8 Amendments of Elsi KATAINEN related to 2019/2055(DEC)
Amendment 8 #
2. Notes that most rural development actions which were audited produced the expected results but regrets that the Court of Auditors identified weaknesses in the use of result indicators; asks the Commission and Member States to improve their performance framework where needed and to introduce further simplification measures, such as simplified cost options; regretnotes that the Court of Auditors identified weaknesses in the use of result indicatorsa common, measurable and fully developed set of result and output indicators and milestones will be the basis for the proposed new delivery model;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Highlights the Court of Auditors' view, from its own audits, that the Control System (IACS), which incorporates the Land Parcel Identification System (LPIS) has helped to bring down the level of errors in direct payments, with the LPIS making a particularly significant contribution; notes the potential of digitalisation, innovative methods and technology under the New Delivery Model in further reducing the error rate and administrative burden;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to monitor closelyFully supports the Union's ambition to conclude ambitious, balanced and fair free trade agreements with third countries; urges the Commission to make sure that there is a strong sustainability chapter in all trade agreements and that trade partners comply fully with those requirements; calls also on the Commission to continue to closely monitor ongoing trade agreements with third countries inwith respect of quality, healthto the application of food safety, environmental and animal welfare requirementstandards;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Reminds the Commission that there is a significant difference in types of errors, for example between unintentional omissions and cases of fraud; recalls that most of the beneficiaries are small and medium-sized farms and complex regulation increases the risk of unintentional omissions, which should also be taken into account while estimating the actual error rate;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights that increased flexibility of Member States in allocating CAP subsidies risks further aggravating abusWelcomes the fact that the future performance-based CAP will continue to require the legality and regularity of payments; stresses that the shift from compliance to the performance-based model must be reflected in changes in the way in which measures, and urges thereforere monitored; notes with satisfaction theat Commission to avoid renationalisationis proposing the transition to a single audit as part of the new CAP;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights that increased flexibility of Member States in allocating CAP subsidies risks further aggravating abuses, and urges therefore the Commission to avoid renationalisation of the CAPwithout a strong, measurable, fully developed and common set of output and result indicators and milestones, the increased flexibility of Member States in allocating CAP subsidies may lead to an increase in the error rate;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Considers it possible that a more results-based CAP based on strategic plans could lead to new types of irregularities and therefore calls on the Commission to take this into account when evaluating the national strategic plans and the measures they contain;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that support to young farmers from the CAP is essential; encourages the Commission to move towards a greener CAP in line with the Paris Agreement. and notes the importance of a clear definition of active or genuine farmer;