Fullständigt förhandlingsreferat

Onsdagen den 13 september 2017 - Strasbourg

18. Europeiska riskkapitalfonder och europeiska fonder för socialt företagande (debatt)

  El Presidente. – El punto siguiente en el orden del día es el debate sobre el informe de Sirpa Pietikäinen, en nombre de la Comisión de Asuntos Económicos y Monetarios, sobre la propuesta de Reglamento del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo por el que se modifica el Reglamento (UE) n.º 345/2013, sobre los fondos de capital riesgo europeos, y el Reglamento (UE) n.º 346/2013, sobre los fondos de emprendimiento social europeos (COM(2016)0461 - C8-0320/2016 - 2016/0221(COD)) (A8-0120/2017).

  Sirpa Pietikäinen, esittelijä. – Arvoisa puhemies, eurooppalainen talous on äärimmäisen riippuvainen perinteisestä pankkirahoituksesta. Tämä ongelma nousee esille erityisesti pk-yritysten rahoitustarpeessa, joka on edelleen suurimpia kapeikkoja ja kompastuskiviä. Erityisesti tämä luonnollisesti kohdistuu uusien, innovatiivisten ja tätä kautta myös riskialttiiden ideoiden, projektien ja yritysten rahoitukseen, olipa kyse – niin kuin usein on – pienistä pk-yrityksistä, joista idea lähtee liikkeelle, tai sitten isommista hankkeista.

Me tarvitsemme kipeästi enemmän koko sisämarkkina-alueella toimivia bisnesenkeleitä ja venture capitalia, tätä riskipääomarahoitusta. EU:n riskipääomamarkkinat laahaavat edelleen kaukana lähimmän vertailukohtamaamme Yhdysvaltojen jäljessä. EU:n markkinat ovat noin viisi kertaa pienemmät kuin Atlantin takaiset, ja ne ovat kaiken lisäksi sirpaloituneet kansallisiksi, mikä rajoittaa myös täällä toimivien rahastojen kasvua ja niiden mahdollisuutta kohdentaa omaa erityisosaamistaan esimerkiksi teknologiaan, ympäristöosaamiseen tai lääketieteeseen. Oppia hyvin toimivista riskipääomamarkkinoista kannattaisi myös hakea Aasian suunnalta tai Israelista.

Ongelma muodostuu erityisen pahaksi erityisesti silloin, kun rahasto on päässyt tavoitteeseen, eli löytänyt toimivan idean ja yrityksen. Vahvassa kasvuvaiheessa oleva startup-yritys kaipaisi nopeasti kasvavaa lisärahoitusta ja osaamista. Silloin meidän suhteellisesti hyvin pienillä rahastoillamme ei välttämättä ole tarjota yritykselle osaamista, tukea eikä myöskään rahoitusta. Kun follow-up-rahoitusta ei ole tarjolla Euroopassa, idea joko kuihtuu kasaan, tai vaihtoehdot on etsittävä muualta Euroopan ulkopuolelta.

Tämä ongelma ei ole tietenkään uusi eikä tiedostamaton, ja siksi jo vuonna 2013 EU antoi asetuksen eurooppalaisen riskipääoman yhteisestä passista eli EuVECA-passista, joka luo yhteiset pelisäännöt riskipääomarahastomarkkinoille ja varainkeruulle ympäri Eurooppaa. Se ei kuitenkaan ole toiminut oletetulla tavalla, koska huhtikuussa 2016 rahastoja oli rekisteröity vain 70 EuVECA-rahastolla ja vain neljä EuSEF-rahastolla. Nyt osana pääomamarkkinaunionia komission ehdotuksella me pyrimme korjaamaan tätä ongelmaa.

