Activities of Albert DESS related to 2011/2051(INI)
Reports (1)
REPORT the CAP towards 2020: meeting the food, natural resources and territorial challenges of the future PDF (350 KB) DOC (246 KB)
Amendments (17)
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas rural development is an important instrument of the CAP and whereas the new programmes should be geared even more strongly to the priority objectives of rural development and of farmers (employment, the agricultural environment, water, climate change, competitiveness, innovation and education),
Amendment 463 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for an adequate basic allowance for small farmers, which Member States can optionally determine in those Member States where these farms help to stabilise rural development; calls for these Member States to decide, in accordance with subsidiarity, what percentage of the direct payments to be incorporated in the new subsidy system should be made available to their small farmers; stresses, however, that this must not hamper the necessary structural change;
Amendment 517 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that decoupling has essentially proved its worth, given the increased effect on income and greater autonomy in decision-making on the part of farmers and the associated simplification of the CAP, and calls for this also, in general, to apply to suckler cow and sheep premiumsCAP; recognises, however, that in certain sectors and regions such as mountain regions, northern regions and extremely remote areas, where there are no alternatives to relatively labour-intensive livestock farming, there may be considerable economic and environmental drawbacks which cannot be reconciled with the aims of the Treaty; acknowledges, therefore, that production- based premiums might be defensible within a narrowly defined framework for a limited period even after 2013;
Amendment 633 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that better natural resource protection is an central element in sustainable farming, which should involve separate support forjustifies special funding for the many environmental measures, which already going beyond the requirements of Cross Compliance (CC), which already entail many environmental measures, and being geared to multiannual applications, as a result of which greaternotes in this regard the proposed greening of the CAP, which could play an important role in enhancing the environmental benefits can be attaineddelivered by farmers;
Amendment 644 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Rejects the implementation of a new additional payment, control and sanction system for the greening of Pillar 1; stresses that any greening measures should be simple to implement and should not result in new administrative burdens or costs for farmers or Member States, in particular regarding additional controls; insists that greening measures should treat all farmers equally;
Amendment 655 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers thaterefore that natural resource protection should be directly linked to the granting of direct payments in order to attain these environmental objectives to the maximum without the need to introduce new, bureaucratic environmental conditions into the first pillar; considers that a flat- rate income payment, as envisaged in a top-up model in the first pillar, must cover costs and income losseenvisages the possibility of a flat-rate income payment, that must cover costs and income foregone; stresses that these measures will have to balance environmental and economic performance, be relevant from an agronomic point of view and provide appropriate incentives for farmers;
Amendment 678 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Considers therefore that significanyt environmental advantages can be attained more effectively and directly by means of second-pillar measures adopted by the Member States, which should ideally build on existingthrough the implementation of comprehensive measures to supplement the targeted agri-environmental measures or shouldunder the second pillar, stresses that supplementary measures whichmust take into account climatic and geographical differences in the Member States; observes that resource protection programmes should be pursued everywhere by means of a priority catalogue of area-based measures in the second pillar which are subject to basic requirements, particularly in the fields of climate, environment and innovation (Annex I), and are 100% EU-financed; regards the greening of direct payments in the first pillar as lying in the fact that any recipient of direct payments further greening of the CAP should be pursued across the Member States by means of a priority catalogue of area-based measures that are 100% EU-financed; considers that this greening should result in a mandatory implementation at the farmer level, unless the farmer already participates to a large extent in agri- environmental programmes under the second pillar; demands that in order to streamline the EU must implemadministrative burdent at least two priority area- based resource protection programmes in order to be eligible for the complete farm payment; believes that the administration involved in these measures can be minimised by managing them in accordance with the system of the existing agrienvironmental programmes, thus avoiding duplication of monitorssociated with these measures, that all agricultural controls are, as far as possible, operated concomitantly; therefore proposes that greening should be achieved through either: - a mandatory system for greening within Pillar 1; - a system which conditions the receipt of full direct payments on the participation ing and additional application and administration procedures; gri-environmental schemes within the existing structures, i.e. Pillar 2;
Amendment 693 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Calls on the Commission to present to the European Parliament and the Council, before it elaborates its final legislative proposals, detailed feasibility studies and impact assessments for the following models to enhance the environmental performance of the CAP: - a mandatory system for greening within Pillar 1; - a system which conditions the receipt of full direct payments on the participation in agri-environmental schemes within the existing structures, i.e. Pillar 2; - emphasises that both models must be assessed in terms of: ease of implementation, compatibility with existing control systems, attractiveness to farmers to participate and expected environmental performance;
Amendment 713 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for the resources allocated to greening to be reserved for recipients of direct payments and only disbursed in connection with greening; considers that the resources allocated to greening will be inextricably linked to the level of budgetary resources allocated to the CAP as a whole;
Amendment 723 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Regards this model asConsiders that this approach should makinge a substantial contribution to the simplification of the direct payments system and to the attainment of new compulsory environmental objectives; observes thatnot result in new administrative costs, in particular regarding additional controls, uander this model, there is no need to step up the current rate of monitoring and the current monitoring capaci should also make a substantial contribution to the attainment of new compulsory environmental objectives, as existing checks can be used, and that checks thereby further enhancing the second pillar can be combined in the basic and regeneration programme; considers also that no new systems of payments or penalties need be introducedlegitimacy of the CAP from an agricultural, environmental and societal points of view;
Amendment 747 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Realises that resources from the first pillar (as for a top-up model) should be used to pay forCalls on the Commission to examine, how this environmental component; believes, however, that can be financed and whether Member States where direct payments lie below the EU average shcould be given the option of making the payment by means of cofinancing from the first pillar or instead by means of financing entirely from the second pillar; observes that the Member States must notify the Commission of their decision on the financing by 31 July 2013; notes that individual Member States' modulation resources should be usedfinancing this by means entirely from the second pillar;
Amendment 770 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that direct payments are no longer justified without cross -compliance (CC) and therefore that the CC system should apply equally to all recipients of direct payments19;
Amendment 912 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Considers that the use of these instruments which have been described should be triggered only by a political assessment by the EU legislaturecommenced by the EU legislators following a request from the Commission;
Amendment 1079 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Is aware of the importance of the second pillar, in view of its environmental, modernisation and structural improvement achievements, but also for attaining political objectives, which should also benefit farmers; calls therefore for second- pillar measures to be better suited to their objectives, so that the effectiveness of growth, employment, competition and climate measures and measures for the benefit of rural areas can be increased; considers that, in this context, particular attention should be devoted to assisting young farmers;
Amendment 1112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Advocates therefore introducing targeted measures, to be decided by the Member States in the second pillar, to attain priority objectives of the EU (2020 Strategy); observes that these measures should be applied in addition to the basic programmes for greening of direct payments in the first pillar and that a reduced national cofinancing rate of 25% should apply;
Amendment 1187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Advocates that, in the case of second pillar measures which are of particular importance to Member States, an optional increase of 25% in national financing in the second pillar (top-up) should be possiblethe current cofinancing rates should continue to apply after 2013;
Amendment 1215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 a (new)
Paragraph 54 a (new)
54 a. Calls for new, innovative funding instruments to be geared to the farming sector as well, particularly non- bureaucratic micro-loans for young farmers;