ap proach by building a fourth pillar ongressive and common approach to taxation;
Amendment 527 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that national fiscal councils could play a useful role at EU level; requests the set-up of a European network allowing for an independent analysis of the economic perspective to be established as a basis for a proper political discussion among stakeholders; recalls that independent bodies due to assess the effective and timely monitoring of compliance with the rules where created by the Council directive 2011/85/EU of 8 November 2011 on requirements for budgetary frameworks of the Member States; is of the opinion that an independent analysis is also needed at the EU level; reminds that the Commission's independent Chief Economic Analyst (Decision of the President of the European Commission of 28 October 2011) was designed in response to the calls for an independent surveillance of the Commission's increased discretionary powers enshrined in the 6-pack and the 2-pack; believes that the national independent bodies should work as a network, under the leadership of the Chief Economic Analyst, to monitor the fair and transparent implementation of the EU rules' framework; calls on this monitoring to be made public;
Amendment 533 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Suggests that such a fiscal council led by the Chief Economic Analyst could provide objective, independent and transparent analyses to both the Commission and the Council as well as the Parliament;
Amendment 544 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Believes that the MIP must be used in a more balanced manner between deficit and surplus countries, also to address countries with significant room for actionefficient manner, particularly with regard to strengthening competitiveness and better taking into account the euro area as a whole, including all the spill- over effects of national policies through the scoreboard;
Amendment 557 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 564 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 578 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Insists on the need to clarifyBelieves that the way in which effective actions are taken into account under the EDP should be based on clear, numerical and quantifiable criteria;
Amendment 580 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 593 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 594 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 604 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Believes that the credibility of the economic governance framework rests on the fair and transparent application of the rules; calls on the Commission to publish the reports of its independent Chief Economic Analyst verifying the consistent implementation of the rules; invites the Commission's Chief Economic Analyst to present to the European Parliament his/her assessment regarding the consistent implementation of the rules;
Amendment 617 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Takes the view that implementation and an effective enforcement of the current economic governance framework is the best way forward for the EMU: stresses the need for political ownership of the common rules and tool both at EU and national level which includes a stronger commitment of national parliaments and governments to implement structural reforms;
Amendment 618 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Takes the view that in the field of EMU parliamentary control is shared between the national and the European level and insists that responsibilities must be assumed at the level where decisions are taken or implemented, with national parliaments scrutinising national governments and the European Parliament scrutinising the European executive; it is only in this way that the required increased accountability of decision making can be ensured; considers that this increased legitimacy can be ensured by foreseeing the adoption of National Reform Programmes and possible Convergence Partnerships by national parliaments as well as the adoption of European policy orientations, detailed in the Annual Growth Survey, by the European Parliament; stresses that such a cooperation should not be seen as the creation of a new mixed parliamentary body which would be both ineffective and illegitimate from a democratic and constitutional point of view;
Amendment 619 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Considers that in the medium term, notably in order to ensure the required accountability for the ESM, a Euro area parliament will be required, under the auspices of the European Parliament, for Euro area Member States, with appropriate and inclusive mechanisms for those Member States committed to joining;
Amendment 628 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Acknowledges, based on the current situation, that the economic governance framework must be corrected and completed in both the medium and long term to allow for the EU and the euro area to meet the challenges of convergence, long-lasting investment and relicompetitiveness, future- oriented investment and sound public finances;
Amendment 636 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls for the annual sustainable growth guidelines to be made subject to a codecision procedure that should be introducgrowth survey to be made subject to a more formal involvement of Parliament based ion the next Treaty changa consent procedure; instructs its President to represent the annual sustainable growth guidelines as amended by Parliament at the spring European Council based on a resolution adopted in plenary;
Amendment 643 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Recalls that legislation implemented during the crisis on the basis of intergovernmental agreements lacks sufficient democratic accountability at EU level;
Amendment 650 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Recalls the European Parliament’'s request that the creation of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) and the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance ('Fiscal Compact') outside of the structure of the institutions of the Union represents a setback to the political integration of the Union and, therefore, demands that the ESM and the Fiscal Compact be fully integrated into the community framework and made formally accountable to Parliament, for the latter on the basis of an assessment of the experience of its implementation, as stipulated in Article 16 of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the EMU;
