53 Amendments of Maria NOICHL related to 2020/2085(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
— having regards to Art. 13 of the TFEU,
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
— having regard to the recent note of the Council l ("Agriculture and Fisheries") of 28 June 2021 calling for a permanent prohibition of fur farming in the EU,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8
Citation 8
— having regard to the study requested by European Parliament’s PETI Committee ‘End the cage age: Looking for alternatives’ (November 2020), its resolution of 10 June 2021 on the European Citizens’ Initiative ‘End the Cage Age’ (2021/2633 (RSP)), and to Commission Communication - C(2021)4747 of 30 June 2021,
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)
Citation 9 a (new)
— having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on the Common Agricultural Policy adopted on 5 December 2018 (CDR 3637/2018),
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 b (new)
Citation 9 b (new)
— having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions on Agro-ecology adopted on 5 February 2021 (CDR 3137/2020),
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
Citation 11 a (new)
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas animal welfare is an ethically sensitive and increasingly important issue in our society;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognises that animals are sentient beings and stipulates that the Union and Member States shall pay full regard to their welfare requirements in formulating and implementing the Union's agriculture policies;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas some of the European food-production standards, including animal welfare criteria, are among the highest and most rigorous in the world;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas more uniform applican updationg of existing animal welfare legislation is a prerequisite to raising these standards;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas European farmers have made steadyome progress in recent decades by looking critically at their practices and making improvements and adjustments in their work; whereas they rely on the support of advisory and research bodies and a number of non-governmental organisations to improve their practices; whereas, what is more, European farmers want to continue to move forward in this area but face technical and economic obstacles;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas animal welfare goes hand in hand with farmers’ welfare operators’ well-being and both should be given appropriate resources;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the Covid-19 pandemic has highlighted the direct link between animal and human health and wellbeing and was most likely the result of dysfunctional interaction with animals; whereas animal welfare is also linked to the environment, as best explored through the One Welfare framework;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas currently the animal welfare law lacks species- and age- specific provisions that cover all production cycle stages;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the directives on pigs (for pregnant sows), calves and laying hensome of the current directives have led to positive structural changes to the way in which animals are reared; whereas in the egg, veal and pigmeat sectors, the directives have led to significant changes to buildings and equipment and played a part in some advances in the number and size of holdings (the calves directive concerning the limitation in the use of the individual pens, and the laying hens directives with regards to the definition of multi-layer rearing systems); whereas these Directive as well as the general Farming directive, and the broiler and the pig directives have had little effect in terms of animal welfare;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas the laying hens directive has been a success in providing good definitions for the different products systems; whereas this success is limited, however, given the broad range of approaches applied by the Member States to its implementation, which has distorted competition in the single market, and given the Directive’s lack of clear, mandatory and comprehensive provisions;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
Pa. whereas the surgical castration of pigs is still routinely practiced despite the Brussels Declaration where different actors of the farming and the food chain committed to end the surgical castration of pigs by 1st January 2018;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas livestockanimal production farming methods vary among the Member States;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
R. whereas ourthe European Union's agricultural, environmental and commercial strategies should be coherent;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
T. whereas particular attention should be paid to ensuring that our political decisions do not weaken the European livestock-production sector, which would lead to the relocation of productionthe Union will support a shift towards less and better animal-based products' consumption, and better animal welfare during the whole production cycles; and to other parts of the world where livestock conditions and standards are lower than in Europe, and to other, connected problemsromotion of higher animal welfare standards both internationally and on the domestic market;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas labelling can only be effective if it is easy for consumers to understand, designed for an integrated single market applied to all animal products, and underpinned by a coherent EU trade policy;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
V. whereas information tools for consumers should be designed in such a way as to maintain a level playing field, and a harmonised approach which is currently hampered by the welter of private initiatives using unprotected animal welfare terms and claims for varying standards;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V a (new)
Recital V a (new)
Va. whereas an animal welfare related label can only be truly transparent if it is mandatory and labels all animal products from minimum EU legislative standards to premium levels;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Acknowledges the great strides made by livestockattempts made by animal production farmers on their farms, particularly in improving animal welfare, and their drive and commitment of some of them to forward thinking and progress;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Acknowledges that the development of some farming methods and technologies aiming at increasing production and/or reducing production costs have and have had negative consequences on the welfare of the animals; regrets that the intensification in animal production, which is the result of a business model largely relying on exports, is a significant obstacle to the welfare animals farmed in the European Union;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Recognises that the Covid-19 pandemic is a stark reminder of the interconnectivity of human, animal and planetary health; expresses deep concern that intensive agriculture, through its contribution to biodiversity loss and climate change is a leading driver of pandemics as well as posing a direct threat to human health through the spill- over of zoonotic diseases from livestock;
