11 Amendments of Mireille D'ORNANO related to 2018/0217(COD)
Amendment 28 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled 'The Future of Food and Farming' of 29 November 2017 concludes that the Common Agricultural Policy (hereinafter ‘CAP’) should continue to step up its response to future challenges and opportunities, by boosting employment, growth and investment, fighting and adapting to climate change and bringing research and innovation out of the laboratories and onto fields and markets. The CAP should furthermore address citizens' concerns regarding sustainable agriculture production. Furthermore, the CAP should be radically reformed, its principles should be completely overhauled and it should seek in particular to promote sustainable agriculture without pesticides, allowing farmers to be fairly paid and ensuring that the general public is provided with healthy food.
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled 'The Future of Food and Farming' of 29 November 2017 is highly conservative, concludesing that the Common Agricultural Policy (hereinafter ‘CAP’) should continue to step up its response to future challenges and opportunities, by boosting employment, growth and investment, fighting and adapting to climate change and bringing research and innovation out of the laboratories and onto fields and markets. The CAP should furthermore address citizens' concerns regarding sustainable agriculture production.
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The CAP's compliance-driven delivery model should be adjusted to ensure a greater focus on results and performancthe principle of sustainable agriculture. Accordingly the Union should set the basic policy objectives, types of intervention and basic Union requirements while greater responsibility and accountability for meeting those objectives should be borne by the Member States. As a consequence, there is a need to ensure greater subsidiarity in order to take better account of the local conditions and needs. Accordingly, under the new delivery model, Member States should be responsible for tailoring their CAP interventions in line with basic Union requirements in order to maximize their contribution to Union CAP objectives and to establish and design the compliance and control framework for beneficiaries.
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to achieve the objectives of the CAP laid down in Article 39 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (the ‘Treaty’), to pursue a different, more fundamental objective of ensuring sustainable agriculture that is safe for human health and is environment- friendly, and to comply with the principle of shared management, as provided for in Article 59 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012, Member States should ensure that the necessary governance systems are in place. Provision should therefore be made for designating the competent authority, paying agency, coordinating body and certification body.
Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In order to avoid an excessivease the administrative burden for, which national administrations and farmers currently find inordinate, provision should be made that reimbursement of the amounts carried over from the preceding financial year in relation to financial discipline applied, should not take place either where financial discipline is applied for a second subsequent year (year N+1), or where the overall amount of non- committed appropriations represents less than 0,2% of the EAGF annual ceiling.
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Member States shouldare called on to ensure that Union aid beis paid to beneficiaries in good time so that they may use it efficiently. A failure by the Member States to comply with the payment deadlines laid down in Union law might create serious difficulties for the beneficiaries and could jeopardise the Union's yearly budgeting. Therefore, expenditure made without respecting deadlines for payments should be excluded from Union financing. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, the Commission should be empowered to provide for exceptions from this general rule with regard to both Funds.
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Member States shouldare called on to send the annual accounts and an annual performance report on the implementation of the CAP Strategic Plan to the Commission by 15 February N+1. Where these documents are not sent, thus preventing the Commission from clearing the accounts for the concerned paying agency or checking the eligibility of the expenditure against reported outputs, the Commission should be empowered to suspend the monthly payments and to interrupt the quarterly reimbursement until the outstanding documents are received.
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) In order to enable the Commission to fulfil its obligation to check the existence and proper functioning of management and inspection systems for Union expenditure in the Member States, provision shcould conceivably be made, irrespective of the inspections carried out by Member States themselves, for checks to be carried out by persons authorised by the Commission to act on its behalf who should be able to request assistance from the Member States in their work.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) In order to to safeguard the financial interests of the Union's budget, systems should be put in place by Member StatesMember States are called on to put systems in place in order to satisfy themselves that interventions financed by the Funds are actually carried out and are executed correctly, while maintaining the current robust framework for sound financial management. In accordance with the Financial Regulation, Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/201315 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2988/9516, Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/9617 and Council Regulation (EU) 2017/193918, the financial interests of the Union are to be protected through proportionate measures, including the prevention, detection, correction and investigation of irregularities including fraud, the recovery of Funds lost, wrongly paid or incorrectly used and, where appropriate, the imposition of administrative sanctions. Moreover, in accordance with Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 and Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) may carry out administrative investigations, including on- the-spot checks and inspections, with a view to establishing whether there has been fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union. In accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) may investigate and prosecute fraud and other criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union as provided for in Directive (EU) 2017/137119 of the European Parliament and of the Council. In accordance with the Financial Regulation, any person or entity receiving Union Ffunds is to fully cooperate in the protection of the Union’s financial interests, to grant the necessary rights and access to the Commission, OLAF, the EPPO and the European Court of Auditors (ECA) and to ensure that any third parties involved in the implementation of Union Ffunds grant equivalent rights. Member States should have the systems in place allowing them to report to the Commission, for the purpose of enabling OLAF to exercise its powers and ensure an efficient analysis of cases of irregularity, on detected irregularities and other cases of non-compliance with the conditions established by Member States in the CAP Strategic Plan, including fraud and on their follow-up as well as on the follow-up of OLAF investigations. To ensure the effective examination of complaints concerning the Funds, Member States should have in place the necessary arrangements. _________________ 15 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/1999, (OJ L248, 18.9.2013, p. 1). 16 Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests (OJ L 312, 23.12.95, p. 1). 17 Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96 of 11 November 1996 concerning on-the-spot checks and inspections carried out by the Commission in order to protect the European Communities'’ financial interests against fraud and other irregularities (OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 2). 18 Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘'the EPPO’') (OJ L 283, 31.10.2017, p. 1). 19 Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law (OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 29).
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) Conditionality is an important element of the CAP, in particular with regard to its environmental and climate elements but also concerning public health and animal related issues. In the field of public health, compliance with the rules on pesticides must of course be an aid conditionality factor. This implies that controls should be carried out and, where necessary, penalties should be applied to ensure the effectiveness of the conditionality system. To have a level playing field between beneficiaries in different Member States, certain general rules on conditionality controls and penalties should be introduced at Union level.