2012/2286(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Changes: 2023/08/03events.docs, 2021/12/18events.docs, events, docs.docs.url, procedure.Modified_legal_basis, procedure.legal_basis, events.type, procedure.Other_legal_basis, 2020/01/19committees, events.docs.url, 2019/07/06procedure.Modified_legal_basis, events, procedure.dossier_of_the_committee, activities, committees, procedure.subject, docs, links, other, procedure.legal_basis, commission, 2014/11/09activities.date, activities.committees, committees.rapporteur.mepref, procedure.Modified_legal_basis, activities.type, activities, procedure.legal_basis, activities.docs, committees.rapporteur.group

View current state | View Changes for this date

Procedure completed

2012/2286(INI) European Investment Bank - 2011 annual report

Role	Committee	Rapporteur	Shadows
Opinion	CONT	AUDY Jean-Pierre (EPP)
Lead	ECON	MAURO Mario (EPP)

Lead committee dossier: ECON/7/10267
Legal Basis RoP 048

Subjects

8.40.07 European Investment Bank

Links

Activites

2013/02/07 Text adopted by Parliament, single reading
- T7-0057/2013
2013/01/25 Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
- A7-0016/2013 summary
  
  The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted the report by Mario MAURO (EPP, IT) on the 2011 Annual Report of the European Investment Bank (EIB). Members point out that a new set of rules for economic, fiscal and budgetary surveillance and discipline have been introduced in the EU, and especially the eurozone, in order to ensure the sustainability of public debt and that this set of rules needs to be urgently backed up by measures designed to boost the economy, industry, growth, competitiveness, innovation and employment, requiring the mobilisation of the EU budget and of the EIB’s lending capacity and expertise. The report focuses on three main issues: 1. Financial and economic aspects: Members stress there is a crucial need to ensure that the EIB keeps its AAA credit rating, in order to preserve its access to worldwide capital markets under attractive funding conditions that can be transferred to final project promoters. They believe that a further increase in the EIB’s capital would be greatly beneficial to the Union in the context of its need for economic growth. They recall their insistence, as repeatedly expressed over many years, on the need for prudential banking supervision of the EIB. They regret that the Commission has proposed no action in this regard, despite Parliament’s requests dating back to 2007. Members welcome the EU 2020 project bond initiative, and call for a more rapid improvement of the pilot phase and a prompt evaluation of its achievements, with a view to starting with the second phase of the project bonds. They encourage the EIB to continue its efforts together with the Commission to develop innovative financial instruments, with the objectives of leveraging limited EU budgetary resources in the most efficient way, mobilising private funding sources and promoting risk-sharing instruments for financing key investments for the EU. 2. Internal and external priorities: with a view to maintaining current levels of welfare while Member States are restructuring public financing, Members encourage the EIB Group and the Commission to continue supporting the social economy sector and young entrepreneurs. They welcome the review of the EIB’s mandate for operations outside the Union and support the EIB’s focus on investing in the long-term prosperity and stability of the EU’s neighbourhood, in particular the Mediterranean area and the countries preparing for EU membership, by financing support in the areas of interconnection, growth, climate change, European FDI and SMEs. They encourage the EIB to further improve its efforts to conduct lending operations outside the EU and to step up its cooperation with other global and regional development banks, as well as the development finance agencies of Member States, in order to reduce costs and achieve more efficient use of resources. 3. Transparency: Members point to the fact that the EIB pursues its efforts against a background of weakly regulated, non-transparent or uncooperative jurisdictions, including by i): screening the AML-CFT (anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism) capability of financial intermediaries used for its intermediated lending, so that they duly identify the final beneficiaries of EIB funds in accordance with applicable EU AML-CFT Directives or FATF (Financial Action Task Force) standards, as applicable; and ii): monitoring EIB disbursements through such jurisdictions. They recommend that the implementation of EIB/EU financial instruments should be based on ex ante policy objectives and criteria, combined with a transparent and efficient ex post reporting system that will preserve the independence of the EIB as regards project selection and due diligence.
2013/01/22 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2012/11/22 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2012/11/21 Amendments tabled in committee
- PE498.120
2012/09/25 Committee draft report
- PE496.522

