16 Amendments of Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA related to 2017/2128(INI)
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the fact that between 1993 and 2009 the number of authorised active pesticidal substances fell by 70% while the number of pest outbreaks in the EU increased;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Underlines that that EU rules for the approval of active substances for agricultural uses are among the most restrictive in the world, thus putting EU farmers – who have to compete in an increasingly globalised market with imports from countries which permit the use of substances and technologies that are prohibited in the EU – at a competitive disadvantage;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Expresses concern at the small number of new active substances that have been authorised since Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 entered into force; points out that since the current rules were introduced, only eight new active substances have been authorised for use on the EU market;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. wWhereas transparency in all stages of the approval procedure is insufficient and leads to negative effects on health and the environment and provokes public mistrust in the system regulating pesticide substances; whemportant to foster a better understanding of the robust system and increas the transparency of the authorisation related activities of competent authorities is also unsatisfactory;ust in the scientific method.
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Highlights the potential that precision farming techniques can have in helping European farmers optimise pest control arrangements in a more sustainable manner;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Stresses the fact that, if farmers have no access to plant-protection products, they will be powerless to prevent the growth of some natural pathogens present in crops, thus jeopardising our food security;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses its concern about systematic delays in the authorisation processes and the increasingfor new active substances and products and in the re-evaluation processes for substances and products already available on the market, and stresses that these delays lead to the increased use of derogations as laid down in Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, while underlining the necessity for Member States to comply with the legal deadlines to ensure predictability for applicants and facilitate the market introduction of innovative PPPs that are in line with more stringent requirements;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that a proper implementation and enforcement of Regulation EC 1107/2009 would lead to an acceleration of the approval process of innovative solutions while guaranteeing the highest levels of human and environmental safety; underlines that the prospect of a more time efficient authorization process could create incentives into the development of new synthetic, biological and low-risk plant protection products.
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recognises the importance of plant protection products to ensure food safety in the EU, in particular given the increasing risks derived from invasive pest and diseases as well as natural and microbial food contaminants, such as mycotoxins and other fungal toxins, one of the top three causes of food safety alerts in the European Commission’s Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF).
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Expresses concern that the tool box of available plant protection products is continuously decreasing; warns against the impact this has on the viability and resilience of agriculture in the EU, the production of specialty crops such as fruit and vegetables as well as a sufficient and continuous supply of safe food.
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that the complexities of the current evaluation and authorisation system lead to deadlines being missed and mean that the entire system cannot work properly; stresses, therefore, the need to review and simplify this system;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses the importance of policy making that is informed by regulatory science, producing verifiable and repeatable evidence using internationally agreed scientific principles including guidelines, good laboratory practices and peer-reviewed research;
Amendment 143 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Welcomes the effort made by the European Commission in creating the coordination tool for the approval of plant protection products for minor uses but stresses the need to make active substances for these purposes more widely available, and recalls that in many Member States, minor uses represent a large majority of crops;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to properly implement the existing regulatory framework to harmonise the approval system of products, and ensure effective mutual recognition procedures between EU Member States in the zones identified in Regulation EC 1107/2009, avoiding duplication and delays.
Amendment 160 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Deplores the fact that the credibility of the European Union's scientific agencies is being unjustifiably undermined.
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Takes note of the Commission’s initiative on transparency and sustainability of the EU risk assessment model in the food chain to propose improvements for the transparency of the regulatory process for plant protection products; stresses the importance of transparency to regain trust in the authorization system; underlines the importance of an effective protection of intellectual property and confidential business information to maintain incentives for innovation