Amendment 659 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Calls for a newUnderlines that the legal framework for future assistance programmes needs to be improved in order to ensure that all decisions are taken under the responsibility of the Commission with full involvement of Parliament; stresses that Parliament should without delay follow up on its resolution of 13 March 2014 on the enquiry on the role and operations of the Troika and prepare a new, separate resolution fully dedicated to this issue drawing and building on the first enquiry, irrespective of any eventual evolution concerning the name of the Troika;
Amendment 671 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
Amendment 689 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Requests that a reassessment of the Eurogroup’s decision-making process be conducted so as to provide for apimpropriateved democratic accountability; believes that in the long term the Commissioner for Economic Affairs should assume the role of President of the Eurogroup;
Amendment 699 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Recalls that a ‘genuine Economic and Monetary Union’ (EMU) cannot simply be limitneeds to a system of rules but also requires an increased euro area fiscal capacitybe based on a rules based system, which is simple, comprehensible and can be easily enforced, including automatic sanctions in the case of non-compliance;
Amendment 706 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34a. Believes that there will never be genuine EMU without Treaty change and a role for the ECJ in the enforcement of the budgetary rules, according to the principle of the rule of law, as stated in article 2 of TEU; this includes both infringement proceedings against Member States failing to fulfil their obligations and action for annulment against decisions of the institutions, thereby inter alia providing programme countries with a guarantee; believes that the involvement of the ECJ may notably be a guarantee that the rules will be applied identically irrespective of the size of the Member State; states that this role for the ECJ will not result in economic governance procedures being delayed;
Amendment 710 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 726 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Asks the Commission to come forward with an ambitious roadmap which takes into account the need for economic governance reforms, as outlined in this report, andfor the establishment of a genuine economic and monetary union, which should be presented to Parliament by the end of May 2015, ahead of the June European Council building on previous work such as the Thyssen report of 20 November 2012 "Towards a genuine Economic and Monetary Union", the communication of the Commission of 28 November 2012 "A blueprint for a deep and genuine economic and monetary union. Launching a European debate" and the final Four Presidents report of 5 December 2012;
Amendment 730 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Is of the opinion that a 'genuine EMU' cannot be limited to a system of rules but requires an increased budgetary capacity based on specific own- resources which should, in the framework of the Union budget, support growth and social cohesion addressing imbalances, structural divergences and financial emergencies which are directly connected to the monetary union, without undermining its traditional functions to finance common policies.
Amendment 754 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 1
Paragraph 37 – indent 1
– a ‘taxation union’, common approach to taxation including a common corporate tax base, convergence of tax rates, simpler and more transparent tax systems and country-by-country reporting for corporates;
Amendment 769 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 2
Paragraph 37 – indent 2
– a social dimension, including a minimum wage mechanism and a minimum unemploymentcommon approach to social benefit schemes for the euro area and in-depth reforms to favour mobility,
Amendment 780 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 3
Paragraph 37 – indent 3
– the inclusion of the ESM in Union law and a new approach towards Eurobonds,
Amendment 782 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 3 a (new)
Paragraph 37 – indent 3 a (new)
- the establishment of a European redemption fund based on conditionality;
Amendment 785 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 3 b (new)
Paragraph 37 – indent 3 b (new)
- the introduction of exposure limits and risk weights on sovereign debt (sovereign debts can no longer be considered as a safe asset);
Amendment 799 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 37 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Within the framework of future Treaty revision, calls for - a role for the ECJ in the enforcement of the budgetary rules; - the creation of a parliament for the Euro area, under the auspices of the European Parliament, in order to ensure full legitimacy and parliamentary control at the level where decisions are taken and/or implemented, for the ESM for example; - the merging of the deficit and debt procedures, the macroeconomic imbalance procedure and the Country Specific Recommendations into one single, legally binding instrument;
Amendment 807 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
Amendment 811 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38 a. Notes that the President of the Commission has indicated his intention to draw on input from the President of the European Parliament in his reflections during the preparation of the 4 Presidents' reports; Underlines that the President of the European Parliament can only represent the institution on the basis and within the remit of a mandate by plenary;
Amendment 817 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. AsksStresses that if its President were to represent Parliament in this upcoming task, it shall be on the basis of thea mandate given by this resolutionplenary based on a new resolution prepared by its competent committee addressing inter alia the questions in the Four Presidents' Analytical Note on 'Preparing Next Steps on Better Economic Governance in the Euro area';
Amendment 819 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39 a. believes that some reflexion should be launched to improve the in-house analysis capacity of the European Parliament, building on the experience of the U.S. Congressional Budget Office which provides budgetary and economic information such as baseline budget and economic projections, cost estimates, scorekeeping for legislation;