30 Amendments of Katerina BATZELI related to 2006/2059(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas developments in biotechnologyies might have the potential to yield many benefits for agriculture, such as increased yields, reduced use of herbicides and pesticides, less fossil fuel use and reduced soil whereas it is advisable to weigh the value of such potential benefits against the possibility of reduced genetic diversity associated with GM monoculture cropping and damage to biodiverosionty,
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the mid-term review shows that little progress has been made towards achieving the goals set in “Life Sciences and Biotechnology — A strategy for Europe”,
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas Community legislation is sometimes interpreted differently by Member States and its implementation is therefore not always consistent across all Member States; whereas there is a clear need to develop a common approach, particularly with regard to the possibility of coexistence of genetically modified crops and conventional and organic crops which would provide the basis for choice for both farmers and consumers,
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the provision of choice for farmers and consumers must include the option of avoiding GM-contaminated crops,
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas genetically modified products for use in agriculture necessarily have toshould pass very stringent assessments and the present authorisation process is slow and bureaucratic, whereas the existing legal requirements need to be better implemented, especially as regards assessment of the long-term effects of genetically modified organisms on health and the environment,
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas genetically modified products for use in agriculture necessarily have to pass very stringent assessments and the present authorisation process is slow and bureaucraticGMO- related environmental risk assessment procedures and methods must be further harmonised,
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas genetically modified crops represent only 2.6% of crops grown on agricultural land in the world, of which 50% is grown in one country alone - the US - and 70% is grown in three countries alone – the US, Argentina and Brazil, whereas the surface area under cultivation in the EU decreased between 2007 and 2008,
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers it important to acknowledge that biotechnology could present real opportunities in various fields; believes that, beyond the traditional agricultural products of food, feed and fibre, entirely novel products will emerge;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises the need to work towards ensuring that, in the near future, an increased variety of better and healthier food and feedstuffs could also be produced in less favoured areas, such as in restricted climate conditions, in dry or moist conditions and on harsh soil, and notes that the correct use of biotechnology could be an important factor in these developments; emphasises also that protecting the diversity of crops and varieties in a single field can provide the necessary diversity and resilience to cope with rapid changes in weather conditions (e.g. droughts, floods, storms and heatwaves);
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Emphasises that socio-economic factors should also be considered during the approval process;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes the Commission's recent report on the implementation of national measures on the coexistence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming and urges better harmonisation of rules and conditions within the EU; emphasises the importance of the right of farmers to choose between traditional, organic and genetically modified organism production and, therefore, the need to establish clear, uniform and transparent coexistence measures that enable farmers to coexist with neighbours using different farming methods without compromising the right of non-GM farmers to farm without GM contamination;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Reaffirms that, in accordance with Article 26a(1) of Directive 2001/18/EC, the Member States may adopt national measures on crop coexistence to enable them to 'take appropriate measures to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in other products';
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Considers that the rules on crop coexistence should contain clear provisions on liability which take account of the 'polluter pays' principle; calls on the Commission to draw up a binding legal framework in relation to liability which would cover the contamination of conventional or organic crops by GMOs;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Stresses that the legislation currently in force allows the Member States to impose a total ban on the cultivation of GMOs in geographical areas which have special agronomical or environmental characteristics or are particularly important in terms of maintaining biodiversity or specific agricultural practices;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10 b. Urges the Commission to adopt, as soon as possible, specific labelling thresholds for the presence of genetically modified seeds in conventional seeds on the basis of Article 21(2) of Directive 2001/18/EC;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Asks for clarificationUrges the Commission and the Member States to adopt a legislative framework concverning liability for damages incurred in the growing and using of biotechnological products with regard to: who is liable, what can be claimed and under what circumstances a claim can be made;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission and Member States to promote research and development in the field of biotechnology as well as on modern sustainable agricultural practices, other crop methods and agricultural product quality by increasing funds for work and further enhancing cooperation and coordination between public sector research and companies at European, national and regional level;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses that the existence of independent publicly funded research must be guaranteed and R&D activity in small biotechnology undertakings and plant-technology centres must be supported in order to maintain maximum competitiveness at the various levels of the food production chainfor all farming models;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Also suspectStresses that thesre may be contributing tois a strong concentration of research, inventions and intellectual property rights among a few large global players, thus causing their influence and power to increase to the detriment of smaller companies, and causing countries and people to become more dependent on them;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Observes the need to enhance and broaden public debate and improve the level of scientific knowledge; considers that it is the responsibility of policy- makers, as well as industry, the scientific community and non-governmental organisations to communicate with citizens in a clear and transparent manner on the benefits and risks of biotechnologies; recommends that Commission policies reflect public opinion on genetically modified organisms;