72 Amendments of Adamos ADAMOU
Amendment 2 #
2008/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- Having regard the council meeting of 4th December 2008, where the EU Ministers of Environment have confirmed (paragraph 16 and 17) the possibility of restrictive and prohibitive measures regarding the cultivation of GMOs, based on the Precautionary Principle, in areas with specific agronomical and environmental characteristics, including isolated/remote islands,
Amendment 189 #
2008/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Is deeply concerned that no specific labelling thresholds for the presence of genetically modified seeds in conventional seeds have been established; considers positively the proposal that genetically modified DNA to be used as the unit of measure for adventitious presence throughout the agricultural chain from seed to food and feed, to ensure consistency and to avoid litigation among stakeholders;
Amendment 193 #
2008/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Takes the view that those thresholds should be set at the lowest possible level, preferably at zero level. If the minimal "symptomatic" presence of GMOs in the crops of traditional seeds will be allowed, this will mean that authentic traditional seeds will be lost and in this way, we do not prevent the contamination of traditional seeds and wild related to genetically modified plants species, in the long-term. The range of contamination from GMOs in natural (non-GMOs) cultivations and wildlife can even extend up to 23 km;
Amendment 208 #
2008/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Notes that GMO-free zones can also be set up by means of a voluntary agreement between all operators concerned in a determined area; . It should be taken into consideration that the Republic of Cyprus, due to its island geography and its limited area space, the multi-fracturedness of agricultural land characteristics that constitute impossible any cultivation of GMOs not to infect the flora of the island in general is seeking to declare the Republic of Cyprus into a GMO free zone.
Amendment 221 #
2008/2306(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Stresses that, in addition to those possibilities, Member States must be allowedhave the right to prohibit completely the cultivation of GMOs; in restricted geographical areas,sensitive ecosystems for instance in sitesthose belonging to the NaturaATURA 2000 network; 1 Judgment of 23 September 2003 in Case C-192/01, Commission/Denmark, ECR 2003, p. I-9693; judgment of 7 September 2004 in Case C-127/02, Landelijke Vereniging tot Behoud van de Waddenzee and Nederlandse Vereniging tot Bescherming van Vogels / Staatssecretaris van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij, ECR 2004, p. I-7405., as well as in areas with special agronomical and environmental characteristics also including small isolated/remote islands;
Amendment 2 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas wireless technology (mobile phones, Wi-Fi/WiMAX, Bluetooth, DECT landline telephones) is considered to be a ‘clean’ technology, but that fact cannot be treated as proof of its harmlessness toemits EMF that may have adverse effects on human health,
Amendment 6 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas most European citizens, especially young people aged from 10 to 20, use a mobile phone, an object servstarting from a young age, use a mobile phone, important questions remaing a practical purpose and a fashion accessory, but there are continuing uncertainties about the possible health risks to their possible effects on health, such as leukemia and brain tumours, in particular in the long-term, as the widespread duration of exposure of humans to radiofrequency fields is shorter than the induction time of some cancers,
Amendment 7 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas it is paradoxical to say the least that the EU’s powers to legislate andthe EU's legislative powers have layid down exposure limits to protect workers against the effects of electromagnetic fields should apply only as far as workers are concerned and not to the population as a whole; whereas on the basis of the precautionary principle such measures should also be taken for the concerned population, such as residents and consumers,
Amendment 17 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Renews its call to the Council in its above-mentioned resolution of 4 September 2008 to update its Recommendation 1999/519/EC by laying down stricter exposure limits for all devices emitting electromagnetic waves in the frequency range between 0.1 MHz and 300 GHz, taking into account the best available techniques on the market (BAT), as scientific evidence does not exclude the possibility of risks to human health, both cancer and non-cancer;
Amendment 18 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls for particular consideration of biological effects when assessing the potential health impact of electromagnetic radiation, all the more that some studies have found the most harmful effects at lowest levels; calls for active research to address potential health problems by developing solutions that negate or reduce the pulsating and amplitude modulation of the frequencies used for transmission;
Amendment 21 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that industry stakeholders can already influence certain factors, for example the distance between a given site and the transmitters, the height of the site in relation to the height of the base station, or the direction of a transmitting antenna in relation to living environments, or by sharing transmitters amongst several operators, and, indeed, should obviously do so in order to reassure, and afford better protection to, the people living close to such facilities; calls on the Commission and Member States to draw up appropriate guidance;
Amendment 22 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that industry stakeholders as well as relevant infrastructure managers and competent authorities can already influence certain factors, for example setting provisions with regards to the distance between a given site and the transmitters, the height of the site in relation to the height of the base station, or the direction of a transmitting antenna in relation to living environments, and, indeed, should obviously do so in order to reassure, and afford better protection to, the people living close to such facilities;
