23 Amendments of Beatrix von STORCH related to 2017/2114(INI)
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas the growth rates of the EU's and the euro area's economies have for years been too low and politicians are not sufficiently ambitious to help boost them by means of reforms;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the euro area and EU28 unemployment rates were 9.3 % and 7.8 % respectively in April 2017, their lowest rates since March 2009 and December 2008; whereas unemployment rates have for years been well wide of the target of full employment; whereas significant differences in unemployment rates remain across the EU ranging between 3.2 % and 23.2 %;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the EU’s excessively low productivity and global competitiveness calls for structural reforms, continued fiscal efforts and investment in Member States as well as massive deregulation, a reduction of bureaucracy and a return to the subsidiarity principle on the part of the EU in order to bring about sustained growth and employment and achieve upward convergence with other global economies and within the EU;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the good performance of the European economy, supported by moderate GDP growth and decreasing, yet still high, unemployment rates; notes that the modest recovery remains fragile and that the development of GDP per capita is close to stagnation; finds that the gap between the per capita GDP of the EU and of emerging countries has narrowed dramatically; notes that this is not only because of favourable economic conditions in emerging countries but also as a result of unfavourable conditions in the EU;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that Europe harbours untapped economic potential as growth and employment are advancing unevenly; underlines that this is the result of the heterogeneous performance of the Member States’ economies; emphasises that the implementation of structural reforms in the Member States could facilitate at least1 % 1% higher growth; is very disappointed that many Member States are putting structural reform on the back burner; is concerned at the role of the Commission, which, by centralising more and more sectors of the economy, is making it impossible to have stimulating regulatory competition and thus cementing the position of many Member States at the head of the field;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes the view that a greater degree of upward convergence would be needed to sustain the economic recovery in the EU and the euro area in the longer term; is concerned that the desire for upward convergence by means of structural reform is not shared by all;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that for this to materialise the structural conditions for growth need to be improved; takes the view that the potential growth of all Member States should increase in the long term to at least3 3%; for this to happen, establishing clear benchmarks on how to improve the potential growth of Member States could provide the necessary guidance for policy actions; points out that such a regular benchmarking exercise would have to take due account of individual structural strengths and weaknesses of Member States; stresses the role of competition for growth, the creative potential for disruption of which is being suppressed in the EU rather than liberated;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the uneven growth and employment situation in the euro area requires better coordination of structural reforms, in particular through improved implementation of the country-specific recommendations (CSR)means that more structural reforms are needed, for which the country-specific recommendations could provide a preliminary reference point in resolving the more glaring inadequacies; underlines the Commission's lack of ambition to set out an efficient, ordoliberal framework for a thriving economy, particularly because of its long- standing dislike of regulatory competition and its preference for planning;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Notes that doubtful claims, particularly in the banking sector, remain one of the most pressing problems;stresses the need finally to create the political will to disclose and set down these requirements according the principles of balance sheet reality and transparency;points out that large-scale bank insolvency is unavoidable if the foundations for future growth are to be laid;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Is disappointed that, after many years of work, Italy's bail-in rules are not being applied;reminds the Commission that it is the Guardian of the Treaties and that it is not doing justice to this distinguished task;stresses that the aim of the new rules on resolution was to break the vicious circle between states and banks and that this work was abruptly ruined by Italy's and the Commission's assumption of bank debts;considers that as a result the markets will put Italy's capital market access to the test sooner or later, as happened in 2012;regrets the fact that this will put the euro and, as a result, the savings of European savers at risk;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Recalls that ultimately, consumers benefit from lower corporate tax;stresses that unrestricted tax competition is the only way to keep taxes low;in this context, considers the efforts to harmonise corporate tax rates and bases in the EU to be damaging;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Points out in this context that a tax wedge as well as taxes themselves have a negative impact on competitiveness;finds that charges borne by employees and employers place work as a production factor at a disadvantage and make the automatisation of jobs more attractive;is concerned that this will worsen disruption at the lower end of the pay scale;
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Stresses that investment stems from private capital accumulated as savings and cannot be replaced by the Central Bank or other vehicles of centralised planning;
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes the view that a timely agreement in the ongoing negotiations on the revised European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) could help to improve the effectiveness of this instrument and to address shortcomings experienced in its implementation so farthe European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) must be abolished;
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Points out that the interest rate is effectively the market price and that the manipulations of the ECB undermine its effectiveness as a pointer, thereby making investment decision-making extremely difficult;is concerned at disruption in the production structure caused by the sustained low-interest-rate policy;is convinced that many EFSI investments and investments in sectors affected by the low-interest-rate policy will soon prove unsustainable;
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that prudent fiscal policies play a fundamental role for the stability of the euro area and the Union as a whole; underlines that strong coordination of fiscal policies and compliance with the Union rules in this area are a legal requirement and key to the proper functioning of Economic and Monetary Union (EMU);
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Considers that the fiscal policy rules in the euro area have lost all credibility;expects the rules currently in force to be broken as much as all those which preceded them;is disillusioned at the majority support, in spite of this history of rule-breaking, for a fiscal regime for the euro area which will institutionalise rule-breaking rather than prevent it;recommends that investors position themselves accordingly and continue to expect the rules to be broken;
Amendment 294 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the fact that deficits in the euro area are projected to decline; is concerned, however, that this process is slowing down and agrees that government debt remains too high in somall the Member States; is concerned at the high implicit debt burden arising, for example, from commitments to provide cover for social security systems;
Amendment 312 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Does not expect the European Central Bank to change its policy in the future; rather, anticipates that it will continue to pursue fiscal policy in the guise of monetary policy;does not assume that it will raise interest rates in the euro area, although all indicators suggest that they should be higher;takes the view that this is because the ECB does not pursue a monetary policy for the euro area as a whole but protects the interests of certain euro area members;reminds the politicians that they paved the way for this breach of the mandate by dismissing the idea of structural reform and not demanding such reform now;
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines that, given the fiscal stances at national and euro-area level must balance the long-term, the sustainability of public finances in full compliance with the Stability and Growth Pact with short-term macroeconomic stabilisationmust be central; points out that the tools of short-term macroeconomic stabilisation have consistently proved unhelpful, inter alia because corrective measures have never been applied in times of surplus;
Amendment 333 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Points outRegretsthat the current aggregate fiscal stance for the euro is broadly neutral and presents an appropriate balance of debt sustainability requirements with support for investmentinstead of generating budgetary surpluses;
Amendment 384 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Is convinced that these macroeconomic imbalances are the price to be paid for the euro and must be accepted as such, as they take the place of the traditional aligning of exchange rates in a fixed rate regime such as the euro, thereby indicating where national economies are particularly uncompetitive;stresses in this context that all euro area countries have had ample time since 2012 to make the crucial adjustments;
Amendment 401 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Considers it crucial for the euro area to be equipped with a mechanism for dealing with sovereign default;stresses that the euro area needs an exclusion mechanism and a withdrawal mechanism;notes that the stability of a currency does not mean its political imposition in a particular geographical area but the long-term conservation of its purchasing power;