1649 Amendments of Albert DESS

200. ~~Reiterates its view~~Points out that direct payments ~~may not fully play their role as a safety net mechanism for stabilising farm income, particularly for smaller farms given the unbalanced distribution of payment~~play an essential role in stabilising farm incomes;

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 205

205. Notes that the greening payments have been a source of errors impacting 17% of the level of error estimated by the Court and that the errors were found mainly to be related to the ecological focus area requirements, although the error rate for EAGF was below materiality; welcomes in this regard the fall in the error rate for EAGF to 1.7%;

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 207

207. Points out ~~that~~ the positive trend in the error rates issued by the Court ~~is not corroborated~~and whereas by the evolution of the amounts at risks reported by DG AGRI in its AARs, namely from 1.38% in 2015 to 1.996% in 2016 (the market measures with an error rate of 2.85% being not included) and 4% for both financial years in rural development; show some fluctuations from one year to another, with the error rate for direct payments remaining below materiality;

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 213

213. Points out that since the ~~error rates reported by the Member States for each paying agency are not always reliable, DG AGRI adjusts that level of error~~management and control system of some Member States are affected by deficiencies, DG AGRI adjusts the reported control statistics based mainly on the Commission's and the Court's audits carried out in the last three years as well as on the opinion of the Certification Body for the financial year in question;

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 222

~~222. Regrets that the greening schemes are more an instrument for supporting farmers’ income than to enhance CAP’s environmental and climate performance;~~deleted

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 224

224. Points out ~~with concern~~ that according to the Commission: “ the actual impact (of the greening schemes) on environmental outcomes depends on the choices made by Member States and farmers and that so far few Member States made use of the possibilities to limit the use of pesticides and fertilisers in the ecological focus areas”;

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 226

226. Deplores the fact that greening adds significant complexity to the CAP due to overlaps with the CAP’s other environmental instruments (cross- compliance and the Pillar II environmental measures)~~, which creates the risk of double funding~~;

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 232 – point a

(a) the Commission to carefully analyse the causes of the overall decline in factor income since 2013 and to define a new key performance objective, accompanied with indicators, aiming at mitigating the income inequalities between the famers;deleted

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 232 – point h

(h) the Commission to prepare and develop, for the next CAP reform, a complete intervention logic for EU environmental and climate-related action regarding agriculture, including specific targets and based on an up-to-date scientific understanding of the phenomena concerned;deleted

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 233 – point a

(a) Farmers should ~~only have access to~~benefit from CAP payments if they meet a single set of basic environmental norms including GAECs and greening requirements which are both meant to go beyond the requirements of environmental legislation; welcomes in this regard the logic of the Commission's "budget focused on results" approach, a future delivery system should thus be more result-driven;

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2136(DEC)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 233 – point b

(b) Specific, local environmental and climate-related needs can be appropriately addressed through ~~stronger~~targeted programmed action regarding agriculture;

2018/03/01
Committee: CONT

2017/2128(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Norbert LINS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the importance of a science-based approach in authorising any active substance, in line with the EU’s risk analysis principles and the precautionary principle as established in the General Food Law (Regulation (EC) No 178/2002); calls therefore for an adequate and sufficient funding as well as for the appropriate amount of staff of the relevant agencies such as for example EFSA, ECHA, etc. in order to ensure an independent, transparent and timely authorization process;

2018/01/30
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

– taking into consideration the Danube Soya Declaration of 19th January 2013;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the European Union is still suffering from a major deficit in vegetable proteins, despite the use of co-products from biofuels production based on rapeseed which has regrettably seen little improvement despite the many intentions announced, and initiatives taken, on this topic for more than 15 years; whereas the present-day context means that we should be taking more energetic action;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the issue of vegetable protein used in animal feed has too often been analysed with a focus on protein-rich matter, linked to our deficit in vegetable proteins and to the search for raw materials to supplement farm animals’ diets;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas it is necessary to adopt a more comprehensive analysis of the vegetable protein issue in Europe so as to maximise the number of instruments at our disposal for boosting the effectiveness of action to reduce our dependence on vegetable proteins;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas vegetable proteins are at the core of the challenges of food safety, nutritious food and feed, renewable energy, environmental protection and global warming; whereas they are essential to life and are present in all foods consumed by both humans and animals;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas proteins are at the core of the challenges of food safety, animal feed, renewables, environmental protection and global warming; whereas they are essential to life and are present in all foods consumed by both humans and animals;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas in recent years China has become the world’s largest importer of soya and has launched a genuine security of supply strategy for itself which could threaten the current balance of oilseed world market and by consequences jeopardise our own supplies tomorrow;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the ~~development of agriculture in the past 50 year~~globalisation of the diet regime over the world and bearing in mind that more than 60% of the world population is living in towns has given rise to the large-scale long-distance transport of raw materials for the production of vegetable and meat proteins which is now causing ~~problem~~challenges for the environment and the climate;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas the production of protein crops, particularly soya, in many regions outside Europe is a major driver of global deforestation and whereas increased European protein crop growing could provide an important complement to measures to promote agricultural commodity supply chains without deforestation;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the ~~nitrogen~~fertilizers needed to feed plants, except for leguminous, ensure a qualitative contents of the grains and manufacture vegetable proteins is today mainly provided by synthetic nitrogenous fertilisers, which are costly to produce in the EU and generate pollution of both water and air;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas in order to reduce dependence on outside suppliers, it is necessary to focus on ~~not only~~ protein-rich crops which address ruminants' and non- ruminants’ needs but also on all other crops (including in forage and grassland areas) which address specifically ruminants needs, while they have a lesser protein content, are extensively cultivated throughout the Union;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas there will be any increase of vegetable protein production without improvement of the profitability of such plants and there is a need today for a strategic, effective and ambitious vegetable protein supply plan to be implemented for the sustainable development of European agriculture; whereas such a plan requires the mobiliszation of several EU policies, first and foremost the CAP;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas the vegetable proteins research policy should be stepped up to cover productivity gain and better use (digestibility, storage and process) and extended over the long term;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)

Ja. whereas soybean producers and processors, animal feed producers, but also representatives of the food industry (meat producers, milk and egg producers and other soybeans), trade chains and other relevant institutions and NGOs support sustainable systems in the production of GM-free soybean controlled origin;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas the 1992 Blair House Agreement on ~~proteins is now obsolete and no longer reflects present-day realities~~oilseeds production is not covering the proteins crops and should not represent a limitation for an ambitious EU vegetable proteins plan;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Takes the view that it is time to implement a major strategic European vegetable protein supply plan based on the sustainable development of all the crops grown throughout the EU; further takes the view that ~~this change implies a substantial alteration of our production systems to meet the requirements of~~production systems should be analysed with a view to factoring in the many and varied goals related to food safety and security, the circular economy, and ~~of agroecology~~the use of natural resources;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Takes the view that it is time to implement a major strategic European vegetable protein supply plan based on the sustainable development of all the crops grown throughout the EU; further takes the view that this change implies a substantial a~~lteration~~nalysis of our production systems to ~~meet the requirements of the circular economy and of agroecology~~integrate multipurpose objectives such as food security, circular economy and management of natural resources at a global level;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Calls for the ~~establishment of a European platform making it possible~~European arable crops Market Observatory to: identify protein cultivation areas by crop category ~~and location;~~, location and the economic challenges to produce more vegetable proteins in EU and recommend to establish a permanent European platform to create technical references that are accessible to all farmers; ascertain European protein production capacities; and catalogue all the research carried out into proteins;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Recommends focusing on all vegetable protein resources, including processed proteins, and thus on crops used both in human food and in farm animal feed;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Points out that the EU’s earlier protein strategy, under the second CAP pillar, was not taken up by farmers, as protein crops were financially unattractive compared with other crops;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Points out that protein crops, as well as being a source of protein, also benefit soil and biodiversity;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Is of the opinion that a European protein strategy cannot succeed unless it is linked to other policy issues, for example the recast of the Renewable Energy Directive, and that, in particular, the dual use of rape as a feed protein and an energy source should be taken into account; calls, therefore, for the proportion of first-generation biofuels to be set at 7%;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes the view that this plan must maximise the complementarity between the different biomass production of all usable agricultural areas by ~~developing permanent plant cover, some~~taking into account the protein yield per hectare from crops as well as developing plant production of which can be devoted to protein supply;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Considers it necessary to look ~~in particular at the~~at growing potential of leguminous crops, whether grain or forage legumes, as this family of plants presents ~~many~~several agricultural~~, economic~~ and environmental benefits (being the only one to fix nitrogen from the air);

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Recommends supporting ~~the cultivation of soya,~~under the Common Agricultural Policy the cultivation of leguminous crops and grain legumes (soya, lupins, faba beans, peas, etc.), as new varieties of which are currently opening up fresh possibilities~~, but notes that this should not overshadow interest~~ in term of more incorporation in othe~~r grain protein crops (lupins, faba beans, peas, chickpeas, etc.)~~ feed compound formula;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Recommends supporting the cultivation of soya, new varieties of which are currently opening up fresh possibilities, but notes that this should not overshadow interest in other grain protein crops (lupins, faba beans, peas, chickpeas, etc.); deplores the fact that the delegated act on greening, which prohibits the use of pesticides in ecological focus areas under peas and beans, was not rejected; to that extent considers it unfortunate that a costly protein strategy should now have to be put in place in order to achieve the same effect;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for greater attention to be paid to the management of grassland crops which, given the extensive areas they occupy, make a major contribution to meeting protein needs for animal (only ruminants) feed;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Maintains that parts of carcasses unfit for human consumption – primarily on account of their appearance – should be considered for use as feed for monogastric animals under a new European protein strategy;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Hopes that crops such as lucerne,~~Recommend that the vegetable protein crops such as soya, alfalfa, faba beans, peas and crops such as clover, sainfoin, and many other legumes ~~may~~to be reintroduced into large-scale cultivation and forage systems;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Considers it advisable to develop regional protein production and processing chains by creating closer links between ~~cereal~~arable crops farmers and livestock farmers (supply and exchange contracts), and deems it useful, to that end, to assist, via the CAP, risk- taking by operators entering ~~small~~direct supply chains for protein-based food and feed;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Encourages promoting the production of high-quality, GMO-free proteins by improving their traceability and labelling because there is an increasing interest of the European consumers for GM free products;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Considers it necessary to support the self-sufficiency ~~in feed~~ of farms with animal feed at farm and regional level for ruminants as well as for mono gastric animals (including on- farm feed production) by reviewing the rules on the greening measures and allowing more flexibilities at farm level;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

~~11. Considers it necessary to support the self-sufficiency in feed of farms at farm and regional level for ruminants as well as for monogastric animals (including on- farm feed production);~~(Does not affect the English version.)

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Considers it desirable to enhance yields, minimise harvest losses, and increase nutritional value by supporting breeding, maintaining production resources, and improving harvesting and storage conditions (drying, wrapping, etc.);

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Takes the view that in order to enhance protein production it is necessary to increase the economical profitability of such crops and new farming practices to rotate crops (over a minimum of three years) and increase mixing of varieties and crops in the pulse (clover/rape, triticale/peas etc.) and forage (leguminous grasses, meslins, etc.) production sectors; at the same time, the production of vegetable protein crops should be encourage on ecological focus areas by allowing the use of plants protection products and fertilizers;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls for research work to begin on: selection of new varieties and species~~; crop mixing;~~ which allow seeding period in winter to allow more flexibilities for the farmers in relation to climate change; crop mixing; resilience to stress, improvement of the yields, protein content and digestibility of animal feed (sprouted seeds, etc.); and biostimulants;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Recommends greater use of ~~precis~~digitalisation in agriculture in order to adjust plant n~~itroge~~utrition supplements sand animal feed rations as accurately as possible with the principle of the “right dose at the right time at the right place” and so as to limit wastage and some types of pollution;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Recommends greater use of digitalisation and precision agriculture in order to adjust plant ~~nitrogen supplements~~fertilisation and animal feed rations as accurately as possible so as to limit wastage and some types of pollution;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Takes the view that this plan calls for the mobilisation and coordination of several EU policies: the CAP, renewable energy policy, research policy, the neighbourhood policy and trade policy;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Recommends supporting the production of biofuels from European Biomass through multiple strategies and directives to enhance the European protein production; and to maintain the quantities of protein meal produced as by- product due to the production of biofuels in recent years; a loss of the current production level of biofuels and in consequence of the produced protein meals would put an unnecessary burden on the European Strategy for the promotion of Protein Crops;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Considers it important for the CAP to support protein crop cultivation by means of the voluntary coupled payment (which, if not restricted to crops and regions in difficulty, would give scope for more action) and the greening payment, and by means of the second pillar, particularly through agro-environmental measures on organic farming, investment quality, advice, training and of course innovation via the EIPNotes that the voluntary coupled payment for protein crops is part of the European protein strategy; believes, however, that transferring financial support schemes to the second pillar is an option that should be considered;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Considers it important for the CAP to support protein crop cultivation by means of the voluntary coupled payment (which~~, if~~ should not be restricted to crops and regions in difficulty, and would give scope for more action~~) and~~, the greening payment, and by means of the second pillar, particularly through agro-environmental measures on organic farming and other type of farming, investment quality, advice, training and of course innovation via the EIP and regret the environmental value of leguminous production is partially recognized (coefficient used for EFA);

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Feels it is relevant to the future of the CAP to: consider additional proposals to support vegetables proteins, such as those for three- year-minimum rotation systems if the CAP budget is multi- annual; create an ecosystem payment that is more flexible than the greening payment so as to ~~encourage sustainable agricultural practice~~recognize the benefit of leguminous crops and oilseeds crops for the biodiversity, including for the feed of pollinators; provide risk-taking mechanisms for innovators; and open up a proteins sub- priority in the rural development policy;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Feels it is relevant to the future of the CAP to: consider additional proposals to support proteins, such as those for ~~three- year-minimum~~multiannual rotation systems ; create an ecosystem payment that is more flexible than the greening payment so as to encourage sustainable agricultural practices; provide risk-taking mechanisms for innovators; and open up a proteins sub- priority in the rural development policy;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Takes the view that it is necessary that future policies on renewable energies acknowledge the importance of protein- rich by-products from the production of biofuels and bioliquids (e.g. rapeseed meal, distillers grains) as an indispensable part of the European protein supply;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Takes the view that it is necessary to secure our soya supplies by ~~cooperating more closely with our neighbourhood, in particular with Ukraine, which has opted for Europe and which produces soya that could b~~diversifying the origin of the non EU vegetable proteins, in particular with Ukraine, and should integrate also the same EU requirements that the EU farmers have to respect in relation to environment and GM-free bpro~~ught into the EU via the Danube~~duction and limitation plant protection products;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Takes the view that it is necessary to secure our soya supplies by cooperating more closely with our neighbourhood~~, in particular with Ukraine, which has opted for Europe and which produces soya that could be brought into the EU via the Danube~~ – breeding being among the areas to explore further – instead of importing supplies from overseas;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Recognises that today’s agricultural practices are unthinkable without soya; this highly important legume in the recent history had almost vanished from European cultivation into oblivion; the cultivation rose from 17 million tonnes in 1960 to 319 million tonnes in 2015;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)

21b. Supports the Donau Soja Initiative promoting the safety and the high quality of soya products, GM-free production and use of GM-free soybeans originating from Europe;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Takes the view that the 1992 Blair House Agreement is ~~now~~ obsolete and is ~~likely~~anymore a justification to hamper the sustainable development of protein crop growing in Europe;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Takes the view that the 1992 Blair House Agreement is now obsolete and is likely to hamper the sustainable development of protein crop growing in Europe; calls for the biofuel sector to be maintained on a solid footing, as it is central to the EU’s GMO-free protein supply; believes that the importance of protein production has to be emphasised more strongly in the ongoing biofuel debate;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Takes note of the improvement of the coefficient criteria of leguminous within the ecological focus areas but regrets this coefficient is not yet valuing the benefits of these crops at the level it should be;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)

22b. Calls to work on the second pillar to have a better recognition and remuneration of the contribution of such crops to feed the pollinators at critical time of the season (early flowering plants in spring) and contribution against the pollinator depopulation;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 c (new)

22c. Calls on the research work program to investigate possible improvement of the digestibility of rapeseed meal;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2116(INI)

James NICHOLSON, Albert DESS, John PROCTER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 d (new)

22d. Calls for the maintenance of a strong EU biofuels sector which provides the main part of concentrated vegetable proteins to the EU livestock sector. Therefore, the role of protein in the current bio fuels debate should be taken into consideration so that, crop-based bio fuels achieving GHG savings in accordance with sustainability criteria of the RED II directive and from feedstock produced in accordance with the environmental rules under the CAP, generating valuable co-products should not be limited in the calculation of the EU RES target for renewables;

2017/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2017/2115(INI)

Norbert ERDŐS, Franc BOGOVIČ, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Marijana PETIR, Vladimir URUTCHEV, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the importance of pollination in the EU is not sufficiently recognized because this service is taken for granted, while for example in the United States 2 billion euros are spent per year for artificial pollination;

2017/09/12
Committee: AGRI

2017/2115(INI)

Norbert ERDŐS, Franc BOGOVIČ, Albert DESS, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Vladimir URUTCHEV, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas on 11 May 2015, Slovenia initiated at the meeting of the Agriculture and Fisheries Council the official recognition of 20 May as the World Bee Day to be declared by the UN, which idea was widely supported by all Member States; whereas it was agreed there that particular attention should be paid to the apiculture sector in terms of agriculture, plant protection and sustainable farming, because bees have a large impact on ecological balance in the World;

2017/09/12
Committee: AGRI

2017/2115(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. Highlights the importance of the sharing of harmonised, accessible and up- to-date data in relation to bee health and challenges with all stakeholders across Europe and notes the positive potential of digital tools and platforms in this regard, notes that the collection of data in relation to bee health should not place an additional burden on beekeepers;

2017/09/12
Committee: AGRI

2017/2115(INI)

Norbert ERDŐS, Franc BOGOVIČ, Albert DESS, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Marijana PETIR, Vladimir URUTCHEV, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Understands that financing of beekeeping must be increased in future agricultural policy preferably from 2021;

2017/09/12
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Nuno MELO, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Emmanouil KEFALOGIANNIS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Vladimir URUTCHEV, Tom VANDENKENDELAERE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recommends that the support to the ‘Young Farmer Scheme’ should continue and ~~the maximum level of national funding allocation be increased beyond 2 %~~implement the recent decisions taken in the Omnibus Regulation in order to encourage generational renewal;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Nuno MELO, Michel DANTIN, Angélique DELAHAYE, Albert DESS, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Emmanouil KEFALOGIANNIS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Vladimir URUTCHEV

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4

Access to land ~~and countering ‘land- grabbing’~~

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Nuno MELO, Daniel BUDA, Michel DANTIN, Albert DESS, Emmanouil KEFALOGIANNIS, Vladimir URUTCHEV, Norbert ERDŐS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Notes that in many Member States the generational renewal and the access of young people to agricultural land is hindered by late succession; considers that the current CAP lacks any incentives for older farmers to pass their businesses to younger generations; recommends reconsidering the implementation of measures that would motivate older holders to pass their farms to young farmers~~, such as the ‘farm-exit scheme’ and other incentives for retirement~~;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Nuno MELO, Michel DANTIN, Angélique DELAHAYE, Albert DESS, Emmanouil KEFALOGIANNIS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Vladimir URUTCHEV

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Believes that the Member States and the regions should be given more power to regulate farmland and set restrictions to that end, particularly with a view to tackling Europe’s ~~land-grabbing and~~ concentration phenomenon, which is limiting young farmers’ options when starting out;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Nuno MELO, Franc BOGOVIČ, Daniel BUDA, Angélique DELAHAYE, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Emmanouil KEFALOGIANNIS, Marijana PETIR, Sofia RIBEIRO, Vladimir URUTCHEV, Tom VANDENKENDELAERE, Norbert ERDŐS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. The same conditions and standard of living should be ensured for young people living in rural areas as well as for those living in urban areas. In order to avoid discrimination and to prevent the abandonment of rural areas, it should be provided: Wi-Fi connection, access to health, education, training and innovation, better roads;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Jens GIESEKE, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5

Training ~~and innov~~, innovation and communication

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Mairead McGUINNESS, Albert DESS, Vladimir URUTCHEV, Herbert DORFMANN, Norbert ERDŐS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Sofia RIBEIRO, Marijana PETIR, Franc BOGOVIČ, Daniel BUDA, Emmanouil KEFALOGIANNIS, Tom VANDENKENDELAERE, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Encourages the setting-up of an "Erasmus" type scheme associated with vocational training to improve young farmers' skills and experience;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Jens GIESEKE, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Points out that, for smallholder farming and rural areas to develop further in a sustainable way, a generational change is required;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Jens GIESEKE, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)

18b. Stresses that creating new jobs and safeguarding them, promoting innovation, and digitisation in the area of agricultural training are essential for the competitiveness of European farming;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Jens GIESEKE, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)

18c. Notes that strong support for young farmers and the development of new economic activities in the European agricultural sector are essential for the future of rural areas and must be furthered as part of the new, post-2020 CAP;

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2088(INI)

Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Jens GIESEKE, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 d (new)

18d. Calls for a new dialogue with society about the future of the agrifood industry so as to produce a realistic picture of what farming involves and improve knowledge of what it means to be a farmer and how food is produced.

2018/01/26
Committee: AGRI

2017/2053(INI)

Peter JAHR, Jens GIESEKE, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes that the CAP primarily provides around 500 million European citizens with high-quality, affordable food every day; in addition, points out that this costs every EU citizen on average 32 cents a day as a contribution to ensuring safe, healthy food and a varied agricultural landscape; stresses that the CAP, as the only fully integrated EU-level policy, contributes the highest European added value and that a nationally-financed agricultural policy would be considerably more expensive;

2017/11/29
Committee: AGRI

2017/2053(INI)

Peter JAHR, Jens GIESEKE, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Points out that the report of the High Level Group on Own Resources (HLGOR) put forward new proposals, including reforming the VAT own resource and the EU emissions trading system, a CO2 levy, transport taxation, electricity taxation and revenues deriving from the digital single market; emphasises that the introduction of new ORs could lead to greater policy coherence between the revenue and expenditure sides of the budget and stresses that, in spite of these proposals, the Member States’ contributions must remain a key own resource;

2017/11/29
Committee: AGRI

2017/2053(INI)

Peter JAHR, Jens GIESEKE, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that the EU needs a stable form of own resources and notes that punitive duties, for example, cannot therefore be foreseen as income and are not, for the same reason, suitable as predictable sources of income;

2017/11/29
Committee: AGRI

2017/2053(INI)

Peter JAHR, Jens GIESEKE, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Points out that these new types of ORs are essential to finance ~~more recent Union prioritie~~new Union tasks such as migration, internal security and defence and to offset the expected loss in revenue of EUR 9 to 12 billion a year which could result from Brexit; notes also that new ORs are needed to avoid the potential spending cuts to the common agricultural policy (CAP) presented in the Commission’s ‘Reflection Paper on the Future of EU Finances’;

2017/11/29
Committee: AGRI

2017/2053(INI)

Peter JAHR, Jens GIESEKE, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses that an indirect boost to income is also possible through simplification of, and reducing red tape in, the common agricultural policy;

2017/11/29
Committee: AGRI

2017/2053(INI)

Peter JAHR, Jens GIESEKE, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Calls for the funding which was allocated via the financial discipline mechanism in the agricultural sector but was not used to be made available in its entirety in the coming budgetary year as direct payments;

2017/11/29
Committee: AGRI

2017/2052(INI)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Notes that the CAP primarily provides around 500 million European citizens with high-quality, affordable food every day; notes further that this costs each EU citizen only EUR 0.32 per day; stresses that the CAP, as the only fully integrated EU-level policy, contributes the highest European added value and that a nationally-financed agricultural policy would be considerably more expensive;

2017/11/28
Committee: AGRI

2017/2030(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert LINS, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas ~~incoherence~~synergy between other high- level ~~EU policy~~ instruments ~~and the EAP is undermining the achievement~~of Union policy and the EAP needs to be improved in order to achieve the objectives of the programme~~’s objectives~~;

2017/12/08
Committee: ENVI

2017/2030(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert LINS, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Cconsiders that coherence and synergies with other high-level EUuropean policy instruments ~~is fundamental~~needs to be improved in order to achiev~~ing~~e the objectives of the 7th EAP;

2017/12/08
Committee: ENVI

2017/2030(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert LINS, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Recognises that the cCommon aAgricultural pPolicy (CAP) ~~presents challenges to~~ has progressively integrated environmental objectives by ensuring that its rules are compatible withe a~~chievement of the EAP’s objectives, particularly as regards resource-intensive production and biodiversity~~nd farmers comply with the environmental requirements laid down in Union legislation (cross- compliance) and by promoting the development of farming practices that preserve the environment (greening and agro-environmental measures);

2017/12/08
Committee: ENVI

2017/2030(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert LINS, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Underlines the substantial financial contribution of the CAP to the environmental objectives of the Union; recalls that 30% of the CAP direct payments (73 billion EUR for the period 2014-2020) are conditioned to greening requirements, while around half of rural development funds are dedicated to improving the eco-systems (46% of funds - 56 billion EUR for the period 2014- 2020) or to promote resource efficiency and transition to a low carbon agricultural activities (8% of funds - 9.7 billion EUR for the period 2014-2020);

2017/12/08
Committee: ENVI

2017/2030(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert LINS, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Underlin~~Stresses that impro~~tecting~~ving food security and en~~hanc~~suring food s~~ecurity in the long term by preventing environmental damage should be a~~upply at a reasonable price for consumers while preserving natural resources are key priorityies of the CAP;

2017/12/08
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter LIESE, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) The World Health Organisation (WHO) Regional Office for Europe conducted a detailed review of the list of parameters and parametric values laid down in Directive 98/83/EC in order to establish whether there is a need to adapt it in light of technical and scientific progress. In view of the results of that review74, enteric pathogens and Legionella should be controlled, six chemical parameters or parameter groups should be added, and three representative endocrine disrupting compounds should be considered with precautionary benchmark values. ~~For three of the new parameters, parametric values that are more stringent than the ones proposed by the WHO, yet still feasible, should be laid down in light of the precautionary principle.~~ For lead, the WHO noted that concentrations should be as low as reasonably practical, and for chromium, the value remains under WHO review~~; therefore, for both parameters, a transitional period of ten year~~. The scientifically based WHO recommendations should ~~apply~~ be fo~~re the values become more stringent~~llowed. _________________ 74 Drinking Water Parameter Cooperation Project of the WHO Regional Office for Europe "Support to the revision of Annex I Council Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption (Drinking Water Directive) Recommendation", 11 September 2017..

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter LIESE, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14

(14) The risk-based approach should gradually be applied by all water suppliers, including small water suppliers, as the evaluation of Directive 98/83/EC showed deficiencies in its implementation by those suppliers, which were sometimes due to the cost of performing unnecessary monitoring operations. When applying the risk-based approach, security concerns should be taken into account. For smaller suppliers, the competent authority should support the monitoring operations.

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter LIESE, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3

3. 'water supplier' shall mean an public or private entity supplying at least 10 m3 of water intended for human consumption a day as an average.

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter LIESE, Karl-Heinz FLORENZ, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)

The Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure that the treatment agents, materials and disinfection procedures used in water supply systems do not adversely affect drinking water quality. The resulting contaminations must be minimised without, however, compromising the effectiveness of disinfection.

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Member States shall ensure that the supply, treatment and distribution of water intended for human consumption ~~is subject to a~~are adapted to local circumstances and appropriate. A risk-based approach shall be adopted, composed of the following elements:

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 a (new)

Article 9 a Article 9 Derogations Member States may provide for derogations from the parametric values set out in Annex I, Part B, or set under Article 5(3), up to a maximum value to be determined by them, provided such derogations do not constitute a potential danger to human health and the supply of drinking water in the area concerned cannot otherwise be maintained by any other reasonable means. Authorisations for derogations should be for as short a time as possible and may not exceed three years; towards the end of the authorisation period, a review shall be carried out to gauge whether sufficient progress has been made. Where a Member State intends to grant a second derogation, it shall communicate the review, along with the grounds for its decision on the second derogation, to the Commission. This second authorisation of a derogation shall not exceed three years. (2)In exceptional circumstances, a Member State may ask the Commission for a third derogation for a period not exceeding three years. The Commission shall decide on this request within three months. (3) The authorisation of derogations under paragraph 1 or 2 shall include information on the following points: (a) the reason for the derogation, (b) the parameter concerned, previous relevant monitoring results and the maximum permitted value provided for the derogation, (c) the geographical area, the quantity of water delivered per day, the population concerned and whether relevant food businesses are affected or not, (d) an appropriate monitoring programme, if necessary with an increased frequency of monitoring, (e) a summary of the corrective action plan, including a timetable for the work, an estimate of the costs and provisions for review, and (f) the duration of the derogation required. (4) Where the competent authorities consider that non - compliance with a parameter value is immaterial and that the problem can be remedied by means of corrective action within 30 days in accordance with Article 8 (2), Paragraph 3 need not be applied, in which case the competent authorities or other relevant authorities shall specify only the maximum permissible value for the parameter concerned and the period allowed to remedy the problem. (5) Recourse to paragraph 4 is no longer possible if a parameter value for a given water supply has not been complied with during the previous 12 months for a total of more than 30 days. (6) Member States which make use of the derogations provided for in this Article shall ensure that the population affected by the derogation is informed promptly and adequately of the derogation and associated conditions. In addition, Member States shall ensure that, where necessary, advice is given to particular categories of persons for whom the derogation might pose a particular risk. Those obligations shall not apply to the case referred to in paragraph 4 unless the competent authorities decide otherwise. (7) Except in the case of derogations under paragraph 4, Member States shall inform the Commission, within two months, of derogations relating to a water supply of more than 1 000 m³ per day on average or more than 5 000 persons and add the information required in paragraph 3. (8) This Article shall not apply to water intended for human consumption, which is offered for sale in bottles or other containers.

