Next event: Commission response to text adopted in plenary 2017/11/20 more...
- Results of vote in Parliament 2017/06/15
- Decision by Parliament 2017/06/15
- End of procedure in Parliament 2017/06/15
- Debate in Parliament 2017/06/14
- Committee report tabled for plenary 2017/05/22
- Vote in committee 2017/05/15
- Committee opinion 2017/04/12
- Committee opinion 2017/04/06
- Committee opinion 2017/03/23
- Committee opinion 2017/03/23
- Committee opinion 2017/01/31
- Committee draft report 2017/01/30
Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Committee Opinion | INTA | MAUREL Emmanuel ( S&D) | William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH ( EFDD), Marielle DE SARNEZ ( ALDE), Sander LOONES ( ECR), Fernando RUAS ( PPE) |
Committee Opinion | CONT | TAKKULA Hannu ( ALDE) | Georgi PIRINSKI ( S&D), Marco VALLI ( EFDD) |
Committee Opinion | EMPL | TOMC Romana ( PPE) | Laura AGEA ( EFDD), Enrique CALVET CHAMBON ( ALDE), Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO ( GUE/NGL), Dominique MARTIN ( ENF), Emilian PAVEL ( S&D), Ulrike TREBESIUS ( ECR) |
Committee Opinion | ITRE | MARINESCU Marian-Jean ( PPE) | Sofia SAKORAFA ( GUE/NGL), Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER ( ENF), Claude TURMES ( Verts/ALE) |
Committee Opinion | IMCO | DANTI Nicola ( S&D) | Antanas GUOGA ( PPE), Richard SULÍK ( ECR) |
Committee Opinion | TRAN | AYALA SENDER Inés ( S&D), RIQUET Dominique ( ALDE) | Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS ( GUE/NGL) |
Committee Opinion | REGI | BRESSO Mercedes ( S&D) | |
Committee Opinion | CULT | EVANS Jill ( Verts/ALE) | Liadh NÍ RIADA ( GUE/NGL), Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI ( PPE) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54, RoP 58
Legal Basis:
RoP 54, RoP 58Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 477 votes to 105 with 35 abstentions a resolution on the implementation of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI).
Noting the significant investment gap in Europe, which the Commission estimates to be at least EUR 200-300 billion per year , Members voiced their concern that the most recent data on national accounts showed no significant increase in investment since the creation of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI). Bridging the investment gap by creating an environment conducive to investment in certain strategic areas is considered essential to boost growth.
The main recommendations contained in the resolution are as follows:
Additionality: recalling that EFSI’s aim is to ensure additionality by helping to remedy market failures or non-optimal investment situations, Members called for further clarification of the concept of additionality . They called on the Commission to draw up an inventory of all EU-supported EIB financing meeting the additionality criteria and to provide clear explanations justifying why the projects could not have been carried out otherwise.
Dashboard and project selection: project promoters expressed the wish to have quick feedback and increased transparency regarding project selection criteria and the amount of support that could be provided by the EFSI.
Members called for greater clarity to encourage project promoters to apply for EFSI support , including by making the dashboard available to funding applicants. They regretted that current dashboards give as much importance to the technical aspects of the projects as to the more important desired outcomes.
Small-scale projects should be supported because they often encounter difficulties in obtaining the funding that they need.
Governance: with a view to improving the effectiveness and accountability of the EFSI, Parliament suggested that options for the complete separation of the governance structure of the EFSI from that of the EIB should be examined. It also considered that the project selection process was not sufficiently transparent and that the EIB should make improvements with regard to the publication of information on the projects that it approves under the EFSI.
The resolution recalled that national development banks were necessary for the EFSI’s success, as they were close to local markets. However, synergies have so far not been exploited. Investment platforms , as a means of geographic and thematic diversification of investments, should be promoted and the rules for their establishment simplified.
Financial instruments: recalling that the EIB has developed new financial instruments for the purposes of EFSI, in order to provide tailor-made products adapted to high-risk financing, MEPs voiced their concern at project promoters’ criticisms that the financing instruments are not compatible with their projects’ needs. In addition, the EIB should consider how the development of green bonds would enhance the potential of EFSI in financing projects with environmental or climate benefits.
Geographical diversification: Parliament regretted that the EFSI's support has mainly benefited a limited number of countries , whose investment gap is already below the EU average. Moreover, within the beneficiary countries, there is often an uneven geographical distribution of projects financed by the EFSI.
Members called on the EIB to provide additional technical assistance to countries and regions which have benefited less from the EFSI.
European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH): Members recalled the importance they attached to the functioning of the hub. They are convinced that EIAH could help to remedy many shortcomings in the implementation of the EFSI. However, they stressed that the EIAH should enhance the profile of its services , improve its communication and raise awareness and understanding of its activities among EIAH stakeholders.
Future funding: Parliament noted that the Commission had proposed extending the EFSI to the level of duration and financial capacity, which would have implications for the Union budget. It indicated its intention to present other funding proposals . It also noted that, because of overlaps and competition between the EFSI and the financial instruments of the EU budget, guidelines had been adopted recommending combining EFSI funding and ESI Fund financing.
Extension: recognising that the EFSI would probably not be able on its own to close the investment gap in Europe, Members called for new proposals on how to stimulate investment in Europe over time.
The Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by José Manuel FERNANDES (EPP, PT) and Udo BULLMANN (S&D, DE) on the implementation of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (ESFI).
The report has been adopted pursuant to Rule 55 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament (Joint committee meetings).
Members recalled that EFSI has now been in place for around 1.5 years. Even though this does not allow for a comprehensive or final assessment, evidence gathered so far can give a first indication of how the Regulation has been implemented.
Firstly, the most recent data on national accounts do not indicate any surge in investment since the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) was launched, leading to concerns that, without a change, there will be continued subdued growth and continuing high unemployment rates. Closing this investment gap by creating an environment conducive to investment in certain strategic areas is key to reviving growth.
The role played by EFSI is stressed in helping to resolve difficulties and remove obstacles to financing as well as to implement strategic investments and to encourage private investment in all regions of the EU.
The main findings of the report are as follows:
Additionality : projects supported by EFSI are considered to provide additionality if they carry a risk corresponding to EIB special activities. These projects shall typically have a higher risk profile than projects supported by EIB normal operations. Members underlined that EIB projects carrying a risk lower than the minimum risk under EIB special activities may also be supported by EFSI only if use of the EU guarantee is required to ensure additionality.
The Commission is called upon, in cooperation with the EIB and the EFSI governance structures, to draw up an inventory of all EU-backed EIB financing falling under the additionality criteria and to provide clear and comprehensive explanations of the evidence that the projects could not have been realised through other means.
Scoreboard and project selection : prior to a project being selected for EFSI support, it has to undergo due-diligence and decision-making processes both in the EIB and the EFSI governance structures. Project promoters have expressed a wish for swift feedback and enhanced transparency in relation to both the selection criteria and the amount of possible EFSI support. Members called for greater clarity in order to further encourage project promoters to apply for EFSI support, including by making the scoreboard available to applicants for EFSI financing.
Small-scale projects should be supported as they often encounter difficulties in obtaining the funding they need.
Governance : the report observed that the EFSI governance structures have been implemented in full within the EIB. With a view to improving the efficiency and accountability of EFSI, options for making the EFSI governance structure completely separate from that of the EIB should be discussed.
It was also highlighted that project selection is not transparent enough and that the EIB should make improvements in relation to the disclosure of information about the projects it approves under EFSI. The report recalled that national promotional banks are essential for the success of EFSI, as they are close to, and familiar with, the local markets. However, synergies have so far not been exploited. Investment platforms should be promoted and their establishment rules simplified.
Financial instruments : recalling that the EIB has developed new financial instruments for the purposes of EFSI, Members expressed concerns about project promoters’ criticisms that the financing instruments provided are not compatible with their projects’ needs.
Geographical diversification : Members regretted that EFSI support has mainly benefited a limited number of countries where the investment gaps are already below the EU average. They noted that within beneficiary countries, there is often an unequal geographical distribution of EFSI-funded projects.
The EIB is called upon to provide further technical assistance to those countries and regions which have benefited less from EFSI.
EIAH : the report attached the utmost importance to the operation of the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) with Members convinced that it has the potential to play an instrumental role in addressing many of the shortcomings of EFSI implementation. However, they stressed that the EIAH needs to enhance the profile of its services, improve communication and raise awareness and understanding of its activities amongst EIAH stakeholders.
Future financing : Members noted that the Commission has proposed an extension of EFSI, both in terms of duration and financial capacity, and that this would have an impact on the EU budget. They intend to put forward alternative financing proposals. Members noted awareness of overlaps and competition between EFSI and financial instruments of the EU budget on the part of the Commission and the EIB has led to the adoption of guidelines recommending the combination of EFSI and ESI Fund financing .