Amendment 25 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 30 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that, given the increasing numbers of legal actions and, for that matter, measures by public authorities having the effect of a moratorium, it is in the general interest to encourage solutions based on negotiations involving industry stakeholders, public authorities, military authorities and residents’ associations to determine the criteria for setting up new GSM antennas or high-voltage power lines, and to ensure at least that schools, crèches, rest homes, and health care institutions are kept clear, within a reasonable distancespecific distance determined by scientific criteria, of facilities of this type;
Amendment 33 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Commission to present a yearly report on the level of electromagnetic radiation in the EU, its sources, and actions taken in the EU to better protect human health and the environment;
Amendment 39 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Also suggests to the Commission, to make for efficiency in policy and budget terms, that the Community funding earmarked for studies on electromagnetic fields be partly switched to finance a wide- ranging awareness campaign to familiarise young Europeans with good mobile phone techniques, such as thelimiting the use of mobile phones, making use of hands-free kits, keeping calls short, and using phones in areas that have good reception;
Amendment 40 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Such awareness-raising campaigns should also familiarise young Europeans with the health risks associated with household devices and the importance of switching off devices rather than leaving them on stand-by;
Amendment 42 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Calls on the Commission, in line with energy efficiency standards for electrical and electronic appliances, to propose a ban on the stand-by mode for new equipment;
Amendment 43 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection and the WHO to be more transparent and open to dialogue with all stakeholders in standard setting;
Amendment 44 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Condemns certain particularly aggressive marketing campaigns by telephone operators in the run-up to Christmas and other special occasions, including for example the sale of mobile phones designed solely for children or free call time packages aimed at teenagers;
Amendment 46 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Is greatly concerned about the fact that insurance companies are tending to exclude coverage forUrges insurance companies to take account of the risks associated with electromagnetic fields fromin the scope of liability insurance policies, the implication of them not doing so clearly being that European insurers are already enforcing their version of the precautionary principle;
Amendment 47 #
2008/2211(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Calls on Member States to follow the example of Sweden and to recognize persons that suffer from electrohypersensitivity as being disabled so as to grant them adequate protection as well as equal opportunities;
Amendment 9 #
2008/2074(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas water scarcity and drought have occurred with increasing frequency over the past 30 years and climate change is likely to aggravate the situation, contributing to an increase in extreme hydrological events inside and outside the EU, probably affecting both the quality and quantity of water resources,
Amendment 12 #
2008/2074(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas no comprehensive, technically and scientifically sound assessment of the water quantity situation in the EU exists; whereas the available data at regional level and on seasonal variations are very limited, while the unequal distribution of water resources within the EU means that they are not being used as effectively as possible,
Amendment 59 #
2008/2074(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the importance of reassessing the available quantities of groundwater throughout the EU and the rules governing the use thereof, the principal objective being to ensure rational use of groundwater resources according to the needs of the individual country concerned;
Amendment 83 #
2008/2074(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Urges the EU to support the introduction of a pricing policy in each Member State reflecting the actual cost of using water resources, taking account of social priorities and needs;
Amendment 17 #
2008/0218(CNS)
Proposal for a recommendation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Patients and patients’ representatives should therefore be involved at all steps of the policy and decision-making processes. Their activities should be actively promoted and supported, including financially, in each Member State, but also on an EU level in terms of pan-EU patient support networks for specific rare diseases.
Amendment 24 #
2008/0218(CNS)
Amendment 25 #
2008/0218(CNS)
(5a) establish at the national level multi- stakeholder advisory groups comprising all interested stakeholders to guide governments in the setting up and implementation of national action plans for rare diseases. These should ensure that governments are well-informed and that the decisions taken at national level reflect the views and needs of society.
Amendment 27 #
2008/0218(CNS)
(5b) encourage treatments for rare diseases to be funded at national level. Where Member States may not wish or may not be able to have Centres of Excellence, this central national fund should be used to ensure that patients can travel to a Centre in another country. However, it is also vital that this separate budget is annually reviewed and adapted on the basis of the knowledge about patients needing treatment in that given year, and about eventual new therapies to be added. This should be done with the input of the multi-stakeholder advisory committees.
