Der Präsident. - Als erster Punkt der Tagesordnung folgt die Aussprache über die Erklärung des Präsidenten der Kommission zum Paket der Kommission für Beschäftigung, Wachstum und Investitionen (2014/2975(RSP)).
Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the Commission. - Mr President, honourable Members, I addressed this House just over a month ago and promised to present an ambitious investment plan before Christmas. One month later and Christmas has come early. I am here to deliver on my promise. I am doing it here at the European Parliament because this is the institutional place where important events have to happen.
Today Europe is turning a page. After years of fighting to restore our fiscal credibility and to promote reform, today we are adding the third point of a virtuous triangle: an ambitious yet realistic investment plan for Europe. Europe needs a kick-start, and today the Commission is applying the jump leads.
Investing in Europe means much more than figures, projects, money and rules. It is about people – mainly about those amongst our citizens who are unemployed. We need to send a message to the people of Europe and to the rest of the world: Europe is back in business. This is not the moment to look back. Investment is about the future.
Of course, we should never neglect the sacrifices that many in Europe have made over the past six years to overcome the crisis, nor should we stop the push to bring down barriers, open up markets and reform what does not work in our economies. These are necessary but not sufficient conditions for growth.
Yes, we need structural reforms to modernise and preserve our social market economy. Yes, we need fiscal responsibility to restore confidence and the sustainability of our public finances and to complete this virtuous omne trium perfectum we now need to boost investment. No tree can grow on soil and air alone. The investment plan we are presenting today is the watering can. For the first time, the Commission is presenting all three components of Europe’s future economic success together – not pitched one against the other but grouped in one single simple message, namely that Europe can offer hope both to its future generations and to the rest of the world as a promising, attractive hub for jobs, growth and investment.
Why are we doing this? First, because not only are we faced with a serious investment gap but we are caught in an investment trap. When we talk to investors, they all agree that Europe is an attractive place to invest in. But when I look at the figures, they tell a totally different story. Investment levels in the European Union are down to EUR 370 billion below the historical pre-crisis norms. While investment is taking off in the US, Europe is lagging behind. Why? Because investors lack confidence, credibility and trust.
Secondly, because we are confronted with a major paradox. Despite the huge liquidity in the world’s money markets and corporate bank accounts, investment in Europe is not rebounding.
Thirdly, because our public resources are stretched – our debt levels have increased from 60% of our GDP to 90% in the space of just a few years. Public expenditure already represents close to 50% of the European Union’s GDP. What we need is a smart use of public money geared to unlocking investment. Public expenditure should be used for what it is best at doing: funding our schools and welfare systems, not servicing our debt.
Today we are responding to these European pathologies and keeping our eye on the one ball that matters: the real economy. This is not the time for national, political or ideological fights. It is the time for a major political and social consensus, a grand bargain to put Europe back to work.
I often hear that we need ‘fresh’ money, but what I believe we really need is a fresh start and fresh investment. Others say that we need more debt. We do not. National budgets are already stretched. The European Union operates on balanced budgets, and the abundant liquidity can allow Europe to grow without creating new debt. We will not betray our children and grandchildren and write more cheques that they will ultimately have to pay off. We will not betray the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact that we have agreed jointly. This is a matter of credibility. However, if Member States chip in capital to the Fund, we will not take these contributions into account in our assessments under the Stability Pact. What we are going to do is set up the right system that will use available public money to leverage additional capital that will never otherwise be mobilised. Every public euro mobilised can generate additional investment that would not have happened otherwise, and it can create jobs.
We will need to look carefully at projects. Destinations for the fresh investment drive should be attractive, free of regulatory burdens and linked to economic reality, not political expedience.
Let me be clear about one thing: the money we are putting forward today comes on top of what already exists. It comes on top of the EUR 630 billion that is about to be unlocked from the structural and investment funds at national and regional level. It comes on top of what the European Investment Bank has already been able to do so far. After the capital increase of EUR 10 billion, the European Investment Bank was shipping EUR 180 billion to the real economy. It comes on top of all the existing programmes which are already investing in infrastructure, innovation and European small and medium-sized enterprises. Perhaps most importantly, it comes on top of what Member States can do to help themselves, for Member States must also support the investment environment through better use of public money and a greater commitment to structural reforms.
Let me explain my vision for where this money should go. I have a vision of schoolchildren in Thessaloniki walking into a brand new classroom decked out with computers. I have a vision of European hospitals saving lives with state-of-the-art medical equipment. I have a vision of a French commuter being able to charge his electric car along the motorway in the same way we fill up with petrol today. Households and companies want to benefit from technological progress and are crying out for action to become more energy-efficient. Our energy sector needs to interconnect networks and markets, integrate renewable sources of energy, and diversify our sources of supply. Our transport sector has to modernise its infrastructure, reduce congestion and improve trade connections. Our environment needs better waste, recycling and water treatment facilities. We need far-reaching and faster broadband and smarter data centres across Europe, and we need to invest in our education and innovation systems that are often underfunded and less equipped than those of our key competitors.
Investing in people – that is what the social market economy is about. The needs we are facing are vast. This is the challenge of a generation. Europe will have to face it head-on.
How is this going to work? Money will not fall from the sky. We do not have a money-printing machine. We will have to attract money and make it work for us. Today we are setting up the new architecture which will make this possible. The key is to provide a risk-bearing capacity that can unlock additional investment.
Our plan is built on three main pillars. First, we are creating a new European Fund for Strategic Investments, guaranteed with public money from the EU budget and the European Investment Bank. The Fund will be able to mobilise EUR 315 billion over the next few years, and yet some say this is not enough. I have to remind you that this is the greatest effort in recent EU history to mobilise the EU budget to trigger additional investment – and without changing the rules.
I know some of you are worried about the impact on the research and infrastructure allocations. You fear that redirecting money from the Horizon 2020 and Connecting Europe budget lines will mean that money is lost. But this is not the case. Every euro from this programme paid into the Fund creates EUR 15 for those very same research and infrastructure projects. We are not just moving money around; we are maximising its input.
If Member States step up to the plate and contribute to the Fund, then the knock-on effect of this significant amount will be even bigger.
Herr Präsident, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren! Die zweite Komponente unseres Programms ist folgende: Wir schaffen eine glaubwürdige Projektpipeline, flankiert von einem Programm für technische Hilfe, um die Investitionen in ausgereifte, wachstumsfördernde Projekte von europäischer Bedeutung zu lenken. Es ist nicht der Job von Politikern, Projekte auszuwählen. Wir sollten bescheidener sein. Es ist die Aufgabe der Fachleute, die über die notwendige Erfahrung und das einschlägige Know how verfügen, dies zu tun. Dem Fonds wird ein Investitionsausschuss aus Experten zur Seite stehen, der jedes Projekt aus wirtschaftlicher und gesellschaftlicher Perspektive bewertet und prüft, welchen Mehrwert es für die Europäische Union hat.
Die dritte Komponente unseres Programms ist ein ehrgeiziger Fahrplan, mit dem wir Europa für Investoren attraktiver machen wollen. Dazu werden wir – dies ist existenziell wichtig – Bürokratie abbauen und regulatorische Engpässe beseitigen. Es geht nämlich nicht nur um die finanzielle Ebene. Es geht auch und vor allem um die richtigen Rahmenbedingungen auf der Regulierungsebene. Die Europäische Investitionsbank hat in den letzten Jahren exzellente Arbeit geleistet, und ich bin froh, sie als zentralen Akteur und Partner in diese neuen Investitionsprogramme einbinden zu können.
Das Triple-A der Bank, die übrigens nicht risikoscheu ist, ist eine europäische Trumpfkarte, die wir jetzt noch besser für Europa einsetzen werden. Ohne die Europäische Investitionsbank wäre es nicht zu diesem Investitionsprogramm gekommen. Ich möchte mich bei dem Präsidenten der Bank, Werner Hoyer, sehr herzlich bedanken für eine vorzügliche Zusammenarbeit in den letzten Wochen, ich müsste eigentlich sagen Monaten. Die Kommission ist erst seit drei Wochen im Amt. Wir sind in der Lage, heute das Investitionsprogramm vorzustellen. Aber Werner Hoyer und ich haben uns schon im Juli – schon vor meiner Wahl zum Kommissionspräsidenten – intensiv in dieser Sache ausgetauscht, und ich bin ihm zu großem Dank verpflichtet und im Übrigen auch froh, dass er mit der Erlaubnis des Herrn Präsidenten dieser Sitzung des Plenums beiwohnen kann.
Wir haben, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, noch einige wichtige Schritte vor uns, die wir aber sofort angehen müssen, denn wir stehen erst am Anfang. Deshalb möchte ich heute einen Appell an alle richten, die Europa wieder auf einen Pfad kräftigen Wachstums zurückführen wollen. Die Mitgliedstaaten sollten dem Fonds beitreten und damit seine Leistungsfähigkeit weiter verstärken. Auch die Mitgliedstaaten haben Pflichten zu erfüllen, wenn es um die Wiederankurbelung der Investitionen in der Europäischen Union geht. Jeder für diesen Fonds bereitgestellte Euro aus öffentlichen Mitteln kann 15 Euro an Investitionen mobilisieren. Im Gegenzug verspreche ich Ihnen, dass diese Kapitalbeiträge an den Fonds bei der Überprüfung der öffentlichen Haushalte auf der Grundlage des Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakts nicht eingerechnet werden.
Wieso sollten Mitgliedstaaten einzahlen, wenn sie nicht mit Sicherheit vorausberechnen können, welche Rückflüsse es in ihr Land gibt? Das ist ganz einfach: Mehr Wachstum in Spanien ist gut für mehr Wachstum in Frankreich. Mehr Wachstum in Frankreich ist gut für mehr Wachstum in Italien. Mehr Wachstum in Südeuropa ist gut für das Wachstum in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Man sollte endlich zur Kenntnis nehmen, dass wir eine Schicksalsgemeinschaft sind, und das impliziert Solidarität mit allen und allen gegenüber.
Bei dem anvisierten Investitionsvolumen von 315 Milliarden Euro handelt es sich nicht um eine Obergrenze. Wenn sich der Fonds bewährt – und das wird er, da bin ich mir sicher –, dann können wir sogar darüber hinausgehen. Wir brauchen sowohl im Europäischen Parlament als auch im Europäischen Rat die breitestmögliche Unterstützung für dieses Investitionsprogramm, seinen Inhalt, seinen Aufbau, seine Ziele. Wir brauchen in Europa eine Koalition der Investitionswilligen.
Monsieur le Président, Mesdames et Messieurs, je compte notamment sur l'engagement de cette Assemblée pour accélérer l'adoption de la législation nécessaire à la mise en place du fonds. J'inviterai mes collègues au Conseil européen à prendre le même engagement. Nous devons rendre le fonds opérationnel d'ici au mois de juin de l'année prochaine afin qu'il puisse commencer à produire des résultats.