Extension : noting that EFSI alone will probably not be able to close the investment gap in Europe, Members called for further proposals to be made on how to permanently boost investment in Europe.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2017)574
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T8-0270/2017
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A8-0200/2017
- Committee opinion: PE599.570
- Committee opinion: PE599.549
- Committee opinion: PE594.092
- Committee opinion: PE595.719
- Committee opinion: PE585.729
- Committee draft report: PE597.724
- Committee opinion: PE589.274
- Committee opinion: PE587.416
- Committee opinion: PE584.238
- Committee opinion: PE584.238
- Committee opinion: PE587.416
- Committee opinion: PE589.274
- Committee draft report: PE597.724
- Committee opinion: PE585.729
- Committee opinion: PE594.092
- Committee opinion: PE595.719
- Committee opinion: PE599.549
- Committee opinion: PE599.570
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2017)574
Activities
- Tibor SZANYI
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Inés AYALA SENDER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Hugues BAYET
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Nicola CAPUTO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Brian HAYES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Sander LOONES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ulrike LUNACEK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ivana MALETIĆ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Andrejs MAMIKINS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Momchil NEKOV
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Lambert van NISTELROOIJ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Liadh NÍ RIADA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Stanisław OŻÓG
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Georgi PIRINSKI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Claude ROLIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Eleftherios SYNADINOS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Hannu TAKKULA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marco VALLI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Daniele VIOTTI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Miguel VIEGAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Anna ZÁBORSKÁ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Janusz ZEMKE
Plenary Speeches (1)
Amendments | Dossier |
297 |
2016/2064(INI)
2016/09/07
IMCO
63 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 c (new) 1c. Reminds that in principle, there are little differences between the EFSI and standard European funds; believes that the main difference is in the extent of support - while standard European funds finance most of the costs of the supported projects, the EFSI provides a loan for the part of the project; thus, EFSI can support more projects for less taxpayers' money but only in the cost of dead-weight loss, shifting of resources and moral hazard;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 d (new) 1d. Acknowledges the dead-weight loss; reminds that EFSI supported financing of Normandy Dairy Production Facility and Polish milk powder factory while there is a general excess capacity in the diary production; reminds also that the same applies for the EFSI support of the wind farms while there are excess capacities for the electricity production in Europe; believes that EFSI must stop financing ordinary projects which deforms standard market competition; 1c __________________ 1cThe EIB declares that the EFSI “remains focused on the specific objective of addressing the market failure in risk- taking, which hinders the investment in Europe. In doing so, the EFSI will also increase the volume of high risk projects supported by the EIB Group.” The EFSI also finances a Slovak PPP project; a construction of approximately 27 km of the D4 motorway around Bratislava, which is to connect to the R7 expressway (outside the scope of EIB financing). Paradoxically, while the contribution to the transport capacity of the D4 remains controversial, the more necessary R7 will not receive an EFSI funding. Moreover, there is no reason to assume this D4 PPP project would not find sufficient funding without a help from the EFSI.
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. U
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Urges that EFSI ensure greater additionality for its projects in relation to normal EIB activities; underlines the fact that EFSI should support strategic investments related to projects that cannot obtain funding because of market failures, suboptimal investment situations or high levels of risk; recalls, furthermore, that when determining the criteria for use of the EU guarantee, EFSI should consider
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. In this regard, urges the Commission to do a thorough assessment of the additionality of the projects already funded under EFSI and, based on the results, to set clear rules and criteria for defining the additionality in terms of eligibility for receiving EFSI funding;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Notes that despite the several successful infrastructure and innovation projects, the high ceiling for the minimum project amounts (50 million euro) limits the number of projects that may be implemented through EFSI, particularly in small Member States; therefore, calls for lowering the minimal ceiling for project funding;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that, while the SMEs window of the EFSI is a great success and represent
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that, while the SMEs window of the EFSI represented a good opportunity for start-ups, SMEs and mid- caps, there is a lack of big investment; emphasises, therefore, the need to improve the financing of infrastructure and innovation projects in Member States such as Greece and to boost investments, which have been eroded by falling wages and pensions and consequently lower purchasing power on the Greek market;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that, while the SMEs window of the EFSI represented a good opportunity for start-ups, SMEs and mid- caps, there is a lack of big investment, especially in the long term; emphasises, therefore, the need to improve the financing of infrastructure and innovation projects;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that, while the SMEs window of the EFSI represented a good opportunity for start-ups, SMEs and mid- caps, there is a lack of big investment; emphasises,
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that, while the SMEs window of the EFSI represented a good opportunity for start-ups, SMEs and mid- caps, there is a lack of
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that EFSI SME window provides a good opportunity for SMEs to attract funding; emphasises, however, that more elasticity should be given to projects that currently do not fall within the existing EFSI rules; underlines the need for additional financial instruments within EFSI to improve the SME window;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that, having been fully operational for
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that the strong interest and participation in EFSI projects by intermediary banks across the EU in order to provide finance to SMEs was extremely successful; encourages the Commission to work with the EFSI Steering Board to use all the existing possibilities under the EFSI Regulation to reinforce this access to finance for SMEs, in order to increase in the overall volume of actions for these instruments and allow the EIF to finance a significant extra volume of operations;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that the EFSI commitments in digital sector projects are highly insufficient in the context of the positive effect that a fully operational DSM will have for the EU economy; therefore, calls for the Member States and stakeholders to further explore and promote investment opportunities in the area of digital content and services, high-speed broadband and telecommunications infrastructure;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Urges that moral hazard shall not be overlooked; stresses that even partial loses of the investments supported by EFSI can cause 100% loss of the European taxpayers money due to high level of leverage the EFSI uses; stresses also that taxpayers unwillingly bear the risks of the failed investments;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses the fact that the low numbers of SMEs to have used the EFSI owing to a lack of capital points to the need to find new means of cofinancing projects funded through the EFSI;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for better coordination between EFSI and other EU funds, in particular the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs), so as to promote stronger cohesion in Europe and ensure that EFSI has wide geographical coverage, particularly in those countries in which attempts to obtain EFSI financing have been low; urges the Commission to step up the EFSI communication campaign and to increase awareness of EFSI; suggests preparing information for SMEs to explain, in a simple and intelligible manner using specific examples, how they can obtain financing and the types of projects that are financed by EFSI; calls, also, for closer cooperation with national promotional banks, local and regional authorities and relevant stakeholders, including further encouragement to establish investment platforms to aggregate sectorial and geographical investment opportunities;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for better coordination between EFSI and other EU funds, in particular the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs), so as to promote stronger cohesion in Europe and ensure that EFSI has wide geographical coverage; calls, also, for closer cooperation with national promotional banks, local and regional authorities and relevant stakeholders, including further encouragement to establish investment platforms to aggregate sectorial and geographical investment opportunities; encourages the Advisory Hub to work more locally and to enhance its cooperation with National Promotional Banks;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for better coordination between EFSI and other EU funds, in particular the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs), so as to promote stronger cohesion in Europe and ensure that EFSI has wide geographical coverage, particularly in southern European countries such as Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain; calls, also, for closer cooperation with national promotional banks, local and regional authorities and relevant stakeholders, including further encouragement to establish investment platforms to aggregate sectorial and geographical investment opportunities;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for better coordination between EFSI and other EU funds, in particular the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs), so as to promote more effective spending of EU financing, stronger cohesion in Europe and ensure that EFSI has wide geographical coverage; calls, also, for closer cooperation with national promotional banks, local and regional authorities and relevant stakeholders, including further encouragement to establish investment platforms to aggregate sectorial and geographical investment opportunities;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Notes that Article 6(2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1017 stipulates that there should be no restriction on the size of projects eligible for EFSI support; in the meantime, finds that a disproportionately low number of projects of total investment under €100 million are approved under EFSI; therefore, calls for more targeted communication and advisory efforts in attracting also mid- range projects, which are in most cases more high-risk and innovation oriented and bring growth in the short and medium-term;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that, having been fully operational for less than a year, the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) has kicked off successfully, delivering
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses that profitability of projects cannot be counted simply by looking at the cash flows; stresses that, in addition to adjustments for lost income from alternative use of the resources (e.g. what would happen if the resources were never taken from the hands of the taxpayers), the investment risk calculation must be considered as well; believes that, since risk is what seems to be one the main reasons for the lack of private investments in the EU, its inclusion can throw many EFSI projects into red numbers;4a __________________ 4a The profitability of the investments approved by the EFSI should not be compared to the situation where no other investments are made by the private sector. Instead, the profitability of the EFSI should be compared to an alternative scenario in which the public sector eliminates the investment uncertainty it created and which caused the investment gap in the first place: deficit public spending; failure of the regulatory role of the banking system; and bureaucratic, regulatory and tax burden it forced on private investors. These are the key issues that have not yet been addressed.
