BETA

33 Amendments of Markus FERBER related to 2014/2145(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas, according to the Commission’s autumn forecast, investment in the euro area decreased by 3.4 % in 2012, by 2.4 % in 2013 and by 17 % since the pre-crisis period, with the expected rebound rate in 2014 (0.6 %) and that anticipated for 2015 (1.7 %) being very weak; whereas a lack of investment can ~~be just as detrimental to future generations as excessive public debt~~undermine future European economic competitiveness;

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Believes that the current economic situation calls for ~~urgent, comprehensive and decisive~~both decisive and carefully considered measures to face the threat of deflation or very low inflation, low growth and high unemployment;

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights the fact that, while the current economic governance framework ~~does not allow for a proper debate on~~contains the eco~~nomic perspective of the euro area or on an aggregate fiscal stance and does not address the different economic and fiscal situations on an equal footing~~rrect instruments, they are not always used to sufficient effect;

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Is concerned that the Commission's recent national budget review is deviating from the principle of equal treatment, having granted three Member States a further reprieve not provided for under current rules;

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that major policy initiatives which included policy recommendations were based on economic forecasts that had not anticipated the low growth and inflation experienced and have not fully taken into account the underestimation of the size of the fiscal multiplier, the importance of spillover effects across countries in a period of synchronised consolidation and the deflationary impact of cumulative structural reforms;deleted

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the current situation calls for closer and inclusive economic coordination (to ~~increase aggregate demand,~~ improve fiscal sustainability and allow for ~~fair~~targeted and sustainable structural reforms and related investments) and fmor ~~swift reactions so as to correct the most obvious fault lines in the economic governance framework~~e decisive use of existing instruments;

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines ~~all~~ the existing provisions under the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) which have been put in place to ensure an anti-cyclical policy; finds it regrettable that these provisions were not put to full use in previous years, in the context of low inflation, low growth and high unemploymentalready guarantee adequate economic flexibility;

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Supports all the incentives to finance the new European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), mainly by making national contributions to the fund fiscally neutral as regards the SGP; calls for further clarification regarding the concrete treatment of these contributions in accordance with the new paradigm set out in the communication; stresses at the same time that EFSI-funded projects must, under no circumstances simply replace investment already planned and that net investment must, on the contrary, be effectively increased as a result;

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Stresses in particular the importance of the regulatory component of the investment programme for an improved investment climate;

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Believes~~Is extremely concerned that the communication ~~rightly~~ broadens the scope of the investment clause, allowing for flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGP to accommodate investment programmes by the Member States, in particular as regards expenditure on projects under structural and cohesion policy, including the Youth Employment Initiative, trans-European networks and the Connecting Europe Facility, and co financing under the EFSI; believes that this approach must be urgently reassessed to be symmetrically applied to the corrective arm of the SGP;

2015/03/04
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Believes that the structural reform clause under the preventive arm and the means of considering structural reform plans under the corrective arm constitute a step forward as regards ensuring the more efficient implementation of reforms by Member States; calls for further clarification as to the types of structural reforms eligible under this new scheme; believes that a direct link to the cost, timeframe impact and value of structural reforms should also be explicit in the corrective arm of the SGPmust not lead to postponement of urgently needed budgetary consolidation;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Believes that, in the long term, shrewdly implemented structural reforms ~~should~~will always have a positive socioeconomic return and ~~contribute to increased administrative capacity~~help make administrative action more efficient;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Deplores, however, the fact that the communication does not touch upon the nature of ‘unusual events’ falling outside the control of a Member State which could allow it to temporarily depart from the adjustment path towards achieving its MTO;deleted

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Believes that ~~more room for flexibility and soft laws exists~~there is already adequate room for flexibility under the SGP and in the European Semester; invites the Commission ~~to build on this flexibility and to propose rule changes where needed~~not, under any circumstances, to weaken that framework through additional rule changes;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Insists that the Annual Growth Survey (AGS) and euro area recommendation must be better designed and put to better use to allow for a global economic debate, notably as regards convergence in the euro area; proposes that the country- specific recommendations (CSRs) should be established on the basis of striking a better balance between the AGS and the macroeconomic imbalance procedure (MIP), and suggests that the euro area recommendation should be made compulsory following a proper debate with the European Parliament, with incentives being offered so as to encourage the implementation thereof; requests that the excessive deficit procedure (EDP) recommendation be joined together with the CSRsmeaningful economic debate;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