Tarkoituksena on varmistaa, ettei kukin kansallinen viranomainen vaadi rahastolta perusteettomasti kansallisia rekisteröinti- tai valvontamaksuja tai luo teknisiä esteitä markkinoillepääsylle. Nykyisin yleinen käytäntö on täysin eurooppalaisen passin ajatuksen ja pääomamarkkinoiden vastainen. Keskeinen osa ehdotusta on ylimääräisten maksujen ja velvoitteiden täyskielto. Lisäksi myös usein isommille rahastoille avataan mahdollisuus hallinnoida EuVECA- ja EuSEF-rahastoja, mikä lisää rahastojen mahdollisuutta antaa lisää follow-up-rahoitusta. Myös mahdollisuutta sijoittaa pk-yrityksiin parannetaan.

Tähän komission ehdotukseen liittyy laajempi paketti, jolla kokonaisuudessaan pyritään lisäämään riskipääomarahoitusta unionissa. Siellä on EU:n budjettitukea, rahastojen rahasto, jolle voidaan houkutella pääomaa, vivuttaa sitä suurilta yhteisösijoittajilta. Ongelmaksi yhä edelleen jää kansallinen verokohtelu, joka on EU:n kompetenssin ulkopuolella. Pieniä askeleita päästiin eteenpäin siinä, että nämä kauniit periaatteet myös toteutuisivat yhteisellä eurooppalaisella valvonnalla, jolla taataan, että kaikki jäsenmaat kohtelevat eurooppalaisia rahastoja tasapuolisesti ja samalla tavalla.

  Karmenu Vella, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, your vote will be an important step in finalising yet another element of the capital markets union, reviewed rules for European venture capital funds and new European social entrepreneurship funds. Venture capital is an important source of funding for businesses in the start-up and expansion phase. By providing capital-intensive financing and specialised support, venture capital fills an important gap in the funding escalator that other financial actors may not be able to fill.

Unfortunately, Europe is currently lagging behind other markets in this area. European venture capital funds are fragmented, concentrated in only a few Member States, and often lacking in scale. The original regulations aimed to address this funding by creating deeper and more integrated venture capital markets in Europe. By setting up EU-wide labels, EuVECA and EuSEF were designed as a means for qualifying funds to market themselves easily across the EU.

EuVECA had some success, with about 126 EuVECA funds having been notified to ESMA as of last month, but this is not enough to meet the financing challenge. For EuSEF progress has been slow, with only seven funds notified so far. Under the CMU project, the European Commission therefore made reviewing EuVECA and EuSEF regulations a matter of priority in order to turn these labels into truly effective vehicles for venture and social capital financing in Europe. More specifically, we introduced three main changes to improve and speed up the growth and spread of these funds.

First, we extended the range of managers eligible to market and manage EuVECA and EuSEF funds to include large fund managers. In other words, those with assets under management of more than EUR 500 million. These managers can provide economies of scale and trusted brands, thereby passing benefits on to investors.

Second, we expanded the ability of EuVECA funds to invest in small midcaps and SMEs listed on SME growth markets. This should increase the diversification possibilities offered by EuVECA funds and therefore make them more attractive to investors.

Third, we decreased costs by explicitly prohibiting fees imposed by Member States’ authorities where no supervisory activities were performed. We also simplified registration processes. The new rules for EuVECA funds are part of a range of measures we are putting forward in order to support innovation by strengthening European venture capital markets. Throughout the legislative process, the legislators have shown a clear commitment to developing the rules and finding necessary compromises.

The final text provides certainty and simplicity about requirements for the level of own funds to be held by managers. Legislators have also taken practical steps to clarify and enhance the role of ESMA in ensuring consistent and convergent practices among national competent authorities across the EU. The Commission welcomes these changes which will further help revitalise the EuVECA and EuSEF labels.

Colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, by endorsing the political agreement you will move Europe one step closer to a high-growth, innovation-led economy by breaking down the barriers currently impeding venture and social investment at EU level. We want to take this opportunity again to thank the European Parliament and, in particular, the rapporteur Mrs Pietikäinen, the shadow rapporteurs, and also Mr Gualtieri for their efforts and constructiveness during the trilogue negotiations.

  Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, în numele grupului PPE. – Domnule președinte, un punct slab al piețelor de capital în Uniunea Europeană este insuficiența fondurilor cu capital de risc. Este, poate, cea mai importantă diferență calitativă între piețele de capital din Uniunea Europeană și piața de capital din SUA, unde aceste fonduri de risc finanțează în mod deosebit start-up-urile din domeniul inovației. De aceea, nu pot decât să salut propunerile Comisiei Europene, precum și acordul la care s-a ajuns, pe raportor și pe toți cei care au lucrat la acest proiect, întrucât, prin măsurile propuse, se îmbunătățesc condițiile atât de înființare, cât și de dezvoltare a acestor fonduri de risc, se deschide oportunitatea de a finanța start-up-uri, în special pentru întreprinderile mici și mijlocii și, desigur, se întărește rolul Autorității europene de supraveghere a piețelor și a hârtiilor de valoare în acest domeniu. Voi vota aceste propuneri.

  Andrea Cozzolino, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la revisione dei fondi EuVECA ed EuSEF ha una ricaduta positiva per accelerare la crescita economica, creare nuovi e più stabili posti di lavoro e creare condizioni più favorevoli agli investimenti.

I fondi di venture capital finanziano soprattutto, come abbiamo detto, imprese innovative ad alto tasso tecnologico, molto competitive sullo scenario globale, con una buona ricaduta dal punto di vista occupazionale. Sono io stesso testimone di tante esperienze, soprattutto nel mio paese, in Italia, di imprese che hanno potuto utilizzare questi fondi e hanno svolto attività straordinarie.

Siamo intervenuti principalmente in quattro dimensioni. La prima è quella di estendere la platea di coloro i quali possano utilizzare questi strumenti, includendo i gestori di fondi di maggiori dimensioni; in questo modo incentiveremo economie di scala per gli investimenti; inoltre abbiamo ampliato il novero di imprese in cui i fondi UeVECA possono investire e abbiamo diminuito i costi regolamentari attualmente esistenti.

La seconda scelta che abbiamo fatto: abbiamo reso questi fondi realmente europei. Infatti, siamo intervenuti uniformando le procedure di registrazione e supervisione tra tutti gli Stati membri, attraverso un ruolo di maggiore coordinamento dell'ESMA.

Terzo: abbiamo reso questi fondi più sicuri, facendo in modo che abbiano maggiori garanzie in merito alla loro qualità e gestione. Infine, è presente un obbligo di reporting per EuSEF, in modo da includere una descrizione di come i rischi ambientali e climatici siano presi in considerazione nella modalità di investimento.

Credo possiamo considerarci tutti, e lo siamo, soddisfatti del lavoro che abbiamo svolto, perché con questo nuovo regolamento noi incoraggiamo un'imprenditoria sociale tecnologicamente avanzata, diamo una forza maggiore agli investimenti, pubblici e privati, creiamo una finanza al servizio dell'economia reale, prestiamo maggiore attenzione all'ambiente e, infine, offriamo una tutela e una salvaguardia del lavoro.

Mi pare si tratti di un risultato molto importante, che abbiamo raggiunto grazie al lavoro che abbiamo svolto tutti insieme.

  Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας GUE/NGL. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, χρειάζεται να ενισχύσουμε τις νεοφυείς επιχειρήσεις, την νεανική επιχειρηματικότητα, την καινοτομία. Η πρόταση της Επιτροπής κάνει με καθυστέρηση ένα βήμα μπροστά και η πρόταση του Ευρωκοινοβουλίου, με τη συμβολή της κυρίας Pietikäinen και των σκιωδών εισηγητών, βελτιώνει την πρόταση της Επιτροπής. Αλλά χρειάζεται να τρέξουμε γρηγορότερα γιατί η απόσταση που χωρίζει την στήριξη της καινοτομίας και της νεανικής επιχειρηματικότητας και των νεοφυών επιχειρήσεων στην Ευρώπη, σε σύγκριση με άλλες οικονομίες, παραμένει μεγάλη. Άρα πρέπει να ενισχύσουμε ακόμη περισσότερο τις μικρές και τις μεσαίες επιχειρήσεις. Να μειώσουμε το κόστος της γραφειοκρατίας περισσότερο. Να διευκολύνουμε όσους έχουν σπουδαίες ιδέες αλλά δεν έχουν τα κεφάλαια για να τις υλοποιήσουν. Και πρέπει να νοιαστούμε περισσότερο για τις χώρες που υποφέρουν περισσότερο - όπως η χώρα μου η Ελλάδα - από την ύφεση, όπου σπουδαία μυαλά μεταναστεύουν στο εξωτερικό γιατί το τραπεζικό σύστημα της χώρας τους δεν έχει τη δυνατότητα να στηρίξει επιχειρηματικές ιδέες. Άρα χρειαζόμαστε σε αυτό το θέμα περισσότερα βήματα και περισσότερη Ευρώπη.

