II SÉRIE-D — NÚMERO 29

8

Because “target countries” are limited to increase their public debt? Or is it a problem of visibility. Do

governments, regional or local authorities, or public agencies, are they aware of CEB possibilities to finance

social projects?

How can it be explained that 58 years after being founded, 8 member States are still missing on the group of

stakeholders: Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Monaco, Russian Federation, Ukraine and the United

Kingdom?

In another angle, CEB strategy should continue to be addressed to sectorial needs, but should revise its

priority on geographical areas.

Social and economic development levels cannot be looked anymore in a traditional perspective of Eastern

and Western Europe.

Crisis and social cohesion problems can be found all over Europe, cross-cutting so called rich, emerging or

poor countries.

In every country, is possible to find highly depressive regions needing social help, together with other

regions not suffering so much from austerity times.

This regional approach should be considered on the allocation of loans from the ECB.

Be careful with Public-Private Partnerships. Please, avoid it. The bad use of this tool in some member

States, with heavy repercussions on the long term costs supported by tax payers, gave them a bad and nom

recommendable reputation among the public opinion.

And bad reputation is the last asset CEB would require.

The report and the draft resolution do not enoughly emphasize the possibility for the CEB to support and

provide direct funding to public bodies and agencies, without relying on the intermediation of private banks,

whenever is adequate, as amendment 4 tabled by our colleague Mrs. Bergamini, and others, state.

We support all measures contained in the governance reform of the CEB, and the objective of

compatibilizing all requirements on capital adequacy, leverage and liquidity, with the aim of financing projects in

favor of youth employment, Roma integration or housing for vulnerable population, amongst other issues.

CEB is a bank, indeed. But is a different bank from others. Has a social added value, and combines

financial rules with the values and principles of the European Convention on Human Rights.

That’s the way it is, that’s the way it must continue to be, counting on us, parliamentarians. To support and

to keep it accountable!

—————

Relatório da participação do Presidente da Comissão de Assuntos Europeus na Reunião Informal de

Chefes de Delegação dos Parlamentos do Sul no âmbito da Conferência Interparlamentar da PESC-

PCSD, que decorreu em Atenas, Grécia, no dia 3 de abril 2014

Delegação da AR:

• Deputado Paulo Mota Pinto (PSD), Presidente da Comissão de Assuntos Europeus (CAE)

Apoio Técnico:

• Bruno Dias Pinheiro, Representante permanente da Assembleia da República junto das instituições

europeias e Alexandra Pereira da Graça, Assessora da CAE.

No quadro da Conferência Interparlamentar da PESC-PCSD, os Parlamentos Helénico e Cipriota

promoveram, no dia 3 de abril de 2014, uma reunião informal dos Chefes de Delegação dos chamados

Parlamentos do Sul, tendo sido convidados os Parlamentos/Câmaras Parlamentares de Portugal, França,

Itália, Espanha, Croácia, Malta, Eslovénia, Roménia e Bulgária, além dos países anfitriões.

Participaram na reunião os representantes dos Parlamentos/Câmaras de Chipre, República Helénica,

Croácia, Itália, Espanha, Bulgária, Roménia e Portugal.