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Underlines the need to increase the transparency of EFSI operations and to improve information about projects and their quality to citizens and potential beneficiaries; believes that all contracts signed between EIB and its clients, either public or private ones, need to be disclosed on a systematic basis, in order to prove the additionally of EFSI projects and demonstrate to the public that it is including strong environmental, social, fraud and integrity clauses in the contracts signed; points to the need to enhance the European Investment Project Portal (EIPP) and the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) in order to establish a link with the real economy, give visibility
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Underlines the need to increase the transparency of EFSI operations and to further improve information about projects and their
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Acknowledges that the most important effect of EFSI activities is shifting of resources as every euro the EFSI lends for the investments it supports is a euro that was taken from the hands of a private lender; stresses that, if a private entrepreneur makes an investment that EFSI is willing to support, he will not realize an investment that he could otherwise accomplish without the help from EFSI;5a __________________ 5aEvery investment inevitably carries a level of risk and therefore investing is a natural role for the private sector. When people invest their own capital, they carefully consider potential profits and losses of their investments as well as the credibility of the borrower. Risks (and thus both profits and losses) stay in private hands. If the EFSI applies high standards set by professional investors from the private sector, there will be no reason for its existence, as its role will already be fulfilled by the private sector. The very existence of the EFSI is therefore problematic: the EFSI uses public resources to incite investments that are too risky for private lenders to take, while the private sector and taxpayers bear the risks of failing EFSI investments.
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that EFSI is instrumental in completing and restructuring the Single Market; underlines, in this light, the importance of strengthening the third pillar of the ‘Investment Plan for Europe’, also in the context of the European Semester process, in order to make the EU regulatory environment more certain, homogeneous and favourable to investments by focusing especially on strategic objectives such as completion of the Single Market and the development of a well-functioning and innovation driven Digital Single Market, and on key actions that support these objectives;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that, having been fully operational for less than a year, the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) has kicked off successfully, delivering some initial concrete results and acting as a positive instrument to overcome the lack of investment in Europe through coordinated action; stresses, however, that the pace needs to be accelerated and its initial results need to improve significantly in the near future, particularly in those Member States in which the financing provided by EFSI was particularly low, in order for the instrument to achieve its objectives fully;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that EFSI is instrumental in completing and
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Stresses the need to support the EFSI with a view to the implementation of international-level projects that contribute to the development of SMEs and help increase their lifespan;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Underlines that the EFSI shifts the capital from the market-driven projects where they would be most effective to the projects driven by the EFSI bureaucrats where they are less effective; underlines that economy as a whole therefore loses;6a __________________ 6aThe EFSI is an entity that does not solve the causes of the investment gap, but rather shifts the risks that private lenders are not willing to take to all European taxpayers. The resources of the Public sector are solely those it has obtained in taxes from the Private sector. Every public euro used for the activities of the EFSI is therefore missed in the private sector, which makes the situation for the future of private investments even worse.
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Acknowledges that EFSI enables avoiding fiscal rules; stresses that national contributions to EFSI are considered one-off measures, respectively a "relevant factor" in terms of assessing the deficit; as a result, stresses that several countries struggling with fiscal problems including the ones with public debt exceeding 60% GDP cap rule or 3% GDP deficit rule pledged billions of euros in contributions on EFSI projects;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. In particular, considers essential to fill the gap of investments for the completion of a wide-spread, affordable and secure high-speed connectivity infrastructure, as a precondition for the full development of the Digital Single Market and for growth and cohesion in Europe; stresses the importance to overcome the still existing different level of infrastructures development among regions in Europe and between urban and rural areas;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Considers that reducing the investment gaps in terms of digital projects is a prerequisite for genuine enforcement of consumers' rights such as the access to content, the quality of service and costs;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 c (new) 6c. Points out the need to make funds available for the digital transformation in order to support the SMEs affected by the digital transition, foster new and innovative technological development, with closer cooperation between established companies and start-ups; underlines the importance to finance the establishment of technology centres in less-industrialized regions in order to reduce regional disparities, revitalize local economies by providing high-quality jobs and skill development support;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that, having been fully operational for less than a year, the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) has kicked off successfully, delivering some initial concrete results and acting as a positive instrument to overcome
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Welcomes the recent Commission proposal to extend EFSI beyond 2018 and
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Stresses the fact that the EFSI was created as an alternative means of financing investments with a major impact on the development of the internal market, but a year later on has not produced the expected results, with the less developed areas in the internal market being unable to capitalise on this fund; believes there is a need to review the criteria for the granting of EFSI funding in order to ensure greater uniformity of investment and reduce regional disparities.
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Recommends to reject the Commission proposal to extend the EFSI beyond 2018 and to stop providing any further loans from the EFSI.
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Underlines that the guiding principle of EFSI is to mobilise private, market-based investments on a fully demand-driven basis and therefore urges the Commission to explore the opportunities to use the EFSI guarantees to encourage participation of wider investment sources such as pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and social investments as co-financiers on key projects;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Reaffirms that a fully integrated, competitive and well functioning internal market, complemented by effective investment, is a prerequisite for the recovery of the European economy;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Strongly supports the ambition of the Commission to overcome the investment gap and strengthen the incentives in the private sector to invest in and boost the sustainable growth of the European economies; for this reason, however, firmly opposes the activities of the EFSI that undermine these goals and are not a solution but rather part of the problem;1a __________________ 1a As of July 2016, the EFSI approvals ensured 37% of its original goal of €315 billion in the new investments (289 approved transactions in total). Some say the existence of these investments is a success of its own, as they would not have existed without the fund. This statement is a mistake that indicates lack of economic understanding.
source: 589.111
2016/09/16
REGI
96 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs), and that a greater margin of flexibility must be provided in allocating funds from the Structural Funds for specific needs that are not covered by the present Structural Funds arrangements; underlines the importance of ensuring additionality of the EFSI with respect to other EIB initiatives and EU-
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs) and other EU programmes; underlines the importance of ensuring additionality of the EFSI with respect to other EIB initiatives and EU-
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Welcomes the approved by the EIB Board of Directors investment projects revealing a pool if higher risk operations that would not have been financed by financial institutions or Cohesion Policy operations; notes, however, that many of the operations cover ESIF intervention and eligibility criteria, especially with regards to the ERDF; calls for a higher risk profile of approved investment projects to bring more value to economy and to cover market niches which will otherwise remain major investment gaps;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Is concerned about the weak compliance with the principle of additionality which makes it difficult to determine whether EFSI projects help address market failure or suboptimal market situations and whether they would have been carried out also in the absence of EFSI; Urges the Commission and the EIB to step-up efforts and put in place mechanisms including a set of criteria that ensure the verification of additionality;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Notes that the available data do not currently make it possible to agree with the Commission’s entirely positive interim assessment of EFSI and its proposals for extending EFSI’s duration and scope;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Expresses surprise at anticipated EFSI leverage in terms of private investment, given that the figures are based on estimates and not guaranteed results;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Asks the Commission - in order to assess the usefulness of EFSI support already granted, the prospects for EFSI support in future and the possibility of extending EFSI - to submit a comprehensive analysis of the projects supported so far, including the SME pillar; calls for any discussion of extending the duration of EFSI to take place only after such an analysis is available;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Calls on the Commission in collaboration with the EIB to provide a full-scale data and information on the progress of the SME window, including utilisation of financial products by SMEs. Such efforts are particularly important for a true mid-term review and could reveal drawbacks such as burdensome requirements that lessen the investment potential locally;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments, which as of July 2016 totalled to 20.4 billion euros of EFSI financing that will trigger an expected 115.7 billion of euros in investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Considers that implementation of EFSI remains below the expectations in terms of achieving the leverage effect envisaged and contributing to overarching Union priorities and objectives;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 c (new) 1c. Takes the view that any extension of the duration or scope of EFSI should where appropriate be funded exclusively from additional EU budgetary resources and EIB resources, and from remittances by the Member States;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the publication of the Commission’s new guidelines of 22 of February 2016 on combining ESIFs and the EFSI; takes note, however, that the number of existing synergies between EFSI and ESIFs funds is still extremely low and calls on the Commission, the EIB, the national promotional banks and institutions (NPBI) and the managing authorities to accelerate the design and implementation of further synergies; emphasizes that the ESIFs are and must continue to be the key and essential EU investment policy aiming at developing all regions of the European Union with a special focus on the less developed ones in order to reduce gaps, and that synergies between the ESIFs and EFSI are extremely important to better serve the objectives of the ESIFs;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the publication of the Commission’s new guidelines of 22 of