(Ο ομιλητής δέχεται να απαντήσει σε ερώτηση με γαλάζια κάρτα (άρθρο 162 παράγραφος 8 του Κανονισμού))

  David Coburn (EFDD), blue-card question. – Mr President, would you not agree with me that governments who are generally massively incompetent are not the best people. Bureaucrats who have no experience of business or entrepreneurial affairs have no business involving themselves in capital markets in the stock exchange or anything like that. Surely, capitalism is the best way to make sure young businesses grow. And, quite frankly, I have been in business for 30 years and I have always found that if there’s a good plan and there’s a good project then somebody wants to put money into it. So why should we be wasting taxpayers’ money on something that the stock market and financial markets should be dealing with. This is a lot of nonsense, and a waste of taxpayers’ money.

  Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης (GUE/NGL), απάντηση "γαλάζια κάρτα". – Κύριε Coburn, εσείς, που θεωρείτε ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση είναι σαν τη Σοβιετική Ένωση, είναι λογικό να θεωρείτε ότι η βοήθεια νέων ανθρώπων να αναπτύξουν νεοφυείς επιχειρήσεις είναι κάτι επικίνδυνο και κακό. Πιστεύετε ίσως σε έναν καπιταλισμό-ζούγκλα χωρίς ρυθμίσεις. Διαφωνώ μαζί σας, δεν συμφωνώ καθόλου. Όσον αφορά δε τις επικρίσεις για τις κυβερνήσεις, μπορεί εσείς να έχετε δίκιο επικρίνοντας την κυβέρνηση της χώρας σας.

  Bernard Monot, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, j’espère que vous prêterez attention à mon intervention.

Tout d’abord, je vous avoue que nous avons des doutes profonds sur la nécessité affichée par la Commission de développer à toute force le financement des entreprises européennes via les marchés financiers, obligataires et boursiers. Cela est organisé au détriment des financements bancaires traditionnels, des économies européennes et au détriment de la compétitivité des banques européennes.

En effet, une révision des règlements sur le fonds d’investissement en capital-risque et sur les fonds d’entrepreneuriat sociaux, adoptés il y a seulement quatre ans, nous semble encore prématurée. Le temps aurait dû être donné à ces deux nouveaux labels européens de prendre leur essor progressivement, comme les fonds UCITS auparavant.

Mais non, il y a urgence, selon la Commission, qui considère que les fonds regroupés sous ce label ne sont pas assez paneuropéens et seraient de trop petite taille. Or, en matière de capital—risque, la gestion d’un petit nombre de projets est souvent gage de succès. Small is Beautiful.

De même, la connaissance parfaite des conditions économiques, sociales et réglementaires locales est souvent une condition préalable au succès de l’investissement en capital. Des managers de fonds transnationaux sont moins efficaces que des investisseurs en capital-risque à spécialité nationale.

Mais nous avons une autre préoccupation. Cette modification des règlements ouvre la possibilité d’octroyer le label «fonds de capital-risque européen» aux gestionnaires de hedge funds, c’est-à-dire les fonds alternatifs au sens de la directive AIFM. C’est même d’ailleurs le principal apport de ce texte.

Cette évolution dénature l’esprit originel du règlement de 2013. Les fonds d’investissement en capital vont ainsi se retrouver noyés au sein des diverses stratégies des mastodontes de la gestion alternative transnationale.