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Albert DESS, Peter LIESE

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b – paragraph 2

~~With regard to the regular monitoring referred to in the first subparagraph, Member States~~Member States shall ensure access to systems in priority premises for the purposes of sampling and may set up a special monitoring strategy ~~focusing on priority premises~~, in particular as regards Legionella;

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 a (new)

Article 10 a Minimum requirements for products and materials in contact with water 1. Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure that substances and materials for the manufacture of new products in contact with water intended for human consumption used for abstraction, treatment or distribution, or the impurities associated with such substances: (a) do not directly or indirectly reduce the protection of human health provided for in this Directive; (b) do not affect the smell or taste of water intended for human consumption; (c) are not present in water at a concentration in excess of that required for the attainment of the intended target; and (d) do not promote microbial growth. 2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 19 in order to supplement this Directive by laying down the minimum hygiene requirements and the list of substances and materials in contact with water intended for human consumption approved in the EU. 3. Materials coming into contact with water intended for human consumption covered by other Union acts, such as Regulation (EC) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council, fulfill the requirements set out in paragraphs 1 and 2.

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter LIESE, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) setting up and maintaining outdoor~~s and~~ or indoors equipment for free access to water intended for human consumption in public spaces; these measures must be adapted to local conditions such as climate and geography.

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter LIESE, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

On the basis of the information gathered under paragraph 1(a), Member States shall take all necessary and appropriate measures to ensure access to water intended for human consumption for vulnerable and marginalised groups.

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a – point ii

~~(ii) treatment and distribution of water intended for human consumption;~~deleted

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a – point iii

~~(iii) waste water collection and treatment;~~deleted

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)

(a a) information on water quality;

2018/06/19
Committee: ENVI

2017/0332(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Renate SOMMER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Albert DESS, Peter LIESE

Proposal for a directive
Annex II a (new)

Minimum hygiene requirements for substances and materials for the manufacture of new products coming into contact with water intended for human consumption: (a) A list of substances approved for use in the manufacture of materials, including, but not limited to, organic materials, elastomers, silicones, metals, cement, ion exchange resins and composite materials, and products made therefrom. (b) Specific requirements for the use of substances in materials and products made therefrom. (c) Specific restrictions on the migration of certain substances into the drinking water. (d) Hygiene rules regarding other properties required for compliance. (e) Basic rules to verify compliance with (a) to (d). (f) Rules concerning sampling and analysis methods to verify compliance with (a) to (d).

2018/07/02
Committee: ENVI

2017/0004(COD)

Jens GIESEKE, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1

(1) Directive 2004/37/EC aims to protect workers against risks to their health and safety from exposure to carcinogens or mutagens at the workplace and lays down minimum requirements to that effect including limit values, on the basis of the available scientific and technical data. Limit values should be laid down in accordance with a uniform approach to assessment of the health risks arising from exposure to carcinogens and mutagens.

2017/06/27
Committee: AGRI

2017/0004(COD)

Jens GIESEKE, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1

(1) Directive 2004/37/EC aims to protect workers against risks to their health and safety from exposure to carcinogens or mutagens at the workplace and lays down minimum requirements to that effect including limit values, on the basis of the available scientific and technical data. In accordance with the principles of better law-making, a uniform appraisal approach on the basis of a risk assessment should be adopted at EU level.

2017/06/27
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Recognises the importance of preserving the rainforest and biodiversity, but stresses that this preservation should be combined with rural development policy instruments to prevent poverty and promote employment in the concerned areas;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Notes the palm oil exploitation is not the only cause of deforestation, also the expansion of the illegal logging is responsible for this situation;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Is concerned that the certification schemes do not guarantee genuinely sustainable palm oil, notably certified sustainable palm oil (CSPO) certification, which is not effective in ensuring relevant standards and compliance therewith;deleted

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Recognises some gaps of existing certification schemes, which should be improved constantly to ensure the sustainability of palm oil production;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Urges the Commission to step up dialogue with governments of palm-oil- producing countries in ~~order~~the frame of bilateral agreements to encourage the introduction of effective environmental legislation in palm oil producing countries to prevent land use changes and to increase environmental, land tenure and human rights standards, as well as transparency on land tenure and corporate ownership;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish a regulatory framework of strong and enforceable measures to guarantee that all actors throughout the supply chain, including EU financial institutions and the investments and loans they provide, par~~e not involved in deforestation~~ticipate in sustainable projects and contribute to economic and social development in the concerned regions to ensure the protection of the rainforest and biodiversity;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls for the phasing-out of all ~~land-based biofuels, such as palm oil biodiesel, that drive deforestation and compete against food production for land or~~biofuels based on palm oil, as these drive deforestation and therefore do not significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls for the phasing-out of ~~all land-based biofuels, such as palm oil biodiese~~biofuels, based on palm oil, that drive deforestation and compete against food production for land or do not significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Highlights that palm oil biodiesel can be replaced by biodiesel made from European raw materials, especially in land that is not currently being used;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls to support the EU's biofuel policy of the first-generation biofuels made from European raw materials generating animal feeding stuff for the European market;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2222(INI)

Nuno MELO, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Call for the permanent reintroduction of support for butter fat for use in ice cream and bakery products, with the aim of permanently replacing palm oil, which is imported from third countries and sometimes produced under environmentally questionable conditions;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2204(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas the status of family farms as primary food producers can only be improved and their farming and livestock activities maintained through providing adequate financial resources and measures at EU level and safeguarding property rights;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI FEMM

2016/2204(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Takes the view that, from a social, economic and envirmnmental perspective, female entrepreneurship is a major sustainable-development pillar for rural areas, and therefore points to the urgent need to pursue appropriate digitisation initiatives and drive forward the process of expanding broadband coverage;

2016/11/21
Committee: AGRI FEMM

2016/2148(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that the European Structural and Investment Funds should contribute to the development of infrastructure in rural areas, and in particular to promoting the expansion of broadband, developing and modernising the agri-food sector, and improving access to funding for SMEs in this sector; takes the view that many of the current CAP instruments should be used to implement targeted investments successfully and efficiently;

2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI

2016/2148(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the new EAFRD builds on the previous programming periods by providing flexibility to better address specific territorial needs and broadening the objectives to six EU priorities for rural development divided into 18 focus areas, all of which contribute to the three cross-cutting objectives of innovation and environment/climate change mitigation and adaptation; also stresses that the ESIF should first and foremost target investments that are likely to boost the business cycles;

2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI

2016/2148(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to guarantee easier and geographically balanced access to funding, according particular priority to undertakings and cooperatives in rural and structurally disadvantaged areas, and to projects seeking to promote territorial cohesion and the networking of rural areas;

2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI

2016/2148(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Stresses that, in order to improve the environment for investment in the EU, the necessary structural reforms must be carried out and bureaucracy reduced;

2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI

2016/2141(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas EU policies and subsidies encourage concentration phenomena, as direct area payments disproportionately benefit large farms, and the use of these funds leads to a rise in land prices, which tends to exclude small and medium-sized undertakings from the land market;deleted

2016/12/14
Committee: AGRI

2016/2141(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls for the creation of a central observatory tasked with recording the level of farmland concentration in the EU, changes in land use and the market behaviour of owners and tenants, and with issuing regular reports;deleted

2016/12/14
Committee: AGRI

2016/2141(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Calls on the Commission to create a legal basis in order to ensure the regular collection of data of comparable quality on rent levels and land prices in connection with all sales of farmland and farm shares by agricultural undertakings in all Member States;deleted

2016/12/14
Committee: AGRI

2016/2141(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Considers it sensible to create a uniform, Europe-wide land inventory in which all ownership rights and rights of use in respect of farm land are recorded in an up-to-date and accurate manner and presented in a comprehensible form in a publicly accessible digital data bank;deleted

2016/12/14
Committee: AGRI

2016/2141(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on Member States to take comprehensive and effective measures against the further withdrawal of land from farming by means of local- government planning and infrastructure measures and associated compensatory measures under nature conservation law;

2016/12/14
Committee: AGRI

2016/2141(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Proposes a mandatory cap on the part of direct payments exceeding the upper limit of EUR 150 000, as set out in Article 11 of Regulation No 1307/2013 (the Direct Payments Regulation), as well as the compulsory reduction by at least 5% of the part of the basic payment due to the farmer which exceeds EUR 150 000;deleted

2016/12/14
Committee: AGRI

2016/2141(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

~~11. Takes the view that 30% of direct payments should be payable on the first hectare, provided that the requirements of Articles 41 and 42 of the Direct Payments Regulation are complied with;~~deleted

2016/12/14
Committee: AGRI

2016/2141(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Endorses the Commission’s finding that land is a finite resource ~~which is already under much pressure as a~~ , and therefore sult of climate change, soil erosion and over- exploitation, and calls for farmland to be given special protection with a view to compliance with the four fundamental European freedoms, so that the Member States can regulate thepports ecosocial measures to protect the land, and once again draws urgent attention to the fact that land is a matter for which saole ~~and letting of agricultural land in the light of social and environmental criteria~~responsibility is vested in Member States;

2016/12/14
Committee: AGRI

2016/2141(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Albert DESS, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Sofia RIBEIRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls on the Commission to draw up and publish a list of criteria making it clear to the Member States what land market regulation measures are, at the minimum, permitted in the context of the four freedoms of the European Union, in the interests of easier access to the acquisition by farmers of land for use in farming and forestry;

2016/12/14
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas there is insufficient data available to directly quantify how many working equidae are used on small and semi-subsistence farms, ~~86 %~~many of which are found in the newer Member States, and in tourism;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas equidae provide valuable employment and revenue to localities from tourism~~, but the welfare of some equidae is compromised and tourists a~~ and, by recognising welfare labels introduced by the industry, it can be ensured t~~oo often insufficiently informed to identify welfare problems15 ; _________________ 15Santorini Donkey and Mule Taxis – an Independent Animal Welfare Report for the Donkey Sanctuary, 2013.~~hat the activities concerned are carried out properly and that the public is given the necessary information;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Nuno MELO, Michel DANTIN, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas owners are faced with difficult decisions when they are no longer able to sufficiently care for their equidae; whereas in some Member States euthanasia is too often the first recourse for owners who are no longer able to ~~meet the equid’~~bear the cost of veterinary care for an animal and the cost of ensuring its welfare ~~needs~~, yet in other Member States, equidae can only be euthanised where there is a clear immediate veterinary need, irrespective of the long-term welfare of the animal concerned;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Albert DESS, Nuno MELO, Sofia RIBEIRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that good equid health and welfare boosts the economic output of farms and businesses alike and benefits the rural economy overall and encourages Member States to create an environment in which farmers can earn enough to make their businesses viable;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Albert DESS, Nuno MELO, Sofia RIBEIRO, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to introduce EU-wide measures that will take greater account of the equine sector and its benefits for the rural economy, in particular under the CAP;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Sofia RIBEIRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Affirms that ~~equid~~private owners ~~should~~of equidae must have a minimum level of knowledge of equid ~~husbandry~~care provided by equid professionals, and that with ownership comes a personal responsibility for the standard of health and welfare of the animals in their care;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to actively support the development of guides to good practice~~, by releasing resources for translation of such documents and~~ in consultation with equine professionals, in order to assist~~ing~~ with their distribution and with that of the guides already existing in Member States;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Calls on the Commission to promote exchanges of good practices between Member States to facilitate rational use of medicines for Equidae, and to analyse the problem of the taking of medicines which exclude them from the food chain;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to ensure effective and uniform enforcement of existing EU legislation on animal transport and legally binding reporting across all Member States; requests that the Commission propose a shortened maximum journey limit for all movements of horses for slaughter, based on findings of the European Food Safety Authority and on the transport guides for Equidae produced by industry professionals;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Michel DANTIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Commission to ~~commit to the development of validated Animal Welfar~~make use of existing indicators of the welfare of Equidae validated by professionals in the Iind~~icators~~ustry, which should be used to ~~assess the welfare of equidae, identify~~review existing problems and ~~help driv~~encourage improvements, promoting exchanges of good practices between Member States;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2078(INI)

Angélique DELAHAYE, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Calls on the Commission to establish European rules making it possible to protect against fraudulent practices, particularly doping, in horse racing;

2016/11/16
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas price volatility creates a ~~climat~~high degree of uncertainty, a~~nd puts a brake on investment, in farming~~mong producers and consumers, with the former seeing their income and ability to invest and therefore the long-term viability of their activities as under threat when prices are low, whilst the ability of consumers to feed themselves and have access to basic goods might be compromised by high food prices, thereby giving rise to crisis situations;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Pilar AYUSO, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 d (new)

10d. Is convinced that the Commission should have flexible and productive instruments in order to prevent and manage the very high levels of market risk which farmers cannot guard against by themselves;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Pilar AYUSO, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Angélique DELAHAYE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Notes that inter-branch organisations encourage dialogue among the various stakeholders and facilitate joint initiatives to understand markets and production better and to enhance their transparency, forecast production potential, help improve supply management and draw up standard contracts that are compatible with EU rules and regulations;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Pilar AYUSO, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Call on the Commission to conduct an in-depth analysis of what is holding back optimal implementation of the CMO and the measures that would enable better use to be made of tools placed at the disposal of Member States and sectoral stakeholders;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Pilar AYUSO, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that ~~farmers must be permitted to come together in bodies~~, against a background of processing and distribution stakeholders becoming increasingly concentrated at both EU and national level, farmers must be permitted to come together in producer organisations or associations thereof that carry as much clout as those of ~~the~~ other stakeholders in the chain with whom they negotiate;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16b. Believes that the guidance from the European Commission for the development of these tools, particularly the mutual funds and the income stabilisation tool, is particularly vague and must be made more accessible for farmers;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Angélique DELAHAYE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Considers that price volatility ~~adversely affects the income of farmers who have made investments, and that CAP tools should be put in place to prevent the impetus for investment being lost;~~ is detrimental to the impetus for investment and to the establishment of young farmers and that sectoral tools for risk management should be developed that are adapted to the specific features of the different European agricultural sectors; notes by way of comparison that in its Farm Bill 2014 the United States has developed specific insurance policies for different agricultural sectors, including cereals (wheat, soya, maize, cotton), livestock and dairy production, beekeeping, fish farming and horticulture;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Considers that farmers and farmers' organisations should be better informed about and trained for the management of risk in order to take ownership of these tools; calls on the European Commission to adopt an awareness-raising plan and calls on the Member States and the local authorities to strengthen these aspects in their programme of agricultural education and vocational training;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)

21c. Notes that the Commission makes little or no use of the crisis reserve in the agricultural sector;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Angélique DELAHAYE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Notes that price volatility can also be generated at national level, and calls, therefore, on the Member States to take market volatility into account in their fiscal rules, in particular by providing for the constitution of crisis reserves outside national budgets;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Pilar AYUSO, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)

21b. Notes that the traditional CAP crisis management tools (public intervention and private storage) are no longer sufficiently effective in a globalised economy;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 e (new)

21e. Notes that the budgetary rules which apply to the crisis reserve, in particular the annuality rule, and the discretion which the Commission enjoys when it comes to releasing funds from the reserve limit its use;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 d (new)

21d. Points out that it called for a crisis reserve to be constituted outside the EU budget and for provision to be made for amounts to be transferred from one year to the next;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Pilar AYUSO, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 f (new)

21f. Calls on the Commission to propose the introduction of revised, effective crisis prevention and management tools;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2034(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Pilar AYUSO, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Angélique DELAHAYE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Welcomes the Commission's decision to set up a meat market observatory along the lines of the European Milk Market Observatory, and points out that in the context of the last CAP reform Parliament had called for a price and margin observatory covering the agricultural sector as a whole to be established;

2016/06/21
Committee: AGRI

2016/2019(BUD)

Paul RÜBIG, Albert DESS, Manfred WEBER, Markus FERBER, Michael GAHLER, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Axel VOSS, Sven SCHULZE, Claudia SCHMIDT, Ulrike MÜLLER, Csaba SÓGOR, Andrzej GRZYB, Angélique DELAHAYE, Anne SANDER, Mercedes BRESSO, Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH, Monika HOHLMEIER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

~~39. Sees no added value in financially supporting the European Parliamentary Association;~~deleted

2016/03/15
Committee: BUDG

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter LIESE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) It is thus appropriate to establish a Union binding target-range of at least 27% to 33% share of renewable energy. Member States should define their contribution to the achievement of this target by setting up their indicative trajectories as part of their Integrated National Energy and Climate Plans through the governance process set out in Regulation [Governance]. The Commission should assist Member States in this process by setting up the indicative benchmarks to ensure the fair contribution of each Member State to the target on renewable energy in 2030.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) The national targets and sub- targets set for 2020 should constitute Member States' minimum contribution to the new 2030 framework. Under no circumstances the national share of renewables in all sectors of the energy system, should fall below such contribution and, in case this happens, the relevant Member States should take the appropriate measures to ensure that this baseline is maintained as well as contribute to the financial instrument referred to in Regulation [Governance].

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Anne SANDER, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 25 a (new)

(25a) In order to facilitate the use of renewable energy in the transport sector Member States shall jointly endeavour to gradually increase the share of renewable energy supplied for transport to at least 15% in 2030 at Union level.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 62

(62) The European Strategy for a low- carbon mobility of July 2016 pointed out that food-based biofuels have a ~~limited~~n essential role in decarbonising the transport sector and should ~~be gradually phased out and replaced by advanced biofuels~~therefore remain on the market. To prepare for the transition towards advanced biofuels and minimise the overall indirect land-use change impacts, it is not appropriate to reduce the amount of biofuels and bioliquids produced from food and feed crops that can be counted towards the Union target set out in this Directive. It should be noted that advanced biofuels will not be available in the necessary amount in the near future.

2017/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0382(COD)

Albert DESS, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 62

(62) The European Strategy for a low- carbon mobility of July 2016 pointed out that food-based biofuels have a limited role in decarbonising the transport sector and should be gradually phased out and replaced by advanced biofuels. To prepare for the transition towards advanced biofuels and minimise the overall indirect land-use change impacts, it is appropriate to reduce the amount of biofuels and bioliquids produced from food and feed crops that can be counted towards the Union target set out in this Directive.deleted

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 62

(62) The European Strategy for a low- carbon mobility of July 2016 pointed out that food-based biofuels have a limited role in decarbonising the transport sector and should be gradually phased out and replaced by advanced biofuels. To prepare for the transition towards advanced biofuels and minimise the overall indirect land-use change impacts, it is appropriate to reduce the amount of biofuels and bioliquids produced from food and feed crops. In order to foster the uptake of advanced biofuels and ensure investors' confidence in the consistency of Union policies, it is appropriate to maintain at 7 % the share of biofuels and bioliquids produced from food and feed crops in the final consumption of energy in road and rail transport that can be counted towards the Union target set out in this Directive.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 62

(62) The European Strategy for a low- carbon mobility of July 2016 pointed out that food-based biofuels have a ~~limited~~n essential role in decarbonising the transport sector and should ~~be gradually phased out and replaced by advanced biofuels~~therefore remain on the market. To prepare for the transition towards advanced biofuels and minimise the overall indirect land-use change impacts, it is not appropriate to reduce the amount of biofuels and bioliquids produced from food and feed crops that can be counted towards the Union target set out in this Directive. It should be noted that advanced biofuels will not be available in the necessary amount in the near future.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 63

(63) Directive (EU) 2015/1513 of the European Parliament and of the Council23 called on the Commission to present without delay a comprehensive proposal for a cost-effective and technology-neutral post-2020 policy in order to create a long- term perspective for investment in sustainable biofuels with a low risk of causing indirect land-use change and in other means of decarbonising the transport sector. An ambitious 15 % incorporation obligation on fuel suppliers can provide certainty for investors, ensure that decarbonisation in the transport sector is achieved, and encourage the continuous development of alternative renewable transport fuels including advanced biofuels, renewable liquid and gaseous transport fuels of non-biological origin, and renewable electricity in transport. It is appropriate to set the obligation on fuel suppliers at the same level in each Member State in order to ensure consistency in transport fuel specifications and availability. As transport fuels are traded easily, fuel suppliers in Member States with low endowments of the relevant resources should be able to easily obtain renewable fuels from elsewhere. __________________ 23 Directive (EU) 2015/1513 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 amending Directive 98/70/EC relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels and amending Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 239, 15.9.2015, p. 1).

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 75

(75) ~~It is appropriate to introduce Union-wide s~~Sustainability and greenhouse gas emission saving criteria for biomass fuels used in the electricity and heating and cooling generation, ~~in order to~~should continue to ensure high greenhouse gas savings compared to fossil fuel alternatives, to avoid unintended sustainability impacts, and to promote the internal market. To ensure fair competition and transparency on the energy markets production criteria of fossil fuels and fossil energies are indispensable.

2017/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 75 a (new)

(75 a) To ensure full transparency through out all sectors of energy production the European Commission should set up production criteria for fossil energies until December 2018 via delegated act.

2017/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0382(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 64

(64) ATogether with crop-based biofuels, advanced biofuels and other biofuels and biogas produced from feedstock listed in Annex IX, renewable liquid and gaseous transport fuels of non- biological origin, and renewable electricity in transport can contribute to low carbon emissions, stimulating the decarbonisation of the Union transport sector in a cost- effective manner, and improving inter alia energy diversification in the transport sector while promoting innovation, growth and jobs in the Union economy and reducing reliance on energy imports. The inclusion of those energy sources in the overall incorporation obligation of 15 % on fuels suppliers should encourage continuous development of advanced fuels, including biofuels, and it is important to ensure that the incorporation obligation also incentivises improvements in the greenhouse gas performance of the fuels supplied to meet it. The Commission should assess the greenhouse gas performance, technical innovation and sustainability of those fuels.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 65

(65) The promotion of low carbon fossil fuels that are produced from fossil waste streams can also contribute towards the policy objectives of energy diversification and transport decarbonisation. It is therefore appropriate to include those fuels in the incorporation obligation on fuel suppliers.deleted

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 65 a (new)

(65a) The Commission, together with the Member States, should work towards implementing a single cross-checking traceability database for all biofuels. Such a system is necessary to interlink national schemes and to have a verified and transparent traceability system at Union level.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Anne SANDER, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 66

(66) FHighly sustainable crop-based feedstocks, as well as feedstocks which have low indirect land use change impacts when used for biofuels, should be promoted for their contribution to the decarbonisation of the economy. Especially feedstocks for advanced biofuels, for which technology is more innovative and less mature and therefore needs a higher level of support, should be included in an annex to this Directive. In order to ensure that this annex is up to date with the latest technological developments while avoiding unintended negative effects, an evaluation should take place after the adoption of the Directive in order to assess the possibility to extend the annex to new feedstocks.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 75

(75) ~~It is appropriate to introduce Union-wide s~~Sustainability and greenhouse gas emission saving criteria for biomass fuels used in the electricity and heating and cooling generation, ~~in order to~~should continue to ensure high greenhouse gas savings compared to fossil fuel alternatives, to avoid unintended sustainability impacts, and to promote the internal market. To ensure fair competition and transparency on the energy markets production criteria of fossil fuels and fossil energies are indispensable.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 75 a (new)

(75a) To ensure full transparency throughout all sectors of energy production the European Commission should set up production criteria for fossil fuels and fossil energies until December 2018 by means of delegated acts.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4

For the calculation of a Member State’s gross final consumption of energy from renewable energy sources, the contribution from biofuels and bioliquids, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport, if produced from food or feed crops, shall be no more than 7% of final consumption of energy in ~~road and rail~~ transport in that Member State. This limit shall be reduced to 3,8% in 2030 following the trajectory set out in part A of Annex X. Member States may set a lower limit and may distinguish between different types of biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops, for instance by setting a lower limit for the contribution from food or feed crop based biofuels produced from oil crops, taking into account indirect land use change.

2017/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Mairead McGUINNESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point g

(g) ‘biofuels’ means liquid or gaseous fuel for transport produced from biomass;

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d d

~~(dd) ‘food and feed crops’ means starch-rich crops, sugars and oil crops produced on agricultural land as a main crop excluding residues, waste or ligno- cellulosic material;~~deleted

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Andrzej GRZYB, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point dd a (new)

(dda) ‘highly sustainable crop-based biofuels’ means biofuels that: – are produced from cereals, other starch-rich crops, sugars and oil crops, – save the GHG emissions in compliance with the criteria laid down in Article 26(7) when compared to fossil fuel in accordance with the methodology referred to in Article 28(1), – generate high value protein, other animal feed or cellulosic by-products, and – are produced from feedstocks obtained in accordance with the requirements and standards laid down in Article 93 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Werner LANGEN, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point f f

~~(ff) ‘waste-based fossil fuels’ means liquid and gaseous fuels produced from waste streams of non-renewable origin, including waste processing gases and exhaust gases;~~deleted

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point f f

~~(ff) ‘waste-based fossil fuels’ means liquid and gaseous fuels produced from waste streams of non-renewable origin, including waste processing gases and exhaust gases;~~deleted

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point m m

~~(mm) ‘forest holding’ means one or more parcels of forest and other wooded land which constitute a single unit from the point of view of management or utilisation;~~deleted

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point mm a (new)

(mma) ‘supply base level’ means the geographic region from which biomass feedstock originates;

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Werner LANGEN, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point n n

(nn) '‘biowaste'’ means biodegradable ~~garden and park waste, food and kitchen waste from households, restaurants, caterers and retail premises, and comparable waste from the food processing industry~~waste within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2008/98/EC;

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point n n

(nn) ‘biowaste’ means bio~~degradable garden and park waste, food and kitchen waste from households, restaurants, caterers and retail premises, and comparable waste from the food processing industry~~waste as defined in point (4) of Article 3 of Directive 2008/98/EC;

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter LIESE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Anne SANDER, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall collectively ensure that: (a) the share of energy from renewable sources in the Union’s gross final consumption of energy in 2030 is ~~at least 27%~~within the target-range of at least 27% (binding) and 33% (indicative); (b) the share of energy from renewable sources in all forms of transport in 2030 is at least 15 % of the final consumption of energy in transport at Union level; (c) the contribution from biofuels and bioliquids, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport, if produced from food or feed crops is no more than 7 % of the calculation of the Union’s gross final consumption of energy in transport in 2030; and (d) from 1 January 2021, the contribution from biofuels and bioliquids, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport, if produced from feedstock with land use emissions greater than 160 gCO2eq/MJ, is no more than 10 % of the total biofuel mix at Union level and is gradually reduced to 1 % by 31 December 2030.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

With effect from 1 January 2021, Member States shall require fuel suppliers to include a minimum share of energy from biomass fuels produced from food or feed crops, advanced biofuels and other biofuels and biogas produced from feedstock listed in Annex IX, from renewable liquid and gaseous transport fuels of non-biological origin, from waste-based fossil fuels and from renewable electricity in the total amount of transport fuels they supply for consumption or use on the market in the course of a calendar year.

2017/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter LIESE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2

2. Member States’ respective contributions to this overall 2030 target- range shall be set and notified to the Commission as part of their Integrated National Energy and Climate Plans in accordance with Articles 3 to 5 and Articles 9 to 11 of Regulation [Governance].

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter LIESE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. By the end of 2019 the Commission shall set up an indicative benchmarks to ensure the fair contribution of each Member State to the target on renewable energy in 2030. Based on this indicative benchmark member States shall communicate their indicative trajectories.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Andrzej GRZYB

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3

3. From 1 January 2021 onwards, the share of energy from renewable sources in each Member State’s gross final consumption of energy shall not be lower than that shown in the third column of the table in part A of Annex I. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure compliance with this baseline, which shall include: (a) support for the use of biofuels that are generated in the course of the processing of high-value protein concentrate, other feed or cellulosic by- products which support food security goals and the transition towards a biobased and circular economy in the Union; and (b) phasing out the use of vegetable oils in biofuels and bioliquids that drive direct and illegal land use changes, deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions from peatland.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4 – point b – paragraph 1

for the calculation of the numerator, the energy content of biomass fuels produced from food or feed crops, advanced biofuels and other biofuels and biogas produced from feedstock listed in Annex IX, renewable liquid and gaseous transport fuels of non- biological origin, waste based fossil fuels supplied to all transport sectors, and renewable electricity supplied to road vehicles, shall be taken into account.