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the publication of the Commission’s new guidelines of 22 of February 2016 on combining ESIFs and the EFSI; takes note, however, that the number of existing synergies between EFSI and ESIFs funds is still extremely low and calls on the Commission, the EIB, the national promotional banks and institutions (NPBI) and the managing authorities to accelerate the design and implementation of further synergies, especially harmonization of State aid and public procurement rules between ESIFs and EFSI would be beneficial in this regard;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the publication of the Commission’s new guidelines of 22 of February 2016 on combining ESIFs and the EFSI; takes note, however, that the number of existing synergies between EFSI and ESIFs funds is still extremely low and calls on the Commission, the EIB, the national authorities, the national promotional banks and institutions (NPBI) and the managing authorities to accelerate the design and implementation of further synergies;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the publication of the Commission’s new guidelines of 22 of February 2016 on combining ESIFs and the EFSI; takes note, however, that the number of existing synergies between EFSI and ESIFs funds is still extremely low and calls on the Commission, the EIB, the national promotional banks and institutions (NPBI), national governments and the managing authorities to accelerate the design and implementation of further synergies;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that Cohesion Policy is the main investment policy of the Union, aimed at reducing regional disparities and contributing to the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs); underlines the importance of ensuring additionality of the EFSI with respect to other EIB initiatives and EU-
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Is concerned about the Commission proposal requiring the highest risk-taking tranche of the investment to be covered by ESI Funds instead of EFSI when the instruments are combined; Believes that this leads to legal uncertainty in the use of ESI Funds, and runs counter to the initial EFSI rationale to provide for new risk-bearing capacity for EU investment;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Expresses concern at the limited role of Parliament in EFSI implementation and the lack of transparency regarding specific project selection criteria, as well as the amounts allocated in each case, many of which are ‘not disclosed’;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Observes that Commission guidelines and action on achieving synergies do not go in-depth; notes that so far existing ESI Funds-EFSI combinations are bottom-up demand- driven by local authorities and actors;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Invites the Commission to provide comprehensive guidance to managing authorities on combining EFSI with shared and direct management instruments under the ESI Funds; notes that special focus should be placed on diverging funding rules, procedures and state aid provisions where a unified EU- wide approach has to be proposed by DG REGIO; believes that pilot projects for combining EFSI with ERDF and Horizon 2020 should be encouraged by the Commission by contributing to the overall ESI Funds performance score for Member States towards the end of the programming period;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB, the Committee of the Regions, and the managing authorities should better cooperate to ensure that more integrated ESIF-EFSI projects are put forward to boost territorial development and cohesion policies; notes that projects in the circular economy could provide an example of integrated ESIF-EFSI projects since they promote the role of local and regional authorities in enabling a transition to a sustainable, resource efficient and competitive economy, while fitting in the investment profile of EFSI fundable projects;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB, the Committee of the Regions, and the managing authorities should better cooperate to ensure that more integrated ESIF-EFSI projects are put forward to boost territorial development and cohesion policies; at the same time there must be an increase in the financing of infrastructure and innovation projects in Member States such as Greece and in investments, which have been eroded by falling wages and pensions;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB, the Committee of the Regions, and the managing authorities should better cooperate to ensure that more integrated ESIF-EFSI projects are put forward to boost territorial development and cohesion policies; points out that, thanks to improved coordination of the EFSI and the European structural funds, ESIF could become an important tool for boosting investments;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments, but underlines that the current situation is well below expectations and that given that EFSI investments are very uneven across Member States a proper geographical balance should be ensured; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs); underlines the importance of ensuring additionality of the EFSI with respect to other EIB initiatives and EU- funded programs;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB, the Committee of the Regions, and the managing authorities should better cooperate to ensure that
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB, the Committee of the Regions, national governments and the managing authorities, including those at regional level, should better cooperate to ensure that more integrated ESIF-EFSI projects are put forward to boost territorial development and cohesion policies;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions, and the managing authorities should better cooperate to ensure that more integrated ESIF-EFSI projects are put forward to boost territorial development and cohesion policies;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB, the Committee of the Regions, and
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers that the Commission, the EIB, the Committee of the Regions, and the managing authorities should better cooperate to ensure that more integrated ESIF-EFSI projects are put forward to boost territorial development
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Points out that if different conditions are applied to individual programmes and instruments, for example if the viability of a project is checked but the validity of its implementation is not verified on the basis of programming documents, there is a risk that the source of funding selected will not be the best in terms of the implementation of development priorities in a given area, such as, for example, the funding of projects with market potential, which can result in support being provided for a project that is viable and has good financial parameters but should not be supported using public funds when other strategic priorities have been agreed on;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Welcomes the fact that EFSI is a demand-driven close-to-market instrument due to the focus on the private sector; Notes that geographically project operations indicate strong and weak regions in the EU - countries with many large projects and countries falling short of succeeding in the infrastructure and innovation window; Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, taking account of the different economic development of the regions and the territorial diversity of the Member States; highlights the importance of also developing cross-border projects that could deliver a high European added value;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, taking account of the different economic development of the regions and the territorial diversity of the Member States; highlights the importance of also developing cross-border projects that could deliver a high European added value; underlines the importance of the accession of the related documents in all the official languages of the European Union to simplify the administrative work and also ensuring the geographical balance of EFSI projects;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs); recognises the added value of the EFSI as an instrument designed to attract private capital and streamline investment in the public interest; underlines the importance of ensuring additionality of the EFSI with respect to other EIB initiatives and EU-
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, taking account of the different economic development of the regions and the territorial diversity of the Member States; highlights the importance of also developing cross-border projects that could deliver a high European added value; points out that the concentration of EFSI investments in more developed regions is partly responsible for the widening gap between regions;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, taking account of the different economic development of the regions and the territorial diversity of the Member States;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, taking account of the
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, taking account of the different economic development of the regions, the economic disparities between the Member States and the territorial diversity of the Member States; highlights the importance of also developing cross-border projects that could deliver a high European added value;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, taking account of the different economic
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, taking account of the different economic development of the regions and the territorial, economic and social diversity of the Member States; highlights the importance of also developing cross- border projects that could deliver a high European added value;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to ensure
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that it is essential to ensure a geographical balance of EFSI projects, taking account of the different economic development of the regions and the territorial diversity of the Member States; highlights the importance of also developing cross-border projects that could deliver a high European added value and cohesion;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. In order to accelerate the implementation of the EFSI projects and their synergies with ESI Funds, calls on the Commission and Member States to facilitate the use of alternative financing models like Public Private Partnerships, as well as to simplify the legislative framework of the state aid rules; calls on Member States to prepare pipelines of mature investment projects with the help of the Advisory Hub, structuring them in an optimal way to ensure the greater use of financial instruments and complementarities between ESIF and ESI Funds;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments; welcomes the alignment of political and economic agendas of both the European Commission and the European Parliament allowing fast start- up time; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs); underlines the importance of ensuring additionality of the EFSI with respect to other EIB initiatives and EU- funded programs;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls on the Commission and the EIB to invest efforts in enabling non- participating regions through investment in on-the-ground technical assistance to induce regionally balanced project operations; Believes that creation of local investment platforms - a meeting point for public funds and private financing - should be accelerated;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Regrets that the EFSI is being used to fund projects involving fossil fuel energy sources such as oil and gas, as well as road haulage, biomass and biogas power plants and heavy industry; calls for a major effort in the implementation of this instrument to promote domestic production and energy self-sufficiency;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Refers to experience drawn from Cohesion policy operations, showing that technical assistance to private and public beneficiaries is most needed at regional and local level; therefore, calls on the Commission and the EIB to involve financial intermediaries and umbrella organisations in a flexible and open way; believes that a rigorous communication campaign on EFSI investment projects should be undertaken in the weak performing EU regions;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that there is a need to develop the thematic concentration of EFSI projects related to cohesion policy and a need to apply the same project impact assessment principles to the implementation of political priorities in the context of the structural and investment funds and EFSI;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that there is a need to develop the thematic concentration of EFSI projects related to cohesion policy
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that there is a need to
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage, where necessary; stresses that the European
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Regrets that the regions were not appropriately involved in drawing up the project list of possible investments by the ‘Investments Taskforce’ set up in September 2014 by the Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB); Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage; stresses that the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) and the EFSI investment committee should use the expertise of regional authorities in order to promote integrated ESIF-EFSI projects; with a view to this, the EIAH should play an active role in enabling even more local and regional authorities to make the most of the EFSI;