Nous craignons également que, au sein des grands gestionnaires alternatifs, les murailles de Chine obligatoires entre les différentes lignes d’investissement et de création de produits financiers titrisés ne soient pas respectées.

Pour ces raisons, malgré notre soutien de principe au développement du capital-risque, nous nous abstiendrons sur ce texte.

(L’orateur accepte de répondre à une question «carton bleu» (article 162, paragraphe 8, du règlement))

  David Coburn (EFDD), blue-card question. – I would like to ask this question of you. I think that this capital is going to be given to some companies in ‘wherever’. I mean I have never heard of any in Britain. I don’t know if you have in France. But surely giving those companies money, to the detriment of other companies which have actually raised the money themselves and got off their bottoms and done it, why would that be a good thing? Surely, those people will be able to crush those other companies that have fairly tried to raise money on the independent markets. Surely this sort of communism or socialism is very, very bad and the reason why the European Union is going bust and why Greece is in a very bad position and why for many years – and you, I know, I agree with me on this – socialism in France has destroyed the French entrepreneurial spirit. I want to see France rise. I don’t want to see France be destroyed. Would you agree with me, sir?

  Bernard Monot (ENF), réponse "carton bleu". – Cher collègue David Coburn, je crois que nous sommes, en termes politiques et économiques, à peu près sur la même ligne. Nous sommes des conservateurs, libéraux dans l’Hexagone, donc en France, bien entendu opposés au socialisme, au communisme, à toutes les formes d’extrémisme économique. Nous sommes tout simplement procapitalistes et bien entendu nous sommes favorables au capital-risque, puisque le risque sera rémunéré justement par les performances.

Le seul problème que ne comprend pas l’Union européenne, c’est que, avant qu’elle existe, il y avait effectivement des marchés de capitaux-risques pour financer les start-up, les entreprises innovantes, etc., et bien entendu les États n’ont pas attendu l’Union européenne pour agir et investir.

Voilà c’est tout ce que j’ai voulu dire: ce label n’est pas forcément bon et c’est pour cela que nous nous abstenons sur ce vote.

  Jonás Fernández (S&D). – Señor presidente, en primer lugar, desearía agradecer el trabajo de la ponente principal en este dosier y, por supuesto, de mi colega Cozzolino como ponente alternativo, para alcanzar el acuerdo que vamos a votar mañana.

Iniciábamos esta legislatura con una crisis económica muy severa en la Unión y con proyectos para impulsar la demanda interna, para mejorar la actividad y facilitar el empleo. Y dentro de esa agenda, teníamos como uno de los ejes fundamentales el impulso de la Unión de Mercados de Capitales.

Y la verdad es que hemos trabajado mucho en los últimos años: hemos sacado adelante el nuevo Reglamento sobre fondos del mercado monetario; los nuevos Reglamentos para facilitar la elaboración de los prospectos; recientemente alcanzábamos un acuerdo en los diálogos tripartitos para crear una titulización estándar en el conjunto de la Unión y revisar sus requerimientos de capital; y el Reglamento que debatimos hoy y que vamos a votar va —creo yo— en la misma línea: facilitar, ayudar a construir ese mercado interno de capitales, haciendo más fácil la creación de fondos de capital riesgo y de emprendimiento social.

Es una gran propuesta en la que mi Grupo se ha esforzado muy duramente, donde hemos conseguido avances claros en la supervisión y el control de la ESMA, en facilitar la inversión de los minoristas, en introducir análisis medioambientales de los proyectos empresariales que nos ayuden a cumplir con los objetivos del Acuerdo de París y, sin duda, yo creo que hemos ido tomando decisiones adecuadas.