Documents

Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T7-0057/2013
Amendments tabled in committee: PE498.120
Committee draft report: PE496.522
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0016/2013

Amendments	Dossier
15	2012/2286(INI) 2012/12/06 CONT 15 amendments... Amendment 1 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Supports the decision by EIB shareholders to increase the fully paid-in subscribed capital by EUR 10 billion, which should allow the EIB to provide up to EUR 60 billion in additional long-term lending; calls for an explanation ofn the ~~figure of EUR 60 billion, given that Article 16(5) of Protocol No 5 to the TFEU~~consonance of that additional intervention capacity with Article 16(5) of Protocol No 5 to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on the statute of the EIB, which provides that the aggregate amount outstanding of loans and guarantees shall not exceed 2.5 times the subscribed capital~~, which would mean an additional amount outstanding of EUR 25 billion, not EUR 60 billion~~; Amendment 10 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Reiterates its proposal for the European Union to become a member of the EIB. Amendment 11 # Edit HERCZOG Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Welcomes the EIB’s framework of structural programme loans which significantly contributes to the co-financing part in the national budgets in the context of the EU structural funds; encourages the Bank to widen this support in order to generate necessary investments in the Member States which are severely affected by the economic crisis; however this measure should remain separate from structural funds programs and should be phased out with the end of the crisis. Amendment 12 # Edit HERCZOG Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Welcomes the Bank’s regional initiatives, especially in the Baltic Sea Region and the Danube Region, with a view to improving the overall sustainability and the competitiveness of those regions; considers these initiatives as best practice with regard to the possibility to widen the support to other regions in the EU; Amendment 13 # Edit HERCZOG Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Welcomes the Bank’s participation in the European Bank Coordination ‘Vienna’ Initiative (EBCI), aimed at preventing a large-scale and uncoordinated withdrawal of cross-border bank groups from the CEE and Baltic region as well as in the announced Joint International Financial Institutions Action Plan for Recovery and Growth for the Central, Eastern and South-Eastern European Member States and candidate countries; Amendment 14 # Edit HERCZOG Draft opinion Paragraph 7 d (new) 7d. Encourages the EIB to further improve its efforts to utilise its lending operations outside the EU and to intensify its cooperation with other global and regional development banks as well as the development finance agencies of Member States in order to reduce costs and to achieve more efficient use of resources; Amendment 15 # Edit HERCZOG Draft opinion Paragraph 7 e (new) 7e. With regard to the EIB’s ‘Policy towards weakly regulated, non-transparent and uncooperative jurisdictions’ of 15 December 2010, reminds the Bank of its commitment to keep this policy under review and to propose any appropriate updating in line with developments in other international financial institutions’ practices and regulatory frameworks; calls on the EIB to inform the Parliament on any decisions taken or foreseen in this respect; Amendment 2 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Reaffirms the importance of the EIB voluntarily complying with the current Basel II capital requirements, and suggests that it meet the forthcoming Basel III obligations while remaining mindful of the specific nature of its activities; considers it very important for the EIB to maintain its triple A rating; Amendment 3 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Stresses that the overall level of credit risk in the Bank’s loan portfolio has risen owing, on the one hand, to growing pressure on the credit standing of counterparties due to the continuing effects of the economic crisis and, on the other hand, to the increased credit risk inherent in new operations; recommends that the EIB take appropriate measures to avoid a deterioration of its loan portfolio; Amendment 4 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes that ~~European Union~~ project bonds will be ~~financ~~backed jointly by the Union and the EIB; supports the call by EU Member States for the Bank to develop such project bonds in order to improve the long- term financing of major infrastructure projects; Amendment 5 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses, however, that in the case of infrastructure funded by the EIB on a public-private partnership (PPP) basis, accumulated public-sector payments should be publicised and a clear distinction drawn between the risks borne by the public and those borne by the private partners; Amendment 6 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Proposes that the Commission, in conjunction with the EIB (in view of the quality of the latter’s human resources and its experience in financing major infrastructure), engage in a process of strategic analysis of investment funding, without ruling out any possible scenario, including subsidies, the release of sums subscribed by the Member States to the EIB’s capital, subscriptions by the European Union to the capital of the EIB, loans, innovative instruments, financial engineering tailored to long-term projects which are not immediately profitable, the development of guarantee systems, the creation of an investment section within the Union budget, financial consortia between European, national and local authorities, public-private partnerships, etc. Amendment 7 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Believes that the EIB, as a bank needing to maintain its triple A rating, must not be exposed on financial interventions that would normally come under the investment section of a public budget, which is something that the EU budget is lacking; Amendment 8 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 regrets that the ~~EIB has taken~~Commission has proposed no action in this regard, despite Parliament'’s requests, dating back to 2007; Amendment 9 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls for the ~~remuneration of the guarantee granted by the European Union for operations conducted outside the Union to be paid to the general budget of the Union; calls on DG Competit~~Commission to provide an assurance to the European Parliament that EIB activities comply with competition rules, particularly with regard to other credit institutions; source: PE-501.914

