13 Amendments of Holger KRAHMER related to 2011/2051(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the post-2013 CAP to pursue food objectives which encourage new forms ofare designed to encourage sustainable agricultural production which, save energy, reduce the use of chemicalspromote efficient input use and exploit the potential of ecosystems more effectively; points out that it must be capable of responding to environmental challenges, such as climate change, depletion of resources, water pollution and soil erosion, etc.;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Points out that previous CAP reforms (the 1992 McSharry reform, the ‘Agenda 2000’ reform, the 2003 reform and the 2008 health check) were all aimed at ensuring that European farmers meet the highest standards in the world as far as environmental protection and animal welfare and traceability of foodstuffs are concerned; stresses in this connection that farmers are not compensated by the market for the costs entailed in meeting these standards; (This paragraph should be the new number 1 and therefore be put on the top.)
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that the CAP encompassesplays a crucial role both for farmers and the public in general - who are both taxpayers and consumers - as the latter benefit from safe, reasonably priced food, a healthy environment, good health and prospects of jobs;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for CAP funding to be based on a model which includes payments linked to natural handicaps and green-point payments or payments for vulnerable regionsrewards compliance with standards that are among the highest in the world and the provision of public goods which are not rewarded by the market; points out, in this connection, that natural handicaps must continue to be compensated for in future;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for a reinforcement of the concept of funding for both pillars subject to the fulfilment of a number of environmental andcriteria relating to the environment, resource efficiency and helping protect biodiversity criteria, so that high- quality food can continue to be produced using sustainable practices; points out that sufficient funding isbudget appropriations are the only guarantee of the success of targeted new, environmentally-friendly practices and existing agri-environmental measures;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that the ‘greening’ of EU agricultural policy is, in reality, nothing new to farmers, as each successive reform has been geared towards strengthening this aspect of the CAP;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Stresses the services which European farmers provide to European society, in particular maintaining a varied cultivated landscape and making an important contribution to the protection and stewardship of natural resources and to climate protection;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises that mandatory greening that respects ecosystems will not only benefit the environment, but alsadditional greening must be based on a win-win approach that brings benefits both for the environment and for farmers and society in terms of resource efficiency and increased productivity and not least respects ecosystems; also stresses that it is necessary to place the emphasis on research, innovation and new technology in order to ensure a sustainable future for EU farming;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Deplores the fact that the EU’s biodiversity targets have yet to be met and expects the CAP to be a catalyst for efforts to achieve those goalsStresses that the EU must continue to make significant efforts in the area of biodiversity; points out, in this connection, that a cooperative nature conservation approach is an effective measure to this end;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Points out that a majority of Europeans currently oppose the use of GMOs in agriculture and food; asks the Commission, therefore, to study the possibility of denying funding to agricultural undertakings involved with GMOsstresses that a uniform EU-wide approach must be found;
Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Encourages more EU-funded and -coordinated projects in which farmers and researchers can work together to find innovative ways of cultivating land in an environmentally sustainable manneensuring a competitive and, at the same time, sustainable agricultural sector;