86 Amendments of Maria NOICHL related to 2018/2037(INI)
Amendment 4 #
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), which requires taking into account all objectives of development cooperation in policies which are likely to affect developing countries; recalls that currently, other policy areas like the common agriculture policy and its funding structure often obstruct development policy;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
– having regard to the European Court of Auditors Special report (No 4/2014) entitled “Integration of EU water policy objectives with the CAP: a partial success”,
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 b (new)
Citation 4 b (new)
– having regard to Directive 2009/128/EC on the sustainable use of pesticides and the report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Member State National Action Plans and on progress in the implementation of Directive 2009/128/EC on the sustainable use of pesticides,
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls the EU’s and its Member States’ commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), especially to goals number 2 (zero hunger), 5 (gender equality), 12 (responsible consumption and production), 13 (climate action) and 15 (life on land), to which the future Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has to align to;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 c (new)
Citation 4 c (new)
– having regard to the Commission communication of 27 May 2016 entitled “Delivering the benefits of EU environmental policies through a regular Environmental Implementation Review”,
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)
Citation 9 a (new)
– having regard to the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) “Ban glyphosate and protect people and the environment from toxic pesticides”,
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Member States to put an end to the goal of an ever more intensified European agriculture and to cease overproduction in the livestock sector through the obligatory introduction of an area-based livestock farming system; 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, including biodiversity loss, displacement of small farmers, land concentration processes, loss of employment and increased food insecurity; in the mean time, calls for the introduction of sustainability criteria for the import of vegetable protein;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Calls therefore on the EU Commission and the Member States to help reduce the heavy dependence on vegetable protein imports for livestock feed in order to minimise the negative impact on third countries like spreading deforestation;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Recalls the fact that agriculture that fails to protect and improve rural livelihoods, equity and social well-being is unsustainable and that sustainability requires direct action to conserve, protect and enhance natural resources;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. Stresses in that regard the fact that our consumption patterns tie down substantial resources from third countries which are no longer available for the local population;
Amendment 48 #
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 and surpluses due to the Russian embargo 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;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Commission’s communication on the Future of Food and Farming acknowledges that the common agricultural policy (CAP) is the most integrated policy in the EU and is enablingwith which the EU farming sector has to respond to justified citizens’ demands regarding not only food security, safety, quality and sustainability, but also environmental care, climate change action, biodiversity and high animal welfare standards;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Commission’s communication on the Future of Food and Farming acknowledges that the common agricultural policy (CAP) is the most integrated policy in the EU and is enabling the EU farming sector to respond to citizens’ demands regarding not only food security, safety, quality and sustainability, but also environmental care, climate change action, health and high animal welfare standards;
Amendment 56 #
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; instead, calls on the EU and its Member States to strengthen developing countries' domestic food production as confirmed in the SDGs.
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas a transformation of the CAP towards a sustainable agriculture and pinpoint funding is indispensable, as the Special Report n° 21/2017 from the European Court of Auditors states that the greening of the CAP, as currently implemented, is unlikely to meet its objective, mainly due to the low level of requirements, which largely reflect the normal farming practice and that greening has led to a change in farming practice on only around 5 % of all EU farmland;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls on the European Commission to make a comprehensive, across all policy areas, ex ante and ex post impact assessment of the CAP’s external effects with the help of SDG indicators;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Underlines that, generally, agricultural trade has to contribute, on a partnership basis, to reducing global inequalities and bringing more inclusive social benefits for all trading partners in the future while staying within the ecological limits of our planet;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the 17 SDGs set new, clear ways for the CAP post-2020;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas over the years the CAP has undergone regular re-programming in line with new challenges, but another step in this continuous process of modernisation and simplification, building on previous reforms, is now necessary in order to achieve sustainable rural areas and ensuring that European climate and environmental targets are being met;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas there are other instruments available to be used in rural communities via structural