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage; stresses that the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) and the EFSI investment committee should use the expertise of regional authorities in order to promote integrated ESIF-EFSI projects; with a view to this, the EIAH should play an active role in enabling even more local and regional authorities to make the most of the EFSI; calls for the necessary analyses to be carried out and for more precise guidelines on ESIF-EFSI coordination to be proposed;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage and with particular emphasis on Southern European countries such as Greece, Portugal, Italy and Spain; stresses that the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) and the EFSI investment committee should use the expertise of regional authorities in order to promote integrated ESIF-EFSI projects; with a view to this, the EIAH should play an active role in enabling even more local and regional authorities to make the most of the EFSI;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage; stresses that the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) and the EFSI investment committee should use the expertise of regional authorities in order to promote integrated ESIF-EFSI projects; with a view to this, the EIAH should play an active role in enabling even more local and regional authorities to make the most of the EFSI and ensure multi-level accountability and control;
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage, where necessary; stresses that the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) and the EFSI investment committee should use the expertise of regional and local authorities in order to promote integrated ESIF-EFSI projects; with a view to this, the EIAH should play an active role in enabling even more local and regional authorities to make the most
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage; stresses that the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) and the EFSI investment committee should use the expertise of regional and local authorities in order to promote integrated ESIF-EFSI projects; with a view to this, the EIAH should play an active role in enabling even more local and regional authorities to make the most of the EFSI;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that the selection of EFSI financing operations and the managing of projects should be more transparent, accountable, based on defined criteria and involve local and regional stakeholders at an early stage; stresses that the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) and the
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Acknowledges the initial results of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) to mobilise private investments; recalls that the EFSI must also contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion and that efforts are needed to enhance synergies and complementarity between the EFSI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs);
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Stresses the need of developing broader communication campaign and awareness raising combining the potential of the European Investment Project Portal with combination of other communicating tools and wider communicating platform with view to increase the visibility of projects to invest;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Expresses concern also at the proliferation of high-risk financial instruments for SMEs that are supported by the EFSI through banks or investment funds;
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the need to strengthen the national and regional platform to support the coordination and synergies between EU funds; calls, at the same time, for administrative instruments to be brought in at Member State level so that projects submitted for funding can be directed to the appropriate instruments depending on the nature of the project;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the need to strengthen the national and regional platform to support the coordination and synergies between EU funds and avoid duplication;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the need to strengthen the national and regional platform to support the coordination and synergies
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the need to strengthen the national
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Requests the Commission to avoid double targeting, whereby EFSI funding is targeted at projects which can equally well be financed by ESI Funds; calls, in light of the importance of additionality and complementarity, for better visibility of and communication on the ESI Funds instead of the current, somewhat one- sided highlighting of the EFSI by the Commission;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Stresses the need for more specialised investment information campaigns, so as to heighten awareness and step up funding possibilities, with a view to giving the EFSI wide geographical coverage;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 Amendment 89 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Requests that
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that Parliament
Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that Parliament must play a fundamental role in
Amendment 95 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that Parliament must play a
source: 589.290
2016/10/19
INTA
34 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI),
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls on the Commission and the European Investment Bank to display the utmost transparency in managing the fund and to disclose the sources of the various contributions, both public and private;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls on the Commission to inform it whether other foreign investors have expressed an interest in contributing to the EFSI and, if they have, to provide it with figures and specific examples of projects;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Considers it imperative that the EU diversify its funding sources as far as possible and attract private investment first and foremost;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that only 13% of SMEs operate outside the EU; takes the view that the EFSI should give priority to the internationalisation of SMEs and strengthen the role of the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) by giving it an export aid mission; calls on the Commission to improve the information it gives SMEs on existing EU-level funding opportunities in connection with international development assistance; considers that SMEs must be able to have access to a regular partner for these questions, e.g. a network of contact points in Member States;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that only 13% of SMEs trade outside the EU; takes the view that the EFSI should give priority to the internationalisation of SMEs through supporting projects for producing companies with export activities and strengthen the role of the European Investment Advisory Hub (EIAH) by giving it an export aid mission; strongly believes that an increased complementarity between the different pillars of the "Investment Plan for Europe" (IPE) would have major benefit and call for actions in this regard;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that SMEs are Europe’s economic powerhouse, but that only 13% of
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that only 13% of SMEs trade outside the EU; takes the view that the EFSI should give priority to
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes with interest the proposal Commission President Juncker made during his 2016 State of the Union address to give the EFSI an external element in order to mobilise between EUR 44 and 88 billion in investments in Africa and the Neighbourhood; stresses that these investments should not take the place of existing investments, must comply with the additionally principle in respect to projects that are already being financed
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), which is used to finance
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes with interest the proposal
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls on the Commission to develop an external component for the EFSI to make it possible to carry out projects involving a Member State and a southern or eastern EU Neighbourhood country; takes the view that those projects should relate to strategic areas such as education, innovation, youth, research, promotion of renewables, energy efficiency, and energy and transport infrastructure development;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Strongly believes that a single coherent framework for investment support is needed and the link between internal (EFSI) and external (EIP) action as to be strengthened by the EU and its Member States through identifying appropriate synergies between own commercial interest, development cooperation objectives and related public instruments to engage the private sector;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Points out that the main objective of the future external investment plan should be to produce tangible outcomes for local populations, in particular by helping to create good jobs at local level;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Insists, in connection with the external investment plan, that no project investor or promoter can be dependent on a person or company operating in a country included on the prospective European list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Takes the view that tools of that kind should be compatible with the principles and objectives of EU external action as set out under Article 21 TEU and Article 208 TFEU, and that compliance with those principles should be
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Takes the view that tools of that kind should be compatible with the principles and objectives of EU external action as set out under Article 21 TEU and Article 208 TFEU, and that compliance with those principles should be one of the most important criteria in the assessment of the efficiency of the EFSI in reports on its implementation; stresses that the future exterior EFSI should tackle the underlying causes of migration and help achieve the UN sustainable development goals (SDG).
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), which is used to finance risky and innovative projects, can be used as a tool to boost EU growth and promote the development of strong, sustainable and competitive industry, provided that effective trade defence instruments are also deployed at the same time;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Takes the view that tools of that kind
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Points out that investment mobilised under the EIP must help realise the objectives of the Paris climate agreement, e.g. by funding renewable- energy infrastructure and technology projects;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Highlights the provisions of EFSI regulation foreseeing a regular report of the EIB and the Commission to the European Parliament on the progress of the Investment Plan and on the details of EFSI projects.
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Suggests that the EIP help fund microcredit activities for the most vulnerable groups;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Highlights the major potential role of European External Action Service delegations in establishing contacts between investors and countries that are project beneficiary countries; calls for Parliament to be closely involved in monitoring implementation of the external investment plan on the basis of regular Commission progress reports;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), which is used to finance risky and innovative projects,
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), which is used to finance risky and innovative projects, can be used as a tool to boost EU growth and employment and promote the development of strong, sustainable and competitive industry;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Recalls that China is planning to contribute to the EFSI and that the Commission has said that China will not be given any quid pro quo, in particular as concerns governance; expects that transparency rules and the social and environmental criteria for investments applicable to EIB projects are fully upheld in EFSI project financing decisions;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Recalls that China is planning to contribute to the EFSI and that the Commission has said that it will not be given any quid pro quo, in particular as concerns governance; stresses that a contribution by China to the EFSI must not be linked or made subject to the question of granting market economy status;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Recalls that China is planning to contribute to the EFSI
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 source: 592.258
2016/12/07
EMPL
104 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be to create growth and a dynamic labour market in Europe, and hence to enhance the well-being of EU citizens; maintains that the EFSI should focus on launching potential economically successful long- term projects as this will be the most effective way to create jobs in the long run;
Amendment 100 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Welcomes the European Commission's proposal in the second phase of EFSI, to increase the transparency of how projects are selected by requiring the EFSI Investment Committee to explain its decisions and give reasons for granting support, as well as to have the Scoreboard for the EFSI projects made public as soon as projects are signed and with the exclusion of commercially sensitive information; notes that indicators such as job creation and skills development are key.