Le Parlement européen, lui, est un partenaire essentiel pour aider l'Europe à renouer avec la croissance. Nous, la Commission, nous serons responsables devant vous. Des représentants de haut niveau de ces nouveaux fonds devront régulièrement vous rendre compte des activités du fonds. Je veillerai également à ce que les vice-présidents et les membres de la Commission chargés des différents domaines d'activité du fonds ainsi que des représentants de la Banque européenne d'investissement vous fassent régulièrement rapport, ainsi qu'à vos commissions compétentes.
Toutefois, permettez-moi d'être très clair. Nous avons besoin d'un aval et d'un soutien politiques. Nous n'avons pas besoin d'une politisation du plan. Pas de jeu politique avec les projets, pas de liste nationale de vœux. Il s'agit d'un important test de crédibilité qui doit être convaincant pour les investisseurs privés et les marchés financiers mondiaux. Là encore, je compte sur le professionnalisme, l'expérience et l'expertise de notre Banque européenne d'investissement.
Le plan n'est pas un guichet automatique, et le fonds ne sera pas une banque. Nous avons besoin d'un mécanisme souple. Nous avons besoin d'un mécanisme qui soit simple d'utilisation pour les investisseurs et les autorités publiques, d'un mécanisme qui puisse évoluer et se développer au fil du temps, qui ne soit pas limité par la logique de cloisonnement, de pré-affectation thématique, sectorielle ou géographique, d'un mécanisme crédible qui s'appuie sur des structures établies garantissant la responsabilité, d'un mécanisme qui drainera vers les pays qui ont le plus souffert de la crise l'essentiel des investissements envisagés.
Ce que nous proposons ici ne peut se faire qu'à l'échelon de l'Union européenne. Moins d'un mois après l'entrée en fonction de ma Commission, nous prenons nos responsabilités et nous agissons. J'invite à présent les autres à faire de même et à montrer qu'ils sont, eux aussi, prêts à jouer le jeu. Je vous le dis dès aujourd'hui, si notre plan fonctionne, et il fonctionnera, il sera reconduit pour les années 2018, 2019 et 2020.
Mr President, this is an investment offensive that optimises our economic policy. We are focusing on long-term, large-scale European investment to create jobs. We are also targeting small and medium-sized enterprises – Europeʼs job creators – to give a boost to the real economy.
We are turning a corner, completing fiscal responsibility and structural reform with innovative investment plans and instruments. The ground-breaking investment plan, mobilising all levels of government, is the missing part of the puzzle, the third point in the virtuous triangle. The omne trium perfectum made whole.
We will stand tall on three pillars: money, projects and tools to create the right business environment. We are offering hope to millions of Europeans, disillusioned after years of stagnation. Yes, Europe can still become the epicentre of a major investment drive. Yes, Europe can grow again, and yes, the European social model will persevere. Now that we are going in the right direction there will be no turning back.
(Applause)
Werner Hoyer, EIB. - Herr Präsident! Herzlichen Dank für die Ehre, heute in diesem Parlament sprechen zu dürfen und das Programm, das die Kommission vorgelegt hat, zu kommentieren. Ich sage gleich zu, das aus vollem Herzen zu unterstützen.
I will propose to the governing bodies of the Bank to support the plan presented by President Juncker just a few minutes ago and to take the necessary decisions in the organs of the Bank in the next weeks and month. That, of course, will then lead to the presentation in the Council of the Finance and Economic Ministers in December and to the presentation in the European Council in December as well.
We are firmly committed to tackling Europe’s investment gap head-on. At the beginning of the year, the Bank made a study on investment gaps in Europe and contributed to the awareness that, for seven years now, Europe has been behind the 2007 investment figures by at least 15% and sometimes 20%, and this is persisting. Beyond that, for almost 15 years Europe has been suffering from an innovation gap in comparison to our main competitors. Our main competitors are not within the Union, they are outside, and in comparison to some of the most advanced of them, we have been trailing for 15 years by almost 1.5% of GDP per year behind their expenditure on innovation, research and development.
Therefore, it is necessary to take action, and therefore I proposed to Ecofin to first make a study of whether the allegation that investment opportunities do not exist is really true. We had a taskforce which concluded its work only a few days ago. It shows clearly that, although there might be quite a bit of wishful thinking in these lists as well, projects do exist, as do project ideas and project needs, so the question remains: why are these gaps not being filled by the private sector and by all those who can contribute to filling them? What are the hurdles to investment? They can be on the risk side - we are going to address it. They can be on the regulatory side, they can be on the legislative side, and I am very happy to hear that the Commission President is resolved to tackle these issues as well, and, of course, the question of confidence, which is decisive for any investment decision in Europe and beyond.
We therefore have to put things in sequence: identification of the investment gap, identification of the reasons for these investment gaps not being filled, and then the question of the instruments we are going to use. We can look back at a history of the last seven years in the crisis. Since 2007, the EU Bank has provided more than EUR 500 billion for investment across Europe, and by the end of next year we will have delivered EUR 180 billion of new investment, following a capital increase recommended by the European Council in 2012.
I was not sure in 2012, when I promised to the European Council, that we would make 18 times as much out of these EUR 10 billion, but now I can tell you that probably, when I come back next year in early December, we will have overshot this target of EUR 180 billion additional investment in Europe by far.
So what is the issue today? Before the crisis, projects were financed directly through public budgets, or the public sector would assume risks to catalyse private support. Capacity for public spending for such projects is now reduced, leading to underinvestment and jeopardising long-term competitiveness. However, in contrast to the darkest days of the sovereign debt crisis, liquidity is no longer an issue, and money is available for the safest projects.
Nonetheless, some segments of the market are risk-averse – partly due to new capital and lending standards – and in many countries, SME access to finance remains a concern. By the way, this is a case where one can show that one-size-fits-all does not hold, because the access to finance for SMEs is quite differentiated in the Member States of the European Union, and we have to address it in a differentiated manner.
It is essential to tackle these market failures that continue to prevent investment in higher-risk infrastructure projects. These will be addressed as part of the investment plan by the new fund which the President of the Commission has just introduced. I will propose to ECOFIN and to the European Council that the EIB contributes EUR 5 billion to the new initiative. That will come together with the EUR 16 billion coming from the EU budget, to be confirmed, of course, by Parliament and the Council.
The new proposal allows the EIB to increase support for risky and more capital-intensive projects. It will be set up in the coming weeks and start to deliver in 2015 using structures already in place. This is the advantage. I am aware that you will have to take key decisions in this context, as will the Council, so it will take time until all the new structures are in place. The EU bank is ready to bridge that time gap so that we can start delivering in early 2015.
To be clear: this new engagement will not impact EIB engagement outside the European Union, where the EIB is a valued source of finance and expertise, supporting projects around the world. Ten per cent of our business goes outside the European Union, and we are a very necessary and valuable partner supporting the European Union in its foreign, development, humanitarian, energy and climate policies and other areas. We believe that the proposed initiative can make a real difference to unlocking additional investment in Europe. The European Investment Bank is aware that this is not the silver bullet, but it represents the EIB’s concrete contribution to addressing Europe’s most pressing investment needs that will ensure that, once again, we can make a difference.
(Applause)
Manfred Weber, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissionspräsident, Herr Hoyer, meine sehr verehrten Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Wir haben ein Versprechen abgegeben – Jean-Claude Juncker bei seiner Wahl und wir im Wahlkampf –, nämlich, die Bürger in den Mittelpunkt der Debatte hier im Europäischen Parlament zu holen. Deswegen möchte ich ausdrücklich den Gedanken von Jean-Claude Juncker unterstreichen, dass wir heute nicht über abstrakte Fragen reden, sondern über die Arbeitslosen in Europa, wir reden über die Unternehmer, die investieren wollen, wir reden über die Menschen in Europa – über ganz praktische Probleme.
Ich möchte der Kommission dafür Respekt zollen, dass innerhalb von drei Wochen der Vorschlag für diesen Investitionspakt vorliegt. Ich möchte auch Danke sagen dafür, dass die Kommission heute wieder vollständig präsent ist. Das zeigt die Geschlossenheit der Institution. Ich möchte auch ausdrücklich sagen, dass die Tatsache, dass die Präsentation des Investitionspakets nach der gestrigen Beschlussfassung heute hier im Europäischen Parlament stattfindet, ein positives, ein gutes Signal ist.
Für die EVP-Fraktion waren bei der Debatte in den letzten Wochen einige Punkte zentral. Der erste zentrale Punkt war: Privates Kapital zu mobilisieren, ist besser, als neue Schulden zu machen. Dieser Grundgedanke hat uns in den letzten Wochen und Monaten geleitet, und ich bedanke mich dafür, dass er aufgegriffen worden ist. Better Spending – die Gelder, die wir haben, besser auszugeben –, das muss uns umtreiben. Die Erfahrungen, die die EIB mit dem Aktivieren von privatem Kapital bereits gemacht hat, sind dabei extrem hilfreich. Die EIB weiß, Herr Hoyer, Sie wissen, dass es bei der Methode, die wir jetzt anwenden, ein, zwei Fragen gibt. Zum Beispiel die Frage des Substituierens. Werden bereits durchfinanzierte Projekte jetzt in dieses Paket mit reingeschoben? Das würde nichts bringen, da müssen wir sorgsam sein. Und wir wissen natürlich auch, dass wir nicht privates Kapital, also privates Engagement, in topsicheren Bereichen ersetzen wollen, sondern neues Investment erzeugen wollen. Deswegen sind dort noch einige Fragen zu klären.
Wir wissen, dass in der Kommission noch einige Fragen offen sind. Die Projektentscheidung muss in der Hand von Experten liegen, das unterstützt die EVP. Aber die Kriterien dafür, welche Projekte wir jetzt angehen, die Rahmenbedingungen, die müssen wir politisch diskutieren und klären.
In Richtung Rat darf ich noch sagen: Um diese Idee der Mobilisierung von Privatkapital hinzukriegen, darf ich an den Rat appellieren, endlich einen Beitrag zu leisten und die Blockade bei den Haushaltsberatungen zu beenden. Wir brauchen für 2015 ein stabiles Budget, damit der Plan umgesetzt werden kann. Das sind die Punkte, die wir sehen, die noch zu bearbeiten sind und die wir jetzt angehen müssen.