Amendments

Dossier

2012/2286(INI)

2012/12/06 CONT 15 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Supports the decision by EIB shareholders to increase the fully paid-in subscribed capital by EUR 10 billion, which should allow the EIB to provide up to EUR 60 billion in additional long-term lending; calls for an explanation ofn the ~~figure of EUR 60 billion, given that Article 16(5) of Protocol No 5 to the TFEU~~consonance of that additional intervention capacity with Article 16(5) of Protocol No 5 to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on the statute of the EIB, which provides that the aggregate amount outstanding of loans and guarantees shall not exceed 2.5 times the subscribed capital~~, which would mean an additional amount outstanding of EUR 25 billion, not EUR 60 billion~~;

Amendment 10 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates its proposal for the European Union to become a member of the EIB.

Amendment 11 #

Edit HERCZOG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Welcomes the EIB’s framework of structural programme loans which significantly contributes to the co-financing part in the national budgets in the context of the EU structural funds; encourages the Bank to widen this support in order to generate necessary investments in the Member States which are severely affected by the economic crisis; however this measure should remain separate from structural funds programs and should be phased out with the end of the crisis.

Amendment 12 #

Edit HERCZOG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Welcomes the Bank’s regional initiatives, especially in the Baltic Sea Region and the Danube Region, with a view to improving the overall sustainability and the competitiveness of those regions; considers these initiatives as best practice with regard to the possibility to widen the support to other regions in the EU;

Amendment 13 #

Edit HERCZOG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7c. Welcomes the Bank’s participation in the European Bank Coordination ‘Vienna’ Initiative (EBCI), aimed at preventing a large-scale and uncoordinated withdrawal of cross-border bank groups from the CEE and Baltic region as well as in the announced Joint International Financial Institutions Action Plan for Recovery and Growth for the Central, Eastern and South-Eastern European Member States and candidate countries;

Amendment 14 #

Edit HERCZOG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)

7d. Encourages the EIB to further improve its efforts to utilise its lending operations outside the EU and to intensify its cooperation with other global and regional development banks as well as the development finance agencies of Member States in order to reduce costs and to achieve more efficient use of resources;

Amendment 15 #

Edit HERCZOG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)

7e. With regard to the EIB’s ‘Policy towards weakly regulated, non-transparent and uncooperative jurisdictions’ of 15 December 2010, reminds the Bank of its commitment to keep this policy under review and to propose any appropriate updating in line with developments in other international financial institutions’ practices and regulatory frameworks; calls on the EIB to inform the Parliament on any decisions taken or foreseen in this respect;