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Welcomes that the Commission will, in close cooperation with the EIB, further strengthen the communication on the EFSI and the Hub in order to raise awareness of the availability of funding and technical assistance across the Union; suggests that information on funding solutions, technical assistance and procedures, including through good practices examples and case studies, can stimulate new ideas and boost investment initiatives;
Amendment 102 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Stresses the need to ensure compliance of EFSI projects with the EU charter of fundamental rights, including the right to fair and just working conditions; highlights, in particular, the need to ensure respect for information and consultation rights of workers in insolvency proceedings, as exemplified in the recent case of Abengoa;
Amendment 103 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls on the Commission to review the principle of austerity which continues to prevail throughout the process of the European Semester; considers that allowing Member States more room for manoeuvre in their budgetary decisions would be the only way of establishing a genuine economic and social recovery policy in Europe;
Amendment 104 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. As recalled by the European Parliament resolution of 28 April 2016 on the EIB - annual report 2014 there is a need for the EFSI to function in an effective, fully transparent and fair way, in that sense insists in the need to achieve the highest levels of transparency and institutional accountability by ensuring the disclosure of exhaustive and sound budgetary information and access to financial data related to projects funded by the EIB;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Notes that EFSI has started functioning successfully, already delivering concrete results in some Member States and therefore, acting as a positive instrument to overcome the lack of investment and to fight unemployment in Europe through coordinated action;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Believes that EFSI could be an important step in demonstrating the effectiveness of making more innovative use of the EU budget, leveraging the EU budget to boost investment in the real economy; emphasises that it is too early to draw conclusions about its general effectiveness according to the ECA;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Recalls that according to recital 13 of the EFSI regulation, EFSI should seek to contribute to strengthening the Union's economic, social and territorial cohesion; in that sense, calls on the Commission to provide guidance to avoid EFSI' aggregated portfolio concentration in the EU15 (92%) as mentioned in the operations evaluation of the European Investment Bank; recalls that the introduction of quotas - regional and sectorial - is not an objective, but the fact that the EFSI is being concentrated in countries where the market gap on investment is less evident, leads to the conclusion that not enough attention is paid to really addressing market failures and labour market constraints; highlights also that 46% of the EFSI financing is allocated to the energy sector and 19% to the transport sector; stresses that there is a need to assess if these concentrations are really enhancing or hampering the fight against the big pockets of unemployment; stresses the need to develop more information campaigns about the EFSI, which would allow to increase private investment and thus avoid this regional and sectorial concentration;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Is deeply concerned by the fact that the majority of EFSI investments are concentrated in the EU top five economies thus creating further divergences; Regrets that there are still a number of Member States where no single EFSI project has been signed or approved;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Recalls that most of the projects financed by the EFSI could have been launched with the support only of the EIB;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Recognises the importance of the extension of the lifetime of the EFSI beyond 2020 and of the necessary increase in the EU budget guarantee but regrets that any comprehensive impact assessment has been made, so the Commission has little evidence that the proposed increase is justified;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 c (new) 1c. Reinforces the additionality of the projects supported under EFSI to enhance the geographical coverage and reinforces the take-up especially in areas with high level of unemployment in order to have a strong impact in the employment figures; highlights the need to develop further the investment in cross-border projects;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 d (new) 1d. Highlights that investment situation in Europe is slowly improving but the pace is still timid and can be reversible; investment levels are still below the pre-crisis level and the investment gap remains wide; in that sense EFSI must be oriented to any kind of projects that lead to job creation and sustainable growth and development;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 e (new) 1e. Highlights that initial results reveal that Member States with greater technical and administrative capacity, as well as financial institutions, are taking greater advantage of the EFSI; underlines that a greater role must be played by the EIB and the Commission in supporting those lagging behind through greater technical assistance and enhancing the capacity of some countries in taking advantage of the EFSI; notes that approximately 63% of total EFSI financing within the Innovation and Infrastructure Window was granted to three Member States, while the EFSI strategy foresees a maximum geographical concentration of 45%; notes that the situation is less problematic when it comes to the SME Window, but even here, only three Member States account for 54% of total EFSI financing;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be t
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to help cooperatives, SMEs and micro-
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to help SMEs
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to help SMEs and micro- enterprises
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to help SMEs and micro- enterprises contribute to achieving the EU 2020 targets through respecting the principles of quality jobs, social inclusion and environmental sustainability to tap into funding more easily, so as to increase their capacity to implement projects and afford them better access to advisory services and technical
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to help SMEs and micro- enterprises to tap into funding more easily, so as to increase their capacity to implement projects and afford them better access to advisory services and technical support; notes that the SME funding seems to be the most successful part of EFSI financing; notes that the success of the SME window is due to frontloading other EU SME initiatives but that there is an argument to increase this window if quality requirements are maintained;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to help SMEs and micro- enterprises to tap into funding more easily, so as to increase their capacity to implement projects and afford them better access to advisory services and technical
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to help SMEs and micro- enterprises to tap into funding more easily, so as to increase their capacity to implement projects and afford them better access to advisory services and technical support; recommends that SMEs and micro-enterprises should be given access to information on the funding that is available;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls on the Commission and the EIB to continue their local/national campaigns to help explain and promote the benefits of Investment Plan across the Union; welcomes the opening of new offices by the EIB in the Member States to provide more support and also enhance cooperation with National Promotional Banks contributing to generate more projects in areas of high level of unemployment that have been less covered so far;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be to create growth and
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls on the European Commission and the EIB Group to increase their efforts and enhance the social and employment impact of the European Fund for Strategic Investments, whilst maintaining the aim of EFSI to help overcome the current investment gap in the EU by mobilising private financing for strategic investments;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Recalls that the methods of financing of projects established by the EFSI are extraordinarily complex and involve too much red tape for them to be readily accessible for SMEs;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Notes that only 4% of the EFSI financing has gone to social infrastructure projects; calls on the Commission, the EIB Group, and the Member States to step up their efforts, build capacity, raise awareness, develop an appropriate ecosystem and increase the attraction of investment into social services such as education, training, healthcare and housing;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Welcomes the EaSI Guarantee enhancement under the SME Window of EFSI, as well as the development of the EFSI Equity instrument focused on ensuring adequate contribution to the market development in the areas such as social impact; calls for an ongoing commitment to the development of social entrepreneurship and social and solidarity economy to further broaden social, cultural, and environmental goals in areas such as poverty alleviation, healthcare and community development;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls on the Member States
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls on the Member States to develop national platforms using the EFSI to
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls on the Member States to develop national and regional platforms using the EFSI to invest in high-quality social, care and health services
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls on the Member States to develop national platforms using the EFSI to invest in high
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Warns the Commission about the development of public-private partnerships, which have the effect of discouraging States from pursuing social welfare policies; observes that there is a danger that the programmed end of the welfare state in the interests of viability will harm the quality of public services and significantly reduce the number of people working in the sector;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Recalls that the strong interest and participation in EFSI projects by intermediary banks across the EU in order to provide finance to SMEs was extremely successful;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be to
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Calls on the Commission to work with the EFSI Steering Board to use all the existing possibilities to reinforce this access to finance for SMEs in order to increase in the overall volume of actions for these instruments;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for the EFSI to operate in closer conjunction with
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for the EFSI to operate in closer conjunction with the
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for the EFSI to operate in closer conjunction with the Structural
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for the EFSI to operate in closer conjunction with the Structural Funds, in order, in so far as possible, to avoid double financing and with the aim of ensuring optimal and effective financing, thanks also to better knowledge of the European Funds in general;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for the EFSI to operate in closer conjunction, and in a more complementary manner, with the existing Structural Funds, in order to ensure that the EFSI does fund future projects;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be to create
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses that blackmail to compel reform is resolutely being introduced by means of the Investment Plan, as the release of funds depends on the degree of acceptance of the reforms recommended to Member States under the European Semester;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to engage more actively in consultation
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to engage
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to engage more actively in consultation at local level, especially
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to engage more actively in consultation
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to engage more actively in consultation at local level, especially in cooperation with national
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission and the EIB Group to engage more actively in consultation at local level, especially in cooperation with national investment banks, and not only; believes that the EFSI should