Meine Damen und Herren! Der zweite wichtige Punkt für die EVP-Fraktion ist: Geld alleine löst die Probleme nicht. Das hat Jean-Claude Juncker deutlich zum Ausdruck gebracht. Die Investoren kommen zurück nach Europa. Wenn man sich heute die Investitionsraten in Europa ansieht, dann sieht man, dass in Portugal, dass in Irland investiert wird. Wir waren letzte Woche mit der EVP-Fraktion in Lettland – auch dort wird investiert! Warum wird dort heute investiert? Weil in diesen Ländern in den letzten Jahren Strukturreformen durchgeführt worden sind, weil man Mut hatte, sich auf die Globalisierung einzustellen und sich als Gesellschaft zu verändern. Deswegen brauchen wir in Europa weiter den Mut zu diesen Strukturreformen, wenn es um die Fragen Beihilferecht, Banken, Eigenkapitalregelungen, Wettbewerbsrecht geht und um den Binnenmarkt. Im Energiebereich haben wir keinen Binnenmarkt, deswegen wird nicht investiert. Im digitalen Bereich haben wir keinen Binnenmarkt, deswegen wird nicht investiert. Das sind unsere Aufgaben in Europa, aber auch auf nationaler Ebene. Wenn Gerichtsverfahren in Italien so lange dauern, wie sie dauern, braucht man sich nicht zu wundern, wenn nicht investiert wird. Wenn die Arbeitsmärkte zu starr sind, wie in Frankreich, braucht man sich nicht zu wundern, wenn nicht investiert wird. Und wenn Planungsverfahren Monate und Jahre dauern wie in meinem Land, in Deutschland, braucht man sich nicht zu wundern, wenn nicht investiert wird. Deswegen muss bei den Strukturreformen jetzt jeder seinen Beitrag leisten.
Den dritten Punkt, der der EVP wichtig ist, um Zukunft zu schaffen auf unserem Kontinent, möchte ich heute nur kurz ansprechen. Aber er ist für uns wichtig: Die Stabilität der Haushalte ist die Grundvoraussetzung dafür, dass wir Wachstum erzeugen. Wenn das Vertrauen der Märkte in die Stabilität der nationalen Haushalte nicht mehr da wäre, wenn die Krise zurückkommen würde, dann wäre das der größte Schaden für mögliche Investitionen in Europa. Deswegen brauchen wir Glaubwürdigkeit.
Jean-Claude Juncker hat heute einen überzeugenden Vorschlag vorgelegt. Ich bitte die Kritiker, die sich bereits jetzt dazu äußern, um einen Ansatz der konstruktiven Kritik. Wir haben leider Gottes in Europa oft das Problem, dass man, wenn jemand eine Idee hat, einen Vorschlag auf den Tisch legt, die Zauderer, die Problematisierer hört, diejenigen, die die Probleme beschreiben können, dass man aber leider Gottes zu wenige auf dem Spielfeld hat, die sagen: Das ist ein guter Vorschlag, und ich habe eine bessere Idee dazu, ich möchte beitragen, um noch zu ergänzen. Ich bitte um diese konstruktive Kritik, um diese Kultur der Zuversicht, des Optimismus, die wir in diesem Bereich jetzt brauchen.
In Richtung Rat darf ich noch ergänzen: Wenn jetzt in Vorbereitung des Europäischen Rates im Dezember diskutiert wird und dann vielleicht auch Bemerkungen kommen wie „Das ist zu wenig, es wird zu wenig gemacht“, dann bitte ich auch wahrzunehmen, dass Europa seine Zusagen einhält. Mit unserer eigenen Kraft können wir die 315 Milliarden stemmen. Wenn jemand auf nationaler Ebene, von den Hauptstädten aus, mehr fordert, dann ist er eingeladen, weitere Beiträge zuzuliefern. Das Projekt ist offen gestaltet, und jeder kann mehr Geld auf den Tisch legen, wenn er das will.
Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die EVP steht hinter dem Vorschlag von Jean-Claude Juncker und der EU-Kommission. Wir wollen dieses Aufbruchssignal. Wir wollen, dass Europa durchstartet. Heute ist ein guter Tag für Europa!
(Beifall)
Gianni Pittella, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, cinque anni fa il mantra della Commissione Barroso fu "stabilità e austerità". Lei, Presidente Juncker, ha scelto il Parlamento – e la ringraziamo – per presentare un piano di investimenti: è il segno che l'aria è cambiata. Lo dico alle imprese, ai cittadini, agli investitori, ai commentatori: al di là delle tecnicalità, si noti il cambio di fase. Cinque anni fa un titolo, oggi un altro titolo: investimenti, crescita, lavoro. Lo ha fatto in anticipo rispetto all'impegno da lei assunto. Bene!
Noi socialisti democratici avevamo d'altra parte vincolato il nostro appoggio a lei e alla sua Commissione a questo impegno. E voglio dirlo senza retorica, ma con orgoglio: questa svolta che inizia oggi è il frutto della nostra battaglia politica. Molte cose di questo piano ci convincono. Innanzitutto il metodo: è finito il tempo degli accordi fatti al chiuso di una stanza tra i governi. Su questo piano il Parlamento sarà pienamente coinvolto. È un punto di non ritorno. Ci convince poi il fatto che vogliate creare uno strumento di investimento. Questo è quello che chiedevamo da mesi. È importante il ruolo proattivo della BEI. Ci convince l'impegno a sostenere investimenti rischiosi, e questo richiede una base finanziaria pubblica. Non ci interessano i giudizi delle agenzie di rating, ci interessano le vite dei cittadini e valuteremo la bontà degli investimenti promossi sulla base dei posti di lavoro creati. Lo abbiamo scritto nella nostra proposta di piano, i nostri suggerimenti a Juncker: vogliamo investimenti che servano, non investimenti facili.
Presidente, lo dico in sincerità, credo che oggi abbiate imboccato la strada giusta, ma c'è ancora molto da fare. Servono priorità chiare, i cittadini devono sapere dove vanno i loro soldi, e per noi la priorità è la transizione energetica. Il cambiamento climatico minaccia la sopravvivenza delle nostre società e di fronte ad una sfida di tale portata non possiamo invocare interessi di parte. Dobbiamo agire e gettare le basi per uno sviluppo davvero sostenibile. Questa è la nostra missione, la missione della civiltà europea: non essere solo Cassandra, profeta di sventura, ma guidare il cambiamento.
Ma voglio dire anche che non si sprechi nemmeno un secondo. Una task force ha individuato gli investimenti prioritari, si sblocchino da subito le risorse per questi investimenti. Noi avremmo voluto più risorse pubbliche, un capitale di base più importante. Tuttavia i 20 miliardi di capitale iniziale sono un buon punto di partenza. Dobbiamo coinvolgere e incoraggiare gli Stati membri a contribuire a questo piano ed è importante ciò che lei ha detto con chiarezza, e cioè che i contributi degli Stati membri sono non calcolati nell'ambito del Patto in riferimento al debito e in riferimento al deficit. Questo è un punto di grandissima importanza. Questa è la flessibilità di bilancio di cui abbiamo bisogno. È una rottura storica, perché spezza il tabù della rigidità del patto. Non vogliamo cambiare le regole, collega Weber, ma vogliamo renderle flessibili, perché il compito della politica è applicare con intelligenza le regole, altrimenti al posto nostro potremmo mandare dei ragionieri. Noi siamo stati eletti come politici, non come ragionieri.
Presidente, aspettiamo con ansia la comunicazione sulla flessibilità. Sulla flessibilità non si può continuare con le mezze parole, bisogna fare chiarezza una volta per tutte e noi le idee le abbiamo chiarissime. Vogliamo che anche determinati investimenti pubblici a sostegno di progetti europei non siano considerati nel Patto di stabilità.
Caro Presidente, alcuni dicono che questa è l'ultima chance. Io non so se è l'ultima chance, però so che bisogna rischiare osando piuttosto che rimpiangere di non aver saputo cogliere l'occasione che si presentava. Noi sosterremo questo piano, lo arricchiremo con le nostre proposte e se andrà bene le chiediamo, come lei ha già annunciato, di prolungarlo per altri tre anni. Oggi è l'avvio, non la fine del processo. La moderazione nel perseguire la giustizia e l'equità non è mai una virtù. Perché il bambino di Salonicco o di Madrid frequenti una scuola di qualità, perché le imprese di Lisbona competano nel mondo, perché i nostri ospedali siano all'avanguardia non serve la moderazione, serve un salto di qualità, servono coraggio e visione.
Syed Kamall, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, as Mr Juncker knows, our political group likes to look forward to the future, not back to the past, and I must say, Mr Juncker, that I like your analogy of using the watering can. How do we make sure it is a watering can that stimulates growth? How do we make sure that it is not a government flood that washes away private investment? How do we make sure it is not a private irrigation system that is never turned on?
What we need are detailed answers to some of our questions, and I have talked to a number of private investors in the past and asked them what stops them from investing.
I was talking to a large institutional investor last week, with over GBP 600 billion of assets under management, and they told me that quite often government projects are fanciful. They do not see any real return. How do we make sure that we have projects that are attractive to private investors?
Venture capitalists tell me they do not invest, that the AIFMD and other EU legislation make the EU less attractive to investment. How do we tackle those issues? A former German industrialist was talking to me the other day and he asked why it is that the non-euro area is so much better at attracting investment than the euro area. If only the euro area was better! But as you know, it is not. What is it? Is the euro the key to that question?
But the key to the package is: how do we unlock this investment? How do we make sure that this is not just talking about money? How do we make sure that we actually have the reforms, as Manfred Weber was saying, to make sure that we unlock these investments?
And let me give you a couple of examples. A few years ago I was talking to a British company which wanted to invest in Brindisi in Italy. They spent over 11 years trying to invest in an LNG terminal: a huge infrastructure project, but they walked away after 11 years because of bureaucracy and frustration. How do we make sure red tape like that does not stop investment in infrastructure? Or think of another example: Castellón Airport: millions of euro of public money but still, 44 months after being inaugurated, it has not opened. And we know of projects in the middle of nowhere.
So the questions we have to ask are: how do we unlock this private investment without taxpayers taking on the burden of risk? How do we avoid a situation where for private investors it is heads they win and tails taxpayers lose? How do we avoid more Brindisis or more Castellóns? Answer those questions, Mr Juncker. Give us real detail about this investment, tell us why the private sector is not investing at the moment, and maybe then we can support your projects.
Guy Verhofstadt, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, I would like to say to Mr Kamall that Berlin airport is not still open either. But that is another issue, or – OK – maybe it is the same issue.
I think it is a good thing that we have this proposal here today. The plan is to start on 1 June 2015 – that is the idea – then the fund can be launched. And it is good that you are not talking about millions, dear colleagues, because for five years in a row we have discussed growth here and talked about millions and project bonds. We are now, I think, really on track by talking about the real investment gap, because the investment gap is huge in Europe: it is EUR 700 billion. Since the start of the crisis, investment stock in Europe has fallen by 14%, while in the US it has been stable during this whole period. So it is a serious and crucial question. And we have three points to make on whether this plan can work.
The first is that this investment plan, Mr Juncker, cannot be considered separately. I think that if you introduce legislation by the beginning of next year, you have to introduce legislation not only on this issue but also on the complementary important files that are necessary. The first is structural reforms in the Member States. Mr Weber has given a number of examples: labour market, pension market and, for me, you can even talk about conditionality here. Let us be honest: what is the purpose of funding investment projects in a number of countries if these countries do not make their own effort to carry out structural reforms? So for me, conditionality on structural reforms can be on the table by the beginning of next year if you come with your whole package.