Amendment 28 #
2008/0218(CNS)
(1) implement a European Union common definition of rare diseases as those diseases affecting no more than 5 per 10 000 persons, as a number for the whole European Union, but it is very important to know the exact distribution for each Member State;
Amendment 33 #
2008/0218(CNS)
(4a) provide industry, which is one of the main funding providers on clinical research, with adequate incentives, in order for it to invest in genetic research.
Amendment 38 #
2008/0218(CNS)
(c) establisharing Member States' assessment reports on the therapeutic added value of orphan drugs at EU level within the EMEA where the relevant European knowledge and expertise is gathered, in order to minimise delays for access to orphan drugs for rare disease patients;
Amendment 52 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Citation 1
Citation 1
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 95 and 152 thereof,
Amendment 56 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
Amendment 64 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) As confirmed by the Court of Justice on several occasions, while recognizing their specific nature, all types of medical care fall within the scope of the Treaty. Under Article 152 of the Treaty, the Community has only complementary powers in the public health sector, this being the responsibility of the Member States, which may conclude agreements between themselves, including those relating to cross-border healthcare for patients.
Amendment 69 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) This directive aims to establish a general framework for provision of safe, high quality and efficient cross-border healthcare in the Community and to ensurein relation to patients mobility and freedom to provide healthcare ands well as a to a high level of protection of health, whilst fully respecting the responsibilities of the Member States for the definition of social security benefits related to health and for the organisation and delivery of healthcare and medical care ands well as of social security benefits in particular for sickness.
Amendment 79 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) For the purpose of this Directive, the concept of "cross-border healthcare" covers the following modes of supply of healthcare: - Uonly the use of healthcare abroad (i.e.: a patient moving of his/her own accord to a healthcare provider in another Member State for treatment); this is what is referred to as 'patient mobility'; - Cross-border provision of healthcare (i.e.: delivery of service from the territory of one Member State into the territory of another); such as telemedicine services, remote diagnosis and prescription, laboratory services; - Permanent presence of a healthcare provider (i.e.: establishment of a healthcare provider in another Member State); and, - Temporary presence of persons (i.e.: mobility of health professionals, for example moving temporarily to the Member State of the patient to provide services).
Amendment 92 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Given that it is impossible to know in advance whether a given healthcare provider will supply healthcare to a patient coming from another Member State or a patient from their own Member State, it is necessary that the requirements to ensure that healthcare is provided according to common principles and clear quality and safety standards are applicable to all type of healthcare in order to ensure the freedom to provide and obtain cross border healthcare which is the aim of the directive. Member States' authorities have to respect the shared overarching values of universality, access to good quality care, equity and solidarity, which have been already widely recognised by the Community institutions and by all the Member States as constituting a set of values that are shared by health systems across Europe. Members States also have to ensure that these values are respected with regard to patients and citizens from other Member States, and that all patients are treated equitably on the basis of their healthcare need rather than their Member State of social security affiliation. In doing so, Member States must respect the principles of freedom of movement within the internal market, non- discrimination inter alia with regard to nationality (or in the case of legal persons, with regard to the Member State in which they are established), necessity and proportionality of any restrictions on free movement. However, nothing in this Directive requires healthcare providers to accept for planned treatment or to prioritise patients from other Member States to the detriment of other patients with similar health needs, such as through increasing waiting time for treatment. Nevertheless special provision should be made for victims of accidents and mass emergencies requiring emergency medical treatment.
Amendment 132 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) This Directive does not provide either for transfer of social security entitlements between Member States or other coordination of social security schemes. The sole objective of the provisions regarding prior authorisation and reimbursement of healthcare provided in another Member State is to enable freedom to provide healthcare for both patients and healthcare providers and to remove unjustified obstacles to that fundamental freedom within the patient's Member State of affiliation. Consequently the Directive fully respects the differences of national health-care systems and the Member States' responsibilities for organisation and delivery of health services and medical care.
