Semestre européen pour la coordination des politiques économiques 2026

Texte tel que publié par le PE, en anglais.

1. Amendement 1Rejeté

   Paragraph 14 a (new)

   Déposé par João Oliveira · The Left

   Ajouté: 14a. Takes the view that Member State budgetary and economic policies are being controlled and conditioned by the package of instruments, rules and mechanisms set out in the ‘Economic Governance’ legislation and the European Semester process; points outs that those instruments and mechanisms have been a key factor in eroding labour and other social rights, deepening social inequalities, diminishing public investment, undermining public services and social benefits provided by the state and weakening productive sectors and have contributed to the deregulation and privatisation of strategic sectors, with a consequent increase in structural deficits; notes that those instruments and mechanisms also represent a serious encroachment on national sovereign powers in favour of the European Union that is being dictated by the interests of major powers and of leading economic and financial groups;

2. Amendement 2Rejeté

   Paragraph 14 b (new)

   Déposé par João Oliveira · The Left

   Ajouté: 14b. Considers it necessary, therefore, to repeal all EU economic governance instruments and mechanisms; calls for those instruments and mechanisms to be replaced by a Social Progress and Employment Pact, the goals of which would be: – respecting each nation’s sovereignty, safeguarding conditions for each country to advance its economic and social development, overcome structural deficits and improve its productive capacity; – tackling unemployment and promoting full employment, upholding and strengthening labour and other social rights, safeguarding and promoting collective bargaining and eradicating precariousness and poverty; – defending and strengthening public services and social benefits provided by states, including access to the rights to healthcare, education, social security, housing and culture; – effectively advancing achievement of the principles of economic and social cohesion and environmental sustainability;

3. Amendement 4Rejeté

   Recital I a (new)

   Déposé par Manon Aubry · The Left

   Ajouté: Ia. whereas those reference values of 3 % for government deficit and 60 % for the debt-to-GDP ratio are arbitrary numbers invented in the early 1980s without a sound economic rationale; whereas the prevailing economic conditions and social and ecological imperatives at that time were significantly different from those prevailing today;

4. Amendement 5Rejeté

   Paragraph 11 a (new)

   Déposé par Manon Aubry, Leila Chaibi · The Left

   Ajouté: 11a. Stresses, moreover, that surging housing costs have significant social consequences, including worsening inequalities, increasing housing insecurity and limiting access to adequate and affordable housing for large segments of the population; considers, therefore, that country-specific recommendations under the European Semester should take full account of these challenges and encourage Member States to financially support city authorities in stepping up investment in public, social and affordable housing and in large-scale thermal renovation programmes in order to reduce energy poverty and improve the resilience of housing stock; calls on the Commission to make EU co-financing of these investments a budgetary priority, including by ensuring that relevant EU programmes and funds prioritise support for city authorities for the development of social housing and the deep renovation of buildings in order to deliver tangible social and climate benefits on the ground;

5. Amendement 7Rejeté

   Paragraph 15 b (new)

   Déposé par Manon Aubry · The Left

   Ajouté: 15b. Regrets that in order to comply with the revised economic governance rules, Member State governments, France being at the forefront, have committed in their national fiscal and budgetary plans to reducing public expenditure and implementing structural reforms; deplores the fact that these commitments have already or will in the near future translate into concrete measures deeply affecting the population, such as the reform of the pension system, the reform of the unemployment scheme, a decrease in healthcare reimbursements, and job cuts in public administrations such as public education, leading to a general degradation of public services; warns that these economic policies aiming at complying with the objectives of the European Semester will have a harmful and long-lasting impact on EU citizens and their collective capacity to cope with the ecological crisis, while at the same time failing to achieve the deficit and debt reduction for which these policies were intended;

6. Amendement 8Rejeté

   Paragraph 16 a (new)

   Déposé par Manon Aubry · The Left

   Ajouté: 16a. Stresses that the use of escape clauses should not be limited to defence spending; considers that external and temporary shocks can occur in a variety of policy areas and sees no justification for limiting the use of escape clauses to a single domain; highlights that this could apply, in particular, to major public health crises, ecological disasters or other systemic emergencies requiring exceptional and rapid public investment;

7. Amendement 9Rejeté

   Paragraph 22 a (new)

   Déposé par Manon Aubry · The Left

   Ajouté: 22a. Regrets that, in the context of a general reduction in public spending, multinational companies have for years benefited from significant public subsidies without conditions attached; calls, therefore, for such subsidies to be made conditional on clear social, economic and environmental commitments, including the preservation of local jobs and production, the achievement of ecological objectives, and limits on shareholder payouts and executive remuneration;

8. Amendement 11Rejeté

   Paragraph 22 c (new)

   Déposé par Manon Aubry · The Left

   Ajouté: 22c. Highlights the fact, for example, that the EUR 24 billion in budgetary cuts imposed by the French Government for the 2026 budget is far less than the annual cost of tax breaks granted to wealthy individuals and multinational corporations since 2017;

9. Amendement 13Rejeté

   Paragraph 30 b (new)

   Déposé par Manon Aubry · The Left

   Ajouté: 30b. Believes that instead of promoting harmful budgetary cuts and structural reforms in order to reach the debt and deficit targets prescribed by the Stability and Growth Pact, the EU economic governance framework should favour and facilitate the collection at both Member State and EU level of additional resources through fair taxation, in particular taxes on the wealthiest and on multinational companies, taxes on ecologically harmful products and services, the removal of ineffective and unfair tax and social contribution exemptions, and the fight against tax dodging and tax evasion on the part of wealthy individuals and multinational companies;

10. Amendement 15Rejeté

    Paragraph 24 a (new)

    Déposé par Enikő Győri, Paolo Borchia, Mireia Borrás Pabón +3 · PfE

    Ajouté: 24a. Emphasises that CSRs should be better focused, by preserving their macroeconomic character, and should always remain within the remit of EU competences and should never use double standards;

11. Amendement 16Rejeté

    Paragraph 28

    Déposé par Enikő Győri, Paolo Borchia, Mireia Borrás Pabón +1 · PfE

    28. Stresses Ajouté: that the growing importance Supprimé: of CSRs Ajouté: and potentially more binding character of CSRs, when linked to the Supprimé: national and regional partnership plans; Ajouté: NRPPs, constitute a significant increase in the Commission’s discretionary power; draws attention to the fact that there is currently no transparent or …

12. Amendement 17Rejeté

    Paragraph 28 a (new)

    Déposé par Enikő Győri, Paolo Borchia, Mireia Borrás Pabón +1 · PfE

    Ajouté: 28a. Expresses strong concern about the Commission’s proposal to make access to significant funding under the NRPPs and the European Competitiveness Fund conditional on the fulfilment of CSRs; recalls that similar conditionality in the context of the RRF has demonstrated serious shortcomings, including inconsistencies in the assessment of national reforms, politicisation of the process and insufficient accountability; stresses that replicating this approach risks undermining the credibility, ownership and effectiveness of both the European Semester and future EU funding;