29 Amendments of Alex AGIUS SALIBA related to 2020/2260(INI)
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fact that the aim of the Farm to Fork Strategy is to establish a sustainable, healthy and resilient food system which benefitsthat should provide food which is affordable and available to all consumers in the EU;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fact that the aimambition of the Farm to Fork Strategy and the fact that its aim is to establish a sustainable, healthy and resilient food system which benefits consumers in the EU;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fact that the aim of the Farm to Fork Strategy is to establish a sustainable, healthy and resilient food system which benefits all consumers in the EU;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Shares the view that the COVID- 19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of a robust and resilient food system that functions in all circumstances, and is capable of ensuring access to a sufficient supply of affordable food for European consumers; stresses, in this respect, the need to preserve the smooth functioning of the single market, and in particular the movement of foodstuffs, including during health crises; stresses, too, that the pandemic must not be used as an excuse to scale down ambitions, given that sustainability and health are interconnected issues;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that promoting healthy and sustainable food consumption calls for changes to diets, production and distribution systems, and internal trade; considers, however, that consumers should not be solely responsible for making this transition; stresses, too, that the choice of healthy and sustainable food consumption must be accessible, affordable, understandable and clear for all consumers;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that successful promotingon of healthy and sustainable food consumption calls for changes to diets, production systems and internal traderequires training and information in order to achieve changes to diets, which in turn motivate and strengthen those changes applied in production systems;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that promoting healthy and sustainable food consumption calls forbrings changes to diets, production systems and and food education of all European citizens, production systems, internal trade and the supply of products on the internal trademarket;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that price, lack of knowledge, unclear information and a limited choice of products are some of the obstacles to more sustainable food; approves the strategy’s aim of ensuring ‘that ultimately the most sustainable food also becomes the most affordable’; suggests, therefore, that prices need to be thoroughly reviewed so that they more fairly reflect the long-term costs for consumers and society, health systems and the environment; calls on governments, the European Commission and associations to make consumers aware that having more sustainable food is not necessarily more expensive;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Stresses the need to conduct consultations and impact analyses on the measures envisaged, and to work with and support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and cooperative systems in order to involve them in this transition and reduce the negative impacts for those who commit to this approach;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to step up its support for regional food systems and short supply chains, which act as a source of fresh, sustainable and better quality products for consumers; takes the view that legislation on European public procurement should be revised in order to foster local, high-quality food supply systems; suggests establishing more flexible criteria for the introduction of local and regional products in public procurement, particularly by adopting the zero-kilometre principle in school canteens;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to step up its support for regional and local food systems, small producers and short supply chains, which act as a source of fresh, sustainable and better quality products for consumers; takes the view that legislation on European public procurement should be revised in order to foster local, high-quality food supply systems;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission to promote alternative business models, such as consumer-friendly cooperative schemes; supports the adoption of tax incentives to encourage consumers to opt for healthy and sustainable diets;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission to promote alternative business models, such as consumer-friendly cooperative schemes so that no one is left behind;
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Supports the establishment of a governance framework and a code of conduct for food and retail businesses, in order to make them accountable and aware of the importance of sustainability and health; considers, however, that binding rules are needed to reduce the marketing and advertising of unhealthy food, particularly to children;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Supports the establishment of a governance framework and a code of conduct for food and retail businesses, in order to make them accountable and aware of the importance of sustainability, health and thealth fight against food waste;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to promote healthier diets by introducing nutritional profiles, which should encourage healthier product reformulations and prevent misleading claims about health benefits, accompanied by mandatory and harmonised labelling of the nutritional value of foods on the front of packaging; stresses the importance of informing consumers and making information clearer, particularly by using a tool that is easy to understand and scientifically sound; points out, in this respect, that the Nutri-Score adopted in five European countries to date is one of the most effective ways for consumers to compare products and choose healthier food;
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to promote healthier diets accessible to all European citizens by introducing nutritional profiles, accompanied by mandatory and harmonised labelling of the nutritional value of foods on the front of packaging in order to correctly inform the consumer and to contribute to the reduction of the population's diseases and to ensure a healthy generation;
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to promote healthier diets by introducing nutritional profiles, accompanied by mandatory and harmonised labelling of the nutritional value of foods on the front of packaging; points out there are several front of pack nutritional labelling schemes in use in Member States, which has an impact on the cohesion and functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 123 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Regards it as essential, further, to keep consumers better informed by introducing mandatory origin labelling of food, which would be broadened to cover animal welfare, sustainability and pesticide residue levels; stresses that imported products which do not meet European environmental or health standards threaten consumer health and create unfair competition for European producers;
Amendment 124 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Regards it as essential, further, to keep consumers better informed by introducing mandatory origin labelling of food, which would be broadened to cover animal welfare, sustainability and pesticide residue levelsprovided that this does not undermine the proper functioning of the internal market, and which would be broadened to cover, on a voluntary basis, animal welfare, or other product qualities which are not already specifically regulated;
Amendment 129 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 requires that where the origin of a food is given and is different from the one of its primary ingredient, the origin of the primary ingredient shall be given or at least indicated as being different to the origin of the food; points out that in practice that means that products whose primary ingredients are not locally or regionally sourced can be marketed as such if the origin of said non-local primary ingredients is indicated in small print; underlines that there is an imbalance between the visibility of marketing practices that use national, regional and local names and symbols for products whose primary ingredients are not nationally, regionally or locally sourced and EU labelling requirements; considers this to be detrimental to the consumers' right to be properly informed and potentially misleading; calls on the Commission to rectify that imbalance;
Amendment 141 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Considers that, in order to ensure transparency and a level playing field for all products placed on the European markets, social and sustainability standards should be guaranteed for all products, both internal and external, through Directive 2017/159; considers also that tariff preferences (tariff rate quotas, GSP +) should only be granted to sea products from countries with sustainable fisheries management when negotiating free trade agreements; believes that both consumers and industry need protection against environmental and social dumping;
Amendment 154 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Recalls that in order to achieve an effective reduction of plant protection products we need to apply all the tools at our disposal without excluding those offered by biotechnology, which includes new genomic techniques for which a legislative framework should be established for their implementation in the EU;
Amendment 155 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Welcomes the Commission’s announcement that it will revise the food contact materials legislation to improve consumer safety and public health;
Amendment 158 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Calls on the Commission to establish the appropriate regulatory framework to speed up the adoption of new plant health solutions, including plant protection products with a lower impact, such as low-risk substances or biosolutions;
Amendment 164 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to clarify the current legislation on use-by dates, in order to reduce food waste; notes that it is eagerly awaiting the reference scenario for reducing food waste throughout the EU;
Amendment 165 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to clarify the current legislation oWelcomes the European Commission’s intention to set binding targets to reduce food waste for which the distinction between ‘use- by dates, in order to reduce food waste’ and ‘best before’ dates can bring positive results;
Amendment 170 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Supports the Commission in its efforts to combat food fraud and counterfeiting, which misleads consumers and distorts competition in the internal market, and regards it as essential to make the penalties imposed on fraudsters more dissuasive and to earmark sufficient resources so that checks on product quality conformity can be stepped up;
Amendment 171 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Supports the Commission in its efforts to combat food fraud, which misleads consumers and distorts competition in the internal market, and regards it as essential to make the penalties imposed on fraudsters more dissuasive and to earmark sufficient resources so that checks can be stepped up, including during the pandemic;