The second thing: I think that this programme needs to have a second part, which is opening our markets, liberalising our markets, unifying our markets in digital, in energy. There are a number of examples. It is nonsense, naturally, to make an energy interconnection between Spain and France if at the same time there is regulation in France that does not allow the use of this energy coming from Spain – then this energy grid interconnection does not mean anything. The same applies to the digital market. If we still continue to have 28 supervisors in the digital market, forget your broadband. First of all, create your single supervisor in the digital market, and then these investments can be productive. That is the way forward. And a third example on capital markets – Lord Hill is there – if we continue to have no real unification of the capital markets, Lord Hill, you cannot use your assets in Britain to have an investment credit, for example, in Italy. So that is the way forward. We need not only this investment plan and package; we need, at the same time, regulation unifying this market, otherwise it will lose on a big scale.
My third point is on the functioning of the Fund. Let us be honest: I think that there is no room for manoeuvre to put public money in it. There is no public money. There are only public debts but no public money for the moment. So using a guarantee scheme is the right way to do it: you do not need capital for a guarantee scheme. You can create leverage, and I think that is not the most important thing for you now. I am thinking about the other side – the Council. The EIB is on board: you are on board because you are presenting the proposal. But these 28 Member States have to be on board too, because if they come on board in this guarantee scheme, you can have a far higher guarantee scheme than the EUR 21 billion that is on the table now. I would ask Mr Gozi and the Italian Presidency to raise this question at the next Council meeting in December. Is it not an obligation, dear colleagues for every Member State to participate in such a guarantee scheme to launch investments in Europe? So that has to be the message of the Italian Presidency.
And the second thing, Mr Gozi: why not bring in tax exemption? All the Member States can help to make it a huge success if, for example, for once, Member States did not impose a tax on the balance of these funds. That could create an enormous boost in the fund, because ordinary citizens could also be interested in taking out a bond in this fund, not only institutional investors. What do you receive for your money today? If you have some money in your bank, maybe nothing at all, because interest rates are so low. If this fund could have a return of 2% with no taxation by the Member States on it, then it could be a big success.
And finally, let us not simply fulfil the wish list of the Member States. It is up to the European Commission to make the choice of the projects, twinned with the EIB so they are not brothers in crime but brothers in investment.
(Applause)
Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας GUE/NGL. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Juncker, δυστυχώς το περίφημο πακέτο των 300 δισεκατομμυρίων ευρώ που μας υποσχεθήκατε στις 15 Ιουλίου είναι άδειο. Είναι σταγόνα στον ωκεανό. Τι μας παρουσιάσατε; Δεκαέξι δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ από τον κοινοτικό προϋπολογισμό και πέντε δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ από την Ευρωπαϊκή Τράπεζα Επενδύσεων. Ούτε ένα ευρώ φρέσκο χρήμα. Μας υπόσχεσθε ότι θα πετύχετε μόχλευση 15 φορές, ένα προς δεκαπέντε. Δεν υπάρχει ούτε ένας οικονομολόγος στον κόσμο που να πιστεύει, σε συνθήκες στασιμότητας της οικονομίας, με τον κίνδυνο μιας νέας ύφεσης στην ευρωζώνη και με τον κίνδυνο του αποπληθωρισμού, ότι είναι δυνατόν κεφάλαια να μοχλευθούν 15 φορές. Ακόμη και υπουργοί οικονομικών, που σας υποστηρίζουν και μετέχουν στις ομάδες που λένε «ζήτω το πακέτο Junker!», σας λένε ότι χρειάζεται φρέσκο χρήμα, ότι χρειάζονται νέα κεφάλαια. Η ιστορία της παγκόσμιας οικονομίας διδάσκει ότι, σε εποχές στασιμότητας ή και ύφεσης, χωρίς ισχυρούς δημόσιους πόρους, δεν είναι δυνατόν να υπάρχει στροφή στην ανάπτυξη. Ο κ. Verhofstadt είπε ότι οι επενδύσεις στην ευρωζώνη μετά την κρίση είναι 15 φορές παρακάτω, ενώ στις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες είναι παραπάνω. Γιατί; Διότι εκεί έριξαν χρήμα. Διότι εκεί η τράπεζα έπαιξε έναν αναπτυξιακό ρόλο ενώ εσείς εδώ δεν αλλάζετε τα εργαλεία. Κύριε Juncker, κάποια στιγμή προτείνατε να αξιοποιηθεί και ένα μέρος από τα λιμνάζοντα 500 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ του ESM αλλά μόλις ο κ. Schäuble είπε όχι και έβαλε το γερμανικό βέτο, το ξεχάσατε. Θα μας πείτε κάτι για αυτή την πρόταση; Και επειδή αναφερθήκατε και στα παιδιά από τη Θεσσαλονίκη, στην πατρίδα μου, η δική σας πολιτική με την τρόικα έχει προκαλέσει ύφεση 25%, ανεργία 30%, ανεργία στους νέους 60%, ανθρωπιστική κρίση. Το περίφημο πακέτο σας είναι business as usual, σε μια λογική γερμανοκρατούμενης Ευρώπης και σκληρής μονόπλευρης λιτότητας.
Philippe Lamberts, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur Juncker, je dois vous rendre hommage car vous venez, après moins d'un mois, nous présenter le début, en tout cas, de ce qui commence à ressembler à un plan d'investissements. Vous voulez donc tenir votre promesse, et c'est tout à votre honneur.
Je voulais vous dire que nous partageons le diagnostic que vous posez, à savoir que l'Europe souffre d'un manque d'investissements, mais il faut savoir ce que nous entendons par investissements.
Nous ne pensons pas que ce soient les investissements au sens de ceux qui, pour quelques jours, quelques heures ou quelques microsecondes, jouent avec de l'argent et qui s'appellent "investisseurs". Nous ne pensons pas non plus que l'investissement recouvre la notion qui consiste à alimenter des bulles immobilières ou des bulles d'actifs, comme nous le voyons aujourd'hui en permanence en Europe. Nous ne pensons pas non plus qu'investir signifie mettre des milliards afin de couler du béton pour faire une centrale nucléaire à Flamanville, un aéroport qui ne servira à personne à Notre-Dame-des-Landes, un barrage à Sivens ou pour bétonner complètement la côte espagnole ou la capitale irlandaise et, finalement, pour satisfaire soit une espèce d'orgueil politique ou technologique ou, tout simplement, pour faire des profits sans créer de valeurs.
Nous pensons, par contre, que le seul investissement utile est l'investissement financier, matériel et humain qui se met au service d'une cause, celle que le Pape François nous rappelait hier, celle de la dignité humaine. Il s'agit donc de la transformation écologique de nos infrastructures, de la restauration de nos ressources naturelles, de la cohésion sociale, de l'éducation, de la formation et de la recherche. Voilà la destination que devraient avoir les investissements en Europe, et votre plan, par ses finalités, semble en tout cas recouper un certain nombre de ces objectifs.
Par contre, au niveau de son volume, il est difficile de croire que la réallocation de 21 milliards d'euros déjà engagés, déjà sur la table, va à elle seule être capable, par un effet de levier, de mobiliser des investissements à hauteur de 315 milliards d'euros. J'entends bien ce que le patron de la BEI nous a dit: "Un ratio de levier de 15 nous semble peu crédible". Par ailleurs, je voudrais aussi souligner qu'il s'agit d'argent que nous prenons à des programmes existants; aller retirer de l'argent aux programmes européens de recherche, je pense que c'est un peu "priver Paul pour gâter Pierre", et je ne suis pas sûr qu'avec cela, nous fassions beaucoup avancer le schmilblick.
Enfin, de par son principe, ce plan vise notamment à ce que le secteur public couvre les premières pertes d'investissements, dont la majorité serait fournie par le secteur privé. Socialisation des pertes, privatisation des bénéfices, cela vous rappelle-t-il quelque chose? Je voudrais donc dire que ce plan est un bel effort, une belle tentative, et s'il y a moyen de l'améliorer, nous y contribuerons dans un esprit constructif. Cher Manfred, les Verts ont toujours voulu apporter leur pierre à l'édifice, mais je voudrais souligner des mesures qui nous semblent manquer et qui seraient un complément utile à ce plan.
Première mesure, fermer le casino. Vous savez, les investisseurs prennent toujours leurs décisions par comparaison. Aussi longtemps qu'un investisseur pourra aller au casino et y gagner de l'argent facilement avec la garantie publique sans risque, il préférera toujours se rendre au casino plutôt qu'investir dans le monde réel. Il y a donc là encore beaucoup à faire pour fermer l'économie casino.
Des choses ont été faites, mais lorsque la Banque centrale européenne met 1 000 milliards d'euros à la disposition des entreprises et que, de ces 1 000 milliards, 50 se retrouvent dans l'économie réelle et, donc, 950 vont dans des bulles, je suis désolé mais les investisseurs continuent à préférer le casino.
La deuxième mesure est le lien avec un autre débat que nous avons: la lutte contre la fraude et l'évasion fiscales. Monsieur Juncker, 21 milliards, c'est ce que devraient payer quelques multinationales si elles payaient un taux d'impôt comme les PME en Europe. Il faut donc mobiliser cet argent-là. La lutte contre la fraude et l'évasion fiscales est un élément intégrant de votre plan d'investissements; elle devrait l'être en tout cas.
Enfin, il faut revoir notre fiscalité. Nous continuons à subventionner les énergies fossiles à hauteur de dizaines de milliards en Europe chaque année. Nous disons qu'il faut réorienter ces subsides vers des subsides à l'investissement utile qui nous permettront de faire la transition écologique et d'affranchir l'Europe d'une facture quotidienne d'un milliard d'euros pour Vladimir Poutine et les cheiks arabes.
Voilà les mesures complémentaires que nous allons proposer à votre plan.
Patrick O’Flynn (EFDD). - Mr President, I thought that some deals in the City of London were highly leveraged, but it turns out that is nothing compared to the European Commission. The brutal truth is you do not have 315 billion euros to spend, or anything like it, and what you do have to spend means throwing good money after bad. As the OECD has now admitted, the eurozone has persistent stagnation tendencies. Mr Juncker is trying to implement a bodged solution, but the truth is that the vehicle itself is unsound. The euro is what motor traders in my country would call a lemon, and it should be scrapped. It prevents the weaker nations of the zone from using exchange rate depreciation as a mechanism for protecting economic activity in tough times.
In Britain, we saved probably a million jobs by allowing the pound sterling to depreciate after the 2008 crash. In Euroland, you lost several million jobs because Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain were unable to follow suit. Of course, one can only pay tribute to the fundamental strength of the German economy. Germany has the infrastructure, the good industrial relations, the excellent technical education, economies of scale, R&D budget and the world’s leading brands; but to expect the southern eurozone members to live in the same exchange rate and same interest rate regime is pure folly. Southern Europe is in a terrible state. The extent of unemployment – and youth unemployment in particular – is a disgrace. It gives the lie to any claim you might wish to make that the EU in its present incarnation is a force for good. There is a fundamentally deflationary bias brought about by the euro across southern Europe. Twenty billion euros parcelled up to sound like 300 billion will not change that. Your imperial ambitions are robbing the peoples of the world’s greatest continent of the chance to fulfil their potential.