La cuestión es que, más allá de todo lo que hemos hecho, como decía antes mi colega Papadimoulis, nos queda mucho por hacer, porque las pequeñas empresas siguen teniendo notables desafíos para poder participar en ese mercado único —hay muchos problemas administrativos, problemas regulatorios que tenemos que abordar—, y porque, en mi opinión, parte de estas reformas van dirigidas a empresas medianas que ya participan en mercados de capitales. Deberíamos pensar —y me dirijo a la Comisión— cómo podemos mejorar de verdad la financiación para las pequeñas empresas, y no solamente las medianas.

PRZEWODNICTWO: RYSZARD CZARNECKI
Wiceprzewodniczący

  Gerolf Annemans (ENF) . – De Europese Commissie - we hebben het ook vanmorgen nog eens kunnen vernemen uit de mond van Jean-Claude Juncker - heeft beslist dat de kapitaalmarktunie in een hogere versnelling wordt geschakeld. Het springt natuurlijk in het oog dat onder de vele bedreigingen die de Commissie opsomt, ook de brexit vermeld wordt. Met 750 000 werknemers in de financiële sector en een bruto toegevoegde waarde van 81 000 miljard pond is de Londense City een van de belangrijkste spelers van die kapitaalmarktunie. Wij vinden dat op deze bedreiging, zoals zij dat noemen of toch tenminste een uitdaging, een afdoende antwoord moet worden gegeven vooraleer de overambitieuze plannen van de EU in een sneltreinvaart verder worden doorgeduwd. Dat is dus ons belangrijkste probleem met dit verslag.

Ten gronde vinden wij bovendien dat niet ESMA maar wel de lidstaten het voortouw moeten nemen in de ontwikkeling van de voorliggende sociale en durffondsen. De verdere eenmaking van het monetaire en economische leven gaat in tegen de aard en de kern van wat het Europese continent in wezen is: eenheid en kracht in en door verscheidenheid.

  Alfred Sant (S&D). – Mr President, the proposals before us attempt to counter a fundamental problem: the availability of equity and risk capital covering SMEs, start-ups and expansion projects. There is not the culture here, as in the US, for such financing to be mobilised through OTCs or similar intermediaries. Encouraging such a system in Europe makes sense but the difficulties should not be underestimated.

The people at the front line, by way of entrepreneurship, intermediation and regulation, need to be of top quality. They need to be innovative, flexible and knowledgeable about operating conditions on the ground. A strengthened supervisory role for the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) is needed, but effective regulation must remain light touch. Initially, small-scale start-ups are quite likely to concentrate around digital, entertainment and social projects. Attention should, however, be paid to appropriate incentives to encourage projects in fields such as light engineering, electronics and environmental technologies.

Projects by young people had better be given priority and promotional ties should be built between venture capital structures and relevant departments of universities and technical institutes. In this context, special programmes for peripheral and island regions should seek to tap there the existing potential for small-scale enterprise that is diminished by the high cost of risk capital in such regions.

  Doru-Claudian Frunzulică (S&D). – Mr President, even though considered the main cornerstones of the capital markets union (CMU) action plan, both the European venture capital funds and the European social entrepreneurship funds are, at this moment, small and concentrated only in a few Member States. For this reason, and not only, I would like welcome the reforms proposed within the report that is outlining measures which aim to stimulate venture capital in Europe, bring forward the important contribution of the two investment schemes for a more integrated European internal market with access to funding and to capital for companies of all sizes in all Member States.

On the one hand, I support especially the proposal to lower the threshold of European venture capital funds to EUR 50 000, as this would increase access to funding and would widen the spectrum of investment possibilities. On the other hand, a more stringent surveillance at EU level, by strengthening the supervisory role of the European Securities and Markets Authority, will avoid excessive risk-taking and instability in financial markets. Moreover, it would also facilitate cross-border operations.

Zgłoszenia z sali

  Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nell'ambito di un'articolata e più complessiva strategia di costruzione del mercato unico europeo, in linea con gli obiettivi del piano dell'Unione dei capitali, l'Unione europea è impegnata a regolamentare e sostenere fondi di investimento collettivi e alternativi, con particolare attenzione al venture capital e all'imprenditorialità sociale.