2017/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter LIESE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2

2. Support for electricity from renewable sources shall be designed so as to integrate electricity from renewable sources in the electricity market and ensure that renewable energy producers are responding to market price signals and maximise their market revenues. Member States my foresee exemptions for small- scale installations, where Member States can demonstrate that the administrative cost of directly or indirectly selling produced electricity in the market would be disproportionate, as well as for demonstration projects.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter LIESE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3

3. Member States shall ensure that support for renewable electricity is granted ~~in an~~through open, transparent, competitive, non- discriminatory ~~and cost-effective manner~~tenders, except for small-scale installations, demonstration projects, and where Member States can demonstrate that tenders cannot be made competitive or would lead to a sub-optimal outcome, i.e. higher support levels or/and lower project realization rates.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter LIESE, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Member States may apply technology specific support on the basis of one or several of the following justifications, which shall be duly substantiated: (a) a long-term potential of a given technology; (b) diversification of the energy mix; (c) system integration costs; (d) grid stability; (c) environmental constrains.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Peter LIESE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4

4. Member States shall assess the effectiveness of their support for electricity from renewable sources at least every four years. Decisions on the continuation or prolongation of support and design of new support shall be based on the results of the assessments.deleted

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN

Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Biomass fuels shall have to fulfil the sustainability and greenhouse gas emissions saving criteria set out in paragraphs 2 to 7 only if used in installations producing electricity, heating ~~and~~, cooling or fuels with a fuel capacity equal to or exceeding 250 MW in case of solid biomass fuels and with an electrical capacity equal to or exceeding ~~0.5~~1 MW in case of gaseous biomass fuels. ~~Member States may apply the sustainability and greenhouse gas emission saving criteria to installations with lower fuel capacity.~~

2017/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0382(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4

For the calculation of a Member State’s gross final consumption of energy from renewable energy sources, the contribution from biofuels and bioliquids, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport, if produced from food or feed crops, shall be no more than 7% of final consumption of energy in ~~road and rail~~ transport in that Member State. This limit shall be reduced to 3,8% in 2030 following the trajectory set out in part A of Annex X. Member States may set a lower limit and may distinguish between different types of biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops, for instance by setting a lower limit for the contribution from food or feed crop based biofuels produced from oil crops, taking into account indirect land use change.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Marijana PETIR, Mairead McGUINNESS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Anne SANDER, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4

From 1 January 2021, for the calculation of a Member State’s gross final consumption of energy from renewable energy sources, Member States may set a limit for the contribution from biofuels and bioliquids, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport, if produced from food or feed crops, shall be no more than 7% of final consumption of energy in road and rail transport in that Member State. This limit shall be reduced to 3,8% in 2030 following the trajectory set out in part A of Annex X produced from food or feed crops, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport in that Member State, in accordance with Article 3(1). Member States may set a lower limit and may distinguish between different types of biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops, for instance by setting a lower limit for the contribution from food or feed crop based biofuels produced from oil crops, taking into account indirect land use change.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2016/0382(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 5 – point a – point i

i) harvesting is carried out in accordance to the ~~conditions of the harvesting permit~~legal right to harvest based on national rules and national circumstances within the legally gazetted boundaries;

2017/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0382(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Albert DESS, Werner LANGEN, Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4

For the calculation of a Member State's gross final consumption of energy from renewable energy sources, the contribution from biofuels and bioliquids, as well as from biomass fuels consumed in transport, if produced from ~~food or feed crops~~cereals and other starch- rich crops, sugar plants, oil plants and plants grown as main crops primarily for energy purposes on agricultural land, shall be no more than 7 % of final consumption of energy in road and rail transport in that Member State. ~~This limit shall be reduced to 3,8 % in 2030 following the trajectory set out in part A of Annex X.~~ Member States may set a lower limit and may distinguish between different types of biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels produced from food and feed crops, for instance by setting a lower limit for the contribution from food or feed crop based biofuels produced from oil crops, taking into account indirect land use change.

2017/07/20
Committee: ENVI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) The transition to clean energy and the bio economy requires changes in investment behaviour and incentives across the entire policy spectrum. It is a key Union priority to establish a resilient Energy Union to provide secure, sustainable, competitive and affordable energy to its citizens as well as promoting bio-based resources to replace fossil resources. Achieving this requires continuation of ambitious climate action with this Regulation and progress on the other aspects of Energy Union as set out in the Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy.16 __________________ 16 COM(2015)80

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) Regulation [ ] [on the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions and removals from land use, land use change and forestry into the 2030 climate and energy framework] lays down accounting rules on greenhouse gas emissions and removals relating to land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF). While the environmental outcome under this Regulation in terms of the levels of greenhouse gas emission reductions that are made is affected by taking into account a quantity up to the sum of total net removals and total net emissions from deforested land, afforested land, managed cropland, managed forest land and managed grassland as defined in Regulation [ ], flexibility for a maximum quantity of ~~280~~425 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent of these removals divided among Member States according to the figures in Annex III should be included as an additional possibility for Member States to meet their commitments when needed. ~~Where the delegated act to update the forest reference levels based on the national forestry accounting plans pursuant to Article 8 (6) of Regulation [LULUCF] is adopted, the power to adopt acts~~ Given the limited mitigation potential it has as a sector, agriculture should benefit first and foremost from the net removals granted under this Regulation, thereby also making accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of Article 7 to reflect a contribution of the accounting category managed forest land in the flexibility provided by that Article. Bef clear distinction between “green” biogenic greenhouse gas emissions from the LULUCF and agricultural sectore adopting such a delegated act, the Commission should evaluate the robustness of accounting for managed forest land based on available data, and in particular the consistency of projected and actual harvesting ratend those resulting from the burning of fossil fuels. In addition, the possibility to voluntarily delete annual emission allocation units should be allowed under this Regulation in order to allow for such amounts to be taken into account when assessing Member States’ compliance with requirements under Regulation [ ].

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)

(12a) This Regulation shall take into account the objective of contributing to the objectives of the EU Forest Strategy to promote a competitive and sustainable supply of wood for the EU bioeconomy, the Member States’ national forest policies, and bioeconomy strategies, and the EU Circular Economy Strategy.

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) In order to ensure efficient, transparent and cost-effective reporting and verification of greenhouse gas emissions and of other information necessary to assess progress with Member States’ annual emissions allocations, the requirements for annual reporting and evaluation under this Regulation are integrated with the relevant Articles under Regulation (EU) No. 525/2013, which should therefore be amended accordingly. The amendment of that Regulation should also ensure that progress of Member States in making emission reductions continues to be evaluated annually, taking into account progress in Union policies and measures and information from Member States. Every two years, the evaluation should include the projected progress of the Union towards meeting its reduction commitments and of Member States towards fulfilling their obligations. However, the application of deductions should only be considered at five-year intervals, so that the potential contribution from deforested land, afforested land, managed cropland, managed forest land and managed grassland taking place pursuant to Regulation [ ] can be considered. This is without prejudice to the duty of the Commission to ensure compliance with the obligations of Member States resulting from this Regulation or to the power of the Commission to initiate infringement proceedings for this purpose.

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) This Regulation should be reviewed as of 2024 and every 5 years thereafter in order to assess its overall functioning. The review should take into account evolving national circumstances and be informed by the results of the global stocktake of the Paris Agreement and the goal of achieving net-zero emissions in the second half of this century in a manner that does not threaten food production and according to the European Council Conclusions of October 2014 that recognised the limited mitigation potential of agriculture and its multifunction character.

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – title

Additional use of up to ~~280~~425 million net removals from deforested land, afforested land, managed cropland, managed forest land, and managed grassland according to each Member State’s potential.

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. To the extent that a Member State’s emissions exceed its annual emission allocations for a given year, a quantity up to the sum of total net removals and total net emissions from the combined accounting categories of deforested land, afforested land, managed cropland, managed forest land and managed grassland referred to in Article 2 of Regulation [ ] [LULUCF] may be taken into account for its compliance under Article 9 of this Regulation for that year, provided that:

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2

~~2. Where the~~ delegated act to update the forest reference levels based on the national forestry accounting plans pursuant to Article 8 (6) of Regulation [LULUCF] is adopted, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt a delegated act to modify paragraph 1 of this Article in order to reflect a contribution of the accounting category managed forest land in accordance with Article 12 of this Regulation.

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) actions that the Member State shall implement in order to meet its specific obligations under Article 4, that respect the lower mitigation potential of agriculture and food security, through domestic policies and measures and the implementation of Union action;

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1

The Commission shall report to the European Parliament and to the Council by 28 February 2024 and every five years thereafter on the operation of this Regulation, its contribution to the EU’s overall 2030 greenhouse gas emission reduction target and its contribution to the goals of the Paris Agreement, and may make proposals if appropriate. The report shall be accompanied by a cost- effectiveness assessment and an assessment on global food security and leakage effects due to climate legislation.

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0231(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Angélique DELAHAYE, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – title

TOTAL NET REMOVALS FROM DEFORESTED LAND, AFFORESTED LAND, MANAGED CROPLAND, MANAGED FOREST LAND AND MANAGED GRASSLAND THAT MEMBER STATES MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT FOR COMPLIANCE FOR THE PERIOD 2021 TO 2030 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 7

2017/03/07
Committee: AGRI

2016/0230(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)

(8a) Common agricultural policy measures and national policies have an impact on the emissions profile of cropland, grassland and wetlands. With regard to the base period for the land accounting categories provided for in this Regulation, the calculation should take into account the agri-environmental measures implemented by the Member States during this period.

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Marijana PETIR, Albert DESS, Hannu TAKKULA, Michel DANTIN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Angélique DELAHAYE, Giovanni LA VIA, Ulrike MÜLLER, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) WThe~~n the Commission chooses to be assisted by an expert review team in accordance with Commission Decision (C(2016)3301) in the review of national forestry accounting plans, it should~~ procedure for setting the forest reference level by the Member States should be transparent and aligned with the requirements for sustainable forest management of Forest Europe (Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe)1a . The Commission should assist the Member States by building on the good practice and experience of the expert reviews under the UNFCCC~~, including as regards participation of national experts and recommendations, and select a sufficient number of experts from the Member States~~. In this context, it is appropriate for the Commission to provide technical assistance on the verification of compliance with the criteria set out in Annex IV, following the consultation of the Standing Forestry Committee established by Council Decision 89/367/EEC1b. __________________ 1aForest Europe - Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe, Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Legally Binding Agreement on Forests in Europe: http://www.foresteurope.org/. 1bCouncil Decision 89/367/EEC of 29 May 1989 setting up a Standing Forestry Committee (OJ L 165, 15.6.1989, p. 14).

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Angélique DELAHAYE, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) Depending on national preferences, Member States should be able to choose adequate national policies for achieving their commitments in LULUCF, including the possibility of compensating emissions from one land category by removals from another land category. They should also be able to cumulate net removals over the period 2021-2030. Trading among Member States should continue as an additional option to help compliance. Following the practice in the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, there should also be a possibility for a Member State to use its overachievement under Regulation [] on binding annual greenhouse gas emission reductions by Member States from 2021 to 2030 for a resilient Energy Union and to meet commitments under the Paris Agreement and amending Regulation No 525/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council on a mechanism for monitoring and reporting greenhouse gas emissions and other information relevant to climate change ~~in order to ensure its compliance with its commitment under this Regulation~~while guaranteeing a clear distinction between emissions and removals of fossil and biogenic greenhouse gases. Therefore the annual net removals from deforested land, afforested land, managed forest land, managed cropland and managed grassland should be limited to agriculture.

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Giovanni LA VIA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) In order to provide for the appropriate accounting of transactions under this Regulation, including the use of flexibilities and tracking compliance, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the technical adaptation of definitions, values, lists of greenhouse gases and carbon pools, the ~~update of reference levels, the accounting of transactions and the revision of methodology~~accounting of transactions and information requirements. These measures shall take into account the provisions in Commission Regulation No 389/2013 establishing a Union Registry. The necessary provisions should be contained in a single legal instrument combining the accounting provisions pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC, Regulation (EU) No 525/2013, Regulation [] on binding annual greenhouse gas emission reductions by Member States from 2021 to 2030 for a resilient Energy Union and this Regulation. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Inter- institutional Agreement on Better Law- Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts have systematic access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Angélique DELAHAYE, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall account for emissions and removals resulting from managed cropland calculated as emissions and removals in the periods from 2021 to 2025 and from 2026 to 2030 minus the value obtained by multiplying by five the Member State’s average annual emissions and removals resulting from managed cropland in its base period 2005-2007. Member States may offset agri- environmental measures implemented during the base period.

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Angélique DELAHAYE, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2

2. Member States shall account for emissions and removals resulting from managed grassland calculated as emissions and removals in the periods from 2021 to 2025 and from 2026 to 2030 minus the value obtained by multiplying by five the Member State’s average annual emissions and removals resulting from managed grassland in its base period 2005-2007. Member States may offset agri- environmental measures implemented during the base period.

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Henna VIRKKUNEN, Marijana PETIR, Albert DESS, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Hannu TAKKULA, Giovanni LA VIA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2

2. Where the result of the calculation referred to in paragraph 1 is negative in relation to its forest reference level, a Member State shall include in its managed forest land accounts total net removals of no more than the equivalent of 3,5 per cent of the Member State’s emissions in its base year or period as specified in Annex III, multiplied by five.deleted

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Henna VIRKKUNEN, Marijana PETIR, Albert DESS, Giovanni LA VIA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall determine the new forest reference level based on the criteria set out in Annex IV, section A. They shall submit to the Commission a national forestry accounting ~~plan~~report including a new forest reference level, by 31 December 2018 for the period from 2021 to 2025 and by 30 June 2023 for the period 2026-2030. (The change of “national forestry accounting plan” to “national forestry accounting report” applies throughout the text)

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Henna VIRKKUNEN, György HÖLVÉNYI, Norbert ERDŐS, Albert DESS, Giovanni LA VIA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

The national forestry accounting ~~plan~~report shall contain all the elements listed in Annex IV, section B and include a proposed new forest reference level based on the continuation of ~~current forest management practice and intensity, as documented between 1990-2009 per forest type and per age class in national forests,~~active, sustainable forest management practice expressed in tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year.

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Henna VIRKKUNEN, György HÖLVÉNYI, Norbert ERDŐS, Marijana PETIR, Albert DESS, Giovanni LA VIA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5

5. The Commission shall ~~review the national forestry accounting plans and technical corrections~~facilitate the technical assessment of the national forestry accounting report submitted by a Member State and assess the extent to which the proposed new or corrected forest reference levels have been determined in accordance with the principles and requirements set out in paragraphs (3) and (4) as well as Article 5(1). To the extent that this is required in order to ensure compliance with the principles and requirements set out in paragraphs (3) and (4) as well as Article 5(1), the Commission may recalculate the proposed new or corrected forest reference levelshe Commission shall compile a synthesis report and shall make it publicly available.

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Krišjānis KARIŅŠ, Henna VIRKKUNEN, György HÖLVÉNYI, Norbert ERDŐS, Albert DESS, Giovanni LA VIA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 6

6. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 14 to amend Annex II in the light of the ~~review~~technical assessment carried out pursuant to paragraph (5) to update Member State forest reference levels based on the national forestry accounting ~~plan~~reports or the technical corrections submitted, and any recalculations made by the Member States in the context of the ~~review. Until the entry into force of the delegated act, Member State~~technical assessment. In the event that a Member State has not updated its forest reference levels, the value as specified in Annex II shall continue to apply for the period 2021- 2025 and/or 2026-2030.

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Henna VIRKKUNEN, György HÖLVÉNYI, Norbert ERDŐS, Albert DESS, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Hannu TAKKULA, Michel DANTIN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Angélique DELAHAYE, Ulrike MÜLLER

Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part A – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) Reference levels should ensure a robust and credible accounting, to guarantee that emissions and removals ~~resulting from biomass~~from managed forest land use are properly accounted for and that emissions are balanced against removals;

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0230(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Hannu TAKKULA, Michel DANTIN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Angélique DELAHAYE, Ulrike MÜLLER, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – part A – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) Reference levels should take into account the objective of contributing to the conservation of biodiversity and the sustainable use of natural resources for production of both energy and other fossil-based material substitution purposes, as set out in the EU Forest Strategy, Member States' national forest programmes and policies, and the EUnion's Bioeconomy and Biodiversity Strategy;

2017/04/06
Committee: ENVI

2016/0084(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1

(1) The conditions for making fertilisers available on the internal market have been partially harmonised through Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council15 , which almost exclusively covers fertilisers from mined or chemically produced, min~~organic~~eral materials. There is also a need to make use of recycled or organic materials for fertilising purposes. Harmonised conditions for making fertilisers made from such recycled or organic materials available on the entire internal market should be established in order to provide an important incentive for their further use. The scope of the harmonisation should therefore be extended in order to include recycled and organic materials. __________________ 15 Regulation (EC) No 2003/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 relating to fertilisers (OJ L 304, 21.11.2003, p. 1).

2017/03/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0084(COD)

Franc BOGOVIČ, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Mairead McGUINNESS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Products with one or more functions, one of which is covered by the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, should remain under the control tailored for such products and provided for by that Regulation. Where such products also have the function of a fertilising product, it would be misleading to provide for their CE marking under this Regulation, since the making available on the market of a plant protection product is contingent on a product authorisation valid in the Member State in question. Therefore, such products should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation. Products containing components registered under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 can have one or more fertilising functions and therefore be covered by the scope of this Regulation.

2017/03/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0084(COD)

Peter JAHR, Jan HUITEMA, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)

(17a) The traceability of products which are vulnerable to organic pollution from certain potentially problematic sources (or perceived as such) should be ensured back to the source of the organic material. This is necessary in order (a) to secure consumer confidence and (b) to limit damage if local contamination occurs. As a result, businesses which use fertiliser products containing organic material from these sources may be identified. This should be compulsory for products containing material from waste or from by-products which have not undergone any processing that destroys organic pollutants, pathogens and genetic material. The aim is not only to reduce risks to health and the environment but also to reassure public opinion and cater for the concerns of farmers regarding pathogens, organic pollutants and genetic material. In order to protect land owners against pollution for which they themselves are not to blame, Member States are called upon to establish appropriate liability rules.

2017/03/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0084(COD)

Peter JAHR, Jan HUITEMA, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 b (new)

(17b) Untreated by-products of animal production should not be subject to the Regulation.

2017/03/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0084(COD)

Franc BOGOVIČ, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Mairead McGUINNESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1

A ~~CE marked fertilising product~~material that has undergone a recovery operation and complies with the requirements laid down in this Regulation shall be considered as a component material of a CE marked fertilising product thato complyies with the conditions laid down in Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC and shall, therefore, be considered as having ceased to be waste.

2017/03/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0084(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part 1 – point 1 – point C – introductory part

C. ~~Inorganic~~Mineral fertiliser

2017/03/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0084(COD)

Franc BOGOVIČ, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part 2 – PFC 1(C) - paragraph 1

A~~n inorganic~~ mineral fertiliser shall be a fertiliser ~~other than an organic or organo-mineral fertiliser~~containing nutrients in a mineral form or processed into a mineral form. Urea and its condensation and association products shall be considered to contain nutrients in a mineral form.

2017/03/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0084(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part 2 – CMC 5 – point 1 – point b

(b) Animal by-products of categories 2 and 3 according to Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 excluding manure and farm fertilizer;

2017/03/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0084(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 1 – point 2 – point e

(e) A description of all components above 51% by product weight in descending order of magnitude by dry weight, including an indication of the relevant component material categories ('CMC') as referred to in Annex II. and including the content as percentage by the dry matter;

2017/03/24
Committee: AGRI

2016/0084(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part 2 – PFC 1(C) – paragraph 1

A~~n inorganic~~ mineral fertiliser shall be a fertiliser ~~other than an organic or organo-mineral fertiliser~~containing nutrients in a mineral form or processed into a mineral form. Calcium cyanamide, urea and its condensation and association products shall be considered as containing nutrients in a mineral form. Organic carbon (Corg) in the CE marked fertilising product shall not exceed 1% by mass. That excludes, by convention, carbon coming from coatings, agronomic additives and technical agents.

2017/03/17
Committee: ENVI

2016/0084(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – part 2 – CMC 5 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) Animal by-products of categories 2 and 3 according to Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 excluding manure and farm fertiliser;

2017/04/05
Committee: ENVI

2016/0084(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – part 1 – paragraph 2 – point e

(e) A description of all components above 51% by product weight in descending order of magnitude by dry weight, including an indication of the relevant component material categories (‘CMC’) as referred to in Annex II. and including the content as percentage by the dry matter;

2017/04/05
Committee: ENVI

2016/0023(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

(1) By way of derogation from point (a) of Article 5(3) of Directive 1999/31/EC and accompanied by a plan for the permanent storage of waste in solidified form, together with a timeframe, mercury waste may be stored in one of the following ways:

2016/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2016/0023(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) temporarily stored for ~~more than one year or permanently stored~~up to one year in salt mines that are adapted for the disposal of mercury, or in deep underground hard rock formations providing a level of safety and confinement equivalent to that of those salt mines;

2016/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2016/0023(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Pilar AYUSO, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Mairead McGUINNESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) ~~temporarily~~ stored in above-ground facilities dedicated to and equipped for the ~~temporary~~ storage of mercury in the proximity either of the operator that will solidify the waste or the operator where the permanent disposal will take place.

2016/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2015/2353(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Points out that the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is the EU’s most genuinely common policy, which means that agricultural spending accounts for a ~~considerable~~n important percentage of the total EU budget; stresses that spending on agriculture has declined considerably in relative terms over the last three decades from 75 % to the current 38 %; stresses, therefore, that each EU citizen contributes only 32 cents per day to the CAP and that this policy has a low error rate in terms of spending irregularities;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2353(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Pilar AYUSO, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Mairead McGUINNESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that the CAP provides income support to farmers through Pillar 1 and provides support for environmental programmes and economic activity in rural areas and prevents rural depopulation through Pillar 2; notes, in this connection, that it is essential to maintain the two-pillar CAP structure in order to compensate and support farmers and rural areas;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2353(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Pilar AYUSO, José BOVÉ, Eric ANDRIEU, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Paolo DE CASTRO, Mairead McGUINNESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Insists that the current amount in Heading 2, as provided for in the current MFF, must remain at least at the same level; refers, in this connection, to Article 2 of the MFF Regulation, which clearly states that allocated national envelopes may not be reduced by the midterm revision; considers, furthermore, that other Union policies must have the necessary financial means to allow the Union to honour its legal obligations in accordance with the corresponding sectoral legislation; calls on the Commission, in a context of migration crisis, to explore the possibility to strengthen synergies between the withdrawal of agricultural products from the market and the distribution of food aid to the most deprived citizens and to refugees through the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (FEAD) ;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2353(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Pilar AYUSO, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses that the fixed ceilings for the CAP until 2020 entail much lower margins than in the previous MFF, while the sector faces more challenges; stresses, in this regard, that any use of the margin must be exclusively to address the needs of the agricultural sector, given that long-term planning and investment security are essential for EU farmers; points out that agriculture should not be the only sector to bear the brunt of political decisions, as is currently the case with the Russian embargo; calls on the Commission to provide the European Parliament with an assessment of the impact of the Russian embargo on the EU agricultural sector;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2353(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Pilar AYUSO, Daniel BUDA, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Stresses that price volatility is increasing and that it is therefore erroneous to believe that farm subsidies are no longer needed; strongly disagrees, in this context, with the notion that a rise in food prices and sales of produce in recent years have provided farmers with a stable income allowing business planning or security; recalls also that European consumers are not ready to pay their food at a price which would be undeniably higher if the agricultural sector was not receiving public support;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2353(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Pilar AYUSO, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Mairead McGUINNESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Stresses that agricultural production has an extremely high added value, since it also supplies the processing sector, thereby contributing to economic and social cohesion in regions and to the EU’s balanced regional development; points out that it is therefore necessary to maintain and, where appropriate, step up the support received by farmers, since this provides an incentive to increase agricultural production; stresses that the CAP contributes significantly to growth and employment in rural areas, more so than other Union policies; recalls that, in statistical terms, one farmer provides seven additional jobs in related sectors; points to the importance of maintaining the CAP’s focus on supporting small-scale and family farming businesses as the cornerstone of agricultural production in the EU and of life in the EU’s rural areas; underlines how essential is to maintain specific measures in the framework of the CAP towards areas suffering from severe and permanent natural handicaps, notably mountainous areas and outermost regions, and other specific handicaps;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2353(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Sofia RIBEIRO, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA, Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO, Pilar AYUSO, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Angélique DELAHAYE, Mairead McGUINNESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 17

17. Strongly opposes any renationalisation of agricultural policies; stresses that the common nature of the EU’s agricultural policy avoids distortion of competition within the internal market and generates savings for European taxpayers; is worried about the trend of renationalisation of public responses to agricultural crisis, in particular the mobilisation of targeted payments instead of real European actions ; affirms that a well-functioning and well-financed second pillar is essential for the success of the CAP and for the economic well-being of the Union’s rural areas;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2353(INI)

Peter JAHR, Michel DANTIN, Albert DESS, Monika HOHLMEIER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Norbert LINS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Stresses that the fixed ceilings for the CAP until 2020 entail much lower margins than in the previous MFF, while the sector faces more challenges; stresses in this regard, that any use of the margin must be exclusively to address the needs of the agricultural sector; warns that the current margin within the agriculture budget may prove insufficient, with market volatility, veterinary and phytosanitary risks and other unforeseen events making increasing demands on the budget to such an extent that the margin is expected to be depleted at the end of this planning period;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Peter JAHR, Michel DANTIN, Reimer BÖGE, Albert DESS, Monika HOHLMEIER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Norbert LINS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Insists that the amounts for direct payments in Heading 2 should be left untouched; points out that this is crucial for the income situation of many farmers, particular in times of crises, and that the absorption rate per year is almost 100%;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2353(INI)

Peter JAHR, Michel DANTIN, Reimer BÖGE, Albert DESS, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Norbert LINS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29a. Insists that the current amount in Heading 2 as foreseen in the current MFF remains at least at the same level; refers in this respect to Art.2 of the MFF regulation, which clearly states that allocated national envelopes may not be reduced by the midterm revision; considers furthermore that other Union policies must have the necessary financial means to allow the Union to honour its legal obligations in accordance with the corresponding sectoral legislation;

2016/05/13
Committee: BUDG

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas agriculture and tourism in the Alpine region have a major impact on the conservation of the environment, traditional landscapes and biodiversity,

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Herbert DORFMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Paolo DE CASTRO, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights the importance of the Alpine region as a place for people to live, work and relax in, thanks to the vital contributions made by agriculture and forestry, tourism and craft trades; stresses that these sectors are of crucial value in the sustainable development of the region, as they secure a high-quality food supply, maintain the population in outlying areas, maintain the cultural landscape, and preserve ecosystems by means of sustainable biodiversity, soil and water protection; welcomes the EU Alpine Strategy as a way to improve economic, environmental and social development in the Alpine region;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Herbert DORFMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Paolo DE CASTRO, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the need for initiatives to improve mobility, digital infrastructure, energy supply and social migration; considers it necessary for specific traditions in the fields of land use, craft trades and tourism to be preserved when implementing the strategy;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Herbert DORFMANN, Ulrike MÜLLER, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Maintains that the Alpine region ~~constitute~~has a vast reserve of natural ~~and~~ landscape, habitat and economic potential, given the exceptional variety of ecosystems to be found there;

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that in the Alpine region largely man-made urbanised environments coexist alongside areas of sparsely populated mountain country; takes the view that the strategy should focus primarily on ~~the latter~~Alpine mountain regions because they have immense potential for the region as a whole;

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Notes that the mountain farming is exposed to climate-related natural disasters, such as floods, avalanches and mudslides; calls for the promotion of risk prevention measures (for example, flood protection schemes);

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for the introduction of a specific quality label for mountain products, initiatives to develop new high-quality products and better safeguards, in particular by specifying a protected designation of origin for products from the Alpine region;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Norbert LINS, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Points out that farming in mountain areas is very important for the hydrogeological stability not only of mountain areas but also of plains below them;

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Herbert DORFMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Paolo DE CASTRO, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Considers it particularly important to give young farmers long-term prospects in order to address rural depopulation; calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote transnational initiatives to support entrepreneurship, emerging industries and the labour market in agriculture and forestry;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Herbert DORFMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Paolo DE CASTRO, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Highlights the importance of agritourism as a source of income for small-scale farmers (e. g. farm holidays); calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish programmes to support investment and entrepreneurship; considers it important to support those farms through specific tourism campaigns;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Considers it necessary, given the economic importance of tourism for the entire Alpine region, to continue to support the development of ‘soft’ tourism; points, on the basis of best practices, such as the tourism platform ‘Alpine Pearls’, created as part of the EU-funded project Alps Mobility, to achievements so far which should be built on;

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Norbert LINS, Albert DESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Considers it necessary to tap renewable and alternative energy sources and expand the model of decentralised energy production and energy supply, inter alia through the Smart Grid systems;

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Considers it necessary to tap renewable and alternative energy sources, such as hydroelectric energy and biomass;

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Herbert DORFMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Points up the important role of agriculture and rural resources in providing social and educational care for particularly vulnerable people; calls on the Commission to promote social agricultural activities, since, for mountain farmers in particular, they represent a new way of providing alternative services;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Emphasises the importance of hydropower for energy supplies in mountain regions and calls therefore for the population living in the Alps also to be able to manage hydropower and exploit it commercially;

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

~~6. Maintains that land use and occupation need to be regulated in order to ensure that land is used sustainably;~~deleted

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

~~6. Maintains that land use and occupation need to be regulated in order to ensure that land is used sustainably;~~deleted

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Herbert DORFMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls for the prospective and current regulatory framework for farms throughout the Alpine region, in particular under the CAP, to be harmonised and simplified respectively; points up the need for specific additional support based on factors such as soil assessment and gradients in order to make it possible to farm sustainably on steep hillsides;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Considers it important that the EU Alpine strategy should be carried out with existing financial resources, such as the 2014-2020 Structural and Investment Funds, and that no new funding should be introduced; stresses that they must be used efficiently in order to carry out the strategy with greater coordination;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Herbert DORFMANN, Norbert LINS, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls for a holistic approach to the future design and implementation of Alpine transport and environment policy so that the achievement of a common target is not jeopardised by arbitrage and transfer effects;

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Paolo DE CASTRO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8c. Welcomes the establishment of a macroregional governance model for the Alpine region so as to foster cross-border cooperation in agriculture and forestry; regards it as important in this connection that there should be improved exchanges of information and experience, on a transnational basis, between associations and producer organisations in the areas of livestock and crop farming and forestry by setting up regular symposia;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Albert DESS, Jørn DOHRMANN, Herbert DORFMANN, Ivan JAKOVČIĆ, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Paolo DE CASTRO, Fredrick FEDERLEY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 d (new)

8d. Emphasises that the development of new initiatives requires regional solutions and participatory approaches, with harmonisation of existing and new initiatives, in order to maximise benefit for mountain farming in the Alps and reduce administrative barriers; points out that the Alpine Convention, EU cohesion policy and existing EU initiatives must be taken into account;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Ulrike MÜLLER, Paolo DE CASTRO, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Albert DESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 e (new)

8e. Considers it especially important that agriculture and forestry stakeholders should be instrumental in carrying out the Commission's action plan at regional level so that a participatory approach and specific issues can be acted on locally;

2016/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

~~7. Maintains that protected areas are a testing-ground for best practice that can be exported to all parts of the Alpine region;~~deleted

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Norbert LINS, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Maintains that protected areas are a ~~testing-ground for best practice that can be exported to all parts of the Alpine region~~particularly sensitive biosphere for people and nature and consequently only best practice should be applied;

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Believes that citizens, local agriculture and forestry stakeholders and local businesses have to be involved in decision- making.