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recommends giving all livestockanimal production farmers the means, via an EU- level framework, to take part in a process of progress, based on objective indicators referring to the f“Five fundamental freedoms defined by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)Domain” model;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for any future legislative initiative (whether the establishment of new legislation or a review of existing texts) entailing an amendment or change to the livestockanimal-raising system (including accommodation) to be based on sound, recent scientific data derived from research grounded in a systemic approach and not focused on any single aspect of sustainability; advocates for balance to be maintained and for scientific advice on how the desired changes will affect the animals, the environment and the farmers to be followed;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to update animal welfare rules in the light of scientific progress in this field, and by embedding the five domains model and the ‘One Welfare’ approach as well as the Farm to Fork Strategy;
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that changes must be made afterin accordance with scientific evaluation and with a view to meeting citizens’ needs, with due account for consumers’ choices and purchasing power and expectations;
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges lawmakers to familiarise themselves with and be fully aware of the consequences of these developments; calls for changes to be assessed using a holistic approach taking in the social, environmental and economic components of sustainability, as well as ergonomics for farmers and health-related aspects; recalls that animal welfare must be coupled with an economic approach if it is to prove successful in the long runRecalls that animal welfare must be coupled with an sustainable economic approach if it is to prove successful in the long run; notes that EU funds have to incentivise continuous improvements and they shall be allocated for producers shifting to farming systems that integrate higher welfare standard;
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. StressAcknowledges that for any change must be considered in the light of the time needed for livestock farmers to implement it and the inertia it may entails on-farm to positively impact animal welfare, they need appropriate transition periods;
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Warns that any potential changes to cages will need to be accompanied by precise and unambiguelcomes the ECI “End the Cage Age” and calls for a precise and unambiguous definition of what constitutes a cage, starting from the basic definition of a cage as a system of confinement in which animals cannot display basic natural behaviours definitions of what constitutes a cage; (such as walking/hopping/flying/foraging/dustbath ing/resting) in a comfortable manner and as they choose to, and benefit from being with their own species;
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that investments in improved animal welfare may incur higher production costs, no matter the type of livestock farming concerned; notes that, unless covered by financial aid or a these higher costs need to be covered by return on investments from the market, the rise in production costs means that farmers will not be able to invest in animal welfare or financial aids;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Calls for financial support to be provided to livestockanimal production farmers who must effect a transition on their farms, including a reduction in the number of animals and better housing conditions which meet animal physical and behavioural needs, whether by means of public policies (a coherent combination of different tools, including the CAP and the EMFAF) or the market, and for consumers to be provided with clear and transparent information by ensuring mandatory, clear and reliable labelling of all animal products on welfare- related aspects of their entire production cycle – from birth to death; calls, further, for a positive and non- stigmatising communications strategy to be implemented; that is transparent and applied across all animal products;
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Invites the Commission to communicate more effectively on virtuousgood practices and to assist the livestockby including the minimum EU animal welfare legislative standards on the EU-wide animal welfare label, and to assist the animal production sector in its efforts to make progress, by supporting the means of implementation, thus respecting the efforts of all stakeholders to get their initiatives off the ground and adopting an encouraging stance;
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Points out that practices intended to improve animal well-being usuallycan incur higherin new production costs and increase farmers’ workload, and that this must be offset by corresponding remuneration; stresses, by way of example, that phasing in loose housing for pregnant sows and farrowing crates would require a 30-year transition period to ensure that the additional costs incurred are recouped from the market, and that the least onerous way of introducing this is to constructand that it might require the construction of new buildings, something that can only be done with the cooperation of the relevant authorities in issuing building permits;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 304 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the multifaceted complexity of the central, thorny welfare problem in pig farming, namely tail biting; observes that the technical difficulty encountered in the extensive research into and analysis of risk factors throughout the EU has meant that no reliable solutions whatsoever have been foundre is a wealth of technical and practical information on methods of preventing tail-biting, including those published by the European Commission and notes that producers need to put that into place;
Amendment 313 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses the need for amendments to the veterinary rules covering pig farms to take account of progress in the field of alternative to piglet castration;