~~17. Asks the Commission to verify whether the current 1/20 rule on debt reduction is sustainable and whether it needs to be reconsidered;~~deleted

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Asks the Commission to make the three-pillar strategy (investment, fiscal rules and structural reforms), presented in the AGS 2015, more concrete under the euro area recommendation and in the CSRs ~~and to strengthen its approach by building a fourth pillar on taxation~~;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Believes that the MIP must ~~be used in a more balanced manner between deficit and surplus countries, also to address countries wi~~take sufficient account of the fact that current account surpluses do not present the s~~ignificant room for action~~ame major risks as deficits;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission to explore ways in which to better align the preventive and corrective arms of the SGP, in ~~particular regarding investment allowing temporary~~order to avoid deviations from the MTO, or the adjustment path ~~towards it, within the existence of a safety margin under the preventive arm~~;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

~~23. Insists on the need to clarify the way in which effective actions are taken into account under the EDP;~~deleted

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. ~~Insists~~Points out that the focus on structural deficits since the 2005 reform of the SGP, together with the introduction of an expenditure rule with the 2011 reform, creates margins for the discretionary implementation of the SGP, as the calculation of potential growth, underpinning the assessment of structural deficits, and that of the expenditure rule are subject to several questionable assumptions and substantial revisions between the Commission’s autumn and spring forecasts, thereby leading to various calculations and diverging assessments as regards the implementation of the SGP; stresses that, in the interests of greater plannability, those divergences should be eliminated;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the Commission, when evaluating the fiscal position of Members States, to ~~include a better balance between the impact of the agreed fiscal measures and the fiscal figures based on estimated potential growth for GDP, output gaps and stru~~take account solely of those fiscal measures and structural reforms which are actural ~~deficits that may introduce unexpected radical change at a later stag~~ly being put into practice;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Believes there is a strong need for less complexity, better ownership, and more transparency ~~and democracy~~ in economic governance; believes that looking forward towards deeper integration cannot be achieved by adding a new layer of rules to the already existing ones; believes, instead, that existing rules must be applied more effectively;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Acknowledges, based on the current situation, that the economic governance framework must be corrected and completed in both the medium and long term to allow for the EU and the euro area to meet the challenges of convergence, long-lasting investment and reliance;deleted

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls for the annual sustainable growth guidelines to be made subject to a codecision procedure that should be introduced in the next Treaty change; instructs its President to present the annual sustainable growth guidelines as amended by Parliament at the spring European Council;deleted

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Recalls the European Parliament’s request that the creation of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) outside of the structure of the institutions of the Union represents a setback to the political integration of the Union and, therefore, demands that the ESM be fully integrated into the community framework and made formally accountable to Parliament;deleted

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls for a new legal framework for future assistance programmes ~~in order to ensure that all decisions are taken under the responsibility of the Commission with full involvement of Parliament~~which makes effective and resolute action possible;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Requests, as per the opinion of the ECJ’s Advocate-General, that the ECB not form part of any assistance programmes or, through monetary policy-making, be indirectly involved in assistance programmes either;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Recalls that a ‘genuine Economic and Monetary Union’ (EMU) ~~cannot simply be limit~~must be based ton a system of ~~rules but also requires an increased euro area fiscal capacity~~smart rules observed and acted on by all stakeholders;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Recalls that the banking union was the result of the political will to avoid a financial crisis and that the same ~~will is needed as regards a fiscal union in order to avoid a political crisis~~political will does not exist as regards a fiscal union;

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Invites the stakeholders in this necessary next step of the EMU to avoid left-over and to explore all options which have been well discussed and documented over a long period of time as ways of achieving a deepening of the EMU, such as: – a ‘taxation union’, – a social dimension, including a minimum wage mechanism and a minimum unemployment benefit scheme for the euro area and in-depth reforms to favour mobility, – the inclusion of the ESM in Union law and a new approach towards Eurobonds, – a euro area fiscal capacity notably to finance counter cyclical actions, structural reforms or part of debt reduction;deleted

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

~~38. Requests that it be elaborated on the basis of a ‘4+1 Presidents’ approach, including the EP President;~~deleted

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

~~39. Asks its President to represent Parliament in this upcoming task on the basis of the mandate given by this resolution;~~deleted

2015/03/03
Committee: ECON