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Norbert LINS, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Points out that active agriculture and forestry are essential to preserving biodiversity in the Alpine Region while at the same time making a significant contribution for other sectors such as tourism.

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls for inclusion, coordination and cooperation with existing Alpine cooperation initiatives such as the Alpine Convention in order to arrive at common policies and goals.

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8a. Draws attention to the Alpine Convention as an already existing international agreement on Alpine protection and sustainable development.

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Calls for targeted approaches to financing by the Member States and the European Union in relation to macro- regional policies as part of the Alpine strategy; calls for taxes and levies that are generated inside the Alpine region and have a macro-regional dimension to be ring-fenced.

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8c. Calls on the Commission to introduce noise emission limits in Alpine goods transport and stronger incentive schemes to encourage investment in noise reduction measures on the main transport routes.

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Herbert DORFMANN, Norbert LINS, Ulrike MÜLLER, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 d (new)

8d. Calls for the introduction of the real cost principle and the principle of internalising external costs in relation to existing and future regulatory measures on taxes, levies and infrastructure use charges, taking account of the comprehensive strategy for the Alpine Region and the need to avoid subsequent transfer and arbitrage effects.

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2324(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 e (new)

8e. Calls for a macro-regional Alpine strategy that will allow sustainable use of land and nature and hence an economic area and biosphere based on coexistence between nature and people, so as to avoid further population exodus that would have a negative impact on nature and landscape protection.

2016/02/25
Committee: ENVI

2015/2279(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas it is essential to secure ~~agricultural and~~multifunctional agricultural production in these regions, which, in addition to food production, a~~nd maintain~~lso affords access to other sources of income and thus possesses added value infor these regions;

2016/01/19
Committee: AGRI

2015/2279(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas a response must be found to the challenges posed by the abandonment of farmland and the associated growth of scrub and trees, or desertification, and lack of generational renewal in mountain areas;

2016/01/19
Committee: AGRI

2015/2279(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas farming in mountain areas is very important for the hydrogeological stability not only of mountain areas but also of plains below them;

2016/01/19
Committee: AGRI

2015/2279(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Considers that the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) should form an integral part of the smart specialisation and multifunctional development strategies of ~~regions with~~ mountain areas; calls therefore on the Commission, Member States and the regions to strengthen synergies between different funds and measures for mountain areas in preparing, examining and adopting operational programmes;

2016/01/19
Committee: AGRI

2015/2279(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the importance of aid under the first pillar of the CAP in maintaining agricultural production and income for farmers in mountain areas; recalls that, in many Member States ~~have the option of establishing specific direct aid and coupled payments to help attain these objectives;~~ , some decoupled aid under the first pillar is far less generous than in prime farming areas, because of inadequate internal convergence, which further limits the competitiveness of farms;

2016/01/19
Committee: AGRI

2015/2279(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that measures under the second pillar of the CAP must ensure the sustainability and diversification of agricultural production in mountain areas by supporting the emergence of projects that create added value, innovation projects, agricultural investment projects and multifunctional farm development projects and projects to maintain processing enterprises; stresses in this context the importance of tourism in many mountain areas and the associated scope for supplementary income for farmers; stresses that these funds should be used as tools to boost the competitiveness of the regional agricultural sector and / or as a means of allowing the economic diversification of farms;

2016/01/19
Committee: AGRI

2015/2279(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Recalls the essential character of measures to support generational renewal and the establishment of active young farmers, in particular by organising access to ~~multidisciplinary training enabling them to carry out various activities simultaneously and successively over the year~~training and further training above the level of the individual holding, enabling them to develop income combinations;

2016/01/19
Committee: AGRI

2015/2279(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses the importance of establishing producer groups or organisations to strengthen the bargaining power of farmers in the food chain; considers that in this way local markets and short supply chains can be preserved for farms, which as a rule are small, and large markets can also be tapped for them; notes that, furthermore, in this way approaches can be initiated geared to quality and promoting and protecting products (‘mountain products’, Protected Designations of Origin (PDO), Protected Geographical Indications (PGI) and Traditional Specialty Guaranteed (TSG));

2016/01/19
Committee: AGRI

2015/2279(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Believes that such approaches help maintain and create local markets and short supply chains and initiate approaches geared to quality and promoting and protecting products (‘mountain products’, Protected Designations of Origin (PDO), Protected Geographical Indications (PGI) and Traditional Specialty Guaranteed (TSG));deleted

2016/01/19
Committee: AGRI

2015/2277(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Jens GIESEKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recognises that over-reliance on imported food should be replaced by establishing resilient domestic food production, given that climates and markets are increasingly volatile, and that emphasis has shifted from merely increasing the production of agricultural commodities to enabling countries to feed themselves;

2016/02/05
Committee: AGRI

2015/2277(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Jens GIESEKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that the NAFSN must lead to the establishment of a regionally adapted agricultural structure in the primary and processing stages;

2016/02/05
Committee: AGRI

2015/2277(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Norbert LINS, Jens GIESEKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – indent 6

- design policies which e~~mpower women in agriculture,~~nhance the social role of rural women;

2016/02/05
Committee: AGRI

2015/2227(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

– having regard to its Motion for a Resolution of 14 December 2015 on patents and plant breeders' rights (2015/2981 (RSP)),

2016/01/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2227(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that agriculture has always developed new practices, techniques and production methods that have increased outputs and improved the adaptability of farming practices to new and changing circumstances; notes further that agriculture is a key part of our natural world which thus provides services - such as ecosystem services and protecting biodiversity and nature - that go beyond producing food and can be enhanced by fostering new developments; is convinced that innovation is a prerequisite for maintaining this progress;

2016/01/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2227(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Is concerned that the EU is highly dependent on the import of minerals for the production of ~~artifici~~mineral fertilisers such as phosphate and that the production of ~~artifici~~mineral fertilisers has a high ecological footprint; emphasises the possibility of processing animal manure into mineral concentrate that could be used to manufacture ‘green fertiliser’ that can reduce and eventually replace the need for ~~artifici~~mineral fertilisers, in the light of an efficiency level comparable to that of the latter; welcomes the fact that the production and use of mineral concentrates makes a significant contribution to the circular economy by closing the mineral loop, and asks the Commission to revise the EU fertiliser regulation and remove barriers in the nitrates directive so as to stimulate the development of mineral concentrate from animal manure;

2016/01/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2227(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls for more efforts to be made to develop an integrated pest management system by supporting research into non- chemical alternatives and low-risk measures and pesticides which are more environment-friendly; calls on the Commission to come forward with an action plan and to set up an expert group in order to work towards a more sustainable pest management system; stresses that integrated pest management is designed to make smarter use of the interplay between chemical and biological measures; highlights the potential of a pest management that improves the interaction between plant breeding efforts, natural combat systems and pesticide use; notes that biological control mechanisms relating to pests and diseases could reduce the use of pesticides and may contribute to better plant resilience;

2016/01/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2227(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls for a continuous development of innovative new breeding techniques for plants, as this is of vital importance for the efficient development of new varieties, contributing to the development of plants with higher yields, greater nutritional value and better resistance to pests, diseases and adverse weather conditions; believes that many new breeding techniques provide unprecedented opportunities to reduce the environmental impact of conventional agriculture; disapproves of the current administrative and regulatory burdens; urges the Commission to encourage new techniques and ensure access to biological materials for SMEs in the breeding sector, and expects it to give primacy to innovation in this respect; therefore disapproves of the current decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO) of 25 March in Cases G2/12 and G2/13;

2016/01/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2227(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Considers that economic development and ecological sustainability are complementary provided enough room is left for innovation and entrepreneurship and provided action is taken to prevent the appearance of unjustified differences in national implementation, so as to ensure a genuine level playing field, also by exploring new and relevant techniques such as satellite imaging; calls on the Commission to ensure a genuine level playing field for the agricultural sector by actively monitoring relevant legislation such as the Birds and Habitats Directives and the implementation thereof and reporting back to Parliament every two years;

2016/01/21
Committee: AGRI

2015/2225(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers PF to be essential for achieving sustainable agriculture in the EU but recognises the constraints for its widespread adoption, including the reliability and manageability of this technology and its adaptability to smaller and irregular farmland areas; thus encourages the European Commission to develop policies to stimulate the uptake of precision farming technologies for farms of all sizes to make use of the full potential of these technologies;

2016/02/02
Committee: AGRI

2015/2225(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Emphasises that PF contributes to resource-efficient agriculture and should therefore be made available to all holdings, irrespective of their size;

2016/02/02
Committee: AGRI

2015/2225(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 (new)

emphasises that PF cuts resource use by at least 15%;

2016/02/02
Committee: AGRI

2015/2225(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Points out that the farming industry, like all other sectors of the economy, is undergoing a process of change; emphasises that modern farming was made possible only by the acceptance of scientific and technological progress and that digital 4.0 likewise offers the possibility of further development in the farming sector;

2016/02/02
Committee: AGRI

2015/2225(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Is of the view that the loss of genetic diversity over the past century threatens food/feed security and undermines EU policies on sustainable agriculture, biodiversity protection and adaptation strategies under climate change; considers all plant varieties and animal ~~variet~~species, including landraces and their wild relatives, as essential for maintaining genetic diversity, breeding programmes and the production of nutritious and sufficient food;

2016/02/02
Committee: AGRI

2015/2225(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the need for greater dialogue between genetic banks ~~and end-users~~, private and public plant research and breeding, end-users and all other actors involved in the conservation and use of genetic resources, in order to build resilience and support for sustainable food production throughout Europe;

2016/02/02
Committee: AGRI

2015/2225(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Highlights the previous support from DG Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI) and DG Research and Innovation (RTD) for genetic resource conservation activities, e.g. the European Native Seed Conservation Network (ENSCONET), but calls for successor programmes to continue the support for crop and livestock genetic conservation activities in order not to lose the significant EU dialogue and momentum gained; calls on the Commission to put forward proposals for the European strategy for the safeguarding of genetic diversity in agriculture provided for in Measure 10 of the 'EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2020';

2016/02/02
Committee: AGRI

2015/2225(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Supports the need for continuous progress in plant and animal breeding to increase not only the range of pest- and disease-resistant traits in crops, but also the range of food raw materials with nutritional and health-beneficial characteristics on the market; recognises the importance of marker-assisted selection (MAS) and SMART breeding, which are now well-integrated into many breeding programmes, but also the potential offered by precision breeding for crop improvement, such as the use of zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs) and CRISPR in genome editing, oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis (ODM) and the use of CMS hybrids in protoplast fusion or tissue culture based methods; Considers important to also ensure sustained support for development and use of future technological tools which may allow breeding to successfully address the societal challenges ahead;

2016/02/02
Committee: AGRI

2015/2225(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 7 a (new)

Recognises the potential that precision farming and digital technology integration can have in making agriculture more attractive for young farmers and creating new opportunities for growth and employment in rural areas;

2016/02/02
Committee: AGRI

2015/2154(DEC)

Michel DANTIN, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Notes the importance of resource efficiency, and a shift towards a low carbon and climate resilient economy in agri-food and forestry sectors (reduced greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions, more carbon sequestration) and the need to measure the overall achievements related to environmental targets 2014- 2020, this should not put viablenvironmentally sound production and processing methods in the agri-food and forestry sectors; points out that this should make for sustainable and safe food production ~~at risk~~;

2015/12/10
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers the opening of new markets for EU agricultural productions, such as dairy products, meat and live animals (pig, poultry and bovine), and fruits and vegetables, to be of the utmost importance in the context of the current farming crisis and accordingly favours the balanced negotiation of bilateral or multilateral agreements with third countries, provided that the most sensitive sectors are adequately protected;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Norbert LINS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that Europe's agrofood industry is an efficient sector of the EU's economy which is distinguished by quality, diversity and innovation in production and which makes a vital contribution to food security;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert ERDŐS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. recalls the multifunctional nature of the agri-food sector and its specific sensitivities and constraints and demands that such sensitivities and constraints be considered in the conduct of EU trade policy;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert ERDŐS, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. calls EU negotiators, in all free trade negotiations, such as those ongoing with the US and Mercosur, to strive to achieve a balanced result within the agricultural chapter of such negotiations with market access opportunities which are equivalent on both sides; invites them therefore to resist the temptation of cross concessions at the expense of European agriculture;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert ERDŐS, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Oopposes any form of negotiation involving the treatment of European agriculture as ~~an expendable~~ bargaining chip and warns ofabout the cumulative effect of tariff concessions ~~granted under different trade agreements~~, whether resulting from multilateral or bilateral negotiations or from autonomous schemes such as the GSP; points out that a zero rate of duty is ~~imposed on~~already applicable to 71 % of all EU agri- food imports;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert ERDŐS, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. considers that the free trade agreement about to be concluded with Canada and those currently under negotiation with the USA and Mercosur or envisaged with Australia and New Zealand will open up the EU market to the most competitive agricultural producers in the world and those with the greatest export potential ; calls therefore on the Commission to defend sensitive agricultural products in a appropriate way;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert ERDŐS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Uurges the Commission to ~~assess the impact on Europe of fresh trade concessions to third countries and forward~~thoroughly assess the cumulative impact on the agri-food sector of current and pending trade concessions to third countries, especially with respect to sensitive products, and to submit its findings to the European Parliament before ~~accept~~making or ~~mak~~revising any ~~commercial offer~~market access offer; recalls that the Commission also has to present an individual impact assessment for any new proposal for a trade agreement;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Albert DESS, Michel DANTIN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls for agricultural imports into the EU to be permitted only if the imported products meet European standards of consumer protection, animal welfare and environmental protection and comply with minimum social standards;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls for special protection for certain sensitive product sectors such as poultry, beef, pigmeat, cereals and sugar, which means excluding them from tariff reductions;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Takes the view that trade agreements should ensure a~~ considers that the EU trade strategy should be coherent with the objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy as set out in the TFEU; warns in this regard against the risk of disrupting the "level playing field" between the ~~different~~EU and its trad~~ing~~e partners in the agricultural sector, taking into account the high environmental, food safety and social costs to be met by European farmers, so as to ensure that the latter are able to benefit fully from the opening of new marketf free trade is introduced without any consideration for the domestic policies conducted on both sides and for the high costs borne by European farmers as a result of strict environmental, food safety and social standards;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert ERDŐS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Cconsiders that the protection of geographical indications should be a sine qua non in trade negotiations with third countries, especially the USA; calls on the Commission to stand firm on this matter and to not consider GI protection as a substitute for genuine market opening from the other party; considers that sensitive agricultural products should be excluded from any "cumulation of origins" for products imported from third countries with which the EU and its FTA's partners already have a free trade agreement in order to protect the real European origin in the agriculture, instead of opening the EU origin to third countries;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert ERDŐS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Sstresses the importance of progress regarding sanitary, phytosanitary ~~barrier~~and other non-tariff barriers to agricultural trade, in all free trade negotiations, paying particular attention to the red lines drawn by the European Union that might have implications for the health of consumers.;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert ERDŐS, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. welcomes the realistic assessment of the Commission concerning the persistent lack of progress in the DDA; believes that, even if multilateral negotiations are indispensable, the DDA has clearly not met the expectations of the European agri-food sector despite unilateral concessions from the EU such as those made at the 10th Ministerial Conference in Nairobi; calls therefore on the EU to define a new and more effective strategy concerning multilateral negotiations at the WTO;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Norbert ERDŐS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Sofia RIBEIRO, Mairead McGUINNESS, Angélique DELAHAYE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. believes that, in the conduct of trade negotiations affecting directly European agricultural interests, the Commissioner for agriculture should be recognised as a leading role on all agricultural aspects; considers also that, in the functioning of collegiality in the European Commission, no decision concerning the conclusion of trade agreements should ever be taken against this Commissioner's assessment of the fundamental interests of EU agriculture;

2016/05/04
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Mairead McGUINNESS, Paolo DE CASTRO, Richard ASHWORTH, James NICHOLSON, Albert DESS, Marijana PETIR, Angélique DELAHAYE, Michel DANTIN, Herbert DORFMANN, Paul BRANNEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Reminds the Commission that the European Parliament's own initiative report adopted in December 2013 called on the Commission to examine the need and possibility of independent enforcement to address the so-called 'fear factor' among primary producers in the supply chain; urges the Commission to consider this in its own report;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Mairead McGUINNESS, Richard ASHWORTH, Paolo DE CASTRO, James NICHOLSON, Albert DESS, Marijana PETIR, Michel DANTIN, Angélique DELAHAYE, Herbert DORFMANN, Paul BRANNEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls on the Commission to assess the SCI in terms of effectiveness, taking into account concerns cited by the farming community; cautions the Commission to avoid assessing the voluntary initiative based solely on the number of registered participants;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Mairead McGUINNESS, Paolo DE CASTRO, James NICHOLSON, Albert DESS, Marijana PETIR, Michel DANTIN, Angélique DELAHAYE, Herbert DORFMANN, Paul BRANNEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that several Member States have ~~initiated actions in national law~~voluntary codes and legislative measures to address the concerns of primary producers regarding the negative impact of UTPs; asks the Commission to assess these national efforts with a view to selecting best practices for application at EU level; notes in particular the Groceries Code Adjudicator in the UK as aone potential model for adaptation at EU level;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/2065(INI)

Mairead McGUINNESS, Paolo DE CASTRO, James NICHOLSON, Albert DESS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Notes that while private–own brand labelled products can bring increased value and choice to consumers, they give an unfair and anti-competitive position to retailers, who become both customer and competitor; notes that market share in a private-own brand product category may undermine the benefits of these products for consumers and the agri-food industry; insists that the issue of private-own brands requires particular attention from the Commission and Competition Authorities, with a need to address the potential long term consequences for the supply chain;

2015/09/23
Committee: AGRI

2015/0275(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) To ensure that recycling targets are based on reliable and comparable data and to enable more effective monitoring of progress in attaining those targets, the definition of municipal waste in Directive 2008/98/EC should be in line with the definition used for statistical purposes by the European Statistical Office and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, on the basis of which Member States have been reporting data for several years. Within this definition municipal waste should be understood as household waste and similar waste, including bulky waste (e.g. white goods, old furniture, mattresses), garden waste (including leaves, grass clipping, and cleansing waste), waste from street cleaning services (including street sweepings), the content of litter containers, waste from park and garden maintenance. Municipal waste does not include waste from sewage network and treatment, including sewage sludge and construction and demolition waste. The definition of municipal waste in this Directive is neutral with regard to the public or private status of the operator managing waste.

2016/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2015/0275(COD)

Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Britta REIMERS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) The Commission shall organize an exchange of information between Member States on the practical implementation of the requirements of this Directive, including on the application of the calculation rules set out in Article 11a, to ensure adequate governance, enforcement, cross-border cooperation and exchange of best practices. This includes, inter alia, the establishment of an electronic register for national by-product and end-of-waste criteria. The Commission shall publish the results of the exchange of information.

2016/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2012/0288(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) Liquid renewable fuels are likely to be required by the transport sector in order to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Advanced biofuels, such as those made from wastes and algae, provide high greenhouse gas savings with low risk of causing indirect land use change and do not compete directly for agricultural land for the food and feed markets. It is appropriate, therefore, to encourage greater production of such advanced biofuels as these are currently not commercially available in large quantities, in part due to competition for public subsidies with established food crop based biofuel technologies. Further incentives should be provided by increasing the weighting of advanced biofuels ~~towards 10% target~~by introducing a separate target for advanced biofuels of at least 2% for transport set in Directive 2009/28/EC compared to conventional biofuels. In this context, only ~~advanced~~ biofuels with ~~low estimated indirect land use change impacts and~~ high overall greenhouse gas savings should be supported as part of the post 2020 renewable energy policy framework.

2013/05/14
Committee: AGRI

2012/0288(COD)

Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Britta REIMERS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) To prepare for the transition towards advanced biofuels and minimise the overall indirect land use change impacts in the period to 2020, it is appropriate to limit the amount of biofuels and bioliquids obtained from food crops as set out in part A of Annex VIII to Directive 2009/28/EC and part A of Annex V to Directive 98/70/EC that can be counted towards targets set out in Directive 2009/28/EC. Without restricting the overall use of such biofuels, the share of biofuels and bioliquids produced from cereal and other starch rich crops, sugar and oil crops that can be counted towards the targets of Directive 2009/28/EC should be limited to the share of such biofuels and bioliquids consumed in 2011.deleted

2013/05/14
Committee: AGRI

Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Britta REIMERS

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – subpoint a

Directive 98/70/CE
Article 7a – paragraph 6

(a) the following paragraph 6 is inserted: 6. Fuel suppliers shall by 31 March each year report to the authority designated by the Member State, the biofuel production pathways, volumes, and the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions per unit of energy, including the estimated indirect land-use change emissions set out in Annex V Member States shall report these data to the Commission.’deleted

2013/05/14
Committee: AGRI

Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Britta REIMERS

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point 2 – subpoint c – point -i new and point i

(c) paragraph 4 is amended as follows: (-i) The first sentence is replaced by the following: Each Member State shall ensure that the share of energy from renewable sources in all forms of transport in 2020 is at least 10 % of the final consumption of energy in transport in that Member State, (i) in point (b), the following phrase is added: "This indent shall be without prejudice to Articles 17(1)a and 3(4)d;" (ii) the following point (d) is added: (d) for the calculation of biofuels in the numerator, (i) the share of energy from biofuels produced from ~~cereal and other starch rich crops, sugars and oil crops shall be no more than 5%, the estimated share at the end of 2011,~~feedstock listed in Annex IX shall be at least 2% of the final consumption of energy in transport in 2020, and (ii) the share of energy from biofuels produced from food crops shall be at least 8% of the final consumption of energy ~~in transport in 2020~~.

2013/05/14
Committee: AGRI

2012/0288(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Werner LANGEN, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Jens GIESEKE, Norbert LINS

Council position
Recital 16 a (new)

(16a) The Commission should periodically review the methodology for estimating land-use change emission factors and the list of available advanced biofuels as laid down in Annex IX, taking into account consolidated, peer-reviewed, technical and scientific progress, and continuously report on the development of models used to estimate indirect land-use change emissions.

2015/02/02
Committee: ENVI

2012/0288(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Werner LANGEN, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Jens GIESEKE, Norbert LINS

Council position
Recital 16 b (new)

(16b) The review and adaptation of this methodology should take into account the fact that undertakings have already made massive investments on the basis of current legislation.

2015/02/02
Committee: ENVI

2012/0288(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Werner LANGEN, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR

Council position
Recital 17 a (new)

(17a) With a view to meeting the target for renewable energies in the transport sector while minimising the negative impacts of land-use change, the use of renewable electricity, modal shift, greater use of public transport and energy efficiency should be encouraged. In line with the White Paper on transport, Member States should therefore seek to secure greater energy efficiency and reduce overall energy consumption in transport and at the same time to enhance the market penetration of electric vehicles and the take-up of renewable electricity in transport systems.

2015/02/02
Committee: ENVI

2012/0288(COD)

Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN, Werner LANGEN, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Jens GIESEKE, Norbert LINS

Council position
Recital 18 a (new)

(18a) The Commission should also review ILUC mitigation measures, such as the use of co-products, yield increases, manufacturing efficiencies and crop production on abandoned, unused or vulnerable land. The Commission may also assess the impact on biomass-using sectors.

2015/02/02
Committee: ENVI

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from Their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity (the Nagoya Protocol) is an international treaty adopted on 29 October 2010 by the Parties to the Convention. The Nagoya Protocol ~~significantly expand~~further details the general rules of the Convention on access and benefit- sharing for the use of genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Britta REIMERS, Sergio Paolo Francesco SILVESTRIS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) It is important to define, in accordance with the Nagoya Protocol, that the use of genetic resources refers to research and development on the genetic or biochemical composition of ~~samples of genetic material, which includes research and development on isolated compounds extracted from genetic material that was accessed in a Party to the Nagoya Protocol~~genetic resources.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Sergio Paolo Francesco SILVESTRIS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) With a view to ensuring an effective implementation of the Nagoya Protocol, all users of genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated with such resources should have to exercise due diligence to ascertain that the genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge used were accessed in accordance with applicable legal requirements and to ensure that, where relevant, benefits are shared. However, given the diversity of users within the Union it is not appropriate to oblige all users to take the same measures for exercising due diligence. Therefore, only minimum features of due diligence measures should be set out. The specific choices taken by users on the tools and measures applied for exercising due diligence should be supported through the recognition of best practiis is the case in particular for subsequent users where the due diligence obligation should only apply in the case such users access a~~s well as complementary meas~~nd use genetic resources in ~~support of sectoral codes of conduct, model contractual clauses, and guidelines with a view to increasing legal certainty and reducing costs~~the form as originally accessed by the initial user. The obligation on users to keep information relevant for access and benefit-sharing should be limited in time, consistent with the time-span for an eventual innovation.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Britta REIMERS, Sergio Paolo Francesco SILVESTRIS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

This Regulation establishes rules governing compliance with access and benefit-sharing for genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources, in accordance with the provisions of the Nagoya Protocol on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilisation to the Convention on Biological Diversity (the Nagoya Protocol).

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Sergio Paolo Francesco SILVESTRIS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – subpoint 3

(3) the source from which the resources or the knowledge were directly obtained ~~as well as subsequent users of genetic resources or traditional knowledge associated with such resources~~;

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – subpoint 5

(5) access ~~decision~~permits and mutually agreed terms, where applicable;

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) obtain a proper access permit, and establish mutually agreed terms~~, or discontinue the use~~ where it appears that access was not in accordance with applicable access and benefit-sharing legislation or regulatory requirements.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Sergio Paolo Francesco SILVESTRIS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point e a (new)

(e a) The obligation referred to in paragraphs (1) to (3) of this Article shall only apply to subsequent users in case such users access and use genetic resources in the form as originally accessed by the initial user.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2

2. The checks referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be conducted in accordance with a periodically reviewed plan following a risk-based approach~~. When developing this risk-based approach, Member States shall consider~~, of which the key principles shall be laid down by the Commission in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 15(2). Such an approach shall take into account that the implementation by a user of a best practice recognised under Article 8(2) of this Regulation or under Article 20(2) of the Nagoya Protocol reduces that user's risk of non-compliance.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

4. The checks referred to in paragraph 1 shall include ~~at least~~:

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Sergio Paolo Francesco SILVESTRIS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2

2. The competent authorities shall exchange information on the organization of their checking system for monitoring user compliance with this Regulation and on serious shortcomings detected through checks referred to in Article 9(1) and on the types of penalties imposed in accordance with Article 11 with the competent authorities of other Member States and with the Commission.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Sergio Paolo Francesco SILVESTRIS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1

1. A Union platform on access to genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources is hereby established. Member States which envisage adopting access rules as regards their genetic resources shall first conduct an impact assessment of these rules and submit the result of this assessment to the Union platform for consideration pursuant to the procedure laid down in paragraph 5 of this Article.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2

2. The Union platform shall contribute to the streamlining of access conditions at Union level by discussing related issues, including the design and performances of access regimes established in Member States, simplified access for non- commercial research, access practices of collections in the Union, access of Union stakeholders in third countries and the sharing of best practices. In particular, the platform should advocate that where competent authorities leave requests for access unanswered, the due diligence obligation shall be deemed to be fulfilled and access should be without any further obligations.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2012/0278(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3

3. Every ten years after its first report the Commission shall, on the basis of reporting on and experience with the application of this Regulation, review the functioning and effectiveness of this Regulation. In its reporting the Commission shall in particular consider the administrative consequences for specific sectors, public research institutions, small or medium- sized enterprises and micro-enterprises. It shall also consider the need for further Union action on access to genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources.