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to engage more actively in consultation at local level, especially in cooperation with national investment banks; believes that the EFSI should focus in particular on business startup projects
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to engage more actively in consultation at local level, especially in cooperation with national investment banks; believes that the EFSI should focus in particular on business
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to engage more actively in consultation at local level, especially in cooperation with national investment banks; believes that the EFSI should focus in particular on business startup projects and projects to reduce unemployment; believes furthermore that the EFSI should focus on projects which have the potential to create jobs;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be to create innovation-led, sustainable and inclusive growth and a dynamic labour market in Europe, and hence to enhance the well-being of EU citizens;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Welcomes the European Commission's proposals for a second phase of the European Fund for Strategic investments EFSI, with regards to the technical improvement of the European Investment Advisory Hub; insists that a European Investment Advisory Hub that would act more locally and enhance its cooperation with National Promotional Banks to provide customized technical assistance according to local needs and build capacity, would lead to a better geographical coverage of EFSI and could also potentially increase the number of social projects;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Recalls that investment primarily benefits businesses which have a good knowledge of the opportunities afforded by the EFSI, as well as particularly benefiting the countries which are the best informed about these measures, so that many Member States in Eastern Europe which need such investment are also those that apply for it least;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Believes that the EFSI should be used primarily to fund businesses that have adopted a code of practice on safeguarding the dignity of workers and protecting the environment;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission and the E
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission and the E
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission and the E
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission and the ECB to increase investment in projects in regions with high unemployment and poverty rates, such as the outermost regions, which are particularly handicapped by underinvestment
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission and the ECB to increase investment in projects aiming at social inclusion and enhancing environmental sustainability in the outermost regions, which are particularly
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission and the ECB to support member States in increas
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be to mobilize investments in order to create growth and a dynamic labour market in Europe, and hence to enhance the well- being of EU citizens;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission and the ECB to increase investment in projects in the most remote and outermost regions, which are particularly handicapped by underinvestment in job opportunities, resulting in unemployment, exclusion, and emigration;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission to step up the EFSI communication campaign and to increase awareness of EFSI by preparing information for SMEs to explain, in a simple and intelligible manner using specific examples, how they can obtain financing and the types of projects that are financed by EFSI;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Recalls that the EFSI remains without an assessment and analysis of the causes of the investment gap and the market needs and how to best address them; in that sense, calls on the Commission to provide this assessment;
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Recalls that wealth creation rather than job creation remains the prime motive for all investors, both private and institutional, which effectively penalises regions where growth is poor;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Highlights that special attention should be paid to projects in Member States and regions suffering most from the crisis in order to reduce divergences in particular in relation to unemployment and employment levels;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Notes the assessment in the context of the EFSI independent evaluation of why there are less applications for the European Fund for Strategic Investments from some countries, such as from the CEE region; calls upon the Commission and the EIB Group to enhance their promotion and technical support in the Member States that have had a low number of approved projects;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it disappointing that the Commission
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it disappointing that the Commission’s assessment of the EFSI has failed to record the number of jobs created to date under the Fund, which is nearly 100 000 jobs in one year;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that while the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) should be to create growth and a dynamic labour market in Europe, and hence to enhance the well-being of EU citizens it should also contribute to greater territorial, social and economic cohesion among Member States and regions;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it disappointing that the Commission’s assessment of the EFSI has failed to record the number of jobs created to date under the Fund and calls for further measures for recording the results achieved through the Funds across sectors and countries;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it disappointing that the Commission’s assessment of the EFSI has failed to record the number of jobs created to date under the Fund and where attempts to obtain EFSI financing have been low;
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it disappointing that the Commission’s assessment of the EFSI has failed to record the number of jobs created to date under the Fund; calls on the Commission to present such an analysis, with particular emphasis on SMEs;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it disappointing that the Commission’s assessment of the EFSI has failed to record the number of jobs created to date under the Fund and calls on the Commission to put employment targets in place and to ensure that the EFSI's contribution to growth and jobs is adequately measured and monitored;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it disappointing that the
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it disappointing that the Commission
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers it disappointing that the Commission’s assessment of the EFSI has failed to record the number of jobs created to date under the Fund; notes, in this respect, the recent ECA opinion 2/2016 and the concerns that EFSI may not be providing additional funding by addressing market failures or sub-optimal investment situations, but simply substituting for other EIB activities; reiterates that any EFSI project must provide evidence of additionality and that all EU budget lines affected by its creation must be restated to their original quantities, so as to maximize the combined effects of public spending and public credit instruments;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Recalls the importance that new figures and updates are released regularly, including independent assessments, drawing on the experience collected so far; regrets that in terms of the objectives relating to growth and jobs, no targets have been set for EFSI; Calls on the monitoring of indicators relating to growth and jobs, as these are the ultimate objectives of the investments;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Welcomes the existence of Growth and Employment reports for the instruments deployed under the EFSI SME Window (SMEW) and of Social Impact reporting under the EaSI Guarantee financial instrument and EFSI SMEW social impact pilot instruments and encourages that such reporting continues to be used;
Amendment 89 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Recalls that job creation is a variable that is impossible to apprehend at the stage when such a plan is being launched, and does not constitute the Commission’s priority objective;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that the main aim of projects financed under the European Fund
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Considers that cross-border infrastructure projects are key for the fulfilment of the Single Market, as well as for enhancing employment opportunities; calls for the European Commission and the European Investment Advisory Hub to focus on providing technical support and building capacity so as to boost the number of such projects and increase their quality and impact;
Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to lay down more clear-cut national investment priorities and to draw up projects
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to lay down more clear-cut investment priorities including as regards job-creation and social investment and to draw up projects in collaboration with the European Investment Advisory Hub
Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the
Amendment 95 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to lay down
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to lay down more clear-cut investment priorities and to draw up projects in collaboration with the European Investment Advisory Hub; calls on the Commission to
Amendment 97 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to lay down more clear-cut investment priorities and to draw up projects in collaboration with the European Investment Advisory Hub; the EIB should ensure a proper feedback loop of information with the European Commission regarding eventual regulatory barriers which may be preventing good projects of taking place at the different levels; calls on the Commission to work in closer cooperation with Member States in the European Semester process in order to help them begin as soon as possible to implement the recommendations, in particular by carrying out economic and social reforms, thus removing national barriers to investment; these reforms identified in the country- specific recommendations are an important condition to sustain and increase investment levels in Member States, taking into account national specificities.
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to lay down more clear-cut investment priorities and to draw up projects in collaboration with the European Investment Advisory Hub and local stakeholders which should be provided with the right to veto investments that are not in compliance with the EU 2020 targets and the criteria outlined in Art. 5 of the EFSI Regulation; calls on the Commission to work in closer cooperation with Member States in the European Semester process in order to help them begin as soon as possible to implement the recommendations, in particular by carrying out economic and social reforms, thus removing national barriers to investment.
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to lay down more clear-cut investment priorities and to draw up projects in collaboration with the European Investment Advisory Hub; calls on the Commission to work in closer cooperation with Member States in the European Semester process in order to help them begin as soon as possible to implement the recommendations, in particular by carrying out economic and
source: 587.669
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
docs/0/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE584.238&secondRef=02
|
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE587.416&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/REGI-AD-587416_EN.html |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE589.274&secondRef=03
|
docs/3/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE597.724
|
docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE585.729&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EMPL-AD-585729_EN.html |
docs/5 |
|
docs/5 |
|
docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE594.092&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TRAN-AD-594092_EN.html |
docs/6 |
|
docs/6 |
|
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE595.719&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CULT-AD-595719_EN.html |
docs/7 |
|
docs/7 |
|
docs/7/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE599.549&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ITRE-AD-599549_EN.html |
docs/8 |
|
docs/8 |
|
docs/9 |
|
docs/10 |
|
docs/10/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE599.570&secondRef=02
|
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/3/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/4 |
|
events/4 |
|
events/5/docs |
|
events/7 |
|
events/7 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/6 |
|
committees/6 |
|
committees/7 |
|
committees/7 |
|
committees/8 |
|
committees/8 |
|
committees/9 |
|
committees/9 |
|
docs/11/body |
EC
|
events/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2017-0200&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2017-0200_EN.html |