and cohesions funds, which are not necessarily being well synergized with the CAP, even though this would help the regions become more competitive faster;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the new delivery model (NDM) is at the core of the Commission’s communication on the Future of Food and Farming, and is to be welcomed, provided that it ensures genuine simplification, not only at EU level but also at Member State and regional level, and flexibility for farmers, as well as that the targets of the new CAP are being fulfilled without adding new constraints on Member States and thus a new layer of complexity;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the future CAP funding must be linked to a clear societal added value as for instance sustainable agriculture, environmental performance, climate change and animal welfare, so that this part of the EU budget can be justified to European taxpayers;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas over the last few years farmers have been confronted with increasing price volatility, which has reflected price fluctuations on global markets and uncertainty caused by macroeconomic developments, external policies, sanitary crises, self-generated excess quantities in some European sectors and more frequent extreme weather events in the EU;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas less favoured regions such as the mountain, remote and outermost regions are in a particularly disadvantaged position in terms of socio- economic development, but also population ageing and depopulation;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)
Recital F c (new)
Fc. whereas strategies for the developments of these regions on national, macro regional and European level has the potential of giving these regions an impetus for further and faster development;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas it is essential to ensure a fair standard of living across regions and Member States, affordable prices for citizens and consumers, and access to quality and sustainable food and healthy diets, while delivering on the commitments for environmental care, climate action, and animal and plant health and welfare;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas allegedly affordable prices of agricultural products for consumers are often linked to the fact that externalised costs, such as groundwater pollution, are not included and have to be paid by the public;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the emergence of new challenges, such as increasing global trade, isclimate change, water protection, lack of agricultural land and land degradation means that the increasing global trade has to be handled in a sustainable and fair manner and that the necessitating fair and sustainable conditions for the global exchange of goods and services, within the framework of the WTO and in accordance with existing EU social, economic and environmental standards, which should be further promoted;
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas while the focus on research and development for both resource-saving product and process innovation is to be welcomed, more must be done to translate the results of research into farming practice, facilitated by EU-wide agricultural extension services;
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the agriculture and food sector must be incentivised to continue to contribute to the, henceforth, must be remunerated for environmental care and measures for climate action objectives of the EU set out in international agreements such as the Paris Agreement and the UN SDGs;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas closed production circles, which refers to the processes of production, processing and packing taking place in the same region, keep the added value in that region and thus secures more jobs in the respective area and has the potential of reviving rural areas;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the objectives of the Cork 2.0 Declaration for a Better Life in Rural Areas stipulate vibrant rural areas, multi- functionality, biodiversity in and outside agriculture, rare animal breeds and conservation crops, as well as organic agriculture, less-favoured areas and commitments in the context of Natura 2000, as well as the role of young people and women in rural development;
Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas Parliament must play a comprehensive role in setting a clear policy framework to maintain common ambition at European level and democratic debate on the strategic issues which have an impact on the everyday lives of all citizens when it comes to the use of natural resources, the quality of our food and the modernisation of agricultural practices with the aim to establish a societal contract on a European level among producers and consumers;
Amendment 381 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that even the flexibility that Member States currently enjoy in defining basic rules may riskshows that parts of the CAP can no longer be seen as a common policy and that distorting competition unfortunately appears within the single market and granting unequal access to support for famers in different Member States or even in different regions;
Amendment 401 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that subsidiarity for Member States should only be granted within a common set of rules and tools agreed at EU level as part of a uniform approach to all programming efforts and eligibility criteria, should cover botBelieves that the additional subsidiarity should be granted only on condition that there are: a strong common set of rules, objectives and indicators concerning the main types of possible intervention tools and the criteria for the selection of measures Member States will be able to apply in their national operational plans, in order to ensure a uniform approach of the CAP’stwo pillars and ensure, in particular, a European approach in Pillar I and thus a level playing field;of the CAP throughout the Union, and for Pillar I in particular to guarantee the respect of conditions of fair competition.