Amendment 2 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Reaffirms the importance of the EIB voluntarily complying with the current Basel II capital requirements, and suggests that it meet the forthcoming Basel III obligations while remaining mindful of the specific nature of its activities; considers it very important for the EIB to maintain its triple A rating;

Amendment 3 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that the overall level of credit risk in the Bank’s loan portfolio has risen owing, on the one hand, to growing pressure on the credit standing of counterparties due to the continuing effects of the economic crisis and, on the other hand, to the increased credit risk inherent in new operations; recommends that the EIB take appropriate measures to avoid a deterioration of its loan portfolio;

Amendment 4 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that ~~European Union~~ project bonds will be ~~financ~~backed jointly by the Union and the EIB; supports the call by EU Member States for the Bank to develop such project bonds in order to improve the long- term financing of major infrastructure projects;

Amendment 5 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses, however, that in the case of infrastructure funded by the EIB on a public-private partnership (PPP) basis, accumulated public-sector payments should be publicised and a clear distinction drawn between the risks borne by the public and those borne by the private partners;

Amendment 6 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Proposes that the Commission, in conjunction with the EIB (in view of the quality of the latter’s human resources and its experience in financing major infrastructure), engage in a process of strategic analysis of investment funding, without ruling out any possible scenario, including subsidies, the release of sums subscribed by the Member States to the EIB’s capital, subscriptions by the European Union to the capital of the EIB, loans, innovative instruments, financial engineering tailored to long-term projects which are not immediately profitable, the development of guarantee systems, the creation of an investment section within the Union budget, financial consortia between European, national and local authorities, public-private partnerships, etc.

Amendment 7 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Believes that the EIB, as a bank needing to maintain its triple A rating, must not be exposed on financial interventions that would normally come under the investment section of a public budget, which is something that the EU budget is lacking;

Amendment 8 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

regrets that the ~~EIB has taken~~Commission has proposed no action in this regard, despite Parliament'’s requests, dating back to 2007;

Amendment 9 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls for the ~~remuneration of the guarantee granted by the European Union for operations conducted outside the Union to be paid to the general budget of the Union; calls on DG Competit~~Commission to provide an assurance to the European Parliament that EIB activities comply with competition rules, particularly with regard to other credit institutions;

source: PE-501.914

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

2013-02-09Show (3) Changes | Timetravel

activities/5/docs	type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0057/2013
activities/5/type	Old Vote scheduled New Text adopted by Parliament, single reading
procedure/stage_reached	Old Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage New Procedure completed

2013-01-31Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4/docs/0/text

The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted the report by Mario MAURO (EPP, IT) on the 2011 Annual Report of the European Investment Bank (EIB).

Members point out that a new set of rules for economic, fiscal and budgetary surveillance and discipline have been introduced in the EU, and especially the eurozone, in order to ensure the sustainability of public debt and that this set of rules needs to be urgently backed up by measures designed to boost the economy, industry, growth, competitiveness, innovation and employment, requiring the mobilisation of the EU budget and of the EIB’s lending capacity and expertise.

The report focuses on three main issues:

1. Financial and economic aspects: Members stress there is a crucial need to ensure that the EIB keeps its AAA credit rating, in order to preserve its access to worldwide capital markets under attractive funding conditions that can be transferred to final project promoters. They believe that a further increase in the EIB’s capital would be greatly beneficial to the Union in the context of its need for economic growth. They recall their insistence, as repeatedly expressed over many years, on the need for prudential banking supervision of the EIB. They regret that the Commission has proposed no action in this regard, despite Parliament’s requests dating back to 2007.

Members welcome the EU 2020 project bond initiative, and call for a more rapid improvement of the pilot phase and a prompt evaluation of its achievements, with a view to starting with the second phase of the project bonds. They encourage the EIB to continue its efforts together with the Commission to develop innovative financial instruments, with the objectives of leveraging limited EU budgetary resources in the most efficient way, mobilising private funding sources and promoting risk-sharing instruments for financing key investments for the EU.