Amendment 149 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) The evidence available indicates that the application of free movement principles regarding use of healthcare in another Member State within the limits of the cover guaranteed by the statutory sickness insurance scheme of the Member State of affiliation will not undermine the health systems of the Member States or financial sustainability of their social security systems. However, the Court of Justice has recognised that it cannot be excluded that the possible risk of seriously undermining a social security system's financial balance or the objective of maintaining a balanced medical and hospital service open to all may constitute overriding reasons in the general interest capable of justifying a barrier to the principle of freedom to provide servicesof movement. The Court of Justice has also recognised that the number of hospitals, their geographical distribution, the way in which they are organised and the facilities with which they are provided, and even the nature of the medical services which they are able to offer, are all matters for which planning must be possible. This Directive should provide for a system of prior authorisation for assumption of costs for hospital care received in another Member State, where the following conditions are met : had the treatment been provided on its territory, it would have been assumed by its social security system and the consequent outflow of patients due to the implementation of the directive seriously undermines or is likely to seriously undermine the financial balance of the social security system and/or this outflow of patients seriously undermines, or is likely to seriously undermine the planning and rationalisation carried out in the hospital sector to avoid hospital overcapacity, imbalance in the supply of hospital care and logistical and financial wastage, the maintenance of a balanced medical and hospital service open to all, or the maintenance of treatment capacity or medical competence on the territory of the concerned Member. As the assessment of the precise impact of an expected outflow of patients requires complex assumptions and calculations, the Directive allows for a system of prior authorisation if there is sufficient reason to expect that the social security system will be seriously undermined. This should also cover cases of already existing systems of prior authorisation which are in conformity with conditions laid down in Article 8.
Amendment 193 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1
Article 1
This Directive establishes a general framework for the provision of safe, high quality and efficient cross-borderprovides rules for the access to safe and high quality healthcare in another Member State and establishes cooperation mechanisms on healthcare between Member States, in full respect of national competencies in organising and delivering healthcare.
Amendment 218 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 - subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 - subparagraph 1 a (new)
In order to accomplish the missions of general interest entrusted to their healthcare systems Member States shall follow in the application of this Directive the principles of general interest; namely universality, accessibility to good quality care, equity, solidarity and affordability of health services. In order to guarantee a high level of public health as required by Article 152 of the Treaty Member States should give precedence to those principles in cases where they conflict with the provisions of this Directive.
Amendment 249 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 - point (a)
Article 4 - point (a)
(a) "healthcare" means a health service provided by or under the supervision of a health professional in exercise of his profession,to patients in order to assess, prevent, maintain or restore their state of health and regardless of the ways in which it is organised, delivered and financed at national level or whether it is public or private;
Amendment 258 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 - point (b)
Article 4 - point (b)
(b) "cross-border healthcare" means healthcare provided in a Member State other than that where the patient is an insured person or healthcare provided in a Member State other than that where the healthcare provider resides, is registered or is established;
Amendment 283 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 - point (h)
Article 4 - point (h)
(h) "Member State of affiliation" means the Member State where the patient is an insured person or the Member State where the patient resides if this Member State is not the same as the former;
Amendment 325 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) mechanisms are in place for ensuring that healthcare providers and medical emergency services are able to meet such standards, taking into account international medical science and generally recognised good medical practices;
Amendment 334 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the application of such standards by healthcare providers and medical emergency services in practice is regularly monitored and corrective action is taken when appropriate standards are not met, taking into account progress in medical science and health technology;
Amendment 340 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) healthcare providers provide all relevant information to enable patients to make an informed choice, in particular on availability, quality, safety, prices and outcomes of the healthcare provided and details of their insurance cover or other means of personal or collective protection with regard to professional liability;
Amendment 346 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) patients have athe means of making complaints and arethere are free of charge mechanisms in place to guaranteed remedies and compensation when they suffer harm or become aware of harm caused arising from the healthcare they receive;
Amendment 372 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. In so far as it is necessary to facilitate the provision of cross-border healthcare and cross-border emergency medical services and taking as a basis a high level of protection of health, the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, shall develop guidelines to facilitate the implementation of paragraph 1.
Amendment 534 #
2008/0142(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point (a a) (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 – point (a a) (new)
(aa) the urgency of the treatment,
Amendment 63 #
2008/0050(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point p
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point p
(p) ‘Labelling’: attribution of any words, particulars, trade marks, brand name, pictorial matter or symbol referring to a feed byand placing this information on any medium like packaginged on any packaging, document, container, notice, label, document, ring, or collar or the internet referring to or accompanying such feed;
Amendment 123 #
2008/0018(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 41 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where, in the course of that evaluation, the market surveillance authorities find that the toy does not comply with the requirements laid down by this Directive, they shall require the relevant economic operator, while at the same time notifying consumers, to take all appropriate corrective actions to bring the toy into compliance with those requirements or to withdraw the toy from the market or recall it within such reasonable period, commensurate with the nature of the risk, as they may prescribe.