events/7/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2017-0270New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2017-0270_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/6 |
|
committees/6 |
|
committees/7 |
|
committees/7 |
|
committees/8 |
|
committees/8 |
|
committees/9 |
|
committees/9 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
CJ16/8/06315New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/legal_basis/1 |
Rules of Procedure EP 58
|
procedure/legal_basis/1 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 055
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
procedure/subtype |
Old
ImplementationNew
|
procedure/summary |
|
activities/3/docs |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Debate scheduledNew
Debate in Parliament |
activities/4/docs |
|
activities/4/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading |
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
activities/2/docs/0/text |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Debate in plenary scheduledNew
Debate scheduled |
activities/2/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2017-0200&language=EN
|
activities/2/docs |
|
activities/3 |
|
activities/4/date |
Old
2017-06-12T00:00:00New
2017-06-15T00:00:00 |
activities/4/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in plenary scheduled |
activities/2 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
activities/1/committees |
|
activities/1/type |
Old
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading |
activities/2/date |
Old
2017-05-16T00:00:00New
2017-06-12T00:00:00 |
activities/2/type |
Old
Debate in plenary scheduledNew
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading |
activities/1/date |
Old
2017-05-10T00:00:00New
2017-05-15T00:00:00 |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/1/mepref |
Old
53b2e068b819f205b000013eNew
4f1ac82bb819f25efd0000cf |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/1/name |
Old
TANG PaulNew
GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/3/mepref |
Old
55495f5ed1d1c51cbe000000New
5445a7ded1d1c50c58000000 |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/3/name |
Old
RUOHONEN-LERNER PirkkoNew
LOONES Sander |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
53b2d725b819f205b0000012New
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/5/name |
Old
ARTHUIS JeanNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/6/group |
Old
ENFNew
GUE/NGL |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/6/mepref |
Old
53b2ddecb819f205b00000d7New
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004a |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/6/name |
Old
MONTEL SophieNew
DE MASI Fabio |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/10 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/12/mepref |
Old
53b2d71ab819f205b000000cNew
53b2dbc9b819f205b0000096 |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/12/name |
Old
ANNEMANS GerolfNew
KAPPEL Barbara |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/1/mepref |
Old
53b2e068b819f205b000013eNew
4f1ac82bb819f25efd0000cf |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/1/name |
Old
TANG PaulNew
GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/3/mepref |
Old
55495f5ed1d1c51cbe000000New
5445a7ded1d1c50c58000000 |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/3/name |
Old
RUOHONEN-LERNER PirkkoNew
LOONES Sander |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
53b2d725b819f205b0000012New
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/5/name |
Old
ARTHUIS JeanNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/6/group |
Old
ENFNew
GUE/NGL |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/6/mepref |
Old
53b2ddecb819f205b00000d7New
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004a |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/6/name |
Old
MONTEL SophieNew
DE MASI Fabio |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/10 |
|
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/12/mepref |
Old
53b2d71ab819f205b000000cNew
53b2dbc9b819f205b0000096 |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/12/name |
Old
ANNEMANS GerolfNew
KAPPEL Barbara |
committees/0/shadows/1/mepref |
Old
53b2e068b819f205b000013eNew
4f1ac82bb819f25efd0000cf |
committees/0/shadows/1/name |
Old
TANG PaulNew
GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider |
committees/0/shadows/3/mepref |
Old
55495f5ed1d1c51cbe000000New
5445a7ded1d1c50c58000000 |
committees/0/shadows/3/name |
Old
RUOHONEN-LERNER PirkkoNew
LOONES Sander |
committees/0/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
53b2d725b819f205b0000012New
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
committees/0/shadows/5/name |
Old
ARTHUIS JeanNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
committees/0/shadows/6/group |
Old
ENFNew
GUE/NGL |
committees/0/shadows/6/mepref |
Old
53b2ddecb819f205b00000d7New
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004a |
committees/0/shadows/6/name |
Old
MONTEL SophieNew
DE MASI Fabio |
committees/0/shadows/10 |
|
committees/0/shadows/12/mepref |
Old
53b2d71ab819f205b000000cNew
53b2dbc9b819f205b0000096 |
committees/0/shadows/12/name |
Old
ANNEMANS GerolfNew
KAPPEL Barbara |
committees/3/shadows/1/mepref |
Old
53b2e068b819f205b000013eNew
4f1ac82bb819f25efd0000cf |
committees/3/shadows/1/name |
Old
TANG PaulNew
GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider |
committees/3/shadows/3/mepref |
Old
55495f5ed1d1c51cbe000000New
5445a7ded1d1c50c58000000 |
committees/3/shadows/3/name |
Old
RUOHONEN-LERNER PirkkoNew
LOONES Sander |
committees/3/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
53b2d725b819f205b0000012New
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
committees/3/shadows/5/name |
Old
ARTHUIS JeanNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
committees/3/shadows/6/group |
Old
ENFNew
GUE/NGL |
committees/3/shadows/6/mepref |
Old
53b2ddecb819f205b00000d7New
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004a |
committees/3/shadows/6/name |
Old
MONTEL SophieNew
DE MASI Fabio |
committees/3/shadows/10 |
|
committees/3/shadows/12/mepref |
Old
53b2d71ab819f205b000000cNew
53b2dbc9b819f205b0000096 |
committees/3/shadows/12/name |
Old
ANNEMANS GerolfNew
KAPPEL Barbara |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/7 |
|
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/7 |
|
committees/0/shadows/7 |
|
committees/3/shadows/7 |
|
activities/1/date |
Old
2017-04-24T00:00:00New
2017-05-10T00:00:00 |
activities/2/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in plenary scheduled |
activities/2 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/7 |
|
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/7 |
|
committees/0/shadows/7 |
|
committees/3/shadows/7 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/0/mepref |
Old
53b2de09b819f205b00000deNew
4f1ac975b819f25efd000139 |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/0/name |
Old
MUREŞAN SiegfriedNew
KARAS Othmar |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/0/mepref |
Old
53b2de09b819f205b00000deNew
4f1ac975b819f25efd000139 |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/0/name |
Old
MUREŞAN SiegfriedNew
KARAS Othmar |
committees/0/shadows/0/mepref |
Old
53b2de09b819f205b00000deNew
4f1ac975b819f25efd000139 |
committees/0/shadows/0/name |
Old
MUREŞAN SiegfriedNew
KARAS Othmar |
committees/3/shadows/0/mepref |
Old
53b2de09b819f205b00000deNew
4f1ac975b819f25efd000139 |
committees/3/shadows/0/name |
Old
MUREŞAN SiegfriedNew
KARAS Othmar |
activities/1 |
|
activities/0/committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4f1adbe7b819f207b30000eeNew
4f1adbcab819f207b30000e5 |
activities/0/committees/1/rapporteur/0/name |
Old
THEURER MichaelNew
TAKKULA Hannu |
committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4f1adbe7b819f207b30000eeNew
4f1adbcab819f207b30000e5 |
committees/1/rapporteur/0/name |
Old
THEURER MichaelNew
TAKKULA Hannu |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fbNew
53b2d725b819f205b0000012 |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/4/name |
Old
TREMOSA I BALCELLS RamonNew
ARTHUIS Jean |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/5/group |
Old
Verts/ALENew
ALDE |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
53b2dd56b819f205b00000bfNew
4ff717aeb819f245c4000000 |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/5/name |
Old
MARAGALL ErnestNew
TORVALDS Nils |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/7/mepref |
Old
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004aNew
53ba82cab819f24b330001b7 |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/7/name |
Old
DE MASI FabioNew
VIEGAS Miguel |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/12/group |
Old
EFDNew
ENF |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fbNew
53b2d725b819f205b0000012 |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/4/name |
Old
TREMOSA I BALCELLS RamonNew
ARTHUIS Jean |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/5/group |
Old
Verts/ALENew
ALDE |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
53b2dd56b819f205b00000bfNew
4ff717aeb819f245c4000000 |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/5/name |
Old
MARAGALL ErnestNew
TORVALDS Nils |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/7/mepref |
Old
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004aNew
53ba82cab819f24b330001b7 |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/7/name |
Old
DE MASI FabioNew
VIEGAS Miguel |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/12/group |
Old
EFDNew
ENF |
committees/0/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fbNew
53b2d725b819f205b0000012 |
committees/0/shadows/4/name |
Old
TREMOSA I BALCELLS RamonNew
ARTHUIS Jean |
committees/0/shadows/5/group |
Old
Verts/ALENew
ALDE |
committees/0/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
53b2dd56b819f205b00000bfNew
4ff717aeb819f245c4000000 |
committees/0/shadows/5/name |
Old
MARAGALL ErnestNew
TORVALDS Nils |
committees/0/shadows/7/mepref |
Old
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004aNew
53ba82cab819f24b330001b7 |
committees/0/shadows/7/name |
Old
DE MASI FabioNew
VIEGAS Miguel |
committees/0/shadows/12/group |
Old
EFDNew
ENF |
committees/3/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fbNew
53b2d725b819f205b0000012 |
committees/3/shadows/4/name |
Old
TREMOSA I BALCELLS RamonNew
ARTHUIS Jean |
committees/3/shadows/5/group |
Old
Verts/ALENew
ALDE |
committees/3/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
53b2dd56b819f205b00000bfNew
4ff717aeb819f245c4000000 |
committees/3/shadows/5/name |
Old
MARAGALL ErnestNew
TORVALDS Nils |
committees/3/shadows/7/mepref |
Old
53b2d8e0b819f205b000004aNew
53ba82cab819f24b330001b7 |
committees/3/shadows/7/name |
Old
DE MASI FabioNew
VIEGAS Miguel |
committees/3/shadows/12/group |
Old
EFDNew
ENF |
other/0/dg/url |
Old
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/economy_finance/index_en.htmNew
http://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/economic-and-financial-affairs_en |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
53b2d725b819f205b0000012New
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/4/name |
Old
ARTHUIS JeanNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
53b2d725b819f205b0000012New
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/4/name |
Old
ARTHUIS JeanNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
activities/0/committees/3/shadows/5 |
|
committees/0/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
53b2d725b819f205b0000012New
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
committees/0/shadows/4/name |
Old
ARTHUIS JeanNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
committees/3/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
53b2d725b819f205b0000012New
4f1adc0db819f207b30000fb |
committees/3/shadows/4/name |
Old
ARTHUIS JeanNew
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon |
committees/3/shadows/5 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/date |
|
activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/3/date |
|
activities/0/committees/3/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/date |
|
committees/0/rapporteur |
|
committees/3/date |
|
committees/3/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows |
|
activities/0/committees/3/shadows |
|
committees/0/shadows |
|
committees/3/shadows |
|
activities/0/committees/7/date |
2016-05-24T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/7/rapporteur |
|
committees/7/date |
2016-05-24T00:00:00
|
committees/7/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/6/date |
2016-05-23T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/6/rapporteur |
|
committees/6/date |
2016-05-23T00:00:00
|
committees/6/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/9/date |
|
activities/0/committees/9/rapporteur |
|
committees/9/date |
|
committees/9/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/4/date |
2016-05-19T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/4/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/8/date |
2016-03-17T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/8/rapporteur |
|
committees/4/date |
2016-05-19T00:00:00
|
committees/4/rapporteur |
|
committees/8/date |
2016-03-17T00:00:00
|
committees/8/rapporteur |
|
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|