Brussels, 25/03/2009 (Agence Europe) - The vote on Wednesday 25 March, in Strasbourg, by the European Parliament (518 votes in favour, 34 against, with 18 abstentions) means that the latter has given its overwhelming support to improved coordination of European Investment Bank (EIB) and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) activities. MEPs consider that the two banks, which are increasingly operating in the same zones, should not be competing with each other but should carry out complementary action, depending on the comparative advantage of each other. MEPs want the EIB to focus on large scale projects and the EBRD on smaller-scale investments. MEPs also want the two banks to collaborate with other international or regional financial institutions (World Bank, Asian Development Bank etc) so as to improve efficiency in regions further away from the EU. Ultimately, in these times of financial instability, they are calling on the EIB and EBRD not to ignore the funding of projects related to renewable energies and the fight against climate change.
On 6 November, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) acknowledged that the European Parliament had to be involved in decisions involving the extension of the EIB's mandate in order to be able to tackle the ramifications of the crisis. The debate took place on 24 March in Strasbourg on the EIB and EBRD's 2007 annual reports within the framework of codecision, much to the satisfaction of MEPs, particularly Esko Seppänen (GUE/Nordic Left), rapporteur on the Community guarantee for the EIB. Mr Seppänen is proposing that the current decision be considered provisional, while waiting for the Commission to present an overall perspective in April, which will allow for a comprehensive debate on the issue. Gay Mitchell (EPP-ED, Ireland), the rapporteur on the two banks' annual reports welcomed the fact that these two institutions had responded quickly to the crisis and expressed hope that their cooperation would be done with maximum synergy and by avoiding any duplication of tasks. Speaking on behalf of the budgetary control committee, Gabriele Stauner (EPP/ED, Germany) said that a wider mandate meant stricter control. While recognising that control was necessary, some MEPs highlighted the EIB's specific situation. In this connection, Udo Bullmann (PES, Germany) said that controls cannot be identical to those imposed on other credit institutions: the EIB would have problems taking on risk it was being asked to shoulder. MEPs welcomed the role the EIB and EBRD will play to help SMEs and Eastern countries and those from Central Asia, but Italian Green Sepp Kusstascher said they should not contribute to large-scale projects that obeyed “an outmoded philosophy”, such as the bridge over the Messina straits and the tunnel under the Brenner.
Joaquin Almunia spoke for the Commission and welcomed the agreement on the EIB's external mandate, which will enable it to act more effectively in specific areas of interest to the Union. He announced that at the beginning of 2010, the Commission would present the text providing this mandate with legal stability.
Thomas Mirow, the EBRD president, agrees that cooperation with the EIB is an essential element in the response to the crisis which requires rapid and coordinated action. Mirow pointed out that “cooperation born of need is the one that works best” and welcomed the “division of labour” that will be part of this cooperation, which he believed would guarantee optimum efficiency. The president also highlighted the fact that by increasing their contribution (the EBRD is contributing €6bn towards the two-yearly package of €24.5bn), the two financial institutions were also increasing risk exposure.
The EIB president, Philippe Maystadt, affirmed that in a crisis, it was normal for member states (“its shareholders”) to appeal to the Bank to outline the direction its action was taking: loans to SMEs, energy and climate change projects (an area in which action for the car industry must be identified by developing clean cars) and support for countries hardest hit by the crisis. Maystadt provided the following figures: during the last five months, the number of loans signed by the EIB had increased by 38% compared to the same period in the previous tax year and we can say that the €15bn target for SMEs in 2008/09 will be exceeded. Mr Maystadt said that this obviously had only been possible by way of increased capital, “this does not cost member states anything but it was necessary to transform reserves into capital”. As for the controls demanded by the Parliament, he said it was a legitimate question and explained that internal and external controls already existed (and the Lisbon Treaty would bolster them even further). Is it necessary to go as far as Ms Stauner who wanted formal banking supervision? Mr Maystadt noted that other MEPs did not want to go so far but asserted the EIB's “total willingness” to accept formal controls if sought but for the instant he expressed support for informal supervision. (L.G./transl.rh)