2013/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2011/2307(INI)

Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Astrid LULLING, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS, Hans-Peter MAYER, Christa KLASS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the new EU biodiversity strategy and notes the Commission recommendations for CAP reform, including clearly formulated measures under both the first and second pillars seeking to conserve and improve biodiversity; stresses in this connection the particular role played by farming, which has already made a great contribution to preserving the diversity of species and biotopes and will also make a crucial contribution to the success of the European biodiversity strategy;

2012/02/08
Committee: AGRI

2011/2307(INI)

Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Astrid LULLING, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS, Hans-Peter MAYER, Christa KLASS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Is convinced that the so-called 'greening' of the CAP should be implemented efficiently and unbureaucratically, without leading to discrimination against existing agri- environmental measures; calls, with regard to the necessary reduction in the administrative burden, for, inter alia, all CAP payments to continue to be underpinned by robust cross-compliance rules after 2014, which should be both transparent and as easy as possible to implement and monitor;

2012/02/08
Committee: AGRI

2011/2307(INI)

Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Astrid LULLING, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS, Herbert DORFMANN, Hans-Peter MAYER, Christa KLASS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Stresses that only functioning, sustainable, broad-based and productive agriculture is in a position to provide the additional services demanded by society in the form of public assets; is therefore in favour of an approach that balances and integrates the introduction of additional environmental protection measures and the key role of the CAP in safeguarding efficient production;

2012/02/08
Committee: AGRI

2011/2307(INI)

Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Astrid LULLING, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS, Hans-Peter MAYER, Christa KLASS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Recalls the key role played by the CAP in guaranteeing a secure supply of high- quality and affordable food for consumers; points out in this connection that the Commission proposal for the mandatory across-the-board designation of 7% of farmland as environmental focus areas is considered to be inappropriate and impracticable, particularly where these areas would no longer be available to produce food in productive regions;

2012/02/08
Committee: AGRI

2011/2307(INI)

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Esther DE LANGE, Christa KLASS, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Points out that the diversity of species and biotopes now seen as meriting protection can be attributed to the way in which land has been used for farming and forestry in Europe in the past, which should therefore be continued as part of a sustainable land-use strategy; points out in this connection that differing conditions such as climate, soil and the availability of water are found mainly at a local and regional level, and that regional conditions should therefore be taken into account and correspondingly differentiated possibilities for use should be found;

2012/02/08
Committee: AGRI

2011/2307(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. ~~Calls for~~Urges that the greening of ~~Pillar I~~the CAP in order to ~~make income support for farmers legitimate by ensuring the conservation of biodiversity in the wider farmed landscape, improving connectivity and adapting to the effects of climat~~protect natural resources should be a significant element in sustainable agriculture and therefore calls for the introduction of an EU-wide incentive sch~~ange; welcomes the Commission’s CAP reform proposal that provides for~~eme with the help of a ‘greening’ of the CAP through the allocation of 30 % of Pillar I payments to a package of worthwhile, basic good practices applied at farm level, which should include crop rotation and diversification, permanent pasture and a minimum ‘ecological focus area’; takes the view, however, that the minimum ‘ecological focus area’ should be 10 % of farmland, and not the 7 % proposed by the Commission component the aims of which are to ensure the sustainability of businesses and long-term food security through the effective management of scarce resources (water, energy, land);

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2114(INI)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Christa KLASS, Astrid LULLING, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas improved sewage systems on farms and in rural areas, as well as composting of slurry have an important potential as nutrient and energy sources, subject to thorough investigation of their possible usage, adequate treatment of potentially harmful substances and strict controlsfermentation of slurry is desirable in terms of plant cultivation and the environment;

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2114(INI)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Christa KLASS, Astrid LULLING, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas integrating certain energy crops into crop rotation systems and extensive livestock production could also significantly help to reduce input costs, NO2 losses to the atmosphere and nutrient leaching;deleted

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2114(INI)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Christa KLASS, Astrid LULLING, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas farm saved seeds can offer significant economic and environmental benefits, including cost reductions for farmers and less commodity dependence, thereby responding to specific agronomic conditions in farms; whereas improved infrastructure in this field can significantly reduce animal feed and seed production costs in the long term;deleted

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2114(INI)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Christa KLASS, Astrid LULLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses in particular the need for a European Food Prices Monitoring Tool which would deliver better transparency on input price development and allow farmgate prices to be linked to production costs;deleted

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2114(INI)

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for a substantial part of the next research framework programme to be earmarked for applied R&D in the efficient use and management of farm-inputs ~~management~~ in order to reduce input costs and improve agronomic practices, including involvement and improved training and capacity building for farmers and better collaboration between public and private science organisations and farmers organisations;

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2114(INI)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christa KLASS, Astrid LULLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Urges the Commission and the Member States to make sure that public support measures for biomass and agro-fuels – including biogas – do not contribute to ~~unsustainable~~ competition for resources between food and energy production, which must be organised sustainably, and do not provoke further increases in input costs and land rent;

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2114(INI)

Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christa KLASS, Astrid LULLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Repeats its call to include crop rotation and crop diversity (within a range of specified crops, including legumes in particular) in an EU-wide list of ‘greening’ measures to be rewarded within the CAP, given the positive effect the former have on climate change mitigation, soil and water quality and farmers’ finances (with significantly reduced use of fertilisers, soil improvers, plant protection products and pesticides which will reduce input costs for farmers);

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2114(INI)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Christa KLASS, Astrid LULLING

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to encourage – subject to thorough investigation of their possible usage, adequate treatment of potentially harmful substances and strict controls – the recycling of nutrients ~~from waste streams, especially liquid manure, organic waste and local sewage systems, which can help reduce input costs for fertilisers and which recapture nitrogen and phosphate~~(especially phosphate and nitrogen) from waste streams and, in particular, recycling waste as part of a cascade process after using it to produce thermal energy;

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2114(INI)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Christa KLASS, Astrid LULLING, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls in particular on the Commission to propose, in the ~~withdrawal of restrict~~context of the forthcoming revisions o~~n the use of farm saved seed as laid down in Article 14(1) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 on Community plant variety rights, in the context of the forthcoming revision of this regulation;~~f Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 on Community plant variety rights, that the obligations laid down in Article 14(1) and (2) thereof, which are an indispensable means of funding progress in the field of agricultural production, are also practicable, as it is only on this basis that the predominance of small- and medium-scale farming in the European agricultural sector can be maintained,

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2114(INI)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Christa KLASS, Astrid LULLING, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls, in the light of the upcoming Rio+20 global conference, for a new EU initiative on the conservation, sustainable use and quality marketing of agro- biodiversity, in order to ~~reduce seed purchase costs and~~ increase added value from farming;

2011/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Ville ITÄLÄ, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
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),

2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Ville ITÄLÄ, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
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;~~

2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Ville ITÄLÄ, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
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 premiums~~CAP; 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;

2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Considers that better natural resource protection is an central element in sustainable farming, which ~~should involve separate support for~~justifies special funding for the many environmental measures, which already go~~ing~~ beyond the requirements of Cross Compliance (CC), ~~which already entail many environmental measures, and being geared to multiannual applications, as a result of which greater~~notes in this regard the proposed greening of the CAP, which could play an important role in enhancing the environmental benefits ~~can be attained~~delivered by farmers;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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 existing~~through the implementation of comprehensive measures to supplement the targeted agri-environmental measures ~~or should~~under the second pillar, stresses that supplementary measures ~~which~~must 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 implem~~administrative 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 a~~nd additional application and administration procedures;~~ gri-environmental schemes within the existing structures, i.e. Pillar 2;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. ~~Regards this model as~~Considers that this approach should mak~~ing~~e a substantial contribution to the simplification of the direct payments system and ~~to the attainment of new compulsory environmental objectives; observes that~~not result in new administrative costs, in particular regarding additional controls, uand~~er 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 introduced~~legitimacy of the CAP from an agricultural, environmental and societal points of view;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. ~~Realises that resources from the first pillar (as for a top-up model) should be used to pay for~~Calls 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;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Ville ITÄLÄ, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
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;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Ville ITÄLÄ, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
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 legislature~~commenced by the EU legislators following a request from the Commission;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Ville ITÄLÄ, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
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;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Ville ITÄLÄ, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
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;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Ville ITÄLÄ, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
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 possible~~the current cofinancing rates should continue to apply after 2013;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/2051(INI)

Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Ville ITÄLÄ, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
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;

2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54

(54) As regards Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy the provisions will only be operational under cross compliance when all Member States will have fully implemented them in particular with clear obligations for farmers. According to the Directive the requirements at farm level will be applied at the latest by 1 January 2013.deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55

(55) As regards Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for Community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides the provisions will only be operational under cross compliance when all Member States will have fully implemented them in particular with clear obligations for farmers. According to the Directive the requirements at farm level will be progressively applied following a time schedule and in particular the general principles of integrated pest management will be applied at the latest by 1 January 2014.deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56

(56) According to Article 22 of Directive 2000/60/EC, Council Directive 80/68/EEC of 17 December 1979 on the protection of groundwater against pollution caused by certain dangerous substances shall be repealed on 23 December 2013. In order to maintain the rules under cross compliance related to protection of groundwater, it is appropriate, while awaiting the inclusion of Directive 2000/60/EC in cross compliance, to adjust the scope of cross-compliance and to define a standard of good agricultural and environmental condition encompassing the requirements of Articles 4 and 5 of the Directive 80/68/EEC.deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c

(c) to ~~ensure that remedial action is taken as regards~~take or coordinate, as the case may be, actions with a view to resolving any deficiencies of a common nature and ~~that~~keep the Commission ~~is kept~~ informed of the follow-up;

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d

(d) the sustainable development of the economical activity of the small farms as defined by the Member States and at least of the farms participating in the small farmers scheme referred to in Title V of Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxx[DP].deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)

(ba) the sustainable development of the economic activity of small farms, as defined by the Member States, and at least of the farms participating in the small farmers scheme referred to in Title V of Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxx[DP].

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 6

6. Before applying this Article, account shall first be taken of the amount authorised by the budget authority for the Reserve for crises in the agricultural sector referred to in point 14 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management.deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29

~~Without prejudice to the eligibility for support under Article 30(2)~~Save with regard to support provided for under Articles 29 and 30 of Regulation EAFRD/2012, which is without prejudice to payments under Chapter II of Title III of Regulation ~~(EU) No RD/xxx~~DP/2012, expenditure financed under the EAFRD shall not be subject of any other financing under the EU budget.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1

(1) Following the ~~Commission deci~~decision of the Commission approving the rural development programme, an initial prefinancing amount for the whole programming period shall be paid by the Commission to the Member State. This initial pre-financing amount shall represent 47% of the EAFRD contribution to the programme concerned. It may be split into a maximum of three instalments depending on budget availability. The first instalment shall represent 2% of the EAFRD contribution to the programme concerned.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Proposal for a regulation
Title 4 – chapter 2 – section 4

~~[...]~~deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2

~~2. Where the latest possible date of payment is not respected by the Member States, they shall pay the beneficiaries default interests, supported from the national budget.~~deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44

Article 44 Suspension of payments in case of late submission When sectoral agricultural legislation requires Member States to submit, within a specific period of time, information on the numbers of checks carried out and their outcome and the Member States overrun that period, the Commission may suspend the monthly payments referred to in Article 18 or the interim payments referred to in Article 35 for which the relevant statistical information has not been sent in time.deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point c

~~(c) rules on the payment by the Member States of default interests to the beneficiaries as referred to in Article 42(2).~~deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1

1. For any undue payment following the occurrence of irregularity or negligence, Member States shall request recovery from the beneficiary within ~~one year of the first indic~~24 months of a control report or similar document stationg that ~~such~~ an irregularity has taken place ~~and shall record~~being received by the paying agency or the body responsible for the recovery. At the same time the corresponding amounts shall be recorded in the debtors' ledger of the paying agency.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The introduction of new payment systems, which would in turn necessitate the introduction of new greening-related monitoring and penalty systems, must be avoided as this would create a need for additional, complicated administrative procedures and more red tape.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

~~The amount of the reduction of aid shall be graduated a~~According to the severity, extent, duration and reoccurrence of the non compliance found an, the administrative penalties imposed may go as far as total exclusion from one or several aid schemes or support measures for one or more calendar years.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 77 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) provisions required for a harmonised definition of the basis for calculation of aid~~, including rules on how to deal with certain cases where eligible areas contain landscape features or trees~~;

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 91 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

However, for forest areas this penalty shall not apply ~~in so far as no support is claimed for the concerned area in accordance with Articles 22(1)(a), 31 and 35 of Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxx[RD]~~.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 92 – paragraph 1

Article 91 shall apply to beneficiaries receiving direct payments under Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxx[DP]~~, payments under Articles 44 and 45 of Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxx[sCMO]~~ and the annual premia under Articles 22(1) (a), 29 and ~~(b), 29 to 32~~30, 31 in so far as it is concerned with agricultural areas, 342 and 354 of Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxx[RD].

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 92 – paragraph 2

However, Article 91 shall not apply to ~~beneficiaries participating in the small farmers scheme referred to in Title V of Regulation (EU) No xxx/xxx[DP] and to~~ the beneficiaries receiving aid under Article 29(9) of Regulation (EU) No RD/xxx.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 93 – paragraph 3

Directive 2000/60/EC of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy will be considered as being part of Annex II once this Directive is implemented by all Member States and the obligations directly applicable to farmers have been identified. In order to take account of those elements the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 111 for the purpose of amending the Annex II within 12 months starting at the moment the last Member State has notified the implementation of the Directive to the Commission.deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 93 – paragraph 4

Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a framework for Community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides will be considered as being part of Annex II once this Directive is implemented by all Member States and the obligations directly applicable to farmers have been identified. In order to take account of those elements the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 111 for the purpose of amending the Annex II within 12 months starting at the moment the last Member State has notified the implementation of the Directive to the Commission, including the obligations relating to integrated pest management.deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 102 – paragraph 3 a (new)

(3a) In so far as statistical analyses are required in order to notify the Commission pursuant to this article , the Commission shall furnish Member States with information required in each case with sufficient notice before the beginning of the period during which they are to be undertaken.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

A common monitoring and evaluation framework shall be established, which may not, however, lead to additional payment, monitoring or penalisation systems for the 'greening of the CAP', with a view to measuring the performance of the common agricultural policy. It shall include all instruments related to the monitoring and evaluation of common agricultural policy measures and in particular of the direct payments provided for in Regulation (EU) No DP/xxx, the market measures provided for in Regulation (EU) No CMO/xxx, the rural development measures provided for in Regulation (EU) No RD/xxx and of the application of the cross compliance provided for in this Regulation.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

The ~~impact~~performance of the common agricultural policy measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall be measured in relation to the following objectives:

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Soil and carbon stock" — GAEC 4

~~Minimum soil cover~~deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Soil and carbon stock" — GAEC 5

~~Minimum land management reflecting site specific conditions to limit erosion~~deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Soil and carbon stock" — GAEC 7

~~Protection of wetland and carbon rich soils including a ban of first ploughing~~deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Landscape, minimum level of maintenance" — GAEC 8

Retention of landscape features, including where appropriate, hedges, ponds, ditches, trees in line, in group or isolated, field margins and terraces, and including a ban on cutting hedges and trees during the bird breeding and rearing season and possible measures for avoiding invasive species and pestsdeleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Identification and registration of animals" — SMR 6

~~Council Directive 2008/71/EC of 15 July 2008 on identification and registration of pigs (OJ L 213, 8.8.2005, p. 31)~~deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Identification and registration of animals" — SMR 7

Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products (OJ L 204, 11.8.2000, p. 1)deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Hans-Peter MAYER

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II — Main Issue "Identification and registration of animals" — SMR 8

~~Council Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 of 17 December 2003 establishing a system for the identification and registration of ovine and caprine animals (OJ L 5, 9.1.2004, p. 8) 8) Articles 3, 4 and 5~~deleted

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 a

1. Member States shall ensure annual ex post publication of the beneficiaries of the EAGF and the EAFRD. The publication shall contain: (a) without prejudice to the first paragraph of Article 110b of this Regulation, the name of the beneficiaries, as follows: (i) the first name and the surname where the beneficiaries are natural persons; (ii) the full legal name as registered where the beneficiaries are legal persons with the autonomous legal personality pursuant to the legislation of the Member State concerned; (iii) the full name of the association as registered or otherwise officially recognised where the beneficiaries are associations without an own legal personality; (b) the municipality where the beneficiary resides or is registered and, where available, the postal code or the part thereof identifying the municipality; (c) the amounts of payment corresponding to each measure financed by the EAGF and the EAFRD received by each beneficiary in the financial year concerned; (d) the nature and the description of the measures financed by the EAGF or the EAFRD and under which the payment referred to in point (c) is awarded. The information referred to in the first subparagraph shall be made available on a single website per Member State. It shall remain available for two years from the date of the initial publication. 2. As regards the payments corresponding to the measures financed by the EAFRD as referred to in point (c) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 1, the amounts to be published shall correspond to the total public funding, including both the Union and the national contribution.Article 110a deleted Publication of beneficiaries

2012/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Hans-Peter MAYER

~~(i) the first name and the surname where the beneficiaries are natural persons;~~deleted

2012/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Where the amount of aid received in one year by a beneficiary is equal or less than the amount fixed by a Member State pursuant to Article 49 of Regulation (EU) No DP/xxx that Member State shall not publish the name of that beneficiary as provided for in point (a) of the first subparagraph of Article 110a(1) of this Regulation. The amounts fixed by a Member State pursuant to Article 49 of Regulation (EU) No DP/xxx and notified to the Commission under that Regulation shall be made public by the Commission in accordance with the rules adopted under Article 110d. Where the first paragraph of this Article applies the Member States shall publish the information referred to in points (b), (c) and (d) of the first subparagraph of Article 110a(1) and the beneficiary shall be identified by a code. Member States shall decide on the form of that code.Article 110b deleted Threshold

2012/10/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/0288(COD)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Hans-Peter MAYER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 c

Information of the beneficiaries Member States shall inform the beneficiaries that their data will be made public in accordance with Article 110a and that the data may be processed by auditing and investigating bodies of the Union and the Member States for the purpose of safeguarding the Union's financial interests. In accordance with the requirements of Directive 95/46/EC, where personal data is concerned, the Member States shall inform the beneficiaries of their rights under the data protection rules and of the procedures applicable for exercising those rights.Article 110 c deleted

2012/10/18
Committee: AGRI

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) The creation and development of new economic activity in the form of new farms, new areas of activity, new agriculture- or forestry-related businesses or new investments in non-agricultural activities and social agriculture is essential for the development and competitiveness of rural areas. A farm and business development measure should facilitate the initial establishment of young farmers and the structural adjustment of their holdings after initial setting up, diversification of farmers into non- agricultural activities and the setting up and development of non- agricultural SMEs in rural areas. The development of small ~~farm~~agriculture- and forestry-related businesses which are potentially economically viable should also be encouraged. In order to ensure the viability of new economic activities supported under this measure, support should be made conditional on the submission of a business plan. Support for business start up should cover only the initial period of the life of a business and not become operating aid. Therefore, where Member States opt to grant aid in instalments these should be for a period of no more than five years. In addition in order to encourage the restructuring of the agricultural sector, support in the form of annual payments should be provided for farmers participating in the small farmers scheme established by Title V of Regulation (EU) No DP/2012 who commit to transfer their entire holding and the corresponding payment entitlements to another farmer who does not participate in that scheme.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) SMEs are the backbone of the Union rural economy. FThe development of farms and non- agricultural small business ~~development~~es should be aimed at employment promotion and the setting up of quality jobs in rural areas, maintenance of already existing jobs, reduction of seasonality fluctuations in employment, ~~development~~networking of non- agricultural sectors ~~outside~~with agriculture and agricultural and food processing while fostering at the same time business integration and local inter-sectoral links. Projects integrating at the same time agriculture, rural tourism through promotion of sustainable and responsible tourism in rural areas, natural and cultural heritage should be encouraged as well as renewable energy investments.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) The development of local infrastructure and local basic services in rural areas, including leisure and culture, the renewal of villages and activities aimed at the restoration and upgrading of the cultural and natural heritage of villages and rural landscapes is an essential element of any effort to realise the growth potential and promote the sustainability ofand resource-efficiency of and a circular regional economy in rural areas. Support should therefore be granted to operations with this aim, including the access to Information and Communication Technologies and the development of fast and ultra-fast broadband. In line with these objectives, development of services and infrastructure leading to social inclusion and reversing trends of social and economic decline and depopulation of rural areas should be encouraged. In order to achieve the maximum effectiveness for such support, covered operations should be implemented in accordance with plans for the development of municipalities and their basic services, where such plans exist, elaborated by one or more rural communes. In order to ensure coherence with the Unions climate objectives the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission in respect of defining the types of renewable energy infrastructure that shall be eligible for support

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) Forestry is an integral part of rural development and support for sustainable and climate friendly land use should encompass forest area development and sustainable management of forests. During the 2007-2013 programming period a variety of measures covered different types of support for forestry investments and management. In the interest of simplification but also of allowing beneficiaries to design and realise integrated projects with increased added value, a single measure should cover all types of support for forestry investments and management. The information shall refer to: This measure should cover the extension and improvement of forest resources through afforestation of land and creation of agro-forestry systems combining extensive agriculture with forestry systems, restoration of forests damaged by fire or other natural disasters and relevant prevention measures, investments in new forestry technologies and in the processing and marketing of forest products, investments in the preparation and storage of forestry biomass and the sowing of areas with multiannual energy crops aimed at improving the economic, innovative and environmental performance of forest holders and non remunerative investments which improve ecosystem and climate resilience and environmental value of forest ecosystems. Support should avoid distorting competition and be market neutral. As a result limitations should be imposed relating to the size and legal status of beneficiaries. Preventive actions against fires should be in areas classified by Member States as medium or high fire risk. All preventive actions should be part of a forest protection plan. The occurrence of a natural disaster in the case of action for the restoration of damaged forest potential should be subject to the formal recognition by a scientific public organisation. The forestry measure should be adopted in the light of undertakings given by the Union and the Member States at international level, and be based on Member States’ national or sub-national forest plans or equivalent instruments which should take into account the commitments made in the Ministerial Conferences on the Protection of Forests in Europe. It should contribute to the implementation of the Union Forestry Strategy. In order to ensure that afforestation of agricultural land is in line with the aims of environmental policy the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the definition of certain minimum environmental requirements.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) Agri-environment-climate payments should continue to play a prominent role in supporting the sustainable development of rural areas and in responding to society's increasing demands for environmental services. They should ~~further encourage farmers and other land manag~~as a matter of priority encourage farmers to serve society as a whole by introducing or continuing to apply agricultural practices contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation and compatible with the protection and improvement of the environment, the landscape and its features, natural resources, the soil and genetic diversity. In this context the conservation of genetic resources in agriculture and the additional needs of farming systems that are of high nature value should be given specific attention. Payments should contribute to covering additional costs and income foregone resulting from the commitments undertaken ~~and should only cover commitments going beyond relevant mandatory standards and requirements, in accordance with the ‘polluter pays’ principl~~. Outputs from recognised agri- environment measures should count towards the fulfilment of greening commitments in the context of the direct payments scheme. In many situations the synergies resulting from commitments undertaken jointly by a group of farmers multiply the environmental and climate benefit. However, joint action brings additional transaction costs which should be compensated adequately. In order to ensure that farmers ~~and other land managers~~ are in a position to correctly implement the commitments they have undertaken, Member States should endeavour to provide them with the required skills and knowledge. Member States should maintain the level of efforts made during the 2007-2013 programming period and ~~have~~be required to spend a minimum of 25% of the total contribution from the EAFRD to each rural development programme for climate change mitigation and adaptation and land management, through the agri- environment-climate, organic farming and payments to areas facing natural or other specific constraints measures. Farm managers should be eligible for this measure as a matter of priority.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33

(33) In order to ensure efficient use of Union funds and equal treatment for farmers across the Union mountain areas and areas facing natural or other specific constraints should be defined in accordance with objective criteria. In the case of areas facing natural constraints these should be ~~bio-physical~~ criteria underpinned by robust scientific evidence. Transitional arrangements should be adopted in order to facilitate the phasing out of payments in areas that will no longer be considered as areas facing natural constraints as a result of the application of these criteria which take account of the specific characteristics and development objectives of the areas concerned and which are properly tailored to the scale of the inherent natural disadvantages those areas face and the type of production and/or the economic structure of holdings in a given area. The Commission should submit by 5 May 2010 a new proposal concerning the relevant criteria based on the European Parliament's resolution of 5 May 2010 (2009/2156(INI)).

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Georgios PAPASTAMKOS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1

The EAFRD shall contribute to the Europe 2020 Strategy by promoting sustainable rural development throughout the Union in a complementary manner to the other instruments of the common agricultural policy (hereinafter ‘CAP’), to cohesion policy and to the common fisheries policy. It shall contribute to a more territorially and environmentally balanced, climate- friendly and resilient and competitive, productive and innovative Union agricultural and forestry sector.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Georgios PAPASTAMKOS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Within the overall framework of the CAP, support for rural development, including activities across the whole of the food sector and in forestry, shall contribute to achieving the following objectives:

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1

(1) the competitiveness of agriculture; and forestry,

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 3

(3) a balanced territorial and regional economic development of rural areas.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part

(2) enhancing the competitiveness of all types of agriculture and forestry and the processing sector and enhancing farm viability, with a focus on the following areas:

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a

(a) facilitating restructuring of farms ~~facing major structural problems~~, notably farms with a low degree of market participation, market-oriented farms in particular sectors and farms in need of agricultural diversification;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b a (new)

(b a) improving competitiveness, including improving the efficiency and increasing the added value of the manufacturing sector;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING, Georgios PAPASTAMKOS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point e a (new)

(ea) facilitating the use of new research- based products and application methods and processes in the agri-food value chain to improve biodiversity management and resource-efficiency.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d

(d) short supply chains. and regional economic channels

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christa KLASS, Peter JAHR, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)

(d a) women in rural areas

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1

~~In addition to t~~The ex -ante conditionalities referred to in Annex IV~~, the general ex ante conditionalities established in Annex IV of Regulation (EU) No [CSF/2012] shall apply for the EAFRD~~ shall apply for the EAFRD if they are relevant and can be applied to the specific goals pursued with the programme’s priorities.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Support may also cover the short-term ~~farm management exchange and farm visit~~exchange of farmers and foresters and visits to agricultural and forestry undertakings.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4

4. Eligible costs under this measure shall be the costs of organising and delivering the knowledge transfer or information action. In the case of demonstration projects, support may also cover relevant investment costs. Costs for travel, accommodation and per diem expenses of participants as well as the cost of replacement of ~~farmer~~beneficiaries shall also be eligible.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Georgios PAPASTAMKOS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) help farmers, forest holders and SMEs in rural areas engaged in the agricultural and forestry sectors benefit from the use of advisory services for the improvement of the economic and environmental performance ~~as well as the climate friendliness and resilience~~, resource- and energy- efficiency, process optimisation and innovation of their holding, enterprise and/or investment;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

The authorities or bodies selected to provide advice shall have the appropriate resources in the form of regularly trained and qualified staff and advisory experience and reliability with respect to the fields they advise in. The beneficiaries shall be chosen through calls for proposals. The selection procedure shall be objective and be open to public ~~as well as to private bodies~~bodies and certified advisory agencies governed by public law.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Advice may also cover other issues linked to the economic, agricultural and environmental performance and the strengthening of the competitiveness of the agricultural and forestry holding.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Milan ZVER, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 6

6. Advice to agriculture- and forestry- related SMEs may cover issues linked to the economic and environmental performance of the enterprise.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Support under this measure shall cover new participation by farmers and producer and sectoral organisations in:

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii

ii) the scheme is open to all producers and producer organisations;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)

(da) contribute to the promotion of ‘green growth’, the safeguarding of jobs at all stages of the production chain and the development of new areas of activity for farms, for example in the tourism and social spheres,

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point a – point ii

ii) non-agricultural activities carried out by agricultural and forestry holdings and other micro- and small enterprises in rural areas;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iii

iii) the development of ~~small farm~~agricultural and forestry holdings;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Georgios PAPASTAMKOS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Support under paragraph 1(a)(ii) shall be granted to farmers or members of the farm household diversifying into non- agricultural activities and to non- agricultural micro- and small- enterprises ~~in rural areas~~which have links to agriculture and forestry in rural areas, including tourism.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3

Support under paragraph 1(a)(iii) shall be granted to farms which meet the criteria laid down in Title II, Chapter 1, Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No DP/2012 and small farms as defined by Member States.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4

Support under paragraph 1(b) shall be granted to non- agricultural micro- and small- enterprises which have links to agriculture and forestry in rural areas and to farmers or members of the farm household.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Member States shall define upper and lower thresholds for allowing agricultural holdings access to support under paragraphs 1(a)(i) and 1(a)(iii) respectively. The lower threshold for support under paragraph 1(a)(i) shall be significantly higher than the upper threshold for support under paragraph 1(a)(iii). Support shall be ~~limited~~given to holdings coming under the definitions of active farmer and micro- and small- enterprises.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) the drawing up and updating of plans for the development of municipalities in rural areas and their basic services, of services of agricultural and forestry value and of protection and management plans relating to NATURA 2000 sites and other areas of high nature value;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) investments in the creation, improvement or expansion of all types of small scale infrastructure, in~~cluding investments in renewable energy;~~ particular the development and expansion of the local marketing and value added chains, including investments in renewable energy, energy-efficient systems and sustainable resource and waste management systems;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) investments ~~by public bodies~~ in recreational infrastructure, small-scale tourist infrastructure linked to agriculture and forestry, regional marketing, tourist information and sign-posting of touristic sites;