Mr Juncker, this is not a new deal – still less Christmas coming early, as you claimed. It is just another EU turkey!
Gerolf Annemans (NI). - Ik denk niet dat ik overdrijf, mijnheer Juncker, als ik de kwestie van uw pakket voor tewerkstelling, groei en investeringen hier en vandaag reeds een farce noem. Het pakket is een warrige rommelhoop van samengescharrelde kruimels. Bovendien een beschamend recyclagespektakel, waarbij nieuwe etiketten worden gekleefd op potjes geld die hier blijkbaar in de wandelgangen nutteloos lagen te sudderen en bovendien, bovenop dat alles, een dossier van leverage, een heus hefboomfonds, een al bij al, als je het spreidt over 28 lidstaten, futiele waterkan van 315 miljard, blijkt een tiende ervan te zijn. Hocus-pocus, abracadabra, de grote tover-Juncker bedelft ons onder nepgeld.
Weet u, mijnheer Juncker, wat uw grootste probleem na vandaag wordt? Ik zal het u zeggen, nadat u zich aan uw zetel heeft moeten vastklampen wegens een ongehoord schandaal was uw mandaat van voorzitter van de Europese Commissie reeds onomkeerbaar bevlekt. Vanaf vandaag moeten wij u bovendien beschuldigen van het feit dat u in een zo belangwekkende zaak er niet voor terugdeinst om ons allemaal maandenlang een rad voor ogen te draaien. Uw grootste probleem is vanaf vandaag, nu en tot wanneer wij u hier wegkrijgen, uw geloofwaardigheid? Egredere, verdwijn en stuur ons iemand die wij tenminste kunnen geloven en vertrouwen!
Pietro Carlo Padoan, Presidente in carica del Consiglio. - Signor Presidente, onorevoli deputati, signor Presidente della Commissione, l'iniziativa del Presidente Juncker è quanto mai opportuna. È inutile negare che la crescita in Europa è poco soddisfacente. Ci sono previsioni della crescita che sono costantemente rivolte verso il basso. C'è un rischio serio di movimento verso la stagnazione, mentre l'inflazione rimane troppo bassa troppo a lungo. È necessario uno shock positivo per imboccare un diverso sentiero di crescita, allontanare il rischio di stagnazione. È necessario e possibile per tutta l'Europa.
La Presidenza italiana del Consiglio ha posto la crescita e l'occupazione al centro della sua agenda e ha indicato tre pilastri: le riforme strutturali, la maggiore integrazione, sia all'interno dell'Europa che verso l'esterno, e il sostegno agli investimenti. La ripresa degli investimenti è cruciale per porre l'Unione europea su un nuovo sentiero di crescita. Gli investimenti, infatti, sostengono la domanda nel breve periodo e rafforzano l'offerta e il prodotto potenziale nel medio periodo. Come molti hanno ricordato, negli ultimi anni la caduta degli investimenti è stata drammatica e generalizzata. Occorre invertire questa tendenza. Le riforme strutturali sono necessarie sia a livello nazionale, in tutti i paesi, che europeo. Le riforme migliorano il business environment, aumentano le prospettive di investimento e di profitto. Inoltre non dimentichiamo che riforme adottate in più paesi generano effetti di spillover positivi e importanti in un'area così fortemente integrata come quella europea.
Ma le riforme sono anche a livello europeo, basta ricordare il completamento dell'Unione bancaria e i recenti risultati come l'adozione di uno standard per lo scambio automatico di informazioni contro l'evasione fiscale. Sono riforme che cambiano le regole, cambiano i comportamenti e cambiano quindi le risorse. Le riforme e l'integrazione generano opportunità di investimenti, la finanza rende possibili questi investimenti. Il dilemma di cui spesso si parla, vale a dire se servono più risorse o se servono progetti, è un dilemma falso: servono ambedue. Se i progetti profittevoli aumentano, bisognerà quindi aumentare le risorse direttamente o indirettamente necessarie per finanziarli.
La task force sugli investimenti lanciata da Ecofin, di cui fanno parte la Banca europea degli investimenti, la Commissione e gli Stati membri, ha già prodotto risultati concreti in termini di progetti da finanziare. Può essere un modello di comportamento anche per il futuro. Il programma presentato dal Presidente della Commissione potrà svolgere un ruolo decisivo per dare impulso agli investimenti e alla crescita e avviare un processo che dovrà essere rafforzato nel tempo e sempre più collegato alle altre leve di politica economica di cui l'Europa dispone o si vorrà dotare. Il Consiglio Ecofin intende dare un contributo fattivo già dalla sua prossima riunione tra qualche giorno.
È necessario anche – è stato già ricordato da molti – che si attivino sia gli investimenti privati che quelli pubblici. È importante che le risorse pubbliche siano mobilizzate per fornire un effetto leva agli investimenti privati, per fornire una rafforzata capacità di risk taking. Ma non dimentichiamoci che gli investimenti pubblici hanno anche un effetto diretto sugli investimenti privati, soprattutto in condizioni di domanda aggregata debole e prolungata come quella attuale. In condizioni di domanda aggregata debole come quella attuale l'orizzonte temporale delle imprese si accorcia, la fiducia si indebolisce e con essa si indebolisce la propensione al rischio e all'investimento. Siamo di fronte a un fallimento di mercato, c'è bisogno di azione pubblica assieme alle scelte dei privati. E per facilitare gli investimenti privati occorrono, lo ripeto, riforme, programmi di riforma per migliorare il business environment e anche l'introduzione di nuovi strumenti finanziari. Vedo questa prospettiva come collegata all'idea che sta emergendo di una capital markets Union. Accanto ai sistemi bancari come fonte principale di finanziamento privato bisogna sviluppare altri strumenti che rafforzino quelli già esistenti.
In tutto ciò è fondamentale il ruolo della Banca europea degli investimenti, anche in collaborazione con le banche nazionali di sviluppo, con cui dovrebbe essere rafforzato il rapporto già forte in una rete complessiva che possa non solo moltiplicare le risorse, ma moltiplicare la capacità tecnica di selezionare i progetti e quindi di indirizzare le risorse verso questi progetti, lungo i settori di investimento strategico che sono noti: infrastruttura, istruzione, ricerche e sviluppo in energia. Questi settori sono importanti in sé, ma sono importanti nel loro complesso. Non dimentichiamoci che la caduta progressiva degli investimenti in Europa è anche quella che fa allontanare l'Europa dalla frontiera tecnologica e quindi abbatte le prospettive di crescita nel lungo periodo.
Mi sto avviando alla conclusione, e vorrei concludere con una riflessione sola: tutto ciò va fatto in fretta. Le aspettative da parte dei cittadini dell'Unione europea sono crescenti ma il rischio di delusione è anch'esso crescente. Il progetto avviato oggi dalla Commissione è importante, richiederà un po' di tempo per essere completato e per essere collaudato. Nel frattempo si possono fare già delle cose. Si possono utilizzare i progetti selezionati, si possono indirizzare le risorse esistenti verso quei progetti. Si può dare così un segnale di fiducia che aumenti la confidence nei confronti dell'azione pubblica, sia a livello nazionale che a livello europeo, e quindi già in questo modo ribaltare la tendenza alla caduta degli investimenti privati.
La revisione verso il basso delle prospettive di crescita a cui mi riferivo è spesso spiegata in gran parte dalla scarsa fiducia nella politica da parte dei cittadini europei. Anche questo è compito delle istituzioni. Sono convinto che l'iniziativa presentata oggi dal Presidente Juncker e dalla Commissione non sia che il primo passo molto importante di una svolta nella gestione della politica economica e quindi nella capacità dell'Europa di tornare a produrre crescita e lavoro.
Jyrki Katainen, Vice-President of the Commission. - Mr President, I would like to thank you all for your very valuable contribution. From now on, we have to concentrate on very deep cooperation in order to make this plan real.
Today, Mr Juncker’s Commission is fulfilling the first promise we made when we were appointed: we are setting out an investment plan that will change the way public money is used for investment in Europe. There is ample liquidity in the market. Interest rates are very low and financial market tension has eased.
At the same time, there is a real demand for credible investment projects, and yet investment is not happening. There is a severe disconnect. Uncertainties and risk aversion are stifling investment flows. Public authorities can play a vital role in both supply and demand. We need to make long-term financing available for projects that contribute towards our common priorities for Europe: energy, digital, transport, and research and innovation. To succeed, Europe must be united and innovative.
We can only deliver a programme of this scale and ambition with the strong political support of this House. We count on your support for this investment plan, to sustain its high level of ambition and to send a clear message to voters that their voices have been heard. I know that attention will be concentrated today on the additional financial capacity. Important as this is, for me this is not enough in itself. As I said in my hearing, I do not want to just put numbers on a piece of paper or money on a table.
Therefore, we are presenting a major reform of investment at European level. We want to make sure that real investment happens in the real economy and that we create real new opportunities in Europe.
The EU investment plan is a triangle, with three parts. Firstly, we will ensure that every euro invested through this plan maximises its impact on the real economy. To achieve this, we will launch a European Fund for Strategic Investment together with the EIB. This fund will be underpinned by guarantees from the EU budget and a capital contribution from the EIB worth a total of EUR 21 billion.
The new, fresh lending capacity of this new fund will be more than EUR 60 billion to the real economy. It will be directed at higher-risk investments providing first-loss guarantees – and I want to repeat this: it will be directed at higher-risk investments providing first-loss guarantees – to complement the traditional lending activity of the EIB. It will also be used to finance long-term strategic investment and to provide additional finance for SMEs and mid-sized companies.
The fund, which is backed by a solid EU guarantee, will bring in more money from investors in the public and private sector, who will be reassured by a lower risk. We estimate that, by this multiplier effect, the fund will unlock public and private investment into the real economy to a value of more than EUR 300 billion. This is a robust, conservative assumption based on previous EIB and EU experiences.
This is not about complex financial instruments for their own sake but about making investment happen. To those who claim that this is not ʽrealʼ money, my reply is: nonsense. This is a very real, additional public lending capacity of more than EUR 60 billion which acts as a magnet to draw in real investment in real projects and create real jobs. What it is not is an expensive cash handout which will damage our public-sector finances and have no longer-term sustainable impact.
Today, we come together to deliver our part. The next step is for national governments to step in and provide additional capital to the fund, and we strongly encourage Member States to do so. The Member States’ contribution to the fund will be Stability and Growth Pact (SGP)-neutral.