2. Internal and external priorities: with a view to maintaining current levels of welfare while Member States are restructuring public financing, Members encourage the EIB Group and the Commission to continue supporting the social economy sector and young entrepreneurs. They welcome the review of the EIB’s mandate for operations outside the Union and support the EIB’s focus on investing in the long-term prosperity and stability of the EU’s neighbourhood, in particular the Mediterranean area and the countries preparing for EU membership, by financing support in the areas of interconnection, growth, climate change, European FDI and SMEs.

They encourage the EIB to further improve its efforts to conduct lending operations outside the EU and to step up its cooperation with other global and regional development banks, as well as the development finance agencies of Member States, in order to reduce costs and achieve more efficient use of resources.

3. Transparency: Members point to the fact that the EIB pursues its efforts against a background of weakly regulated, non-transparent or uncooperative jurisdictions, including by i): screening the AML-CFT (anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism) capability of financial intermediaries used for its intermediated lending, so that they duly identify the final beneficiaries of EIB funds in accordance with applicable EU AML-CFT Directives or FATF (Financial Action Task Force) standards, as applicable; and ii): monitoring EIB disbursements through such jurisdictions. They recommend that the implementation of EIB/EU financial instruments should be based on ex ante policy objectives and criteria, combined with a transparent and efficient ex post reporting system that will preserve the independence of the EIB as regards project selection and due diligence.

activities/5

date: 2013-02-07T00:00:00

body: EP

type: Vote scheduled

2013-01-30Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4/docs/0/url

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2013-16&language=EN

2013-01-27Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4

date: 2013-01-25T00:00:00

docs: type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0016/2013

body: EP

type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading

2013-01-24Show (3) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3/committees	body: EP responsible: False committee: CONT date: 2012-11-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: EPP name: AUDY Jean-Pierre body: EP responsible: True committee: ECON date: 2012-03-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: EPP name: MAURO Mario
activities/3/date	Old 2013-04-18T00:00:00 New 2013-01-22T00:00:00
activities/3/type	Old Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading New Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading

2013-01-23Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3

date: 2013-01-22T00:00:00

body: EP

type: Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading

2013-01-12Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4/date

Old

2013-02-07T00:00:00

New

2013-04-18T00:00:00

2012-12-21Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3/date

Old

2013-01-21T00:00:00

New

2013-01-22T00:00:00

2012-12-14Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3

date: 2013-01-21T00:00:00

body: EP

type: Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading

2012-12-05Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3

date: 2013-02-07T00:00:00

body: EP

type: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading

2012-11-27Show (3) Changes | Timetravel

activities/2	date 2012-11-22T00:00:00 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body: EP responsible: False committee: CONT date: 2012-11-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: EPP name: AUDY Jean-Pierre body: EP responsible: True committee: ECON date: 2012-03-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: EPP name: MAURO Mario
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee	ECON/7/10267
procedure/stage_reached	Old Preparatory phase in Parliament New Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage

2012-11-24Show (5) Changes

activities	date: 2012-09-25T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE496.522 type: Committee draft report title: PE496.522 body: EP type: Committee draft report date: 2012-11-21T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE498.120 type: Amendments tabled in committee title: PE498.120 body: EP type: Amendments tabled in committee
committees	body: EP responsible: False committee: CONT date: 2012-11-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: EPP name: AUDY Jean-Pierre body: EP responsible: True committee: ECON date: 2012-03-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: EPP name: MAURO Mario
links
other	body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/economy_finance/index_en.htm title: Economic and Financial Affairs commissioner: REHN Olli
procedure	reference 2012/2286(INI) title European Investment Bank - 2011 annual report legal_basis Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048 stage_reached Preparatory phase in Parliament subtype Annual report type INI - Own-initiative procedure subject 8.40.07 European Investment Bank

Activites

Documents

History

ParlTrack - 2011-2024