7 Amendments of Elsi KATAINEN related to 2017/2284(INI)
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regrets that in some Member States the training and certification requirements of the Directive are not fully met; underlines the importance of training of users to ensure the safe and sustainable use of PPPs; considers it fitting to distinguish between professional and amateur users, given that they are not subject to the same obligations; emphasises that professional and non- professional users of PPPs should receive adequate training; stresses that PPPs are not only used in agriculture, but also for weed and pest control in urban areas, including public parks and railways;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Highlights that sustainable and responsible use of pesticides is a precondition for the authorisation of plant protection products;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that many Member States have changed their initial targets, focusing more on reducing the risks that pesticide use entails, rather than on actual reductions in the quantities used; regrets the fact that in many Member States there is no real commitment tostresses the importance of commitment from Member States to apply integrated pest management (IPM) and thusto developing a more environmentally- sustainable agriculture with lower costs for farmers;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Encourages the focus on reducing risks that pesticides entail, as limited use of a high-risk plant protection products can be more harmful then extensive usage of a low-risk plant protection products; underlines that this risk reduction should go hand in hand with use reduction;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Underlines that there is always a certain amount of risk involved when one interferes in nature, whether it is with chemical, biological or low-risk plant protection products. Risks can never be excluded, however, they can be managed. Therefore, legislation in the field of plant protection products should set up criteria and levels for acceptable risk;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Underlines the central role IPM plays to reduce pesticide use; acknowledges the willingness of farmers to use IPM, but understands that farmers are reluctant to apply new methods for pest management, if they face an unacceptably high risk to their economic viability in case these methods do not work;
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Stresses the importance of the availability of low-risk pesticides, adequate research and the sharing of best practices within and among Member States to fully utilise the potential of integrated pest management.