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) investments in new forestry technologies and in processing, mobilising and marketing of forest products.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by the Member States in the programme, support shall be conditional on the submission of a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in line with sustainable forest management as defined by the Ministerial Conference on the Protection of Forests in Europe of 199334 (hereinafter "sustainable forest management").deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Milan ZVER, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1

1. Support under Article 22(1)(a) shall be granted only to private land-owners and tenants, municipalities and their associations and shall cover the costs of establishment and an annual premium per hectare to cover the costs of maintenance, including early and late cleanings, for a maximum period of ten years.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2

2. Both agricultural and non-agricultural land shall be eligible. Species planted shall be adapted to the environmental and climatic conditions of the area and answer to minimum environmental requirements. No support shall be granted for the planting of short rotation coppice, or Christmas trees. In the case orf fast-growing trees for energy production, support shall be granted only to cover setup costs. In areas where afforestation is made difficult by severe pedo-climatic conditions support may be provided for planting other perennial woody species such as shrubs or bushes suitable to the local conditions.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2

2. "Agro-forestry systems" shall mean land use systems in which trees are grown in combination with extensive agriculture on the same land. The maximum number of trees to be planted or preserved per hectare shall be determined by the Member States taking account of local pedo-climatic conditions, forestry species and the need to ensure agricultural use of the land.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Milan ZVER, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Support under Article 35(1)(c) shall be granted only to private, semi public and public forest owners, municipalities, state forests and their associations and shall cover the costs for:

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Eligible operations shall be consistent with the forest protection plan established by the Member States. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by the Member States in the programme, support shall be conditional on the submission of a forest management plan detailing the preventive objectives.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3

3. Support under paragraph 1(d) shall be subject to the formal recognition by the competent public authorities of Member States that a natural disaster has occurred ~~and~~or that ~~this disaster, or~~ measures adopted in accordance with Directive 2000/29/EC to eradicate or contain a plant disease or pest hasve caused the destruction of ~~at least 30% of the relevant forest potential. This percent~~forest potential for each unit defined by the Member States. The extent of the damage shall be determined on the basis of either the average existing forest potential in the three-year period immediately preceding the disaster or on the average of the five-year period immediately preceding the disaster, excluding the highest and the lowest entry.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Milan ZVER, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1

1. Support under Article 22(1)(d) shall be granted only to natural persons, private forest owners, private law and semi-public bodies, municipalities and their associations. In the case of state forests support may also be granted to bodies managing such forests, which are independent from the state budget.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1

1. Support under Article 22(1)(e) shall be granted only to private forest owners, municipalities and their associations and to SMEs for investments enhancing forestry potential or relating to processing and marketing adding value to forest products. In the territories of the Azores, Madeira, the Canary islands, the smaller Aegean islands within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 2019/93 and the French overseas departments support may also be granted to enterprises that are not SMEs.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Support under this measure shall be granted in order to facilitate the setting up and development of producer groups in the agriculture and forestry sectors for the purpose of:

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2

2. Agri-environment-climate payments shall be granted to farmers, groups of farmers or groups of farmers and other land-managers who undertake, on a voluntary basis, to carry out operations consisting of one or more agri- environment-climate commitments on agricultural land or land suitable for agriculture or who have invested in measures to adapt to climate change. Where duly justified to achieve environmental objectives, agri- environment-climate payments may be granted to ~~other land-managers or groups of other land-manag~~groups of farmers.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Georgios PAPASTAMKOS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3

3. Agri-environment-climate payments cover only those commitments going beyond the relevant mandatory standards established pursuant to Chapter I of Title VI of Regulation (EU) No HR/2012 ~~and other relevant obligations established under Chapter 2 of Title III of Regulation (EU) No DP/2012~~, relevant minimum requirements for fertiliser and plant protection products use as well as other relevant mandatory requirements established by national legislation. All such mandatory requirements shall be identified in the programme.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 5

5. Commitments under this measure shall be undertaken for a period of five to seven years. However, where necessary in order to achieve or maintain the environmental benefits sought, Member States may determine a longer or shorter period in their rural development programmes for particular types of commitments, including by means of providing for their annual extension after the termination of the initial period.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Georgios PAPASTAMKOS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 6

6. Payments shall be granted annually and shall compensate beneficiaries for all or part of the additional costs and income foregone resulting from the commitments made. Where necessary they may also cover transaction costs to a value of up to 20% of the premium paid for the agri- environment-climate commitments. Where commitments are undertaken by groups of farmers, the maximum level shall be 30%. Funding from the EAFRD may be used for measures which come under Chapter 2 of Title III of Regulation (EU) No DZ/2012.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 6

6. Payments shall be granted annually and shall compensate beneficiaries for all or part of the additional costs and income foregone resulting from the commitments made. Where necessary they may also cover transaction costs and costs as an incentive component to a value of up to 20% of the premium paid for the agri- environment-climate commitments. Where commitments are undertaken by groups of farmers, the maximum level shall be 30%.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Additional costs and income foregone shall be calculated in comparison to areas which are not affected by natural or other specific constraints~~, taking into account payments pursuant to Chapter 3 of Title III of Regulation (EU) No DP/2012~~.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Additional costs and income foregone shall be calculated in comparison to areas which are not affected by natural or other specific constraints, taking into account payments pursuant to Chapter 3 of Title III of Regulation (EU) No DP/2012. The payments shall be duly differentiated, taking into account: – the situation and development objectives peculiar to a region; – the severity of any permanent natural handicap affecting farming activities; – the type of production and, where appropriate, the economic structure of the holding.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3

3. Payments shall be fixed between the minimum and maximum amount laid down in Annex I. Compensatory allowances higher than the maximum amount may be granted provided that the average amount of all compensatory payments granted at the programming level concerned does not exceed the maximum amount.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 5

5. Member States may grant payments under this measure between 2014 and 2017 to farmers in areas which were eligible under Article 36(a)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 during the 2007-2013 programming period but are no longer eligible following the new delimitation referred to in Article 33(3). These payments shall be degressive starting in 2014 at 80% of the payment received in on average in the years 2007-2013 and ending in 2017 at 20%.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 6

6. In Member States which have not completed the delimitation referred to in Article 33(3) before 1 January 2014, paragraph 5 shall apply to farmers receiving payments in areas which were eligible for such payments during the 2007-2013 period. Following completion of the delimitation, farmers in areas that remain eligible shall receive full payments under this measure. Farmers in areas that are no longer eligible shall continue to receive payments in accordance with paragraph 5.deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

~~In order to be eligible for~~Member States may grant payments under Article 32, in areas, other than mountain areas, ~~shall be considered as~~which fac~~ing~~e significant natural constraints ~~if at least 66% of the UAA meets at least one of the criteria listed in Annex II at the threshold value indicated. Respect of this condition shall be ensu~~and which were eligible under Article 36(a)(ii) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 during the 2007-2013 programme planning period. The Commission shall submit by 31 December 2015 a new proposal concerning criteria for delimiting the areas affected by other constraints, based on the European Parliament's resolution of 5 May 2010 (2009/2156(INI)). The criteria for designating the areas other than mountain areas that face significant natural constraints should be underpinned by robust scientific evidence, should take account of the specific characteristics and development objectives of the regions and should be sufficiently tailored ato the ~~appropriate level of local administrative units ("LAU 2" level)~~scale of the inherent natural disadvantages they face and the type of production and/or the economic structure of holdings in a given region.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Milan ZVER, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Support under this measure shall be granted per hectare of forest exclusively to forest holders, municipalities and their associations who undertake, on a voluntary basis, to carry out operations consisting of one or more forest-environment commitments. Bodies managing state owned forests may also benefit from support provided they are independent from the state budget.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

For forest holdings above a certain threshold to be determined by Member States in their rural development programmes, support under paragraph 1 shall be conditional on the submission of a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in line with sustainable forest management.deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3

3. Payments shall compensate beneficiaries for all or part of the additional costs and income foregone resulting from the commitments made. Where necessary they may also cover transaction costs to a value of up to 20 % of the premium paid for the forest-environment commitments. Support shall be limited to the maximum amount laid down in Annex I. In clearly justified cases, support for agreements not to use trees or stands of trees may also be granted in the form of one-off payments or flat-rate amounts per project, calculated on the basis of the relevant additional costs and loss of income.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) co-operation approaches among different actors in the Union agriculture and food chain, forestry sector and among other actors that contribute to achieving the objectives and priorities of rural development policy, including inter-branch organisations; , producer groups and cooperatives;

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

(ba) cooperation among agri-food chain actors for the development of more efficient and productive farming practices, products, processes and technologies in the agriculture, food and forestry sectors and for the reduction of waste;

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point j a (new)

(ja) the development and/or marketing of tourism services relating to rural tourism.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2 – point j b (new)

(jb) development of ‘social agriculture’ projects (following the example of Green Care).

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

(ca) The purchase of advice to facilitate sustainable and economically viable production methods.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 2

~~2. A sum of EUR 30 million shall be withdrawn from the allocation referred to in paragraph 1 and used to finance the prize for innovative, local cooperation referred to in Article 56.~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) increase the involvement of agricultural, forestry and other rural stakeholders in the implementation of rural development;

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1

1. An EIP network shall be put in place to support the EIP for agricultural productivity and sustainability referred to in Article 61, in accordance with Article 51(1). It shall enable the networking of operational groups, in rural areas, producer groups, agricultural advisory services and researchers

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) provide a help desk function and provide information to key actors, particularly primary producers, their suppliers and those they supply, concerning the EIP;

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) animate discussions at the level of the programme inand at implementation level with a view tof encouraging the setting up of local operational groups;

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – point d

(d) collect, consolidate and disseminate ~~good practice~~research findings and new technologies relevant to innovation;

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – point e

~~(e) organise conferences and workshops and disseminate information in the field of the EIP.~~deleted

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) help to sustainably increase productivity of European agriculture and deliver a steady supply of food, feed and biomaterials, both existing and new ones;

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Member States must make available a minimum of 25% of the total EAFRD contribution to each rural development programme for the measures referred to in Articles 29 and 30.

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 4 – point b

(b) past performance with reference to the period 2007-2013.

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

The rural development programmes shall establish once, prior to the start of the programme period, a single EAFRD contribution rate applicable to all measures. Where applicable, a separate EAFRD contribution rate shall be established for less developed regions, and for outermost regions and the smaller Aegean islands within the meaning of Regulation (EEC) No 2019/93. The maximum EAFRD contribution rate shall be:

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 4 – point b

(b) 1050% for operations receiving funding under Article 66.

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Funds transferred to the EAFRD in application of Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No DP/2012 shall be subject to the single EAFRD contribution rate referred to in paragraph 3.

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. The national contribution to the eligible public expenditure may be replaced and/or supplemented by private contributions. This shall not apply in respect of measures under Articles 16, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35 and 36, Chapter IV of Title III, Title IV or Articles 61, 62 and 63.

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Milan ZVER, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Albert DESS, Astrid LULLING

Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) providing the Commission, on a ~~quarte~~yearly basis, with relevant indicator data on operations selected for funding, including ~~key characteristics of the beneficiary as well as the project~~information about output indicators and financial indicators;

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christa KLASS, Hans-Peter MAYER, Manfred WEBER, Martin KASTLER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29

(29) The aid scheme for hop producer organisations is only used in one Member State. In order to create flexibility and to harmonise the approach in this sector with the other sectors, the aid scheme should be discontinued, with the possibility to support the producer organisations under rural development measures.deleted

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 84 a (new)

(84a) In order to enable sugar beet producers to complete their adjustment to the far-reaching reform carried out in 2006 and continue the efforts they have made since then to improve competitiveness, the current quota system should be extended at least until the end of the 2019/2020 marketing year. However, the serious and recurring tensions on the European sugar market call for the introduction of a mechanism on the basis of which non-quota sugar is brought within the quota, automatically and for as long as necessary, in order to maintain the structural balance on the market.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 84 b (new)

(84b) The Commission should also submit to the European Parliament and the Council by 1 July 2018 a report on suitable arrangements for the period after the possible discontinuation of the current quota system and on the future of the sector after 2020 which also sets out proposals as to how the sector as a whole can prepare itself for the post-2020 period.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 146

(146) Pursuant to Regulation (EU) No [COM(2010)799] several sectoral measures, including on milk quotas~~, sugar quotas and other sugar measures~~ and the restrictions on the planting of vines, as well as certain state aids, will expire within a reasonable period following the entry in force of this Regulation. After the repeal of Regulation (EU) No [COM(2010)799], the relevant provisions should continue to apply until the end of the schemes concerned.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)

The export refunds governed by this Chapter shall apply only in conjunction with Article 154 of this Regulation.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) butter and skimmed milk powder, from 1 March to 31 ~~August~~December.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b

b) for butter, 3250 000 tonnes;

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2

Products may be disposed of by making them available for the scheme for food distribution to the most deprived in the Union set out in Regulation (EU) No […] if that scheme so provides. In that case, the accounting value of such products shall be at the level of the relevant fixed public intervention price referred to in Article 14(2).deleted

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)

ha) potato starch;

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 a (new)

Article 17a Conditions for granting aid for white sugar The Commission may, by means of implementing acts, taking into account the market situation, decide to grant aid for the storage of white sugar to undertakings which are allocated a sugar quota, if the average price recorded in the Union for white sugar is below 115% of the reference price during a representative period, and is likely to remain at that level.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point e

e) the conditions for the sale or disposal of products bought-in under public intervention, in particular, as appropriate, regarding selling prices, the conditions for removal from storage, the subsequent use or destination of products released~~, including procedures relating to products made available for use in the scheme for food distribution to the most deprived in the Union, including transfers between Member St~~ where appropriates;

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christa KLASS, Hans-Peter MAYER, Martin KASTLER, Manfred WEBER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 a (new)

Article 29a Aid in the hops sector 1. The Community shall finance a payment to producer organisations in the hops sector recognised under Article 106 to fund measures to achieve the aims referred to in that Article. 2. The annual Community financing for the payment to producer organisations shall be EUR 2 277 000 for Germany. 3. The Commission shall adopt implementing provisions for this Section.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christa KLASS, Hans-Peter MAYER, Manfred WEBER, Martin KASTLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 a (new)

Article 59a Certification for hops 1. Products of the hops sector, harvested or prepared within the Community, shall be subject to a certification procedure. 2. Certificates may be issued only for products having the minimum quality characteristics appropriate to a specific stage of marketing. In the case of hop powder, hop powder with higher lupulin content, extract of hops and mixed hop products, the certificate may only be issued if the alpha acid content of these products is not lower than that of the hops from which they have been prepared. 3. The certificates shall indicate at least: (a) the place(s) of production of the hops; (b) the year(s) of harvesting; (c) the variety or varieties. 4. Products of the hops sector may be marketed or exported only if a certificate as referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 has been issued. In the case of imported products of the hops sector, the attestation provided for in Article 128a(2) shall be deemed to be equivalent to the certificate. 5. Measures derogating from paragraph 4 may be adopted by the Commission: (a) in order to satisfy the trade requirements of certain third countries; or (b) for products intended for special uses. The measures referred to in the first subparagraph shall: (a) not prejudice the normal marketing of products for which the certificate has been issued; (b) be accompanied by guarantees intended to avoid any confusion with those products.

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 101 d (new)

Article 101 d Withdrawal of sugar 1. Given the need to remedy situations of surplus based on the forecast supply balance, and taking into account the commitments of the Union resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty, the Commission may, by means of implementing acts, decide to withdraw from the market, for a given marketing year, those quantities of sugar or isoglucose or inulin sugar produced under quotas which exceed the threshold calculated in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article. In that case, white sugar and raw sugar imports from all sources shall be withdrawn from the market by the same proportion for the marketing year concerned. 2. The withdrawal threshold referred to in paragraph 1 shall be calculated, for each undertaking holding a quota, by multiplying its quota by a coefficient, which may be fixed by the Commission by means of implementing acts adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 162(2) no later than 28 February of the previous marketing year, on the basis of expected market trends. On the basis of updated market trends, the Commission may, by 31 October of the marketing year concerned, by means of implementing acts, decide either to adjust or, in the case where no coefficient has been fixed pursuant to the first subparagraph, to fix a coefficient. 3. Each undertaking provided with a quota or an import licence shall store at its own expense until the beginning of the following marketing year the sugar produced under quota beyond the threshold calculated in accordance with paragraph 2. The sugar, isoglucose or inulin syrup quantities withdrawn during a marketing year shall be treated as the first quantities produced under quota for the following marketing year. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, taking into account the expected sugar market trends, the Commission may, by means of implementing acts, decide to consider, for the current and/or the following marketing year, all or part of the withdrawn sugar, isoglucose or inulin syrup as: (a) surplus sugar, isoglucose or inulin syrup available to become industrial sugar, industrial isoglucose or industrial inulin syrup; or (b) temporary quota production of which a part may be reserved for export respecting the commitments of the Union resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty. 4. If sugar supply in the Union is inadequate, the Commission may, by means of implementing acts, decide that a certain quantity of withdrawn sugar, isoglucose or inulin syrup may be sold on the Union market before the end of the period of withdrawal. 5. In the case where withdrawn sugar is treated as the first sugar production of the following marketing year, the minimum price of that marketing year shall be paid to beet growers. In the case where withdrawn sugar becomes industrial sugar or is exported in accordance with points (a) and (b) of paragraph 3 of this Article, the requirements of Article 101 (x) on the minimum price shall not apply. In the case where withdrawn sugar is sold on the Union market before the end of the period of withdrawal in accordance with paragraph 4, the minimum price of the ongoing marketing year shall be paid to beet growers. 6. Implementing acts pursuant to this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 162(2).

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 101 k (new)

Article 101 k National quota reallocation A Member State may reduce or reduce and reallocate the sugar or isoglucose or inulin syrup quota allocated to an undertaking established on its territory: a) by up to 10% However, this possibility is excluded if a company fully produced its quota during the previous marketing years or b) in accordance with the rules to be laid down in Annex (x) In doing so, the Member States shall apply objective and non-discriminatory criteria.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 101 l (new)

Article 101 l Out-of-quota production 1. The sugar, isoglucose or inulin syrup produced during a marketing year in excess of the quota referred to in Article 101 (x)may be: a) used for the processing of certain products as referred to in Article 101 (x); b) carried forward to the quota production of the next marketing year, in accordance with Article 101 (x) ; c) used for the specific supply regime for the outermost regions, in accordance with [Chapter III of Regulation [ex (EC) No 247/2006] of the European Parliament and of the Council; or d) exported within the quantitative limit fixed by the Commission by means of implementing acts, respecting the commitments resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty. (e) automatically released onto the internal market on the basis of the forecast supply balance to preserve the structural balance of the market, in quantities and subject to arrangements determined by the Commission. The measures referred to in this Article shall be implemented before any activation of the measures to prevent market disturbance referred to in Article 154(1). Other quantities shall be subject to the surplus levy referred to in Article 101 (x). 2. Implementing acts pursuant to this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 162(2).

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Member States ~~shall~~may recognise, on request, producer organisations, which:

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) are constituted by ~~produc~~farmers in a~~ny of the~~ specific sectors listed in Article 1(2);

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) are formed on the initiative of the ~~produc~~farmers;

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Hans-Peter MAYER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) do not ~~hold a dominant position on a given market unless this is necessary in pursuance of the objectives of Article 39 of the Treaty~~exclude competition.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)

(da) market products not covered by Annex I to the Treaty, provided that the proportion of products sold which are not covered by Annex I does not exceed 49 % of the total volume marketed, without this leading to the forfeiture of official status as a producer organisation in the recognised agricultural sector.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 107 – paragraph 1

Member States ~~shall~~may recognise, on request, associations of producer organisations in ~~any of the~~the specific sectors listed in Article 1(2) which are formed on the initiative of recognised producer organisations.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 107 – paragraph 2

~~Subject to the rules adopted pursuant to Article 114, a~~Associations of producer organisations may carry out any of the ~~activities or function~~objectives of producer organisations as set out in Article 106.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Member States ~~shall~~may recognise, on request, interbranch organisations in a~~ny of the~~ specific sectors listed in Article 1(2) which:

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) are constituted of representatives of economic activities linked to the production of, ~~trade in, and/or processing of~~and at least one of the following stages of the supply chain as processing of or trade in, including distribution of, products in ~~one or more~~a specific sectors;

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) cover one or more regions in the Union, thereby representing a significant share of the economic activities in the sector;

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i

(i) improving knowledge and the transparency of production and the market, ~~including by publication of statistical data on the prices, volumes and duration of contracts which have been previously concluded, and~~ by providing analyses of potential future market developments at regional or national level;

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iii

~~(iii) drawing up standard forms of contract compatible with Union rules;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 2

2. For interbranch organisations in the olive oil and table olive and tobacco sectors, the specific aim referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1 may also include at least one of the following objectives: (a) concentrating and co-ordinating supply and marketing of the produce of the members; (b) adapting production and processing jointly to the requirements of the market and improving the product; (c) promoting the rationalisation and improvement of production and processing.deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 108 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

(ca) do not themselves engage in the production, processing or trade in of products of the specific sector.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 109 – paragraph 1

For the purposes of this Regulation, operator organisations in the olive oil and table olives sector shall comprise recognised producer organisations, recognised interbranch organisations or recognised organisations of other operators or their associations.deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 109 a (new)

Article 109a Recognition 1. Member States shall only recognize producer organisations, associations of producer organisations and interbranch organisations which: (a) fulfil the conditions of this Chapter; (b) are legal entities or clearly defined parts of legal entities; (c) have a statute which shows compliance with the conditions of this Chapter; and (d) in the case of producer organisations and associations of producer organisations: (i) have a minimum number of members and/or cover a minimum volume of marketable production, to be laid down by the Member States, in the sector where the organisation or association operates; (ii) carrying out their activities properly both over time and in terms of effectiveness and concentration of supply. 2. In order to adapt the recognition criteria for organisations and associations laid down in this Chapter to specific structures in the Member States, Member States may adopt supplementary criteria in all sectors or in a specific sector, thereby not affecting the sound operation of the market organisation. 3. Organisations and associations which have been recognised by Member States before [x] and which fulfil the conditions laid down in this Chapter are considered to be recognised pursuant to this Chapter. 4. Organisations and associations which have been recognised by Member States before [x] and which do not fulfil the conditions laid down in this Chapter may continue to exercise their activities until [x + one year].

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 1

1. In cases where a recognised producer organisation, a recognised association of producer organisations or a recognised interbranch organisation in the fruit and vegetables sector or a recognised interbranch in the tobacco sector in the fruit and vegetables sector operating in a specific economic area or economic areas of a Member State is considered to be representative of the production of or trade in or processing of a given product, the Member State concerned may, at the request of that organisation, make binding for a limited period of time some of the agreements, decisions or concerted practices agreed on within that organisation on other operators acting in the economic area or areas in question, whether individuals or groups and not belonging to the organisation or association.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

The rules for which extension to other operators may be requested as provided in paragraph 1 shall ~~have one of the following aims:~~comply with the of the organisation or association as set out in this Chapter.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point a

~~(a) production and market reporting;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b

~~(b) stricter production rules than those laid down in Union or national rules;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c

~~(c) drawing up of standard contracts which are compatible with Union rules;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point d

~~(d) rules on marketing;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point e

~~(e) rules on protecting the environment;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point f

~~(f) measures to promote and exploit the potential of products;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point g

~~(g) measures to protect organic farming as well as designations of origin, quality labels and geographical indications;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point h

~~(h) research to add value to the products, in particular through new uses which do not pose a threat to public health;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point i

~~(i) studies to improve the quality of products;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point j

~~(j) research, in particular into methods of cultivation permitting reduced use of plant protection or animal health products and guaranteeing conservation of the soil and the environment;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point k

~~(k) definition of minimum qualities and definition of minimum standards of packing and presentation;~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point l

~~(l) use of certified seed and monitoring of product quality.~~deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 110 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Th~~ose~~e extended rules shall not cause any damage to other operators in the Member State concerned or the Union and shall not have any of the effects listed in Article 145(4) or be otherwise incompatible with Union or national rules in force.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 111 – paragraph 1

Where rules of a recognised producer organisation, a recognised association of producer organisations or a recognised interbranch organisation are extended under Article 110 and the activities covered by those rules are in the general economic interest of persons whose activities relate to the products concerned, the Member State which has granted recognition may decide that individuals or groups which are not members of the organisation but which benefit from those activities shall pay the organisation all or part of the financial contributions paid by its members to the extent that such contributions are intended to cover costs ~~directly incurred as a result~~ of pursuing the activities in question.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 113

Marketing rules to improve and stabilise the operation of the common market in In order to improve and stabilise the operation of the common market in wines, including the grapes, musts and wines from which they derive, producer Member States may lay down marketing rules to regulate supply, particularly by way of decisions taken by the interbranch organisations recognised under Article 108. Such rules shall be proportionate to the objective pursued and shall not: (a) relate to any transaction after the first marketing of the produce concerned; (b) allow for price fixing, including where prices are set for guidance or recommendation; (c) render unavailable an excessive proportion of the vintage that would otherwise be available; (d) provide scope for refusing to issue the national and Union certificates required for the circulation and marketing of wines where such marketing is in accordance with those rules.Article 113 deleted wines

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christa KLASS, Hans-Peter MAYER, Manfred WEBER, Martin KASTLER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 129 a (new)

Article 129a Imports of hops 1. Products of the hops sector may be imported from third countries only if their quality standards are at least equivalent to those applicable to similar products harvested in the Community or made from such products. 2. Products shall be regarded as meeting the quality standards referred to in paragraph 1 if they are accompanied by an attestation issued by the authorities of the country of origin and recognised as equivalent to the certificate referred to in Article 59a. In the case of hop powder, hop powder with higher lupulin content, extract of hops and mixed hop products, the attestation shall be recognised as being equivalent to the certificate only if the alpha acid content of these products is not lower than that of the hops from which they have been prepared. The equivalence of the attestations shall be verified in accordance with detailed rules adopted by the Commission.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 133 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

(1) The export refunds governed by this Chapter shall apply only in conjunction with Article 154 of this Regulation. To the extent necessary to enable exports on the basis of world market quotations or prices and within the limits resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty, the difference between those quotations or prices and prices in the Union may be covered by export refunds for:

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 154 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Taking into account the need to react efficiently and effectively against ~~threats of~~ market disturbance caused by significant price rises or falls on internal or external markets ~~or any other factors affecting the market~~, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 160 to take the necessary measures for the sector concerned, respecting any obligations resulting from agreements concluded in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 154 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Where in the cases of ~~threats of~~ market disturbances referred to in the first subparagraph, imperative grounds of urgency so require, the procedure provided for in Article 161 of this Regulation shall apply to delegated acts adopted pursuant to this paragraph.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 163 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

However, the following provisions of Regulation (~~EU) No [COM(2010)799]~~CE) 1234/2007 shall continue to apply:

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 163 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a

(a) as regards the sugar sector, ~~Title I of Part II, Articles 248, 260 to 262 and Part II of Annex III~~all provisions in Regulation (EU) 1234/2007 and all related implementing regulations until the end of the 2014/2015 marketing year for sugar on 30 September 2015;

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Anja WEISGERBER, Hans-Peter MAYER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 165 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

However, Articles 7, 16 and 101 and Annex III, as regards the sugar sector, shall ~~only~~ apply a~~fter~~t least until the end of the 20149/201520 marketing year for sugar on 1 October 201520.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part XXI – product line (new)

Raw alcohol with an alcohol content of less than 96% by volume which retains the organoleptic qualities associated with the basic raw materials used in its production shall be treated as ethyl alcohol within the meaning of point 1 provided that the raw alcohol in question is, after further processing, marketed or used as ethyl alcohol within the meaning of point 1.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation and to avoid unfair competition or discrimination between farmers, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in respect of: the fixation of the annual national ceiling for the basic payment scheme; the adoption of rules on applications for allocation of payment entitlements; the adoption of measures regarding the reversion of non- activated payment entitlements to the national reserve; the adoption of requirements related to the notification of transfer of payment entitlements to the national authorities and the deadlines within which such notification are to take place; the setting out of the annual ceiling for the payment for agricultural practisces beneficial for the climate and the environment; the setting out of the annual ceiling for ~~the~~a voluntary payment for areas with natural constraints; the setting out of the annual ceiling for ~~the~~a voluntary payment for young farmers; the setting out of the annual ceilings for the voluntary coupled support; the adoption of rules on the procedure for the assessment and approval of decisions in the framework of the voluntary coupled support; the adoption of rules on the procedure for the assessment and approval of decisions in the framework of the voluntary coupled support; the adoption of rules on the procedure of the authorisation and the notifications to the producers related to the authorisation of land and varieties for the purposes of ~~the~~a temporary crop specific payment for cotton; the provision for rules on the calculation of the reduction of the amount of the crop specific payment for cotton; the adoption of rules concerning general notification requirements. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers.