In addition to this, we also look to the Member States to use their EU Structural Funds better and to double the use of financial instruments such as loans and guarantees. Currently, 92% of Structural Funds go to grant schemes. This has to change. Once the money is granted, it is gone. We need to make better use of this financing so that it goes further and has a real effect on the economy.
At the heart of this package there is a political choice: either we continue business as usual with traditional grants and loans and that is as far as the money goes, or we use our budget in the most efficient way to support riskier borrowing and create a larger lending capacity. This is the choice we have made. It is a new approach at European level, to change the way public money is used.
As a second pillar, we want to make sure that this money reaches the real economy. Together with the EIB we are creating a transparent pipeline of trusted investment. We will be identifying viable projects at EU level and stepping up the necessary technical assistance to support project structuring and the use of more innovative financial instruments for Member States.
This is what investors are asking for. There is money out there, but investors tell us they need well-structured, high-quality projects with access to clear and transparent information. The task force led by the Commission and the EIB, with Member States, is currently identifying over a thousand projects which are ready to be assessed. We want to give a European label for the most viable ones.
We need sound investments for the future, not another bubble. That is why we are proposing this combination of guarantees at EU level for higher-risk investments, along with longer-term projects in line with our strategic priorities. Together they will enable us to start moving quickly and also to deliver sustainable investment for the long term.
Thirdly, we want to remove barriers to investment by the private sector. We need to step up our efforts to have better regulation. We need to work with the Member States to renew Europe with structural reforms which create a more favourable investment environment and better competitiveness and create more growth and jobs.
We want to create a single market in the energy, digital, capital, public procurement and services areas. This helps to remove regulatory barriers for business to invest. There are many companies out there creating digital products. They have a single market in the United States but not here. There are many people who want to invest in the energy sector, but until they have an energy union they cannot do so as easily as, say, in the food sector.
The single market needs to be deepened in services and in public procurement. I will also support my fellow Commissioners in completing the single market in energy, the digital sector and transport. I will also work closely with Commissioner Jonathan Hill to deliver a capital markets union. We need a financial sector which serves our companies better – especially SMEs – and reduces their dependence on financing from the banks.
For me, this single market dimension – the third side of the triangle – is the most important part of our work and the one that really changes Europe permanently. Of course, this will not happen overnight, but we can make change together if we are determined. This is our joint responsibility.
Each of these three strands of the investment triangle is needed to make investment happen in Europe. Each strand reinforces the others. I am sure some will say that the money of this new investment fund is not enough. We do not need – and we do not want – to maximise the taxpayers’ burden. What matters is real investment, not just large sums of money sitting in a bank.
We are going to use a relatively small amount of public money to remove the fear factor and unlock the investment funds which are already there and waiting to be used. We need just enough money to get the motor running. After that it will have a life of its own. If Member States still believe these funds are not enough, we invite them to make their own additional contributions.
For the investment plan to succeed, Member States must take courageous decisions and the ECB will need to play its part. On its own, the plan is not a magic bullet to transform the European economy but – and it is a very important but – if we implement all three elements of our plan, we will change the European investment landscape permanently and structurally for the better. So let us all get to work together to get investments working in Europe again.
Der Präsident. - Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.
Schriftliche Erklärungen (Artikel 162 GO)
Clara Eugenia Aguilera García (S&D), por escrito. – El plan de inversiones de 315 000 millones de euros propuesto por la Comisión es un primer paso para estimular el crecimiento en la deprimida economía europea: un plan fruto de la presión del Grupo Socialista en el Parlamento Europeo. El diseño presentado contiene incertidumbres que en las próximas semanas se deben detallar. El fondo parte con poco capital inicial aportado por el BEI, siendo el resto garantías con base en los presupuestos de la Comisión. Es vital la participación de los Estados a través de garantías y a través de capital proveniente de los países con espacio de maniobra fiscal. Asimismo, el fondo debe dotarse de un modelo de gobernanza creíble que permita una selección profesionalizada de los proyectos, con mayor incidencia en las economías con peores perspectivas. La credibilidad de los nuevos proyectos será central para lograr la elevada participación del capital privado, base sobre la que se asienta el conjunto del programa. Trabajaremos en los próximos meses en el Parlamento Europeo para aclarar las incertidumbres que presenta el plan Juncker y para que éste sea más ambicioso, pero también para que se produzcan más cambios en la, hasta ahora, equivocada política económica europea.
Hugues Bayet (S&D), par écrit. – Le plan de relance présenté par Jean-Claude Juncker est un premier pas qui manque d'ambition et suscite avant tout l'interrogation. Les critères restent flous quant à la procédure de sélection des projets. La Commission n'a pas donné de chiffres en matière d'impact des projets en ce qui concerne la création d'emplois ni pour les investissements sociaux. Une fois de plus, les leviers publics sont nécessaires afin de dynamiser la frilosité du secteur privé. Je voudrais d'ailleurs rappeler l'échec récent du TLTRO mis en œuvre par la BCE. Le secteur privé doit aujourd'hui prendre ses responsabilités dans le cadre du Plan. Nul doute par ailleurs que les investissements publics seront nécessaires aussi à la relance européenne via la participation des Etats membres au Fonds. Et la flexibilité annoncée quant à la comptabilisation de ces investissements dans le calcul de la dette devra se concrétiser. Lors de cette présentation, j'ai également pris connaissance avec intérêt de la recommandation de la Commission demandant à la Belgique "de se concentrer plus sur les investissements publics" alors que les normes comptables européennes SEC2010 brident de plus en plus les capacités d'investissement, en particulier des communes.
José Blanco López (S&D), por escrito. – El plan de inversiones de 315 000 millones de euros propuesto por la Comisión es un primer paso para estimular el crecimiento en la deprimida economía europea: un plan fruto de la presión del Grupo Socialista en el Parlamento Europeo. El diseño presentado contiene incertidumbres que en las próximas semanas se deben detallar. El fondo parte con poco capital inicial aportado por el BEI, siendo el resto garantías con base en los presupuestos de la Comisión. Es vital la participación de los Estados a través de garantías y a través de capital proveniente de los países con espacio de maniobra fiscal. Asimismo, el fondo debe dotarse de un modelo de gobernanza creíble que permita una selección profesionalizada de los proyectos, con mayor incidencia en las economías con peores perspectivas. La credibilidad de los nuevos proyectos será central para lograr la elevada participación del capital privado, base sobre la que se asienta el conjunto del programa. Trabajaremos en los próximos meses en el Parlamento Europeo para aclarar las incertidumbres que presenta el plan Juncker y para que éste sea más ambicioso, pero también para que se produzcan más cambios en la, hasta ahora, equivocada política económica europea.
Jonás Fernández (S&D), por escrito. – El plan de inversiones de 315 000 millones de euros propuesto por la Comisión gracias a la presión del Grupo S&D es una buena noticia para la deprimida economía europea. Su urgente necesidad es ampliamente compartida en el ámbito académico, tal y como lo demuestran multitud de estudios económicos, y por la ciudadanía, que ha conformado iniciativas sociales como New Deal 4 Europe. Los socialistas nos felicitamos de este paso tomado por la Comisión a instancias de nuestro Grupo. El diseño presentado contiene incertidumbres que en las próximas semanas se deben detallar. El fondo parte con poco capital inicial aportado por el BEI, siendo el resto garantías con base en los presupuestos de la Comisión. Es vital la participación de los Estados a través de garantías y a través de capital proveniente de los países con margen de maniobra fiscal. Asimismo, el fondo debe dotarse de un modelo de gobernanza creíble que permita una selección profesionalizada de los proyectos, con mayor incidencia en las economías con peores perspectivas. La credibilidad de los nuevos proyectos será central para lograr la elevada participación del capital privado, base sobre la que se asienta el conjunto del programa.
João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), escrito. – O já designado plano Juncker é bem a evidência da profunda crise em que a UE continua mergulhada e da falta de soluções do sistema para lhe pôr fim. Esta terá sido a condição que os socialistas europeus impuseram a Juncker para apoiarem a sua eleição. Vejamos: um programa que reúne 16 mil milhões de euros do orçamento da UE (anteriormente afetados a outros programas) e 5 mil milhões de capital proveniente do Banco Europeu de Investimento. Verba que se procura multiplicar por 15, qual milagre da multiplicação dos pães, graças a investimento privado. Recorde-se que já em 2012 Durão Barroso havia anunciado milagre parecido, embora mais modesto: 10 mil milhões de euros de fundos do BEI transformar-se-iam, através de instrumentos financeiros inovadores, em 60 mil milhões para empréstimos que garantiriam 100 mil milhões de investimentos. Não se concederam mais de 15 mil milhões de empréstimos. Em ambos os casos, a pompa e a circunstância acompanharam o anúncio de medidas que, jurava Barroso como agora jura Juncker, significam a entrada num novo ciclo, marcado pelo crescimento e o emprego. Pura propaganda. Do que se trata é de mais uma injeção de recursos públicos no sistema financeiro, para benefício certo de algumas multinacionais e incerto de países como Portugal.
Javi López (S&D), por escrito. – El plan de inversión propuesto por el Presidente de la Comisión pretende destinar 315 000 millones de euros de capital público y privado para revitalizar la economía europea y crear puestos de trabajo. Se prevé un impacto de entre el 2,5 y el 3,1 por ciento en la tasa de crecimiento del PIB y la creación de 1,3 millones de nuevos empleos en el período 2015-2017. A pesar de que la propuesta de la Comisión no requiere ni aportaciones ni garantías por parte de los Estados, cabe destacar que esto posee dos aspectos positivos: la inversión realizada por el programa no computará en el cálculo del déficit, y la gobernanza del nuevo FEIE no adoptará una estructura intergubernamental, sino que estará bajo la égida del a Comisión y del BEI. Los aspectos más débiles son el apalancamiento propuesto, poco realista, de 1 a 15, así como la falta de mención a la participación del BCE en la compra de los bonos que se emitan para financiar el FEIE.
Krystyna Łybacka (S&D), na piśmie. – W dyskusji nad pakietem inwestycyjnym zwracam uwagę na dwie kwestie: innowacje i edukację. Innowacje to 60% wzrostu w UE. Ambitny plan przewodniczącego Junckera może być zrealizowany tylko wtedy, jeśli będziemy inwestować w innowacje na poziomie unijnym, krajowym i lokalnym. Niestety, dużym problemem, który stawia pod znakiem zapytania największy unijny program w zakresie innowacji Horyzont 2020, jest brak środków na płatności. Jeśli obecny trend ograniczeń w płatnościach będzie się utrzymywał, to pod koniec 2020 r. 40% zobowiązań wobec uczestników programu nie będzie uregulowanych.