Amendment 407 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that subsidiarity for Member States should only be granted within a common set of clear defined and transparent rules and tools agreed at EU level as part of a uniform approach to all programming efforts and eligibility criteria, should cover both of the CAP’s pillars and ensure, in particular, a European approach in Pillar I and thus a level playing fieldthe whole CAP regardless of its architectural design;
Amendment 426 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Welcomes the greater responsibility of Member States in the implementation of the CAP , in order to make it more effective and better adapted to the realities of Europe's different agricultural models, provided that the CAP retains its common character and avoids distortions of competition between Member States;
Amendment 451 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the efforts of the Commission to establish programme design, implementation and control of an output-based approach in order to foster performance, thus the actions of farmers and not the mere possession of land, rather than compliance, while ensuring adequate monitoring via clearly defined, solid and measurable indicators at EU level, including an appropriate system of quality control and penalties;
Amendment 508 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the member states to look for better synergies between the CAP and other policies and funds such as the cohesion, structural and other investment funds, in order to create multiplying effect for the rural areas;
Amendment 509 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Amendment 527 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers it nsecessondary to maintain the current two-pillared architecture, particularly Pillar I, which is dedicated to income support for farmers; considers it necessary, at the same time, to compensate for thereward farmers' provisions of public goods on the basis of uniform performance criteria, while allowing Member States to take specific approaches to reflect local conditions;
Amendment 562 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the current CAP architecture can only deliver its objectives ifwith sufficiently fundeding and a targeted management of the funds; calls, therefore, for the CAP budget to be maintained in the next MFF at at least the current level in order to achieve the ambitions of a revised and efficient CAP beyond 2020;
Amendment 587 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Points out that these objectives must be coherent and based on uniform, transparent, EU-wide eligibility criteria, that Member States do not have to increase co-financing, and that the architecture of the CAP, which used to be the two pillar model, is secondary;
Amendment 593 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Emphasises that the resources of the CAP are taxpayers' money from each Member State and that taxpayers throughout the EU have the right that these funds are exclusively used in a targeted and transparent manner;
Amendment 598 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 d (new)
Paragraph 9 d (new)
9d. Notes that the CAP cannot compensate for market failure, unfair pricing or unfair trade but must aim to reward farmers who provide public goods;
Amendment 599 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 e (new)
Paragraph 9 e (new)
9e. Refers to the old objectives of the CAP, like increasing income through concentration processes, division of labour, intensification, increase in quantity and orientation towards the world market, which has not led to the envisaged increase of the income of a large group of farmers;
Amendment 603 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that more targeted support for family farms is necessary and can be achieved by introducing a compulsory higher support rate for small farms; considers, moreover, that support for larger farms should be digressive, reflecting economies of scale, with the possibility for capping to be decided by the Member States; is necessary for diverse agricultural systems, especially family farms, to strengthen regional economies through a performant agriculture in economic, environmental and social terms; considers that this can be achieved by introducing a compulsory higher support rate for farmers managing sustainably productive farms which have the capacity provide employment and retain people in rural territories; stresses that, reflecting economies of scale, support for larger farms should be digressive, with mandatory capping to be decided at European level, with flexibility criteria to take into account employment levels generated by the farm or the co-operative it belongs to;
Amendment 617 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that more targeted support for small and medium-sized as well as family farms is necessary and can be achieved by introducing a compulsory higher support rate for small farms; considers, moreover, that support for larger farms should be digressive, reflecting economies of scale, with the possibility fan EU-wide mandatory capping to be decided byavoid competitive distortions between the Member States;
Amendment 651 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines the necessity of identifying the key elements of a transparent and objective system of rewards, penalties and incentives for determining farmers’ eligibility for public fundingreceiving public money for the delivery of public goods, which should consist of voluntary and mandatory measures;
Amendment 680 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls for the existing system for calculating direct payments in Pillar I, which isreplacement of the existing pillar I direct payments system, often based on historic entitlements, to be replaced bywith an EU-wide uniform method of calculating payments, in order to make the system simpler and more transparentand transparent methodology for calculating payments for the provision of public goods based on concrete results-oriented EU objectives as well as the objectives of the 2030 Agenda;
