40 Amendments of Maria NOICHL related to 2014/2228(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU agricultural sector is a very sensitive and essential part of the TTIP negotiations and one in which the EU, which already enjoys a significant trade surplus with the US, stands to benefit greatly from new or increased market access opportunities;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU agricultural sector is a very sensitive and essential part of the TTIP negotiations and one in which the EU, which already enjoys a significant trade surplus with the US, stands to benefit greatly from new or increased market access opportunities but could just as well face financial and job losses as a result of stronger competition from US imports;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the free trade agreement is likely to bring few if any benefits for the agricultural sector, and whereas overall agricultural output in the EU is likely to drop by 0.5%;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the likely negative impact of TTIP poses a threat to rural jobs, and whereas average farm incomes will fall as a result of a loss of competitiveness; whereas this could lead to agricultural production being transferred to countries with less stringent standards;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas it is important for European agriculture to secure a mutually beneficial trade deal with the US in order tof that deal advances Europe’s position as a key player on the global market and does not in an way jeopardise the current standard of quality of European agricultural products and the future improvement of that standard;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas respect for European food safety and human and animal health standards will beis a fundamental tenet of the negotiations for European agriculture;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas respect for European food safety and, human and animal health standards will be a fundamental tenetand consumer protection standards will be a precondition for the success of the negotiations for European agriculture;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the free trade agreement could make it more difficult to introduce and enhance consumer protection standards in the future; having regard to the importance of introducing and the potential problems in enforcing an EU- wide labelling requirement for foods produced from animals reared on GMO feed;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the harmonisation of EU and US rules must not under any circumstances jeopardise consumer health or lower the quality standards that must be met by US products placed on the European market;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas industrial animal husbandry is synonymous with widespread damage to the environment, poor working conditions and massive structural change, and whereas increased competition from the United States and more intensive transatlantic trade will speed up that process of change;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas the lack of a positive list means that it will not be possible to restrict the scope of the agreement in the future and that decisions in the areas consumer protection, animal welfare and environmental standards could be taken undemocratically by so-called sectoral coordination bodies or on the basis of regulatory cooperation;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Recital C e (new)
Recital C e (new)
Ce. whereas steps must be taken to ensure that animal welfare standards can be upheld and enhanced in keeping with public attitudes towards health and ethical issues;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Recital C f (new)
Recital C f (new)
Cf. whereas by doing away with tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade a future free trade agreement will put farmers in developing countries under pressure by depriving them of market shares;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Recital C g (new)
Recital C g (new)
Cg. whereas the mutual recognition of sanitary and phytosanitary rules must not give rise to threats to the environment, people and animals, for example as a result of the abolition of checks on imported food and feed;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Recital C i (new)
Recital C i (new)
Ci. whereas giving undertakings the right to bring actions against states will make it more difficult for the democratically elected representatives of the people to put democratic decisions into practice;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
a. prioritise an ambitious and balanced result of the negotiations for agriculture, the three mainkey components of which, such as (market access, geographical indications and sanitary and phytosanitary measures), should be tackled early and in parallel in the negotiation process, in order to give Parliament enough time to discuss and evaluate this chapter with stakeholders and European citizens;
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
a. prioritise an ambitious and balanced result of the negotiations for agriculture, the threfive main components of which (no lowering of food safety standards, consumer protection, market access, geographical indications and sanitary and phytosanitary measures) should be tackled early and in parallel in the negotiation process, in order to give Parliament enough time to discuss and evaluate this chapter with stakeholders and European citizen, focusing in particular on farmers and small family holdings, and with European citizens, civil society and the social partners;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
aa. take proper account of the outcome of the public consultation procedure on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms and reject the inclusion of such mechanisms in the TTIP;
Amendment 104 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
b. firmly commit to the strict preservation of standards on food safety and human and animal health, as defined under EU legislation, and ensure that the enhancement of these standards is in no way hampered in the future and that fundamental values of the EU such as the precautionary principle are not undermined;
Amendment 110 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
b. firmly commit to the strict preservation of standards on food safety and human and animal health, as defined under EU legislation, and ensure that fundamental values of the EU such as the precautionary principle and sustainable farming are not undermined;
Amendment 121 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
ba. ensure that the deal and the mechanisms it would put in place cannot in any way make it easier for genetically modified organisms to be brought on to the European market or produced in Europe; note, in this connection, that much of the beet sugar originating in the United States comes from GM sugar beet and should therefore be labelled ‘sugar produced from GM crops’, in accordance with EU law;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas concluding the free trade agreement is expected to have few or no positive effects for the agricultural sector and, overall, agricultural value added is expected to fall by 0.5% in Europe; Kommentar: (Die Studie des Europäischen Parlaments "Risks and Opportunities for the EU agri-food sector in a possible EU- US trade agreement" sagt einen solchen Rückgang voraus.)
