Activities of Mireille D'ORNANO related to 2018/2037(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the future of food and farming
Amendments (12)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls the New European Consensus on Development in which the EU and its Member States reaffirm their commitment to Policy Coherence for Development (PCD), since the stability and prosperity of countries benefiting from development policy measures have a positive impact on EU Member States, in particular as regards trade and the stabilisation of migratory flows;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) is the most integrated and successful EU policy, serving as basis forshould be interrupted, to the extent that it impoverishes most farmers, makes Europe an integration, and should remain a common policy with an ambitious budged many Member States regress in terms of food independence, food safety and protection of the environment;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Member States to put an end to the goal of an ever more intensified and productivist European agriculture and to cease overproduction in the livestock sector through the obligatory introduction of an area-based livestock farming systemcurrently promoted by the CAP, the economic and environmental impact of which is alarming; consequently urges them to reduce, and ultimately to put an end to, their imports of protein crops from third countries such as Argentina and Brazil, since increased soybean production has led to negative social and environmental impacts; regrets that the negotiations currently under way between the EU and the Mercosur countries will pave the way for a reverse development, i.e. an increase in imports from those countries;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for a shift away from indirect subsidies such as area payments; stresses the fact that EU agricultural exports, such as dairy and tomato products, poultry and cereals, can be a veritable danger to the domestic markets in developing countries; recalls in this context the fact that the market-distorting effects of the reintroduction of coupled support in the CAP 2014-2020, for example for dairy products, and the conscious overproduction after the abolition of the milk quotas in 2015 cannot be reduced by finding so- called ‘new market outlets’ for European agricultural products in developing countries, because this will only aggravate the situation of farmers in these countries without improving circumstances for farmers in EU Member States, on whom that policy has already had a great impact;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that we have to put an end to the myth that European agriculture, through intensification under the common agricultural policy, has to assume responsibility for feeding a growing world population, with a view also to making agriculture more environment-friendly and financially more profitable for small farms.
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the CAP’s goals, if she should be maintained despite her serious shortcomings, should be to ensure food safety and sovereignty, and the resilience and sustainability of the EU’s agriculture systems and territories, which would mean a radical change in strategy;
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas there is a need for a recast CAP to deliver at the level of what is at stake, there is an imperative to give the co- legislators the means to fully exercise their mission within a regulated time frame, and there are the uncertainticonsequences related to Brexit;
Amendment 111 #
Draft opinion
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the impact of climate and sanitary hazards on farming activity is growing, and whereas there is a need for the CAP to address this with dedicated tools, especially in the overseas territories;
Amendment 136 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for a CAP that has its top priority the transition of each European farm towards an undertaking combining economic with environmental performance standards, what would be a revolution in the philosophy of the CAP;
Amendment 197 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for a renovated second pillar that is less complex and more efficient, focused on truly incentive territorial and sector development policies that place agro-environmental initiatives, investment, training, research and innovation, a significant reduction in pesticides use, the ban of glyphosate and neonicotinoids, at the core of local issues;
Amendment 214 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that only with such a complementary model can the EU’s ambitious goals with regard to the environment and rural development be reached in a system where the CAP would unfortunately be maintained;
Amendment 250 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Asks the Commission to ensure that each imported agricultural product meets the same sanitary and social standards that EU products are held to; asks the Commission to conduct a systematic impact assessment of the provisions regarding the agricultural sector in each trade agreement, and to offer specific strategies to ensure that no agricultural sector will suffer as a result of a trade agreement concluded with a third country, while the first impact studies on this topic show that European agriculture, and particularly livestock farming, will considerably suffer because of the agreements, in project or signed.