8 Amendments of Anja HAZEKAMP related to 2015/2065(INI)
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. RecognisNotes that CAP reform introduced measures aimed at addressing the bargaining power gap between farmers and other stakeholders in the food supply chain, measures which have so far proved ineffective;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Believes that short Food Supply Chains and Local Food Systems should be encouraged as such types of food chains has specific social impacts, economic impacts at both regional and farm level as well as environmental impacts translating themselves into clear benefits for producers and consumers;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that the Supply Chain Initiative (SCI), which is purely voluntary in nature, does not address the real problem arising from the highly concentrated structure of large-scale distribution and the supply-side rigidity that applies to most agricultural producers;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Highlights that as supermarkets have acquired increasing reputation and market power, they have developed their own brands, this has given the retailer a new role – in addition to their traditional role as purchaser, they have become a direct competitor This widens the scope for buyer power abuse in that it can adversely affect choice for consumers and could also affect innovation;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Questions the Commission’s unwavering support for the SCI, given its limited success and also given the reluctance of farmers to participate; regrets the pre- emptive conclusion that regulatory action at EU level is not foreseen;
Amendment 116 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that several Member States have initiated actions in national law to address the concerns of primary producers regarding the negative impact of UTPs; asks the Commission to assess these national efforts with a view to selecting best practices for application at EU level; notes in particular the Groceries Code Adjudicator in the UK as a potential model for adaptation at EU level;
Amendment 149 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that framework legislation at EU level is essentialmay help to tackle UTPs and to address their negative consequences for farmers, given that it has an impact on specific issues such as pricing policies and payment deadlines and reflects the social and economic situation in each Member State; urges the Commission to consider this when assessing the SCI;
Amendment 171 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Argues that such legislation would complement the SCI and protect stakeholders who are fully engaged with the Initiativethe production side, which is considered the most vulnerable bearing in mind the supply-side rigidity arising from long production cycles and the perishable nature of products, while ensuring that UTPs are eradicated from the food supply chain and providing primary producers with the necessary legal certainty to address their concerns.