2012/07/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Astrid LULLING, Sandra KALNIETE, Rareș-Lucian NICULESCU, Jan BŘEZINA, Hermann WINKLER, Werner KUHN, Horst SCHNELLHARDT, Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH, Joachim ZELLER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) The distribution of direct income support among farmers is characterised by the allocation of disproportionate amounts of payments to a rather small number of large beneficiaries. Due to economies of size, larger beneficiaries do not require the same level of unitary support for the objective of income support to be efficiently achieved. Moreover, the potential to adapt makes it easier for larger beneficiaries to operate with lower levels of unitary support. It is therefore fair to introduce a system for large beneficiaries where the support level is gradually reduced and ultimately capped to improve the distribution of payments between farmers. Such system should however take into account salaried labour intensity to avoid disproportionate effects on large farms with high employment numbers. Those maximum levels should not apply to payments granted to agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment since the beneficial objectives they pursue could be diminished as a result. In order to make capping effective, Member States should establish some criteria in order to avoid abusive operations by farmers seeking to evade its effects. The proceeds of the reduction and capping of payments to large beneficiaries should remain in the Member States where they were generated and should be used for financing projects with a significant contribution to innovation under Regulation (EU) No […] of the European Parliament and of the Council of….on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) [RDR].deleted

2012/07/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Astrid LULLING, Sandra KALNIETE, Rareș-Lucian NICULESCU, Jan BŘEZINA, Hermann WINKLER, Werner KUHN, Horst SCHNELLHARDT, Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH, Joachim ZELLER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) In order to facilitate the implementation of capping, notably with regard to the procedures for granting direct payments to farmers and the corresponding transfers to rural development, net ceilings should be determined for each Member State to limit the payments to be made to farmers following the application of capping. To take into account the specificities of CAP support granted in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 247/2006 of 30 January 2006 laying down specific measures for agriculture in the outermost regions of the Union and Council Regulation (EC) No 1405/2006 of 18 September 2006 laying down specific measures for agriculture in favour of the smaller Aegean islands and amending Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, and the fact that these direct payments are not subject to capping, the net ceiling for the Member States concerned should not include those direct payments.deleted

2012/07/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) Due to the successive integration of various sectors into the single payment scheme and the ensuing period of adjustment granted to farmers, it has become increasingly difficult to justify the presence of significant individual differences in the level of support per hectare resulting from use of historical references. Therefore direct income support should be more equitably distributed between Member States, by reducing the link to historical references and having regard to the overall context of the Union budget. To ensure a more equal distribution of direct support, while taking account of the differences that still exist in wage levels and input costs, the levels of direct support per hectare should be progressively adjusted. Member States with direct payments below the level of 90 % of the average should close one third of the gap between their current level and this level. ~~This convergence should be financed proportionally by all Member States with direct payments above the Union average~~Without prejudice to this narrowing of the gap, the level of direct payments in Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia should reach at least that of the Member State which among the rest, these three countries excepted, has the lowest payment level. This convergence should be financed proportionally by all Member States with direct payments above the Union average. The difference in direct payment levels per hectare within any Member State should not be greater than the difference per hectare between Member States. In addition, all payment entitlements activated in 2019 in a Member State or in a region should have a uniform unit value following a convergence towards this value that should take place during the transition period in linear steps. However, in order to avoid disruptive financial consequences for farmers, Member States having used the single payment scheme, and in particular the historical model, should be allowed to partially take historical factors into account when calculating the value of payment entitlements in the first year of application of the new scheme. The debate on the next Multiannual Financial Framework for the period starting in 2021 should also focus on the objective of complete convergence through the equal distribution of direct support across the European Union during that period.

2012/07/18
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35

(35) As regards support to the cotton sector, Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 considered necessary that part of it ~~cont~~be linuked ~~to be linked~~for the last time to the cultivation of cotton through a crop specific payment per eligible hectare to ensure against any risk of disruption to production in the cotton producing regions, taking into account all factors that influence this choice. This choice should be maintained temporarily in accordance with the objectives set out in Protocol No 4 on cotton attached to the 1979 Act of Accession. In order to make this measure more relevant in future to the challenges of the CAP, an evaluation of the necessity and effectiveness of the crop specific payment for cotton should be carried out.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38

(38) A simple and specific scheme for small farmers should be put in place in order to reduce the administrative costs linked to the management and control of direct support. For that purpose, a lump- sum payment replacing all direct payments should be established. Rules seeking simplification of formalities should be introduced by reducing, amongst others, the obligations imposed on small farmers such as those related to the application for support, and to agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment, ~~to cross-compliance and to controls as laid down in Regulation (EU) No […] [HZR]~~ without endangering the achievement of the overall objectives of the reform, it being understood that cross- compliance and Union legislation as referred to in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No […...] [HZR] applies to small farmers. The objective of that scheme should be to support the existing agricultural structure of small farms in the Union without countering the development towards more competitive structures. For that reason, access to the scheme should be limited to existing holdings.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii

(ii) an additional payment for farmers observing agricultural practisces beneficial for the climate and the environment;

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iv

(iv) a voluntary payment for young farmers who commence their agricultural activity;

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point vi

(vi) a temporary crop specific payment for cotton;

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b – point vii

(vii) a voluntary simplified scheme for small farmers;

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. No direct payments shall be granted to natural or legal persons, or to groups of natural or legal persons~~, where one of the following applies:~~ if they use less than half their agricultural land for agricultural activities and do not undertake on the areas not used for such activities any of the types of annual minimum activity to be established by the Member States. After having duly notified the Commission, the Member States may decide to exclude at the outset certain types of land use not comprising the exercise of an agricultural activity from eligibility for direct payments.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a

~~(a) the annual amount of direct payments is less than 5 % of the total receipts they obtained from non-agricultural activities in the most recent fiscal year; or~~deleted

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) their agricultural areas are mainly areas naturally kept in a state suitable for grazing or cultivation and they do not carry out on those areas the minimum activity established by Member States in accordance with Article 4(1)(c).deleted

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3

~~3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt~~ delegated acts in accordance with Article 55 concerning: (a) criteria to establish the amount of direct payments relevant for the purpose of paragraphs 1 and 2, in particular in the first year of allocation of payment entitlements where the value of the payment entitlements is not yet definitively established as well as for new farmers; (b) exceptions from the rule that the receipts during the most recent fiscal year are to be taken into account where those figures are not available; and (c) criteria to establish when a farmer's agricultural area is to be considered as mainly areas naturally kept in a state suitable for grazing or cultivation.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Astrid LULLING, Sandra KALNIETE, Rareș-Lucian NICULESCU, Jan BŘEZINA, Hermann WINKLER, Werner KUHN, Horst SCHNELLHARDT, Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH, Joachim ZELLER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11

Article 11 Progressive reduction and capping of the payment 1. The amount of direct payments to be granted to a farmer under this Regulation in a given calendar year shall be reduced as follows: – by 20 % for the tranche of more than EUR 150 000 and up to EUR 200 000; – by 40 % for the tranche of more than EUR 200 000 and up to EUR 250 000; – by 70 % for the tranche of more than EUR 250 000 and up to EUR 300 000; – by 100 % for the tranche of more than EUR 300 000. 2. The amount referred to in paragraph 1 shall be calculated by subtracting the salaries effectively paid and declared by the farmer in the previous year, including taxes and social contributions related to employment, from the total amount of direct payments initially due to the farmer without taking into account the payments to be granted pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title III of this Regulation. 3. Member States shall ensure that no payment is made to farmers for whom it is established that, as from the date of publication of the Commission proposal for this Regulation, they artificially created the conditions to avoid the effects of this Article.deleted

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. any funds from progressive degression or capping shall remain in the region or Member State where they were obtained and shall be used for measures under the second pillar;

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

2. Before 1 August 2013, ~~Bulgaria, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and the United-Kingdom~~the Member States may decide to make available as direct payments under this Regulation up to 5 % of the amount allocated to support for measures under rural development programming financed under the EAFRD in the period 2015-2020 as specified under Regulation (EU) No […] [RDR], on condition that a minimum amount of 20 % of the national ceiling remains available in the EAFRD. As a result, the corresponding amount shall no longer be available for support measures under rural development programming.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Member States operating the single payment scheme on the basis of a regional model in accordance with Article 59 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 may decide against the application of Article 18(2).

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1

1. Member States ~~may~~shall decide, before 1 August 2013, to apply the basic payment scheme at regional level. ~~In that case t~~They shall define the regions in accordance with objective and non-discriminatory criteria such as their agronomic and economic characteristics and their regional agricultural potential, or their institutional or administrative structure.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL, Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1

1. Farmers entitled to a payment under the basic payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1 shall observe on their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2) the following agricultural practises beneficial for the climate and the environment: Member States shall grant an annual payment for agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment to farmers who are entitled to a payment under the basic payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1 if they observe on their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2) one of the following practices: (a) to use at least 10 % of the national ceiling for direct payments by Member States to finance targeted agri- environmental measures under the second pillar: over and above the existing level and 100 % EU-financed; (b)(1) ‘farmers who are green, by definition.’ Member States may select from the following criteria: - organic farming - 100 % certified sustainable agriculture, - > 50 % grassland or < 15 ha or 1/3 of the average farm size in the Member States (which may select one of the options), arable land, - farms with at least 20 % of their utilised agricultural area involved in specific agri- environmental programmes, - farms with at least 20 % of their utilised agricultural area in Natura 2000 areas, - farms which have at least 20 % of their eligible area as forest on plots no larger than 15 ha. (b)(2) Others / ‘farmers who are not green, by definition’ Member States must select at least three of the following greening measures, which will be binding for farmers. As an alternative, Member States may permit farmers to select three greening measures from a longer list to be determined by the Member States. The basic payment will be independent of the 15 % greening payment. The list should include: - ecological priority areas; areas included in the 5 % ecological priority areas: arable areas of a farm which are situated in Natura 2000 areas or other protected areas. Areas of farmland of a farm which benefit from specific agri-environmental programmes. Areas where nitrate fertilisation is not practised. Areas of farmland with landscape features (e.g. afforested areas, hedges, terraces), buffer strips, uncultivated areas (land left fallow). Areas with permanent crops should be exempt from the requirements. In order to increase the benefits to the environment and biodiversity of the ecological priority area measures, Member States may decide on a collective approach whereby the requirements are satisfied by a group of farmers at regional level. - crop diversification, - protection of permanent grassland, - 2 % of ecological priority areas on grassland - land cover/catch crops, - areas with pasture and other perennial crops - fertilisation and/or soil management plans, - certified energy efficiency (reduced input, improved resource efficiency, provision of alternative energies or renewable raw materials, - use of [less than 10 % of] the national ceiling of direct payments by the Member States to finance targeted agri- environmental measures (priorities 4 and 5 of the second pillar: over and above [the existing level] and 100 % EU-financed; (c) in cross-compliance rules, that 2 % on areas of over 50 ha is made available for environment and climate protection, taking into account the existing landscape features.

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) to have three different crops on their arable land where the arable land of the farmer covers more than 3 hectares and is not entirely used for grass production (sown or natural), entirely left fallow or entirely cultivated with crops under water for a significant part of the year;practise crop diversification

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Albert DESS, Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) to have t~~hree~~wo different crops on their arable land where the arable land of the farmer covers more than 315 hectares and is not entirely used for grass production (sown or natural), entirely left fallow or entirely cultivated with crops under water for a significant part of the year;

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) to have an ecological focus area on their agricultural area. The cultivation of multiannual energy crops and/or protein plants, inter alia, shall be permitted on these agricultural areas.

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Farmers shall be entitled ipso facto to the payment referred to in this Chapter if they fall within the following categories: (a) farmers with 20 % or more of their eligible hectares in Natura 2000 areas, national protected areas or national water protection areas, or (b) farmers with 50 % or more grassland, including perennial forage areas, or c) farmers with eligible hectares not exceeding half the average area in accordance with Annex VI of this Directive, and in any case not exceeding 15 hectares of arable land.

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Farmers operating in a Member State which has introduced a single regional or national area payment by means of complete decoupling, thereby increasing the value of grassland, shall be entitled ipso facto to the payment referred to in this Chapter.

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Albert DESS, Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1

1. Where the arable land of the farmer covers more than 315 hectares and is not entirely used for grass production (sown or natural), entirely left fallow or entirely cultivated with crops under water for a significant part of the year, cultivation on the arable land shall consist of at least t~~hree~~wo different crops. ~~None of those three~~The main crops shall not cover ~~less~~more than 75 % of the arable land ~~and the main crop shall not exceed 70 % of the arable land~~. The rest of the arable land shall be used for at least one other crop. Permanent grassland will be recognised as an agricultural crop of equal value.

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1

1. Where the arable land of the farmer covers more than 315 hectares and is not entirely used for grass production (sown or natural), entirely left fallow or entirely cultivated with crops under water for a significant part of the year, cultivation on the arable land shall consist of at least three different crops. ~~None of those three~~The main crops shall not cover ~~less~~more than 75 % of the arable land ~~and the main crop shall not exceed 70 % of the arable land~~. The rest of the arable land shall be used for at least two other crops. Permanent grassland will be recognised as an agricultural crop of equal value.

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Article 30(1) shall not apply to farms on which 65 % of the eligible agricultural area is used as permanent grassland.

2012/07/23
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Christa KLASS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Farmers with permanent grassland whose land requires structural conversion may carry out such conversion with a view to a) reseeding or b) seeding on another site on the farm.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1

1. Farmers shall ensure that at least 72 % of their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2), excluding areas under permanent grassland, is ecological focus area such as land left fallow, terraces, landscape features, buffer strips and afforested areas as referred to in aArticle 25(2)(b)(ii).

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

The following shall be exempted from this requirement: a) land with payment entitlements that is farmed in the context of agri- environment-climate measures under Article 29 of the 2012 EAFRD Regulation, or b) land with payment entitlements that falls under Directive 92/43/EEC or 2009/147/EC, or c) land with payment entitlements that is fertilised without nitrates and is thus also designated as ecological focus area; d) land whose agricultural area comprises more than 50% of permanent grassland, or e) areas totalling less than 15 hectares under arable and permanent crops, or f) farmers with an average parcel size of 2 hectares or less.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Cultivation of the following crops shall be permitted on the agricultural areas referred to in this chapter: a) multi-annual energy plants and b) protein plants.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1

1. In order to finance the payment referred to in this Chapter, Member States shall use 30 10% of the annual national ceiling set out in Annex II.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. The basis for funding under this Chapter should be the average of a Member State’s direct payments as a reference value, to ensure that the payment for agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and environment is the same for each Member State;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. The basis for payments under this Chapter should be the average of a Member State’s direct payments as a reference value, to ensure that the payment for agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and environment is the same for each Member State;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2

2. Member States shall apply the payment referred to in this Chapter at national ~~or, when applying Article 20,~~level. Where Article 20 is relied on, the Member States may apply the payment at regional level. In case of application at regional level, Member States shall use in each region a share of the ceiling set pursuant to paragraph 3. For each region, this share shall be calculated by dividing the respective regional ceiling as established in accordance with Article 20(2) by the ceiling determined according to Article 19(1).

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Any funds derived from reduction of the basic premium or penalty payments pursuant to this Chapter and Chapters 30, 31 and 32 on the grounds of non- compliance with the rules shall remain in the Member States and in the regions from which they derive.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Unused appropriations within the Member States’ national ceiling that were designated for financing the payments referred to in this Chapter shall remain in the Member States and shall be used for agri-environment-climate measures in accordance with the 2012 EAFRD Regulation.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34

~~[...]~~deleted

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35

1. In order to finance the payment referred to in Article 34, Member States may decide, by 1 August 2013, to use up to 5 % of their annual national ceiling set out in Annex II. The decision referred to in the first subparagraph shall be notified to the Commission by the date referred to in that subparagraph. Member States may, by 1 August 2016, review their decision with effect from 1 January 2017. 2. According to the percentage of the national ceiling to be used by Member States pursuant to paragraph 1, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, fix the corresponding ceiling for that payment on a yearly basis. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 56(2).Article 35 deleted Financial provisions

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1

1. Member States ~~shall~~may grant an annual payment to young farmers who are entitled to a payment under the basic payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

In order to finance the payment referred to in Article 36, Member States ~~shall~~may use a percentage of the annual national ceiling set out in Annex II which shall not be higher than 2 %. They shall notify the Commission, by 1 August 2013, of the estimated percentage necessary to finance that payment.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 38 – paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Coupled support shall be progressively reduced. It shall amount in 2019 to no more than 50% of the payment made in 2014.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Title 4 – chapter 2 – title

CTime-limited crop specific payment for cotton;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 a (new)

Article 46a Evaluation The Commission shall be requested to submit a report on the effectiveness and necessity of the measures in Articles 42- 46 which provide for crop-specific payment for cotton in Bulgaria, Greece, Portugal and Spain. The report shall reach the Council by 31 March 2014 and shall contain proposals on alternative support for the cotton sector that are compatible with the development of the CAP.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4

4. Member States shall ensure that no payment is made to farmers for whom it is established that, as from the date of publication of the Commission proposal for this Regulation, they divide their holding with the sole purpose of benefiting from the small farmers scheme. This shall also apply to farmers whose holdings result from that division.deleted

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Jarosław KALINOWSKI, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Artur ZASADA, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1

Farmers wishing to participate in the small farmers scheme shall submit an application by ~~15 October 2014~~a date to be fixed by Member States but not later than by: - 15 October 2014 with effect from 2014, or - 15 October 2015 with the effect from 2015. The date fixed by Member States can not, however be earlier than the last day for submission of an application to the basic payment scheme.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0092(CNS)

Astrid LULLING, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20

(20) Article 15(3) of Directive 2003/96/EC allows Member States to apply to agricultural, horticultural and piscicultural works as well as to forestry not only the provisions generally applicable to business uses but also a level of taxation down to zero. An examination of that option has revealed that as far as general energy consumption taxation is concerned its maintenance would be contrary to the Union's wider policy objectives unless it is linked to a counterpart ensuring advances in the field of energy efficiency in order to guarantee the economic viability of agricultural holdings, which already have to cope with the burden of stringent social, plant-health and environmental requirements for which the market does not provide adequate compensation. As regards CO2 -related taxation the ~~treatment of the~~ sectors concerned should be ~~aligned to the rules applying to industrial sectors~~excluded, given that they capture substantial amounts of carbon through the production of biomass and that the biomass which is processed to produce first- and second-generation biofuels is an essential part of a sustainable energy mix.

2011/12/01
Committee: AGRI

2011/0092(CNS)

Astrid LULLING, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28

(28) Every ~~fiv~~three years and for the first time by the end of 2015, the Commission should report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Directive, examining in particular the minimum level of CO2-related taxation in the light of the evolution of the market price in the EU of the emission allowances, the impact of innovation and technological developments and the justification for the tax exemptions and reductions laid down in this Directive, including for fuel used for the purpose of air and maritime navigation. The list of sectors or sub-sectors deemed to be exposed to a significant risk of carbon leakage shall be the subject of regular review, in particular taking into account the availability of emerging evidence.

2011/12/01
Committee: AGRI

2011/0092(CNS)

Astrid LULLING, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 21

Directive 2003/96/EC
Article 29 – paragraph 1

Every ~~fiv~~three years and for the first time by the end of 2015, the Commission shall submit to the Council and the European Parliament a report on the application of this Directive and, where appropriate, a proposal for its modification.

2011/12/01
Committee: AGRI

Proposal for a regulation - amending act
Article 1 – point 9

1. If a Member State decides that every delivery of raw milk by a farmer to a processor of raw milk must be covered by a written contract between the parties, such contract sh~~all~~ould fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 2.

2011/03/28
Committee: AGRI

2010/0362(COD)

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation - amending act
Article 1 – point 9

Regulation (EC) 1234/2007
Article 185 f – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

In the case described in the first subparagraph, the Member State concerned shall also decide that if the delivery of raw milk is made through one or more collectors, each stage of the delivery m~~ust~~ay be covered by such a contract between the parties. To this end, a “collector” means an undertaking which transports raw milk from a farmer or another collector to a processor of raw milk or another collector, where the ownership of the raw milk is transferred in each case.

2011/03/28
Committee: AGRI

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Christa KLASS, Werner LANGEN, Anja WEISGERBER, Helwin PETER

Proposal for a regulation - amending act
Annex I

Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007
Annex XII c - Part I - section C - paragraph 7

7. Acidification and enrichment~~, except by way of derogation to be adopted by the Commission by means of delegated acts pursuant to Article 112e(1),~~ and acidification and de-acidification of one and the same product shall be mutually exclusive processes.

2011/05/13
Committee: AGRI

2010/0254(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 1

(1) In order to enhance the free movement of fruit juices and certain similar products within the European Union, Council Directive 2001/112/EC of 20 December 2001 relating to fruit juices and certain similar products intended for human consumption4 has laid down specific provisions regarding production, composition and labelling of the products concerned. Those rules should be adapted to technical progress and should take account of developments in relevant international standards, in particular the Codex Standard for fruit juices and nectars (Codex Stan 247-2005) which was adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission during its 28th session on 4-9 July 2005 and the Code of Practice of the European Fruit Juice Association (AIJN). The requirements laid down in this Directive should apply equally to products manufactured in the Union and to imported products.

2011/04/01
Committee: AGRI

2010/0254(COD)

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS

Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 2 a (new)

Directive 2001/112/EC
Article 5 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

2 a) In article 5, the following subparagraph 1 a is inserted : This Directive shall apply to the products manufactured in or imported into the European Union referred to in Annex I.

2011/04/01
Committee: AGRI

2010/0254(COD)

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Ulrike RODUST, Albert DESS, Britta REIMERS

Proposal for a directive – amending act
Annex

Directive 2001/112/EC
Annex I – Section I – point 1 – subpoint a – subparagraph 2

Flavour, pulp, and cells ~~obtained by suitable physical means from the same species of fruit~~from the juice which are separated during processing may be restored to the same juice.

2011/04/01
Committee: AGRI

2010/0254(COD)

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Ulrike RODUST, Britta REIMERS

Proposal for a directive – amending act
Annex

Directive 2001/112/EC
Annex I – Section I – point 1 – subpoint a – subparagraph 5

Flavour, pulp and cells are obtained by suitable physical means from the ~~same species of fruit may be restored to the juice~~fruit juice in question itself or from fruit juices of the same species of fruit.

2011/04/01
Committee: AGRI

2010/0254(COD)

Elisabeth JEGGLE, Albert DESS, Ulrike RODUST, Britta REIMERS

Proposal for a directive – amending act
Annex

Directive 2001/112/EC
Annex I – Section I – point 1 – subpoint b – subparagraph 1

The product obtained by reconstituting concentrated fruit juice defined in Part I.2 with potable water that meets the criteria of Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption*storing to the fruit juice concentrate the water extracted from the juice during concentration, the flavour lost from the juice and, if appropriate, the pulp and cells. The water added must display appropriate characteristics, particularly from the chemical, microbiological and organoleptic viewpoints, such as to guarantee the essential qualities of the juice.

2011/04/01
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the recently created European food price monitoring tool ~~is very complex and is a long way from meet~~does not really contribute to improving transparency on food price building; c~~onsumers’ and farmers’ need for m~~alls, therefore, fore t~~ransparency on food price building~~his instrument to be amended to achieve better comparability;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Points out that price transparency, particularly as regards contractual transactions, may also have negative consequences for farmers and producer groups, as for example the trade could make use of this transparency for its own ends;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission to swiftly carry out the pilot project on the creation of a European farm prices and margins observatory and to establish it within the Commission, for which Parliament and Council adopted a EUR 1.5 million appropriation under the 2010 budget, and to include a comparison of production costs and farm gate prices in key farming sectors of different territories and social- economic situations;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Notes that, to their detriment, farmers and producer groups have a weaker negotiating position than the downstream industry and other parts of the food chain; calls on the Commission therefore to make changes to competition and/or market organisation law in order to make the negotiating position fairer;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to identify the parts of the food supply chain in which competition is distorted and not balanced; calls for those parts to be made more balanced;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to submit a legislative proposal on ~~better implementation of~~more targeted application of, and, if necessary, amendments to, competition rules in the food chain so as to effectively limit the development of dominant market positions and strengthen farmers’ bargaining power through efficient producer organisations and SMEs;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to propose legislation on a specific mandatory maximum time limit for payments of 30 days from the date of delivery or transfer, applicable to all foodstuffs and all operators right along the food supply chain to the retail trade;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Warns that the increasing use of private labels and the associated dominance and market power of distributors can cause problems in relation to price building; calls, therefore, for farmers and producer groups to be treated fairly in the process of price building, specifically in relation to private labels;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Calls on the Commission to uncover unfair practices in relation to listing fees and other market entry fees and to examine them under competition law; calls on the Commission to lay down uniform rules on the use of listing fees and market entry fees and, in particular, to take action against excessive fees demanded by distributors;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2237(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Calls on the Commission to propose legislation for a safety-net-type instrument, covering both the upper and lower levels of the market, to curb speculation and price volatility;

2010/05/20
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Points out that rural development is now an integral part of the CAP architecture; continues, therefore, to call for a well equipped second pillar, with its focus on the rural ~~communities,~~ milieu, with a view to improving the environment, modernising and restructuring agriculture ~~and~~, improving product marketing and competitiveness, and maintaining employment and creating new jobs in the countryside;

2010/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Britta REIMERS, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Affirms that Europe will have to make a substantial contribution to meeting that need against a background of less land, less water and reduced energy inputs due to the impact of climate change, which will act as a serious constraint on European capacity to increase supply; points out that, against this background, agricultural research assumes an important role in guaranteeing food production through more efficient use of resources;

2010/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Is of the opinion that a strong European Common Agricultural Policy is needed to ensure that EU farmers remain competitive ~~on the world market against well subsidised~~even in the face of trade-distorting measures by trading partners; believes that the EU cannot afford to rely on other parts of the world to provide for European food security in the context of climate change, political instability in certain regions of the world and potential outbreaks of diseases or other events potentially detrimental to production capacity;

2010/04/29
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Britta REIMERS, Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Mairead McGUINNESS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Believes that ~~agriculture has a tremendous potential to adapt to and mitigate the impacts of climate change~~the climate impact of agriculture can be considerably mitigated by means of improved education and training of people working in agriculture, better use of innovations stemming from research and development and improving the efficiency of agricultural production;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Believes that agriculture is well placed to make a major contribution to delivering the new EU 2020 Strategy priorities of tackling climate change and creating new jobs through green growth and supplying renewable energy whilst at the same time continuing to provide food security for European consumers by producing safe and high-quality food products;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30 a. Calls for the two-pillar model of the CAP to be maintained beyond 2013; considers that this structure of the CAP, like the present range of measures under Pillar 2, provides a suitable basis for overcoming future challenges;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Herbert DORFMANN, Hans-Peter MAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Insists that EU agriculture must remain competitive against ~~fierce competition from~~trade-distorting measures of well-subsidised trade partners; therefore believes that competitiveness should still be a fundamental objective of the CAP post-2013 to ensure that the EU has the raw materials to produce high- value European food products and they continue to win a greater share of the world market, as well as ensuring fair trade for farmers;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN, Britta REIMERS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Calls for a fairer distribution of CAP payments ~~and insists that it should be fair to farmers in both new and old Member States~~;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – footnote 8

~~8. See graph 6 annex~~deleted.

