Activities of Claude TURMES related to 2012/2027(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on innovative financial instruments in the context of the next multiannual financial framework
Amendments (12)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the large number of European financial instruments and cofinancing programmes is an element that generates confusion and uncertainty among the public and private entities that want to make use of them; hopes therefore for a rationalisation and coordination of the same, in order to encourage their efficient use within a unitary and coherent framework, including structural funds; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission's idea of cross-policy grouping of instruments such as the Connecting Europe Facility, to make a common instrument and exploit cross- sectoral synergies; calls on the Commission to ensure that cross-sectoral projects, such as smart grids, are prioritised and specific funding allocated to fully reap the benefits of a multi- sectoral financial instrument;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Fully supports the Commission's assessment that, by catalysing investment related to improving energy efficiency, to renewable energy sources and related infrastructure, innovative financial instruments can contribute to a climate- resilient economy and society;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that certain financial instruments already in operation in the energy sector, such as the European Energy Efficiency Fund (EEEF) and the Marguerite Fund, are unfortunately producing results that are worseless than expected; observes in fact that the Marguerite Fund has so far funded a fairly limited number of projects, while the European Energy Efficiency Fund offers funds to those who want to make use of it under financial terms that are similar to those offered by the ordinary market, if not less favourable; considers that the adoption of futurse financial instruments should therefore take into account those less- than-positive experiencebe adapted to really become attractive financial instruments;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Regrets the fact that the Energy Efficiency Fund, while in effect qualifying as a financial instrument, is considered by the Commission to be a type of subsidy, and is consequently incompatible with any recourse to structural funds on the part of same entity; emphasises therefore the necessity to ensure in the future that new financial instrumenthis Fund is turned into a revolving fund offering real opportunities in investing, directly or indirectly via financial institutions, in smaller scale energy efficiency and renewable energy projects arend compatible with structural funds and with other subsidising instruments made available by the European Union;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Appreciates the attention given to supporting SMEs through the equity and debt instruments for which the Programme for the Competitiveness of enterprises and SMEs (COSME) and the Horizon 2020 programme provide; believes it appropriate, however, to consider the possibility of increasing the maximum threshold stipulated by the loan guarantee facility in COSME (EUR 150 000), in view of a more precise valuation of the actual credit requirements of European SMEs as well as increasing the overall level of funds foreseen in the facility;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Views favourably interventions that provide for guarantees to be issued for project promoters, aiming to facilitate their access to credit, according to the scheme proposed by the Risk Sharing Financial Facility (RSFF); supports the allocation to SMEs of a large share of the funds of Horizon2020 financing instrument to be delivered through a Facility for Research and Innovation by Small Businesses Enterprises in Europe, as recommended by the RSFF experts review;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Supports the efforts made to incentivise research and innovation within SMEs in the Horizon 2020 programme; notes also that the financing of risk capital is not the only route available to achieve this objective; therefore calls on the Commission and the other interested entities to analyse the possible implications of a system of adjudication of contracts on the part of SMEs for the development of open technologies that are demonstrably needed by Europeanthe institutions in Europe and the Member States, so that European funds go towards funding the creation of technologies that are useful to said institutions and from which further use and innovation may be easily derived; in this regard, supports the allocation of a substantial part of the Horizon 2020 funds to the implementation of the new dedicated SME instrument;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates that these financial instruments should be activated in order to implement projects deemed necessary to achieve the strategic objectives of the European Union for intelligent, sustainable and inclusive growth based on collaborative efforts and collective participation; therefore calls on the Commission and the EIB in particular, but also all the other organisations directly or indirectly involved, to much more actively assist the promoters of these projects, especially in the initial phases;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes, however, that in many cases PPPs suffer from insufficient transparency, where the time between the public investment and the actual time when scrutiny of how the investment played out is often unacceptably long; calls for better methods of continuous transparent evaluation of the use of public funds in PPPs in a way that enables scrutiny primarily by the public which finances the projects and other interested third parties, such as researchers;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Trusts in the more-than-positive impact of greater strategic use of financial instruments on the European Union, but believes that this will unfortunately be limited to projects with short- to medium- term returns; fears that investment in projects equally necessary for the achievement of the long-term strategic objectives of the European Union for intelligent, sustainable and inclusive growth may not be realised because they may be deemed too risky for investors and due to the lack of public funds; emphasises, in this regard, the need to prioritise the more innovative projects, which will contribute to the long-term policy objectives of the European Union but where deployment of new and more sustainable technology creates a higher risk profile;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Therefore urgently requests the implementation of the project bonds initiative and an accurate evaluation of the appropriateness of a new initiative for the issuing of European bonds for infrastructure, with the direct participation of European Union capital in infrastructure projects in the common interest, with strong European added value, through the public issuing of project bonds on the part of the Union; notes, in this regard, that the Project Bonds Initiative in the framework of the EU 2020 partnership agreement shall provide a clear eligibility framework subject to enhanced democratic scrutiny as a proper means for achieving sustainable and counter-cyclical investments programmes consistent with EU social, climate and environmental objectives, while playing a catalytic role aimed at attracting private capital for long-term projects; calls for the Project Bonds Initiative to be expanded to other sectors, in particular within renewable energy and building renovation;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the European Union, by participating directly, alone or with other Member States, in the capital of infrastructure projects (characterised by a long-term return on investment), would send a powerful signal to public and private investors, as well as financial markets; believes that this EU participation in an investment capacity should ensure consistency with the Union's long-term policy objectives and would represent a guarantee of realisation of the project, acting as a strong catalyst and an equally strong lever.