Amendment 127 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
bb. ensure that the deal and the mechanisms it would put in place cannot facilitate the authorisation of practices intended to cut production costs which could have an adverse impact on the health of consumers, farmers or the environment, including the use of chemicals such as chlorine to clean foodstuffs, of antibiotics as growth promoters or growth hormones such as ractopamine or of feed containing animal waste, the production of meat from cloned animals or the lowering of animal welfare standards;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the lack of a positive list means that the subject-matter of the agreement cannot be restricted, including in the future, and decisions on consumer, environmental and animal standards could be undemocratically taken in the future by so-called sectoral coordination committees or regulatory cooperation.
Amendment 131 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)
Recital E c (new)
Ec. whereas the right of corporations to bring actions against States hinders the democratically elected representatives of the people in the implementation of democratic decisions;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E d (new)
Recital E d (new)
Ed. stresses that the removal of tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade in a future free trade agreement will put agricultural production in developing countries under pressure as a result of loss of market share;
Amendment 139 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
c. ensure a positive and ambitious final outcome of the negotiations for agriculture reflecting both the offensive and defensive interests of the EU agricultural sector concerning the abolition or reduction of both tariff and non-tariff barriers, including in particular sanitary and phytosanitary standards and procedures, so that EU producers make genuine gains in terms of access to the US market, affording maximum consumer protection; considers that on no account can it be accepted that measures to protect consumers, maintain food safety and protect consumer health should be regarded as non-tariff barriers;
Amendment 159 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d
Paragraph 1 – point d
d. secure a level playing field, treating as sensitive those products for which direct competition would expose EU agricultural producers to excessivemake the possible ratification of the agreement contingent upon fair competitive conditions which will ensure that farmers are not exposed to even greater pressure than at pressureent, for example in cases wheref products based on values, regulatory conditions and related costs of production which are different in the EU divUSA werge from thoseimported into the USEU, thus causing unfair competition;
Amendment 167 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
da. make every effort to provide special protection for agricultural structures in Europe by defining sensitive product areas, since, if tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade were dismantled to too great an extent, the industrial structure of US agriculture would jeopardise smallholder farming in Europe;
Amendment 178 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
db. inform Parliament and the public as early as possible about a potential list of sensitive products so that all stakeholders have enough time to consider and assess the proposals as soon as possible and before the end of the negotiations;
Amendment 185 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e
Paragraph 1 – point e
e. secure significantly improved protection of EU geographical indications and better consumer information as an essential element of a balanced agreement, taking the relevant chapter of the CETA with Canada as a good example;
Amendment 191 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e
Paragraph 1 – point e
e. secure significantly improved protection of EU geographical indications and of the quality of EU agricultural products and better consumer information and protection, as an essential element of a balanced agreement, taking the relevant chapter of the CETA with Canada as a good example;
Amendment 206 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 –point e a (new)
Paragraph 1 –point e a (new)
ea. officially remove the investor-to-state dispute settlement procedure from the scope of the negotiations, as was also done in the case of the Australia - United States Free Trade Agreement, for instance, since such an arrangement between two developed economies with developed legal systems is superfluous;
Amendment 210 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
f. engage in a fully transparent, timely and comprehensive manner with allthe European Parliament, all national parliaments and the agricultural stakeholders on all aspects of the negotiations.
Amendment 214 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
f. engage in a fully transparent, timely and comprehensive manner with all agricultural stakeholders on all aspects of the negotiations, and ensure scrupulous compliance with all the legislation and collective preferences on which our European social model is based.
Amendment 221 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
fa. submit without delay a clear and objective study of the impact of TTIP on European agriculture, sector by sector, particularly its impact on small family farms.
Amendment 371 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iv a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b – point iv a (new)
(iva) a horizontal exemption clause should be introduced in order to preserve the right of the EU and its Member States to take decisions, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, on all existing and future measures for all obligations in relation to the provision of services by local authorities, and to independently take decisions across all sectors;
Amendment 400 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi
Paragraph 1 – point b – point vi
(vi) to ensure an adequate carve-out of sensitive services such as public services and public utilities (including water, health, social security systems and education) allowing national and local authorities enough room for manoeuvre to legislate in the public interest; an explicit exception – based on Art. 14 TFEU in conjunction with Protocol 26 – should be anchored in the treaty for these services, irrespective of who provides them, the manner in which they are provided and how they are funded; a joint declaration reflecting negotiators’ clear commitment to exclude these sectors from the negotiations would be very helpful in this regard;