Kolejna kwestia to edukacja i szkolenia, które muszą być zmodernizowane, dostępne dla wszystkich, elastyczne i ukierunkowane na potrzeby rynku pracy. Na europejskim rynku pracy Unia musi pełnić rolę koordynatora, podmiotu doradczego wspierającego proces kształcenia i podnoszącego jego jakość. Dlatego dodatkowe środki w pakiecie inwestycyjnym muszą zostać przeznaczone m.in. na zniwelowanie nierówności edukacyjno-szkoleniowych. Do priorytetów w obszarze edukacji i szkoleń należą również: rozszerzenie gwarancji dla młodzieży o osoby do 30 roku życia, szersze wdrożenie dualnego systemu kształcenia opartego na międzynarodowej współpracy, utrzymanie i rozszerzenie współpracy w ramach programu Erasmus+ oraz, podobnie jak w przypadku programu Horyzont 2020, rozwiązanie problemu niewystarczających płatności, który zagraża dalszemu rozwojowi tego programu. Pakiet powinien uwzględniać zapewnienie wysokiej jakości kształcenia przez całe życie.
Sergio Gutiérrez Prieto (S&D), por escrito. – El plan de inversiones de 315 000 millones de euros propuesto por la Comisión es un primer paso para estimular el crecimiento en la deprimida economía europea: un plan fruto de la presión del Grupo Socialista en el Parlamento Europeo. El diseño presentado contiene incertidumbres que en las próximas semanas se deben detallar. El fondo parte con poco capital inicial aportado por el BEI, siendo el resto garantías con base en los presupuestos de la Comisión. Es vital la participación de los Estados a través de garantías y a través de capital proveniente de los países con espacio de maniobra fiscal. Asimismo, el fondo debe dotarse de un modelo de gobernanza creíble que permita una selección profesionalizada de los proyectos, con mayor incidencia en las economías con peores perspectivas. La credibilidad de los nuevos proyectos será central para lograr la elevada participación del capital privado, base sobre la que se asienta el conjunto del programa. Trabajaremos en los próximos meses en el Parlamento Europeo para aclarar las incertidumbres que presenta el plan Juncker y para que éste sea más ambicioso, pero también para que se produzcan más cambios en la, hasta ahora, equivocada política económica europea.
Eduard-Raul Hellvig (PPE), în scris. – Dezvoltarea infrastructurii și impulsionarea economiei țărilor ce au aderat recent la Uniunea Europeană trebuie să fie una din prioritățile Fondului european pentru investiții strategice. Reducerea decalajelor între vechile și noile state membre este un imperativ pentru aprofundarea integrării europene și reprezintă, totodată, o oportunitate semnificativă pentru relansarea creșterii economice și crearea de noi locuri de muncă. Alinierea și mai buna conectare europeană a infrastructurii de transport, spre exemplu, din România și din alte noi state membre nu este doar o dovadă concretă de solidaritate, ci poate fi un business profitabil pentru toți cei implicați. De aceea, pledez pentru canalizarea investițiilor europene în vederea impulsionării regiunilor mai puțin dezvoltate din UE și pentru crearea unor rețele de transport și de aprovizionare energetică menite să consolideze proiectul integrării europene. Concomitent, consider că se impun la nivelul Uniunii măsuri eficiente și urgente pentru încurajarea investițiilor private și flexibilizarea pieței muncii, precum și pentru combaterea fraudei și evaziunii fiscale. Altfel, va fi dificil de atins ținta de 315 miliarde de euro, fonduri pe care Comisia Europeană dorește ca Fondul strategic să le atragă drept investiții suplimentare în perioada 2015 - 2017.
Tunne Kelam (PPE), in writing. – Future of Europe can only be built on competitiveness and solidarity based on trust, credible partnerships between public and private sector and cutting red tape. Future investments need to flow into innovation and completion of single market - energy, digital, services. The key of Junker's initiative lies in not accepting stagnation, but taking a risk by proposing a bold, modern and competent initiative. This should attract new investments worth up to 315 billion, not by taking loans or giving in regarding fiscal discipline as wished by the socialists, but instead by involving EIB to encourage active use of the money available in banks, ensuring guarantees by EIB and EU budget. The encouraging positive reaction by the bigger political groups, is what even the socialist leader Pittella described as entering a new era. One of core issues is cutting red tape on all levels in the EU. Considerable amounts of EU funding is not spent due to rigid and overcomplicated rules preventing SME-s, local authorities, farmers and others to benefit and thrive for growth. And finally we need to attract businesses to invest into public projects. This is possible only if public sector appears fiscally sustainable and stable. Fiscal discipline is core for building trust.
Marian-Jean Marinescu (PPE), in writing. – Europe needs more prosperity, job creation, stability and sustainable growth. This can only be achieved through further investment. The Investment Plan is an ambitious and viable step in that direction aiming at adding around EUR 330 billion to the EU GDP over the next three years and creating up to 1.3 million jobs in key strategic areas, such as energy, transport, education, research and innovation. The economic crisis has generated a crisis of confidence in Europe, we need to attract private investments in order to boost the attainment of genuine, growth-generating European projects. We have the right tools at our disposal and on top of that, we have been presented with a fresh innovative Investment Plan that can streamline all the resources we have at our disposal. I ask all the Member States to fully support and actively take part in this project in order to help restore a sustainable and stable European Union.
Georg Mayer (NI) , schriftlich. – Die Europäische-Union möchte über 300Mrd€ in den Ausbau von Infrastruktur, Forschung und Entwicklung investieren, um die europäische Wirtschaft wettbewerbsfähiger zu machen. Prinzipiell ist diese Vorhaben, „InvestinEurope, ja eine gute Idee, wenn da nicht die Frage zu klären wäre, wo dieses Kapital herkommen soll! Zur Erklärung: „InvestinEurope“ soll mit 16Mrd€ durch die Beitragsleistungen und weiteren 5Mrd€ durch die Europäische-Investitionsbank ausgestattet werden. Ab da beginnt der Zauber. Die Kommission erwartet, dass diese 21Mrd€ aus öffentlichen Geldern, Investoren aus der Privatwirtschaft anlocken werden, deren Gelder wiederum zu Investitionen in die Realwirtschaft in Höhe von 315Mrd€ führen sollen. Juncker verspricht also einen „Finanzhebel“ der aus 21Mrd€ Kapital, 315Mrd€ an Investitionen machen wird. Der Zauber bei dieser wundersamen Geldvermehrung beruht darauf, dass den investierenden Unternehmen das Risikos abgenommen wird! Damit wird die EU zum Risikokapitalgeber, denn wer Unternehmen alle Risiken bei Investitionen abnimmt, fördert jene Zocker-Mentalität, die zur Finanzkrise geführt hat. Dieser Juncker-Plan ist ein Beispiel für eine skandalöse Verschuldenspolitik, auf Kosten der Bürger: die Gewinne aus Projekten werden privatisiert – die Investoren schöpfen die Gewinne ab. Die möglichen Verluste aus diesen risikobehafteten Projekten, die trägt jedoch die Öffentlichkeit, also der europäischen Steuerzahler. Seriös ist das nicht und fair gegenüber den europäischen Steuerzahlern schon gar nicht!
Csaba Molnár (S&D), írásban. – Az új Európai Bizottság által bejelentett, 300 milliárd euró értékű munkahely-teremtési, növekedési és beruházási csomag garancia arra, hogy az Európai Unió erősebben emelkedjen ki történetének legnagyobb gazdasági és szociális váláságából. A beruházási csomag reményt jelent a közel félmillió munkanélküli magyar polgárnak is. Azzal, hogy a Fidesz EP-képviselői az új Európai Bizottság megbuktatásán munkálkodnak, az új munkahelyekre, a gazdasági növekedés beindítására mondanak nemet.
A fideszes Gáll-Pelcz Ildikó múlt heti nyilatkozata, miszerint megszavazzák az Európai Bizottság elnöke ellen benyújtott bizalmatlansági indítványt, leleplezte a Fideszt. Már nem csak a Jobbikkal hajlandóak együttműködni, de az európai szélsőségesek nézeteit is támogatják. Jean-Claude Juncker, a Bizottság elnöke ellen benyújtott bizalmatlansági indítványt ugyanis a Fidesz képviselőin kívül várhatóan csak az EP szélsőjobboldali képviselői szavazzák meg. Ha Juncker és vele az új Európai Bizottság elbukik, a növekedés beindításának utolsó esélye is elvész. Javaslom fideszes képviselőtársaimnak, hogy végre az Európai Unió és benne Magyarország megerősítését, valamint a polgárok valódi érdekeit tartsák szem előtt.
Κωνσταντίνος Παπαδάκης (NI), γραπτώς. – Το λεγόμενο "επενδυτικό πακέτο", με δημιουργία ενός ταμείου που θα διαχειρίζεται τις επενδύσεις, που παρουσίασε σήμερα στην Ολομέλεια του Ευρωκοινοβουλίου, ο πρόεδρος της Επιτροπής Ζ.Κ. Γιούνγκερ, επιδιώκει να προσφέρει επιπλέον κεφάλαια στους επιχειρηματικούς ομίλους, προκειμένου να πραγματοποιήσουν επενδύσεις, με κρατική χρηματοδότηση, για να αυξήσουν την κερδοφορία τους . Αυτή η χρηματοδότηση θα προέλθει από την ακόμη μεγαλύτερης έκτασης λεηλασία του εργατικού λαϊκού εισοδήματος. Σύσσωμο το αστικό πολιτικό προσωπικό, στοιχισμένο στις επιταγές του κεφαλαίου, απαίτησε τη συνέχιση των "διαρθρωτικών μεταρρυθμίσεων", να συνεχίσει δηλαδή να ματώνει ο εργαζόμενος λαός για να δημιουργηθεί "ελκυστικό περιβάλλον" για τα μονοπώλια, με πάμφθηνη εργατική δύναμη, χωρίς εργασιακά και κοινωνικά ασφαλιστικά δικαιώματα. Στην ίδια ρότα της καπιταλιστικής διαχείρισης, ο ΣΥΡΙΖΑ, κατά τη συζήτηση, αφού εκθείασε την "αναπτυξιακή" πολιτική της Ομοσπονδιακής Τράπεζας των ΗΠΑ, διαμαρτυρήθηκε γιατί τα χρήματα στους "υγιείς επιχειρηματίες" είναι λίγα, απαιτώντας περισσότερο "φρέσκο" χρήμα για κερδοφόρες επενδύσεις των μονοπωλίων.
Andrej Plenković (PPE), napisan. – Na sastanku sudionika G20 predsjednik Juncker je najavio investicijski paket od 300 milijardi eura koji EK planira predstaviti prije Božića, a s ciljem poticanja prioriteta rasta europskog gospodarskog prostora, konkurentnosti te radnih mjesta.
Kako bi se novac mobilizirao u naredne tri godine prema javnim i privatnim investicijama, treba se stvoriti pogodno investicijsko okruženje te pojačati apsorpcija fondova. Nadalje, trebala bi se pojačati priprema projekata EIB-a i Komisije. Dodatne investicije treba usmjeriti ka infrastrukturi, ponajviše prema energetskim mrežama, prometnoj infrastrukturi te obnovljivoj energiji. Za brži izlazak iz krize treba promicati inovacije i konkurentnost, pogotovo kada se radi o malim i srednjim poduzećima koja su okosnica ekonomije. S tim u vezi bi ih trebalo osloboditi administrativnih opterećenja.
