Index 
 Zurück 
 Vor 
 Vollständiger Text 
Verfahren : 2016/2064(INI)
Werdegang im Plenum
Entwicklungsstadium in Bezug auf das Dokument : A8-0200/2017

Eingereichte Texte :

A8-0200/2017

Aussprachen :

PV 14/06/2017 - 17
CRE 14/06/2017 - 17

Abstimmungen :

PV 15/06/2017 - 7.5
Erklärungen zur Abstimmung

Angenommene Texte :

P8_TA(2017)0270

Plenardebatten
Donnerstag, 15. Juni 2017 - Straßburg Überprüfte Ausgabe

8.1. Durchführung des Europäischen Fonds für strategische Investitionen (A8-0200/2017 - José Manuel Fernandes, Udo Bullmann)
Video der Beiträge
 

Ustne wyjaśnienia dotyczące głosowania

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Момчил Неков (S&D). – Европейският фонд за стратегически инвестиции е в сила от близо две години. Разделението изток-запад в него обаче все още е силно видимо. Към 30 юни 2016 г. от подкрепата от ЕФСИ държавите от ЕС-15 са получили 91% от фонда, докато държавите от ЕС-13 са получили едва 9%.

С притеснение разбрах, че вместо да бъде в подкрепа на по-различни проекти, Европейската инвестиционна банка използва гаранцията на Европейския съюз за насърчаване на проекти, които пораждат съмнения относно това дали са в съответствие с установените критерии за подбор на проекти.

Бих искал да допълня, че вече над година чуваме от представители на ГЕРБ как с помощта на този фонд в България щял да се финансира проект за интерконектор с Гърция. Това обаче все още остава само на думи и обещания. Този проект най-накрая трябва да получи приоритет, а не да бъде използван само в PR кампании, защото е в интерес на националната сигурност.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Rosa D'Amato (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, l'oste ci ha detto che ha del vino buono ma ci faremmo molto male se ci ubriacassimo con i numeri che continua a dare. Sono state intessute le lodi dell'EFSI stando ai dati forniti da chi l'EFSI l'aveva progettato. Non c'è stata alcuna valutazione indipendente e ci siamo bevuti la narrativa di un piano di successo per gli investimenti che sostiene le piccole e medie imprese, che ha un valore aggiunto e che spinge la crescita e l'occupazione. Invece, nulla di tutto ciò, mancano dati disaggregati sui benefici reali, l'effetto moltiplicatore è stato sopravvalutato, non ci sono informazioni sui posti di lavoro creati, le modalità operative sono opache e le cifre talvolta risultano secretate.

Persino la Corte dei conti europea ha detto chiaramente che l'EFSI ha un impatto limitato. Non solo, molti progetti hanno elevate emissioni impattanti. Ci sono molti interventi per fonti fossili come petrolio e gas e si fa davvero poco per le rinnovabili e per sostenere l'autoproduzione energetica. Nel frattempo si moltiplicano gli strumenti finanziari a elevato rischio per un'EFSI che ammicca alle banche e agli intermediari finanziari, ma che rischia di essere una bomba a orologeria per le economie reali. Per questo motivo abbiamo votato contro.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  President. – Ms D’Amato, your metaphor about wines was very interesting!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Daniel Hannan (ECR). – Mr President, it is always about the money, is it not. How much time we spend in this Chamber talking about transfers of cash! We never think about the debilitating effect it can have on individuals, on whole professions, consultants and contractors, and the people who have learned how to make a living out of the Brussels institution, even on whole nations who are encouraged to look beyond their borders for every rise in life.

We have evolved a whole special vocabulary to talk about how we keep the money going round. For example, the word ‘greed’ is always used for somebody who has a claim on somebody else’s money. It is never used for somebody who wants to keep his own resources. The word ‘solidarity’ is used when we European politicians arrange a transfer.

I would make one warning, one note of caution. If you vote for politicians who have promised to give you somebody else’s money, do not complain when they take your money to spend on somebody else, or indeed to spend on themselves.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Andrejs Mamikins (S&D). – Mr President, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the European Fund for Strategic Investments has benefited mainly those countries that do not have big investment gaps and it creates an unequal geographical distribution of funded projects. Now the competition is going on: which comes first? The positive result of cohesion and investment policies for the Latvian economy or huge demographic change in Latvia.

Many people have left the country because they are tired of waiting for the Latvian economy to reach western and Nordic EU economy levels. They prefer to emigrate with their families. The shrinking working-age population will not offer any prospects for those who remain in the country. As a result, we will see a beautiful but empty country with a small, old and poor population.

The Latvian economy needs investment from the European Fund for Strategic Investments, and distribution should be made without any discrimination. I support the report and especially the idea of providing technical assistance to those countries and regions which have benefited less from the European Fund for Strategic Investments.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Anna Záborská (PPE). – Vážený pán predseda, podporila som uznesenie k správe o vykonávaní Európskeho fondu pre strategické investície, pretože ide o jeden zo spôsobov, ako zvýšiť investície v Európskej únii na projekty, ktoré by mohli zvyšovať zamestnanosť a prosperitu. Táto iniciatívna správa obsahuje mnoho dobrých návrhov ako zlepšiť fungovanie tohto nového nástroja a zlepšiť komunikáciu smerom k občanom aj podnikateľom. Chcem však zdôrazniť, že zlepšenie investičného prostredia nemôže byť len otázkou verejných investícií, ale predovšetkým súkromných zdrojov.

Ďakujem.

 
Rechtlicher Hinweis - Datenschutzbestimmungen