In Strasbourg on Monday 15 May, the committees on budgets (BUDG) and on economic and financial affairs (ECON) of the European Parliament reached their position on doubling the duration and firepower of the ‘Juncker’ investment plan.
The MEPs take the view that from a quantitative point of view, the European investment plan set in place in 2015 is working. The EU Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) has so far granted public guarantees to infrastructure or SME development projects worth a total envelope that has been put at €180 billion (see EUROPE 11783).
However, the MEPs feel that there is room for improvement in the plan from a qualitative point of view. This is why they are calling for qualitative criteria, such as the sustainability of the project or support for social cohesion, to be taken into account as well, Udo Bullmann (S&D, Germany), rapporteur of the ECON committee, told EUROPE.
The Parliament believes that the ‘Juncker’ plan should primarily be used to finance projects that would not get off the ground without its support, or not to the same extent (criterion of additionality). Bullmann said that the EIB should also be able to take more risks without hiding behind its 'AAA' financial rating, for instance by supporting innovative projects by SMEs worth less than €50 million. And it should, in some cases, renounce its ‘senior’ investor status, even if this means absorbing a few losses if a project goes badly.
“We want a better geographical spread of projects supported and funding for small projects via investment platforms”, said the rapporteur of the BUDG committee, José Manuel Fernandes (EPP, Portugal). Bullmann believes that it is possible to give the weaker regions more money by reinforcing the capacity of local players such as advisory platforms.
From a sectorial point of view, the MEPs also clarified the benchmarks to be used by the EIB as a basis to grant the EFSI’s public guarantee. Social sector investment projects – such as social housing or building hospitals, the cultural and creative industries or biotechnology – could be supported more easily, Bullmann argued. The MEPs support the Commission’s proposal to earmark 40% of the EFSI public guarantee to fighting climate change.
Using the available budgetary margin
The MEPs rejected the Commission’s proposal to dip back into the budgetary lines of the ‘Horizon 2020' programme and the Connecting Europe Facility - this time to the tune of €650 million - to extend the investment plan. They would prefer to take the unused budgetary margins under the ceiling of one or more headings of the multi-annual financial framework 2014-2020.
This point is expected to be one of the most hotly disputed at the inter-institutional negotiations with the Council, the first session of which will take place on Wednesday 31 May. However, unlike with the creation of the ‘Juncker’ plan (see EUROPE 11323), “we are not talking about €1 billion this time”, Bullmann observed, confident that this hurdle can be cleared if the member states show flexibility. It is, he feels, possible to conclude the inter-institutional talks by the end of June.
It is also worth noting that the Parliament wishes to increase the transparency of the activities of the ‘Juncker’ plan along with its visibility. The EFSI investment committee will be required to publish the reasons for the decisions made and report regularly to the MEPs. The final beneficiaries will furthermore be notified that their project has received assistance from the EFSI. (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)