Il venture capital, che concentra investimenti alternativi per imprese in fase di avvio, è una significativa fonte di investimenti a medio e lungo termine per imprese giovani e innovative, come pure per le piccole. I dati del 2015 e del 2016 sembrano essere incoraggianti ma va sottolineato che nei primi due anni di applicazione del regolamento EuVECA, secondo i dati di Invest Europe solo il 25 % del venture capital europeo è stato raccolto fuori dagli Stati membri d'origine.

La proposta compie un passo in avanti mediante il divieto di imposte addizionali negli Stati membri e l'ampliamento del numero di imprese in cui è possibile investire, migliorando quindi il flusso di investimenti alternativi e scongiurando la dispersione della portata potenzialmente innovativa e di talento di tante giovani imprese.

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, οι τράπεζες δεν έχουν συνέλθει από την οικονομική κρίση και αυτό που κάνουν, βεβαίως, είναι να μην δίνουν κεφάλαια επενδυτικά στις μικρές νεοφυείς επιχειρήσεις ώστε να αναπτυχθούν. Έτσι είναι αναγκαίο να δημιουργηθεί μια εσωτερική αγορά κεφαλαίου στο πλαίσιο της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και σε αυτή τη διαδικασία θα πρέπει να υπάρχει μια διευκόλυνση για την ίδρυση εταιρειών επιχειρηματικού κινδύνου και ευρωπαϊκών ταμείων κοινωνικής επιχειρηματικότητας για να στηριχθούν οι νεοφυείς επιχειρήσεις σε όλες τις χώρες και, κυρίως, στην Ελλάδα.

Όπου, όμως, στην Ελλάδα θα πρέπει να επισημάνω ότι η Τράπεζα της Ελλάδος, η οποία συμμετέχει στην ποσοτική χαλάρωση, έχει δαπανήσει 42,5 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ ενώ θα έπρεπε μέρος αυτών των χρημάτων να έχει βρει τρόπο να μπορέσουν να δαπανηθούν υπέρ εταιρικών διαδικασιών, δηλαδή υπέρ εταιρικών ομολόγων και, κυρίως, μέσα από αυτή τη διαδικασία να στηριχθούν και οι νεοφυείς μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις, οι οποίες έχουν ανάγκη να έχουν χρηματοδότηση προκειμένου να υπάρξει επιτέλους ανάπτυξη στην Ελλάδα η οποία έχει χτυπηθεί από τη σκληρή πολιτική της τρόικας, και αυτή τη στιγμή έχουμε εκατομμύρια ανέργους.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

  Karmenu Vella, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you for this interesting debate and for the comments and support which many of you have clearly expressed for this agreement.

As I mentioned, the European Commission has treated this file with urgency as an important building block of the capital markets union, and we are grateful that, thanks to your engagement and constructive approach on this file, it looks like we will continue to make rapid progress.

With these reforms to revitalise the EuVECA and the EuSEF labels we are breaking down another barrier to a single market for capital, and we are providing more numerous and deeper sources of funding to support our high-growth and innovative businesses. This is a step towards the economy of the future and it is a step in the right direction. I would like to thank once again the European Parliament rapporteur, Mrs Pietikaïnen, the shadow rapporteurs and Mr Gualtieri for their work.

  Sirpa Pietikäinen, rapporteur. – Mr President, I would like to thank the Commission for very good and constructive cooperation which we have had throughout the process. I hope that you convey the message further, but I would like you to convey two other messages as well. One is that there are still some steps in the European Venture Capital Fund and regarding initial capital and the possibility to invest and other flexibilities that should be looked at a bit later on (at the time of the review). What is most important, now when the Commission is going to have this review: I do hope that you take the necessary steps to ensure transparent and pan-European treatment for the European Venture Capital Funds under the auspices of the European Securities and Markets Authority and improve their role and strength, because I find this to be on the crux of creating an effective European capital market and the European Venture Capital Fund market. It’s an uphill struggle but I find that this was one of the things that was still a bit lacking in this process and hopefully you could push it forward when you are taking the next steps.

  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się w czwartek 14 września 2017 r.