Amendment 689 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls for a higher support of grasslands with regard to arable land with a ratio of 2:1, if unconditional area payments are maintained;
Amendment 707 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Believes that a base amount for the first hectares, a degressive support structure and an obligatory, EU-wide capping of payments related to the average wage in the amount of a comparative salary of a skilled worker of the respective Member State should be introduced in order to promote family farms and SMEs, if unconditional area payments are maintained;
Amendment 711 #
12c. Underlines the fact that funds of the current CAP, which are spent on concrete actions of farmers, are subject to very precise and small-scale controls while the larger amounts of the CAP- budget (direct payments) are being spend for pure possession of land without control and therefore cannot be justified with respect to European citizens;
Amendment 713 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 d (new)
Paragraph 12 d (new)
12d. Recalls that the report on the state of play of farmland concentration in the EU: how to facilitate the access to land for farmers recognises that land payments without clear conditionality lead to distortions of the land market, and thus influences the concentration of more and more agricultural land in few hands;
Amendment 714 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 e (new)
Paragraph 12 e (new)
12e. Draws attention to the consequences of the import of protein feed, which leads to an unnatural increase in livestock in the EU;
Amendment 715 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 f (new)
Paragraph 12 f (new)
12f. Calls to end this, step by step, in order to restore the proportionality of livestock to EU forage;
Amendment 716 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 g (new)
Paragraph 12 g (new)
12g. Emphasises that indirect export subsidies, e.g. by means of area-based payments, support the export of milk, meat and cereals in weak markets, thus flooding other markets with European financial aid;
Amendment 717 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 h (new)
Paragraph 12 h (new)
12h. Points out that small-scale farming and the concept of regionality are key to escape hunger and to reduce migration pressure;
Amendment 718 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 i (new)
Paragraph 12 i (new)
12i. Clarifies that public goods are those services that are above the statutory environmental, climate and animal welfare legislation, including in particular water conservation, biodiversity protection, soil fertility protection, protection of pollinators, protection of the humus layer and animal welfare;
Amendment 719 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 j (new)
Paragraph 12 j (new)
12j. Emphasises that area payments, without clear conditionality to all concrete measures on the respective land, are to be rejected;
Amendment 720 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 k (new)
Paragraph 12 k (new)
12k. Suggests that possible income support for farmers under the CAP should be treated as explicit social benefits from the EU in the future;
Amendment 721 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 l (new)
Paragraph 12 l (new)
12l. Notes that in the future the CAP will no longer be able to implement the so-called income support for farmers without looking at the actual income situation of the individual farmer;
Amendment 722 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 m (new)
Paragraph 12 m (new)
12m. Points out that the previous area payments, without capping, would amount to a transfer in the field of social services, without any control of the amount of money that will reach the respective person;
Amendment 750 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for a fair distribution of direct payments between Member States, which must continuously take into account socio-economic differences, and different production costs and the amounts received by Member States under Pillar II;
Amendment 754 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Welcomes the results of the most recent Commission report on the POSEI implementation and reiterates that the POSEI must be maintained as a specific regime, distinct from CAP direct payments, in order to ensure a balanced territorial development by preventing the risk of abandonment of production due to challenges related with remoteness, insularity, small-size, difficult topography, and climate or economic dependence on few products;
Amendment 802 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Points out that coupled payments should not be paid in sectors with overproduction;
Amendment 809 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Points out that coupled payments should not support livestock over two livestock units per hectare;
Amendment 810 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)
Paragraph 14 c (new)
14c. Recognises the usefulness of coupled payments in exceptional cases, such as promotion of less-favoured areas, protein production or sheep farming;
Amendment 813 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)
Paragraph 14 c (new)
14c. Refers in this context to the principle of area-based agriculture;
Amendment 830 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that generational renewal or a new entry into agriculture is a challenge faced by famers in many Member States and that each national strategy must therefore address this issue through a comprehensive approach, including top- ups in Pillar I and targeted measures in Pillar II, as well as by means of new financial instruments and national measures, in order to incentivise famers to pass on their farming operations;
Amendment 862 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Proposes making it mandatory for Member States to implement as part of their rural development programmes start-up support measures for young farmers (young farmer grants) and measures to support farm modernisation, as provided for under the second pillar of the CAP, in order to enhance the financial support for people taking up farming;