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Britta REIMERS, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Believes that agriculture ~~has a leading role to play in tackling~~can continue to mitigate its climate ~~change~~impact by reducing GHG emissions, increasing carbon sequestration capacity and developing and using more renewable energy sources; believes that climate considerations should be integrated only across CAP ~~measures where appropriate~~Pillar 2 measures;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

41. Notes that the market fails to reward farmers for protecting the environment; therefore believes that ~~the CAP~~farmers must be~~come greener by incentivising farm~~ given suitable financial compensation if the CAP becomes more environment- focused, in orders to ~~maximis~~improve the delivery of eco-system services toand further improve the sound environmental resource management of EU farmland;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44

44. Believes that the new CAP must be simple to administer and reduce red tape and administrative burdens on farmers by moving towards the use of delivery tools such as outcome agreements and simple contracts; at the same time points out that, particularly for smaller producers, the bureaucratic burden is disproportionate, so that it would be worth developing a simplified contribution system in Pillars 1 and 2, without jeopardising targets;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN, Britta REIMERS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45

45. Recognises the wide range of new priorities for the CAP and notes that the new Member States'’ expectation when they joined the European Union was ~~that CAP support would, over time, reach parity with old Member States~~equal participation in the CAP; therefore calls for the 2013 CAP budget amount to be at least maintained post-2013 ifso that the EU ~~is to~~can meet its current commitments and successfully deliver the new priorities;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN, Britta REIMERS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47

47. Insists that the CAP should not be renationalised and therefore believes that core direct support under Pillar 1 should remain fully financed by the EU budget, hence rejecting any ~~further~~ co-financing under Pillar 1 which could harm fair competition within the EU Single Market;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – introductory part

48. Calls for a ~~fair~~n objectively-targeted distribution of CAP funds to farmers across the EU; recalls that to respect the diversity of farming in the EU, objective criteria must be found in order to define a ~~fair system of distribution:~~ n objectively-targeted system of distribution: it should be pointed out that direct payments are a way of contributing to income guarantees and risk-hedging for farmers, offsetting the socially desirable high standards in the EU and the continuing reduction of tariff barriers, and providing remuneration for social agricultural activities which receive no market compensation; finds that the level of economic development, which is very different across the Member States, must also be taken into account;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – point 1

(1) Believes that in order to reduce the disparities in the distribution of direct support funds between Member States, the hectare basis alone will not be sufficient and, therefore, calls for additional objective criteria ~~such as a purchasing power coefficient to be used to~~to be used to provide an overview and achieve an overall balanced distribution;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Britta REIMERS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – point 1 a (new)

(1 a) Rejects any form of reallocation of appropriations from direct payments to Pillar 2 (modulation, degression according to farm size);

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – point 2

(2) Calls for fair and objective criteria to be clearly defined for the allocation of funds for important rural development objectives; calls also for Pillar 2 to be adhered to so that these objectives may be implemented and financed;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN, Britta REIMERS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50

50. Believes that, in the interest of simplification, clarity and a common approach, funding for ~~each of the five building blocks of~~ the CAP must be agreed from the start of the reform;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55

55. Identifies the need for ~~five~~central key building blocks~~, namely:~~ such as Food Security and Fair Trade, ~~Sustainabilit~~including protection of European standards, Sustainability and Renewable Energy, Agriculture across Europe, Biodiversity and Environmental Protection, and Green Growth, to achieve a fairer, greener and more sustainable CAP;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN, Britta REIMERS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57

57. Believes that, a~~n EU-funded top-up direct area payment should be made available to farmers through simple contracts rewarding them for reducing their carbon emissions per unit of production and increasing~~s well as voluntary measures under their sequestration of carbon; notes that this would have the double benefit of making EU agriculture more environmentally and economically sustainable through improved efficiency and would also ensure that farmers can financially benefit from increased carbon sequestration on their land and put them on the same footing as other industries which are in the EU ETS; calls for clear and measurable criteria and targets to be defined appropriately to allow these payments to be implemented as soon as possiblecond pillar, farmers should be offered additional incentives to reduce greenhouse gases;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58

58. Calls for the continuation of specific measures under the second pillar of the CAP to compensate farmers producing in areas with natural handicaps in order to ensure that agricultural activity takes place and local food is produced across the EU, reducing the threat of land abandonment and ensuring balanced territorial management across the EU; considers that this support scheme should remain co- financed as it currently is;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Britta REIMERS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59

59. Believes that the CAP, under the second pillar, needs to further incentivise biodiversity and environmental protection measures by providing the opportunity for the vast majority of agricultural land to be covered by agri- environmental schemes to reward farmers for the delivery of additional eco-system services, while other measures beneficial to the environment such as organic farming projects, the sustainable use of forests, water and soil, and the development of high natural value farming should also be encouraged; considers that all these rural development measures should remain co- financed, with an increased budget if necessary;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Herbert DORFMANN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63

~~63. Recalls that, amongst the current set of market tools, export refunds should continue to be phased out according to WTO agreements;~~deleted

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2236(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64

64. Believes that the design and implementation of the new CAP should have simplicity, proportionality and the reduction of bureaucracy at its heart ~~and, therefore, calls on the Commission to use outcome agreements, simple contracts and territorial contracts where appropriate~~;

2010/04/30
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4

– having regard to Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which lays down that, in formulating and implementing the Union'’s policies in the areas of agriculture, fisheries, transport, the internal market and research and technological development, the Union and the Member States shall always pay full regard to the welfare requirements of pets and productive animals as sentient beings; in that connection, they shall take account of the laws and administrative provisions and customs of the Member States,

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Appreciates the work which has been done to develop alternatives to animal testing and calls on the Commission~~'s efforts~~, under the auspices of the WTO and in bilateral agreements with third countries, to assign the highest priorityies to animal welfare;

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls for a fundamental change in the attitude adopted by the European Union’s main partners in the WTO and for non- trade-related concerns to be acknowledged;

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Peter JAHR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls on the Commission to outline what progress has been made in WTO negotiations towards securing acknowledgment of non-trade-related concerns, which include animal welfare; calls on the Commission to outline to what extent animal welfare issues and standards are being taken into account in the Doha round of WTO negotiations;

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Observes that Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has ~~created a new legal s~~broadened the powers of the EU and its instituation ~~in which new powers and greater responsibility have been vested in the European Union and its~~ s to cover fisheries policy, so as to ensure that the welfare requirements of pets and productive animals are taken into account, at the same time as the laws and administ~~itutions and considers that this article applies to all animals and not only~~rative provisions and traditions of the Member States; points out that this article applies to all pets and imprisoned animals, to animals intended for food- produc~~ing animal~~tion, circus animals, stray animals and animals in zoos;

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Hans-Peter MAYER

Motion for a resolution
Heading 6

~~The link between animal health and public health~~deleted

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Hans-Peter MAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

~~24. Recalls that the use of antibiotics is an indicator of the state of health of animals, and expresses its deep concern about the acute problem of antibiotic resistance in animals and humans;~~deleted

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Hans-Peter MAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Stresses that the problem of antibiotic resistance is not confined to farm animals, and calls on the Commission, therefore, in the light of Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, also to take account of the role of pets in this connection;deleted

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Hans-Peter MAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Recalls that diseases are by their nature not confined within national borders and stresses that common measures are therefore needed to tackle diseases - such as salmonellosis and rabies - which are passed on between human beings and animals, including pets, due to poor animal health and inadequate keeping of animals;deleted

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Herbert DORFMANN, Hans-Peter MAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Recalls in this context its aforementioned resolution of 22 May 2008, which likewise stressed the problem of antibiotic resistance, and emphasises that farmers, breeders and animal owners are primarily responsible for monitoring animals' health and welfare;deleted

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2202(INI)

Peter JAHR, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Hans-Peter MAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

~~28. Calls on the Commission to step up its monitoring of the use of antibiotics in the European Union and, if need be, set up a common European database for this purpose;~~deleted

2010/02/15
Committee: AGRI

2009/2156(INI)

Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the socio-economic criteria used prior to the 2005 reform by some Member States may no longer be used to delimit areas with 'natural handicaps', but may continue to be used to define areas with 'specific handicaps', which are supported pursuant to Article 50(3)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005,(Does not affect English version.)

2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI

2009/2156(INI)

Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that support for areas with natural handicaps is aimed in particular at ensuring that ~~'extensive farming activity' is maintained, and consequently at countering abandonment of the land and migratio~~an efficient and multifunctional form of agriculture is widely and permanently preserved, thereby maintaining the countryside as a vital economic area and place to live in;

2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI

2009/2156(INI)

Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Takes the view that the eight biophysical criteria proposed by the Commission ~~may~~could, in principle, be suitable for delimiting areas with natural handicaps; stresses, however, that the criteria may not be used in all cases for objectively delimiting areas with natural handicaps;

2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI

2009/2156(INI)

Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Takes the view that areas in which none of the eight biophysical criteria are met, but in which individual criteria cumulatively show the existence of a substantial handicap, should also be recognised as areas with natural handicaps;

2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI

2009/2156(INI)

Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Emphasises that a final opinion on the criteria and threshold values proposed by the Commission can only be given when the detailed maps drawn up by the Member States are available; calls on the Commission therefore promptly to examine the simulation outcomes and, on this basis, to draw up without delay a detailed communication on the delimitation of areas with natural handicaps;

2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI

2009/2156(INI)

Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Considers the voluntary, national fine tuning of the criteria ~~for support for areas with natural handicaps to be necessary in order to be able to respond appropriately to particular geographical situations and crops grown~~as a means of differentiating within the delimited areas for support to be necessary in order to take into account particular geographical, geological and agricultural situations and in order to be able to respond appropriately and to exclude areas in which natural handicaps have been offset by human intervention~~; proposes that farm data (such as farm income) be used inter alia for this purpose~~, but also to include areas where necessary; emphasises, however, that the decision on the criteria to be used for fine tuning must lie with the Member States, since many Member States have already developed an appropriate and suitable system of differentiation which should be maintained; it should, however, be possible to combine fine tuning with a determination of the degree of difficulty faced by individual holdings, so as to be able to exclude holdings located in heterogeneous areas which do not face difficulties from support and to make the extent of support dependent on the determination of difficulty;

2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI

2009/2156(INI)

Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Takes the view that areas which will lose the status of 'areas with natural handicaps' under the new rules or areas in which a disproportionate shift is taking place should be allowed a sufficiently long transitional period to adapt to the new situation;

2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI

2009/2156(INI)

Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission within one year to draw up a separate legislative text on agriculture in areas with natural handicaps;

2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the objective should be to reduce the administrative costs of the CAP, ~~both direct and indirect,~~

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Considers that the Member States should have the option, in rural development plans, to introduce a flat-rate land parcels scheme, particularly for small farms, on condition that compliance with the obligations entered into is guaranteed;

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that the principle of cross- compliance should be maintained as one of the key concepts of CAP direct payments, but that strong simplification is recommended, without reducing their effectiveness;

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Stresses the need for the CAP to be simpler, more transparent and more equitable; ~~in this respect a single flat rate payment would be preferable;~~

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls for the possibility of autonomous error correction which would allow recipients of payments who unintentionally broke the rules to inform the authorities without becoming liable to fines as a result;

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Believes that the fundamental objective of checks is to encourage farmers to comply more fully with the law and that yearly CC controls for statutory management requirements (SMR) shcould be reduced~~, or even abolished,~~ if there have only been a few infringements in recent years;

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Emphasises that the requirement for follow-up checks in relation to small infringements (triviality limit) should be ~~abolished~~reduced to random samples;

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER

Motion for a resolution
Heading 3

~~Single d~~Direct payments

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Herbert DORFMANN, Albert DESS, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Stresses that in the first year of application the farmer needs to state the codes for the land used; that if the application is for the whole area, no further information regarding area is required; if the application is for part of the area, the farmer needs to specify the area; and for the second and subsequent years the farmer need only specify changes in the use of his land;deleted

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

~~20. Considers that the future single payment should be based on a simplified flat rate basic support system based on uniform payments in order to make the CAP simpler, fairer and more transparent;~~deleted

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

~~28. Believes that only one holding number should be issued per producer;~~deleted

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Stresses that the number of registers should be limited, with batch registration combined with holding number being sufficient, and that there is no benefit in adding an individual register for each holding;deleted

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

~~32. Considers that the use of handwritten ear tags should be allowed for sheep in the same way as for bovines;~~deleted

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2155(INI)

Peter JAHR, Albert DESS, Herbert DORFMANN, Elisabeth KÖSTINGER, Hans-Peter MAYER, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Giovanni LA VIA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32a. Considers that for sheep and goats, as for pigs, herd identification is sufficient;

2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI

2009/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Herbert DORFMANN, Paolo DE CASTRO, Astrid LULLING, Giovanni LA VIA, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christophe BÉCHU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. ~~Emphasise~~Considers that, on the basis of producers’ experience, it has emerged that the management of the product quality through the PDOs and PGIs specifications, and the protection against usurpations are not sufficient for the further development of GI products; ~~calls for an in-depth assessment to be carried out to identify suitable instruments for the management of the volume of production for PDO and PGI product~~takes the view that EU legislation should be amended so as to enable Member States to authorise organisations which they designate or recognise as responsible for the management, protection and/or promotion of GIs to adapt the production potential to market demands, on the basis of fair and non-discriminatory rules;

2009/11/18
Committee: AGRI

2009/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Herbert DORFMANN, Paolo DE CASTRO, Astrid LULLING, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christophe BÉCHU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 d (new)

18d. Considers that, in view of the importance of the European market to GI producers, the Commission and the Member States should provide additional financial resources for promotion programmes within the internal market, while continuing to increase the budget for promotion campaigns in third countries;

2009/11/18
Committee: AGRI

2009/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Astrid LULLING, Giovanni LA VIA, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christophe BÉCHU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Is against the idea that geographical indications can be replaced by trademarks, as these are fundamentally different legal instruments; stresses that the differences between trademarks and geographical indications need to be better explained; calls for effective implementation of existing Community rules making it impossible for a trademark containing or referring to PDOs/PGIs to be registered by operators who do not represent the producers' organisations for such PDOs/PGIs;

2009/11/18
Committee: AGRI

2009/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Giovanni LA VIA, Astrid LULLING, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls for greater protection of geographical indications - in th~~ird countries, through inclusion~~ e WTO, both by extending protection under Article 23 of the TRIPS agreement to all GIs and by establishing a legally bin din~~ternational registries and international recognition within the WTO system~~g multilateral register for GIs; - in third countries, by negotiating bilateral agreements, in particular with economically significant countries; supports the Commission's aim to include geographical indications within the scope of the "Anti- counterfeiting trade agreement" and in the work of the future "European observatory on counterfeiting and piracy"; considers that the Commission should work more closely with bodies representing GI producers prior to the launch of trade negotiations and during the negotiating process;

2009/11/18
Committee: AGRI

2009/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Herbert DORFMANN, Astrid LULLING, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christophe BÉCHU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Points out that certain GIs are being systematically usurped on the territory of third countries and that this is misleading consumers and undermining the reputation of authentic products; points out that ensuring the protection of a GI in a third country is a particularly time- consuming and difficult process for producers, given that specific protection arrangements and procedures exist in each country; calls on the Commission to provide GI bodies with technical and financial support to resolve these usurpation problems;

2009/11/18
Committee: AGRI

2009/2105(INI)

Michel DANTIN, Paolo DE CASTRO, Astrid LULLING, Albert DESS, Elisabeth JEGGLE, Christophe BÉCHU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b(new)

22b. Believes that it is essential to intensify information and promotion campaigns regarding the sui generis protection of GIs; calls on the Commission to continue to promote the GI concept with third countries, particularly by increasing technical assistance missions in conjunction with European GI producers and/or their representative organisations;

2009/11/18
Committee: AGRI

2008/0180(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The Commission shall without delay draw up an appropriate examination and permit procedure applicable to manufacturers of equipment or facilities for stunning or killing animals. These equipment or facilities may then only be placed on the market with a permit from the competent authority of the Member State.

2009/02/25
Committee: AGRI

2008/0180(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – point 2

~~Certificates of competences shall not be valid for a period exceeding five years.~~deleted

2009/02/25
Committee: AGRI

2008/0180(CNS)

Hans-Peter MAYER, Albert DESS

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – point 4.2

4.2. Electrical apparatus shall deliver a constant current or maintain a constant voltage.

2009/02/25
Committee: AGRI

2008/0149(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
–

The European Parliament rejects the Commission’s proposal.

2008/09/18
Committee: AGRI

2008/0108(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
–

The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.

2009/02/23
Committee: AGRI

2008/0103(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) In order to achieve a better balance between policy tools designed to promote sustainable agriculture and those designed to promote rural development, a system of compulsory progressive reduction of direct payments (“modulation”) was introduced by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. This system should be maintained including the exemption of payments up to EUR 510 000 from its application.

2008/09/01
Committee: AGRI

2008/0103(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Any amount of direct payments to be granted in a given calendar year to a farmer that exceeds EUR 510 000 shall be reduced for each year until 2012 by the following percentages:

2008/09/02
Committee: AGRI

2008/0103(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a

a) 2009: 75%,

2008/09/02
Committee: AGRI

2008/0103(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b

b) 2010: 96%,

2008/09/02
Committee: AGRI

2008/0103(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c

c) 2011: 117%,

2008/09/02
Committee: AGRI

2008/0103(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d

d) 2012: 138%,

2008/09/02
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) In certain areas where the producer is not obliged to label particulars, the customer should have the possibility to request additional information. Nonetheless, the indication of the feed materials incorporated in compound feed in descending order of weight, already provides important information on compositional data. Taking into account the recent developments in Community legislation which give higher guarantees as regards in particular HACCP, traceability, strict hygiene rules and the development of Community guides to good practice for hygiene, the manufacturer ~~should be allowed to reject the request if he considers the requested disclosure to infringe his intellectual property rights~~must comply with the request as follows: the open declaration shall apply to the three most significant feed components by weight. Should these components make up less than 60% of the weight, the open declaration shall apply to as many further feed components as are needed to reach a proportion of at least 60% of the weight. In order to ensure that his intellectual property rights are not infringed, subject to submission of appropriate proof the manufacturer will not be required to provide information about feed materials which make up less than 3% of the total weight. This would not affect the food and feed safety, since the competent authorities always have the right to get the exact percentages of all feed materials.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) In certain areas where the producer is not obliged to label particulars, the customer should have the possibility to request additional information. Nonetheless, the indication of the feed materials incorporated in compound feed in descending order of weight, already provides important information on compositional data. Taking into account the recent developments in Community legislation which give higher guarantees as regards in particular HACCP, traceability, strict hygiene rules and the development of Community guides to good practice for hygiene, the manufacturer ~~should be allowed to reject the request if he considers the requested disclosure to infringe his intellectual property rights~~must comply with the request as follows: the open declaration shall apply to the four most significant feed components by weight. Should these components make up less than 70% of the weight, the open declaration shall apply to as many further feed components as are needed to reach a proportion of at least 70% of the weight. In order to ensure that his intellectual property rights are not infringed, subject to submission of appropriate proof the manufacturer will not be required to provide information about feed materials which make up less than 3% of the total weight. This would not affect the food and feed safety, since the competent authorities always have the right to get the exact percentages of all feed materials.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) In certain areas where the producer is not obliged to label particulars, the customer should have the possibility to request additional information. Nonetheless, the indication of the feed materials incorporated in compound feed in descending order of weight, already provides important information on compositional data. Taking into account the recent developments in Community legislation which give higher guarantees as regards in particular HACCP, traceability, strict hygiene rules and the development of Community guides to good practice for hygiene, the manufacturer ~~should be allowed to reject the request if he considers the requested disclosure to infringe his intellectual property rights~~must comply with the request as follows: the open declaration shall apply to the five most significant feed components by weight. Should these components make up less than 80% of the weight, the open declaration shall apply to as many further feed components as are needed to reach a proportion of at least 80% of the weight. In order to ensure that his intellectual property rights are not infringed, subject to submission of appropriate proof the manufacturer will not be required to provide information about feed materials which make up less than 3% of the total weight. This would not affect the food and feed safety, since the competent authorities always have the right to get the exact percentages of all feed materials.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)

(fa) Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on additives for use in animal nutrition;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point f b (new)

(fb) Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products1; 1 OJ L 189, 20.7.2007, p. 1.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3

3. This Regulation shall not apply to water, either taken in directly by the animals or intentionally incorporated into feed. However, it shall apply to feed designed to be administered in water.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point -a (new)

(-a) ‘Oral animal feeding’: the introduction of feedingstuffs into an animal’s gastrointestinal tract through the mouth with the aim of meeting the animal's nutritional needs and/or maintaining the productivity of normally healthy animals;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point f

(f) ‘Compound feed’: mixture of at least two feed materials, whether or not containing feed additives, for oral animal feeding in the form of complete or complementary feed;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point g

(g) ‘Complete feed’: compound feed which, by reason of its composition, is sufficient for a daily ration, as laid down in Article 2(2)(f) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point h a (new)

(ha) ‘Feed supplement’: feed consisting of a mixture of additives of all categories, with the exception of those listed in Chapter 3 of Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 183/2005. In addition, it may be mixed with feed materials, but, by reason of its composition, it is not sufficient for a daily ration. Its purpose is to meet animals' temporary increased and/or special nutritional requirements. It is administered either with or separately from the daily ration or in water;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point k

(k) ‘Carrier’: substance used to dissolve, dilute, disperse or otherwise physically modify a feed additive in order to facilitate its handling, application or use ~~without altering its technological function and without exerting any technological effect themselves~~;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point o

(o) ‘Batch’ or ‘lot’: ~~unit of production from a single plant using uniform production parameters or a number of such units, when produced in continuous order and stored together. It consists of an~~ identifiable quantity of feed ~~and is determined to~~which haves common characteristics, such as origin, variety, type of packing, packer, consignor or labelling;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point q

(q) ‘Label’: any tag, brand, mark, pictorial or other descriptive matter, written, printed, stencilled, marked, embossed, impressed on, or attached to a container of feed or any medium referring to or accompanying such feed;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point r a (new)

(ra) 'First placing on the market': the first placing on the market of a feed after its manufacture or introduction.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) it is sound, ~~genuine~~unadulterated, fit for purpose and of merchantable quality;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2

2. ~~Manufacturers of feed~~The person responsible for the first placing on the market shall make available to the authorities responsible for carrying out official controls any information concerning the composition or claimed properties of the feed they places on the market which enables the accuracy of the information given by the labelling to be verified.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – title

Prohibit~~ion~~ed materials

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. Taking into account in particular scientific evidence, technological progress, notifications under the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed or results from official controls according to Regulation (EC) No 882/2004, the Commission shall adopt athe list in Annex IIa of materials whose placing on the market or use for animal nutritional purposes is prohibited.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. If, on the basis of available scientific and technical information, the Ccommi~~ssion~~ttee referred to in Article 29 has reasons to believe that the use of the specific feed may not meet the particular intended nutritional purpose or may have adverse effects on animal health, human health, the environment and animal welfare, the Commission shall, in accordance with the regulatory procedure laid down in Article 29(3), forward a request for a assessment together with the dossier to the European Food Safety Authority (‘the Authority’) within three months. The Authority shall give an opinion within six months of receipt of the request. This time limit shall be extended whenever the Authority seeks supplementary information from the applicant.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11– paragraph 3

3. Where feed is offered for sale by means of distance communication as defined in Article 2 of Directive 97/7/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council the mandatory labelling particulars required by this Regulation shall appear on the information material ~~suppor~~relating to the distance selling or be provided by any other appropriate means. At all events, provision of the particulars referred to in Article 15(d), (e) and (f) and Article 17(d) and (e), shall become mandatory only when the feed is delivered.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12– paragraph 1

1. The ~~manufacturer of the feed~~person responsible for the first placing on the market shall be responsible for the labelling particulars and ensure their presence and substantive accuracy.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) the person responsible for the labelling provides on request of the competent authority a scientific substantiation of the truthfulness of the claim, either via publicly available scientific evidence or through documented company research which is open to scientific review. The scientific substantiation shall be available at the time the feed is placed on the market. In order to guarantee appropriate scientific quality and uniform implementation, the Commission shall lay down guidelines concerning the requirements to be met by the scientific substantiation and its documentation. These guidelines shall also incorporate procedures for appraising the scientific substantiation by means of checks to be performed by the competent supervisory authorities. The guidelines shall be laid down in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 29(2).

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) the person responsible for the labelling provides on request of the competent authority a scientific substantiation of the truthfulness of the claim, either via publicly available scientific evidence or through documented company research. The scientific substantiation shall be available at the time the feed is placed on the market. Consumers shall have the right to receive from the competent authority confirmation that the truthfulness of the claim has been scientifically substantiated.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) If the claim relates or may relate to a function of an additive on the basis of the functional groups referred to in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, the presence of the additive in an effective concentration shall be regarded as sufficient substantiation of the truthfulness of the claim. If the claim relating to such a function is based on a criterion other than the presence of an additive, the appraisal of the scientific substantiation of the claim shall be carried out in accordance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 429/2008 of 25 April 2008 on detailed rules for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the preparation and the presentation of applications and the assessment and the authorisation of feed additives1. 1 OJ L 133, 22.5.2008, p. 1.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2

2. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, claims concerning optimisation of the nutrition and support or protection of the physiological conditions are permitted ~~if they are not based on a pharmacological or immunological action~~.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1

1. ~~The mandatory labelling particulars shall be given in their entirety in a prominent place on the packaging, the container or on a label attached thereto, in a conspicuous,~~If the feed is sold to a feed business, the purchaser shall be informed of the mandatory labelling particulars in the most appropriate manner. They shall be given in a clearly legible and ~~indel~~comprehensible manner, in at least the language or one of the official languages of the Member State in which it is placed on the market.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1

1. The mandatory labelling particulars shall be given in their entirety in a prominent place on the packaging, the container or on a label attached thereto or, where appropriate, in an accompanying document, in a conspicuous, clearly legible and indelible manner, in at least the language or one of the official languages of the Member State in which it is placed on the market.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2

2. ~~The mandatory labelling particulars shall be easily identifiable and not be obscured by any other information. They shall be displayed~~If the feed is sold to a person other than a feed business, the mandatory labelling particulars shall be given in their entirety in a prominent place on the packaging, the container or on a label attached thereto, in a colnspicuours, ~~font and size that does not obscure or emphasize any part of the information, unless such variation is to draw attention to precautionary statements~~clearly legible and indelible manner, or on an insert, in at least the language or one of the official languages of the Member State in which it is placed on the market.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) if the percentages of weight for the feed materials incorporated in compound feed for food producing animals are not indicated on the label, the manufacturer shall make available on request information on the quantitative composition data in a range of +/- 15% of the value according to the feed formulation, unlthe open declaration shall apply to the five most significant feed components by weight. Should these components make up less than 80% of the weight, the open declaration shall apply to as many further feed components as are needed to reach a proportion of at least 80% of the weight. In order to ensure that the manufacturer's rights to protection of his intellectual property are not infringed, subject to submission of appropriate proof he shall not be required to provide information about feed materials which make up less than 3% of the total weight. The competent authorities shall at all timess h~~e considers this information to be commercially sensitive and that the disclosure could infringe his intellectual property rights;~~ave the right to be informed about the exact proportions of the total weight accounted for by each individual feed material.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) if the percentages of weight for the feed materials incorporated in compound feed for food producing animals are not indicated on the label, the manufacturer shall make available on request information on the quantitative composition data in a range of +/- 15% of the value according to the feed formulation, unlthe open declaration shall apply to the four most significant feed components by weight. Should these components make up less than 70% of the weight, the open declaration shall apply to as many further feed components as are needed to reach a proportion of at least 70% of the weight. In order to ensure that the manufacturer's rights to protection of his intellectual property are not infringed, subject to submission of appropriate proof he shall not be required to provide information about feed materials which make up less than 3% of the total weight. The competent authorities shall at all timess h~~e considers this information to be commercially sensitive and that the disclosure could infringe his intellectual property rights;~~ave the right to be informed about the exact proportions of the total weight accounted for by each individual feed material.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) if the percentages of weight for the feed materials incorporated in compound feed for food producing animals are not indicated on the label, the manufacturer shall make available on request information on the quantitative composition data in a range of +/- 15% of the value according to the feed formulation, unlthe open declaration shall apply to the four most significant feed components by weight. Should these components make up less than 60% of the weight, the open declaration shall apply to as many further feed components as are needed to reach a proportion of at least 60% of the weight. In order to ensure that the manufacturer's rights to protection of his intellectual property are not infringed, subject to submission of appropriate proof he shall not be required to provide information about feed materials which make up less than 3% of the total weight. The competent authorities shall at all timess h~~e considers this information to be commercially sensitive and that the disclosure could infringe his intellectual property rights;~~ave the right to be informed about the exact proportions of the total weight accounted for by each individual feed material.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – introductory part

On the label of pet food a ~~free telephone number~~cost-free means of contacting the person responsible for the labelling particulars (such as by telephone, e-mail or via the Internet) shall be indicated in order to allow the customer to obtain information in addition to the mandatory particulars on

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

The information in points (a) and (b) must be given without prejudice to the right to withhold details either when they are commercially sensitive or when their disclosure could infringe intellectual property rights.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1

1. In addition to the requirements laid down in Articles 15, 16, 17 and 18, feed containing a level of undesirable substances in excess of that permitted under Directive 2002/32/EC shall be labelled ‘feed with excessive level(s) of … (designation of the undesirable substance(s) in accordance with Annex I to Directive 2002/32/EC), only intended for authorised detoxification establishments’. The authorisation of those establishments shall be based on Article 10(2) or (3) of Regulation (EC) No 183/2005which does not comply with the requirements set out in Annex VIa shall bear the labelling particulars laid down in Annex VIa.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2

2. In case the contamination is intended to be reduced or eliminated by cleaning, the additional labelling of contaminated feed shall be ‘feed with excessive level(s) of … (designation of the undesirable substance(s) in accordance with Annex I to Directive 2002/32/EC), only to be used as feed after adequate cleaning’The Commission may amend Annex VIa in order to bring it into line with legislative progress towards the development of standards.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 7

7. For quantities of pet food ~~not exceeding the daily ration of the respective animal species~~ sold in packages with several containers, the particulars referred to in Article 15(b), (c) and (f) and Article 17(1)(b), (c), (e) and (f) may be given only on the outer package instead of each container.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. The provisions laid down in Article 15(e), (f) and (g) and in Article 16(1) and (2) shall not be required if by-products of vegetable or animal origin derived from agro-industrial processing and with a water content of more than 50% are employed.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1

1. In addition to the mandatory labelling requirements, the labelling of compound feed may also include within the mandatory declarations required by Article 14 voluntary labelling particulars, provided that the general principles laid down in Article 11 are respected.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)

(da) particulars concerning digestible starch and raw protein;

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34

It shall apply from twelve months after the date of its ~~publication~~entry into force; however, in the case of feed for animals not intended for food production placed on the market for the first time at least thirty-six months after the date of publication of the Regulation, the measures referred to in Article 17(3) shall apply.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1

1. Feed materials must, as ~~according to~~far as is possible using the good manufacturing practices as laid down in Regulation (EC) No 183/2005, be free from chemical impurities resulting from their manufacturing process and from processing aids, unless a specific maximum content is fixed in the Catalogue referred to in Article 25.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex II a (new)

ANNEX IIa List of materials whose placing on the market or use for animal nutrition purposes in prohibited The placing on the market or use as feed of the following materials is prohibited: 1.faeces, urine and separated digestive tract content, irrespective of any form of treatment or admixture; 2. hide treated with tanning substances, including its waste; 3. wood, including sawdust or other materials derived from wood, which has been treated with wood preservatives as defined in Annex V to Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council; 4. all wastes obtained from urban, domestic and industrial waste water as defined in Article 2 of Council Directive 91/271/EEC; 5. solid urban waste, such as household waste; 6. packaging and parts of packaging from the use of products from the agri-food industry.

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex V – point 1

1. The following additives shall be listed with their name~~, added amount,~~ or identification number, added amount and respective name of the functional group such as laid down in Annex I of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 or the category in case of ‘coccidiostats and histomonostats’:

2008/07/28
Committee: AGRI

2008/0050(COD)