Amendment 124 #
2008/0018(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 2
Article 41 – paragraph 2
2. Where the market surveillance authorities consider that the non- compliance is not limited to the national territory, they shall inform the Commission and the other Member States of the results of the evaluation and of the actions which they have required the economic operator to take. They shall officially notify Member States and the Commission of the answer and the intention to comply or not to comply issued by the economic operator.
Amendment 82 #
2008/0014(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 3 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. The Community shall, by 2020, limit its domestic greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40% compared to 1990 levels. Greenhouse gas emissions from sources not covered under Directive 2003/87/EC should undertake one third of the emission reduction effort required to meet this target, using 2005 emissions as the baseline. The corresponding greenhouse gas emission limits and amounts in tonnes of CO2 equivalent per Member State for sources not covered under Directive 2003/87/EC, shall be calculated by the Commission.
Amendment 87 #
2008/0014(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Until a future international agreement on climate change has been concluded by the Community leading to emission reductions exceeding those required pursuant to this Article, eEach Member State shall, by 2020, limit its domestic greenhouse gas emissions from sources not covered under Directive 2003/87/EC at a minimum by the percentage set for that Member State in the Annex to this Decision in relation to its emissions in the year 2005.
Amendment 93 #
2008/0014(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. No credits from project activities may be used for the implementation of obligations under this article, unless at least an overall 40% reduction in the Community’s domestic greenhouse gas emissions is guaranteed.
Amendment 155 #
2008/0014(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
Amendment 44 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas various new categories of the population such as young adolescents, adults with young children, elderly people and migrants appear as emerging risk groups,
Amendment 73 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regrets the lack of urgency in the White Paper; is concerned that all actions are deferred to a review by 2010 while further research is conducted; and calls on the Commission to propose concrete steps to tackle the rise of obesity and diet related disease as a priority;
Amendment 92 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that effective self-regulation needs to be accompanied by clear and concrete targets for all parties concerned and by monitoring of these targets;
Amendment 94 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls, however, for more tangible measures especially targeted at children and at-risk groups such as elderly people, especially women, disabled persons, and poor and unemployed people, and young adolescents;
Amendment 124 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the fact that the European Union should take a leading role in formulating a common approach, maintaining ongoing liaison with the WTO and promoting coordination between Member States; is convinced that an important European added value can be provided in fields such as consumer information, nutritional education, media advertising, agricultural production and food labelling;
Amendment 131 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses the need to provide special funding or other incentives, such as tax benefits, for SMEs in order to enable these actors to contribute to reaching the objective of reducing obesity by developing new products, information systems and labelling;
Amendment 139 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a Invites the Commission to develop policies, including legislation, to protect children from commercial influences such as marketing and branding of energy-dense foods and fast food outlets;
Amendment 155 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that it is primarily at school level that steps have to be taken to ensure that physical activity and balanced eating become part of the behaviour of a child; calls on the Commission to develop guidelines on nutrition policies at school and for the promotion of nutritional education, and for the continuation thereof in the post-school period;
Amendment 250 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Asks the Commission to accelerate the revision of Council Directive 90/496/ EEC of 24 September 1990 on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs1, taking care that labelling is meaningful and easily understandable to the consumer; 1 OJ L 276, 6.10.1990, p. 40. and not misleading; Or. el
Amendment 276 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Calls, as a matter of urgency, for an EU wide 9pm watershed on the advertising of foods high in fat, sugar and salt to children;
Amendment 321 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on the Commission to promote best medical practices as well as information campaigns on obesity-related risks and abdominal obesity in particular; urges the Commission to provide information about the dangers of home diets, especially if they involve the use of anti-obesity drugs taken without medical prescription; notes that it would useful to arrange programmes and talks on combating obesity in national hospitals;
Amendment 337 #
2007/2285(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Encourages further scientific research into and monitoring of abdominal obesity in the context of the EU’s research framework programme;
Amendment 18 #
2007/0037B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 2
Article 2
Regulation (EC) No 852/2004
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Without prejudice to the other requirements of this Regulation, paragraph 1 shall not apply to businesses which are micro- enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 and the activities of which consist predominantly in the direct sale of food to the final consumer may be exempted from the requirement to put in place, implement and maintain a permanent procedure or procedures based on the HACCP principles if the competent state authority considers, on the basis of a company- related risk assessment, either that there are no hazards needing to be prevented, eliminated or reduced to acceptable levels, or that any hazards identified are sufficiently controlled through the implementation of the general and specific food hygiene requirements laid down in Article 4.