Amendment 930 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission, in view of the limited results of the current greening measures, to introduce a new and comprehensive legal framework which allowsallowing for the integration of the variousdifferent types of environmental actions at present, such as cross compliance, greening and the good agricultural and environmental conditions (GAEC) standards,currently existing under Pillar I (cross compliance, greening payments) as well as agrio-environmental measures (AEMs) for rural development, so that farmerunder Pillar II, in order to improve the greening results can deliver effectively and with less bureaucracy on environmental care, biodiversity and climate actiod help all farmers more effectively in the adaptation of their farming systems, as imposed by the environmental and climatic challenges and citizens demands , without having to bear excessive administrative burden, while ensuring that Member States have adequate control andmaintain a level of action to takinge into account local agricultural conditions;
Amendment 941 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission to introduce a new and comprehensive legal framework based on concrete results- oriented EU targets as well as the 2030 Agenda, which allows the integration of the various types of environmental actions at present, such as cross compliance, greening and the good agricultural and environmental conditions (GAEC) standards, as well as agri-environment measures (AEMs) for rural development, so that farmers can deliver effectively and with less bureaucracy on environmental care, biodiversity and climate action, while ensuring that Member States have adequate control and taking into account local conditions;
Amendment 961 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Considers that the Commission's future legislative proposals should be able to support the largest number of farmers in their efforts to modernize towards more sustainable agricultural development;
Amendment 962 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls for development of a specific measure within rural development to encourage serious pesticide use reductions, based around the European Union's eight principles of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and encouraging uptakes of non-chemical alternatives;
Amendment 969 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Considers that this ambition for the CAP must be based on a first level corresponding to a simplified and reinforced conditionality and constituting a common base applicable to all farms, and on a second level to go beyond conditionality and including both the current climate and environmental measures of the second pillar and a new European incentive scheme in the first pillar;
Amendment 981 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17d. Proposes that this new form of greening should be accompanied by significant, coordinated and more efficient means in Pillar II through targeted tangible and intangible investments (knowledge transfer, training, advice, exchange of know-how, networking, EIP innovation) as another driver of change;
Amendment 990 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Believes that this new framework should be underpinned by the possible allocation of a minimum amount of the total available budget to AEMs, including organic agriculture, support for biodiversity, agroforestry, and genetic diversity in animals and plants;
Amendment 1027 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to foster innovation, research and modernisation in agriculture by supporting traininga strong advisory system, better adapted to beneficiaries 'needs and agricultural extension as a pre- condition in programme design and implementation in all Member States, while fostering targeted training, the transfer of know-how and the exchange of best practice models between Member States, with a general focus on new technologies and digitalization;
Amendment 1032 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to foster innovation and modernisation in agriculture towards more sustainability and resource protection by supporting training and agricultural extension as a pre- condition in programme design and implementation in all Member States, while fostering the transfer of know-how and the exchange of best practice models between Member States;
Amendment 1108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Recalls the fact that unequal market power hampers cost-covering production most of all in the dairy sector;
Amendment 1122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 1154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Stresses that a future-oriented CAP should be designed to better address critical health issues, such as those related to antimicrobial resistance (AMR), air quality and healthier nutrition;
Amendment 1203 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to allow and indeed encourage – particularly in the dairy sector – active crisis management instruments, such as voluntacompulsory sector agreements to manage supply in quantitative terms among producers, producers organisations and processors as for example the EU milk reduction programme, and to examine the possibility of extending such instruments to other sectors;
Amendment 1233 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Believes that while trade agreements are beneficial to the EU agricultural sector overall, and necessary for strengthening the EU’s position on the global agricultural market, they also pose a number of challenges that require reinforced safeguard mechanisms on both sides to ensure a level playing field between farmers in the EU and in the rest of the world;
Amendment 1323 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Regrets the fact that the whole process of the CAP post-2020 programming exercise – consultation, communication, impact assessment and legislative proposals – is starting with a significant delay as the end of the eighth legislature approaches, jeopardising the possibility ofand a final agreement being reached before the European elections can only be reached with considerable efforts;