Smatram kako će povjerenik Katainen ustrajati u provedbi paketa te osigurati rast, zapošljavanje i ulaganje koje većina građana EU-a očekuje od početka krize 2009. Na sjednici središnjeg odbora EPP-a u Rigi predstavljeno je pet stupova za rast i radna mjesta: stabilnost, pristup kapitalu za MSP, europsko jedinstveno tržište, pametne investicije i jačanje industrije u povezanoj Europi. Vjerujem da će kombinacija ovih paketa mjera imati pozitivan učinak na rast te će revizija VFO-a 2016. godine staviti fokus na daljnje usmjeravanje proračuna ka zapošljavanju, rastu i konkurentnosti.
Bronis Ropė (Verts/ALE), raštu. – Sveikinu Komisiją pateikus Investicijų planą. Europai šiuo metu reikia investicijų, užtikrinsiančių ilgalaikę ir stabilią gerovę. Daugiau teigiamo pasakyti apie pateiktą planą sunku. Jis elementariai nesubalansuoja finansų srautų, neaišku, kaip planuojama pritraukti 315 mlrd. eurų. Vadinamosios inovatyvios finansinės inžinerijos priemonės, turinčios per 7 metus net 15 kartų padidinti ES investicijų vertę, atrodo labiau panašios į spekuliacijas vertybiniais popieriais optimistinėse besivystančiose rinkose, o ne į ilgalaikes investicijas į regionų augimą. Be to, noriu atkreipti dėmesį, kad tokie planai skelbiami dabar, kai ES biudžete nerandama lėšų kompensuoti Sąjungos įsipareigojimus 2007–2013 m. laikotarpio projektams. Minčių pasisemti galima iš žaliųjų parengto investicijų plano, kuris paremtas realiai galimomis mobilizuoti viešojo sektoriaus lėšomis. Mes esame realistai, todėl nemanome, kad vienas viešojo sektoriaus išlaidų euras pritrauks daugiau nei du iš privataus sektoriaus. Mūsų siūlomų priemonių poveikis bus kur kas tvaresnis – švaresnė aplinka, sumažinta tarša, tvaresnė ir išteklius taupanti ekonomika. Žalieji siūlo iš esmės perorientuoti ekonomiką ir skatinti socialias bei aplinkai palankias naujoves, kurti efektyvią, nepriklausomą nuo išorės, energetinę sąjungą. Tokiu būdu užtikrinant plano naudojimą sprendžiant socialinę atskirtį, skurdo problemas, kuriant visiems piliečiams orias gyvenimo sąlygas.
Ivan Štefanec (PPE), napisan. – Podporujem plán predložený Európskou komisiou, ktorý je dobrým podnetom na potrebné naštartovanie rastu. Európa sa musí stať atraktívnejšia pre investorov a tento investičný plán prispeje ku zlepšeniu našej konkurencieschopnosti. Návratnosť súkromných investícií je vždy vyššia a preto je dobré, že tento projekt má ambíciu zmobilizovať najmä súkromné investície.
Dubravka Šuica (PPE), napisan. – Investicijski plan za rast i razvoj u Europskoj uniji, koji je predstavio predsjednik Europske komisije Jean-Claude Juncker, veliko je ohrabrenje nakon globalne gospodarske krize na koju nije ostala imuna niti EU. Recesija nije zaobišla niti Hrvatsku što je rezultiralo odlaskom velikog broja mladih iz Hrvatske, kao i velikom nezaposlenošću, posebice mladih.
Pozdravljam najavljenu suradnju s Europskom investicijskom bankom koja bi trebala osigurati 5 milijardi eura, dok će se iz proračuna EU-a osigurati 16 milijardi eura jer samo koordiniranim djelovanjem možemo ostvariti gospodarski rast i nova radna mjesta. Prema najavama predsjednika Komisije novim planom će se financirati strateški projekti koji će se odnositi na obrazovanje, istraživanja, inovacije, ulaganja u obnovljive izvore energije, modernizaciju prometnog sektora i drugo. Ovakvo strateško planiranje budi optimizam stanovnika Hrvatske u pogledu novih radnih mjesta i gospodarskog rasta te dodatni optimizam stanovnika hrvatskog juga u pogledu prometnog povezivanja s ostatkom EU-a.
S obzirom na strateški karakter ovog plana, a kao zamjenica člana u Odboru za promet i turizam te s obzirom da postoji dio Unije koji još nije cestovno povezan s ostatkom EU-a, očekujem da Komisija projekt nastavka izgradnje pelješkog mosta prepozna kao strateški jer bi osigurao kontinuitet ne samo hrvatskog teritorija, nego i teritorija EU-a.
Marc Tarabella (S&D), par écrit. – Avoir troqué l'austérité contre l'investissement, nous faisons un pas dans la bonne direction mais loin du pas de géant qu'on est en droit d'attendre. Nous ne serons pas les alliés de la Commission si celle-ci ne propose que des écrans de fumée. Investir, et investir bien : c'est indispensable! Si l'Europe reste timide, elle perdra toute chance de prospérité et de relance de l'emploi européen. Nous serons là pour rappeler de manière incessante au président Juncker que l'Europe se doit d'avoir de l'ambition, que les faux pas sont interdits et qu'une Europe plus juste n'est pas une option mais bien un impératif. Beaucoup d'observateurs mettent en doute cet effet multiplicateur de 15 que vous présentez comme acquis Monsieur Juncker. Même en période de vaches grasses, on n'a jamais vu un tel effet de levier, c'est vraiment étonnant. J'espère que ce n'est pas la venue du Pape hier qui vous fait penser que la "multiplication des pains" ou les "miracles financiers" sont des choses faciles à réaliser.
Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D), schriftelijk. – Nadat de Europese Commissie jarenlang de lidstaten een strikt bezuinigingsbeleid heeft opgelegd, verheugt het mij dat de nieuwe Commissie heeft ingezien dat investeringen nodig zijn om Europa uit de crisis te tillen. Met alleen harde besparingen lukt dat niet. Dit investeringsplan vormt dan ook een breuk met het verleden en daarom verwelkom is het. Het plan is echter niet ambitieus genoeg.
Het had veel verder moeten gaan, zowel voor wat betreft het bedrag dat geïnvesteerd gaat worden als de oorsprong van die middelen en de prioriteiten die naar voren geschoven worden. Het bedrag dat vrijgemaakt wordt om publieke investeringen mogelijk te maken, is beperkt en is bovendien voornamelijk een heroriëntering van bestaande budgetlijnen. Dat is teleurstellend. De vooropgestelde hefboomeffecten lijken bovendien onrealistisch groot.
Maar ook qua inhoudelijke prioriteiten mocht het plan voor mij een stuk ambitieuzer zijn! Om de Europese Unie voor te bereiden op de toekomst, moet er radicaal gekozen worden voor de transitie naar een duurzame economie. Investeringen in energie-efficiëntie, aanpak van klimaatverandering, duurzaam transport, de digitale economie en menselijk kapitaal (onderwijs en opleiding) zijn daarbij prioritair. Met de vage prioriteiten die in het investeringsplan naar voren worden geschoven, zal deze duurzame transitie niet worden ingezet.
Beatrix von Storch (ECR), schriftlich. – Der am 26.11.2014 von EU-Kommissionspräsident Jean-Claude Juncker angekündigte Europäische Investitionsplan ist eine Luftnummer. Er ist schon grundsätzlich falsch. Die fehlenden Investitionen sind nicht die Ursache, sondern die Folge der Krise in der Währungs- und Wirtschaftsunion. Die Investoren investieren nicht, weil insbesondere die Krisenstaaten wegen des für sie überteuerten Euros ihre Wettbewerbsfähigkeit verloren haben. Das ist das Grundsatzproblem in der Eurozone. Und die Verkennung dieser Tatsache ist das Grundsatzproblem bei dem Versuch der Lösung der Krise. Aber befremdlich ist noch etwas anderes: es ist eine gezielte Falschinformation der Öffentlichkeit, daß der Umfang des Investitionsprogrammes 315 Mrd Euro betrüge. Die angekündigte "Mobilisierung von Finanzmitteln für Investitionen ohne Verschuldung der öffentlichen Hand" bedeutet nichts anderes als die Umschichtung bereits bestehender EU-Programme. Tatsächlich stehen nur 21 Mrd Euro für "strategische Investitionen" bereit. Diese stammen zum Teil aus Mitteln der Europäischen Investitionsbank, zum größeren Teil aber vor allem aus bereits bestehenden EU-Fonds, die ohnehin investiert worden wäre. Diese werden nun einfach von EU-Fond XY in den neuen Juncker´schen Zauberfond übertragen. Herr Junckers Zauberformel heißt: "Faktor 15". Jeder staatliche Euro aus dem Junker´schen Zauberfond mobilisiert - so Juncker - 15 private Euro. 21 mal 15- macht 315. Abrakadabra.
Σωτήριος Ζαριανόπουλος (NI), γραπτώς. – Το λεγόμενο "επενδυτικό πακέτο", με δημιουργία ενός ταμείου που θα διαχειρίζεται τις επενδύσεις, που παρουσίασε σήμερα στην Ολομέλεια του Ευρωκοινοβουλίου, ο πρόεδρος της Επιτροπής Ζ.Κ. Γιούνγκερ, επιδιώκει να προσφέρει επιπλέον κεφάλαια στους επιχειρηματικούς ομίλους, προκειμένου να πραγματοποιήσουν επενδύσεις, με κρατική χρηματοδότηση, για να αυξήσουν την κερδοφορία τους . Αυτή η χρηματοδότηση θα προέλθει από την ακόμη μεγαλύτερης έκτασης λεηλασία του εργατικού λαϊκού εισοδήματος. Σύσσωμο το αστικό πολιτικό προσωπικό, στοιχισμένο στις επιταγές του κεφαλαίου, απαίτησε τη συνέχιση των "διαρθρωτικών μεταρρυθμίσεων", να συνεχίσει δηλαδή να ματώνει ο εργαζόμενος λαός για να δημιουργηθεί "ελκυστικό περιβάλλον" για τα μονοπώλια, με πάμφθηνη εργατική δύναμη, χωρίς εργασιακά και κοινωνικά ασφαλιστικά δικαιώματα. Στην ίδια ρότα της καπιταλιστικής διαχείρισης, ο ΣΥΡΙΖΑ, κατά τη συζήτηση, αφού εκθείασε την "αναπτυξιακή" πολιτική της Ομοσπονδιακής Τράπεζας των ΗΠΑ, διαμαρτυρήθηκε γιατί τα χρήματα στους "υγιείς επιχειρηματίες" είναι λίγα, απαιτώντας περισσότερο "φρέσκο" χρήμα για κερδοφόρες επενδύσεις των μονοπωλίων.