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Invites the Commission to ensure the availability in the various Member States of a harmonisedfavour the uptake of immuno-castration and take all the legislative measures to phase out piglet castration by 2028; in the meanwhile invites the Commission to lay down a EU list of the available products and protocols for the use of pain-killersanalgesia and anaesthesia for piglet castration; until 2028, asks the Commission to permit the short-term insist on surgical castorage of medicines on farms and to allow veterinarians to leave them theretion to be carried out by veterinarians only with analgesia and anaesthesia;
Amendment 319 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Regrets that beak trimming is one of the symbols of intensification in livestock farming and is still routinely practiced for chicken, turkeys, laying hens and ducks across the European Union; calls on the EU Commission to ban the practice of beak trimming in the EU and to improve housing systems that fulfil the needs of the animals; notes that dehorning and castration are common mutilations in cattle, sheep, and goat farming; calls on the Commission ensure that these mutilations will be forbidden by law;
Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Urges the Commission to inform consumers and raise their awareness of the reality of livestock farming and the diversity and origin of production methods by showing, without dogmatism, the care and attention that farmers pay to their animalanimal production farming by including different tiers from minimum EU standards to premium standards on an EU-wide animal welfare related label and by showing the diversity and origin of production methods;
Amendment 344 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to reword its regulatory framework to make it clearer, with a view not to tightening rules up but rather to makiimprove the welfare of animals in the EU, make it clearer and comprehensive by setting up, among others, objectives and indicators more easily comprehensible and, thereby, to leavinge less room for interpretation and enabling uniform national transposition among Member States; suggests updating the general directive to include the Commission’s objectives and expectations regarding the welfare of farm animalin accordance with the latest scientific knowledge and the five domains and working on species-specific directives, with due account for the nature of livestock farming, the various stages of the animals’ lives from breeding to death, on- farm practices unrelated to livestock farming, and the diversity of soil and weather conditions;
Amendment 349 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Recalls that mink farming can act as a reservoir for SARS-CoV-2 and future strains of the coronavirus and significantly compromises animal welfare; strongly welcomes the initiative presented at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting on 28 June 2021 by Austria and the Netherlands on the issue of fur farming in the EU; notes that a number of Member States have expressed their support for the proposal; reiterates its call on the European Commission to undertake appropriate action to prohibit fur farming in Europe due to animal welfare, ethical and public health concerns;
Amendment 352 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. InvitUrges the Commission to clarify its framework for monitoring Member States and punishing them for any non- compliance, starting infringement procedures and punishing them for any non-compliance; invites the Commission to put forward an effective monitoring and sanction system, to ensure that detrimental practices will be tackled, and responsible parties made legally accountable for any cruelty on animals;
Amendment 359 #
23. Asks the Commission to accompany any decision with a scientific and a socio-economic impact assessment (including a market study) taking into account the diversity of farming methods in each sector in the European Union and analysing the situation from both the animal’s (species by species and at different stages of production) and the farmer’s perspective, and always considering citizens’ expectations;
Amendment 365 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls on the Commission to improve cooperation between all the stakeholders concerned and to facilitate dialogue between the various stakeholders in the Member States so as to enable joint consideration of developments in livestock- animal production-farming systems; encourages the sharing of ‘good’ practices between livestock- farming sectorsanimal production-farming and countries; wishes to see the development of tools to encourage pioneering livestockanimal production farmers to participate in development projects; asks for livestockNGOs, animal welfare scientists and animal production farmers to be involved at all stages of the studies carried out in Europe’s various regions; wishes to see the study documents and documents for disseminating good practice translated into all the languages of the European Union;
Amendment 386 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. DeplorNotes the lack of a return on investment for farmers who take part in voluntary animal welfare recognition schemes; notes, furthertherefore, calls on the European Commission to put forward a European, that animal welfare labelling will only prove successful if a return on investment is forthcoming from the higher price pointrmonised and mandatory method of production labelling system, that provides information about the farming, transport, and slaughter methods as well as information on the welfare of the animals involved, from minimum EU animal welfare standard to premium levels;
Amendment 395 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Stresses that the introduction of animal welfare labelling requires, at an early stage, harmonised rules drawn up in collaboration with farmersall relevant actors along the food chain (including farmers, NGOs, consumer organisations and farmers) and based on clear scientific indicators; calls for consideration to be given to an EU framework for voluntamandatory labelling covering all livestock farmanimal production species, so as to limit the risks of distorting competition in the internal market while leaving sufficient room for private initiatives;
Amendment 401 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Asks the Commission to propose an EU framework for voluntamandatory animal welfare labelling which is linkbased ton EU rules – which must be its basis – and which invites the Member States to record the various approaches used; calls for its specifications to be drawn up according to a technically realistic approach and for this EU framework to ensure that value is redistributed towards livestock animal production farmers;