Debates Parlamentares - Diário 026, p. 28 (2015-07-18)

O texto apresentado é obtido de forma automática, não levando em conta elementos gráficos e podendo conter erros. Se encontrar algum erro, por favor informe os serviços através da página de contactos.

Não foi possivel carregar a página pretendida. Reportar Erro

II SÉRIE-D — NÚMERO 26

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!

II SÉRIE-D — NÚMERO 26 28 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!

Descarregar páginas