20 Amendments of Daciana Octavia SÂRBU related to 2014/2234(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the cCommon aAgricultural pPolicy (CAP) has grown significantly in complexity in recent years without any, so far, any visible reduction in the existing bureaucracy since the 2013 reform ;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the objectives of the CAP have to be fulfilled, while the mutual understanding and trust between all EU institutions, national and regional bodies have to be ensured for the effective implementation of the CAP;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the cost of controls isand providing advice to stakeholders and farmers may be currently estimated at EUR 4 billion at Member State level, and are probably still rising, particularly with the introduction of ‘greening’; emphasizes the need to minimize the cost of controls and their bureaucracy burden;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas performance based controls may become a useful methodology, while stability and an enabling approach are needed on the part of administrative bodies in order to build trust with final beneficiaries; recalls however that a one- size-fits-all system cannot be imposed on the diverse types and scale of agricultural holdings in the EU;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the 2013 reform has resulted in significant changes in the data required from farmers to accompany applications and justify claims, with new requirements which risk bringing about a higher error rate in the initial learning and adaptation phase;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the current system has reachedto deal with an estimated 15 million transactions each year, paid to around 8 million beneficiaries, and includes a million on- the-spot-checks involving millions of reference parcels of land and consequently risks reaching its limits and action is therefore needed;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the burden of controls is often viewed as being in proportion to the complexity of the CAP; calls, therefore, for complexity to be reduced in order to cut error rates, reduce the cost to the taxpayer and at the same time ensure that the budget is correctly spent and in this regard calls for a new examination of the cost of controls compared to how much additional of funding could be safeguarded by such controls;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP with a view to reducing the error rate whilst ensuring that farmers are still able to deliver the vital food production which is at the heart of the policy and believes that continuing to tackle complexity and streamlining the operation of the CAP is one of the keys to attracting new entrants to agriculture and retaining them and their skills to ensure a thriving EU agricultural sector in the future;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that development and administration of performance-based controls should, in no way, become a source of increased uncertainty to the EU’s security of food supply;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Supports the Commissioner Hogan’s initiative of simplifying the CAP with immediate examination of measures which can be implemented quickly , as this would benefit farmers, paying agencies, EU institutions and taxpayers; also urges that amendments be made to the basic legislative actt the mid-term review, proposals for amendments to the basic legislative act be brought forward for consideration for the reform for the next funding period;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Advocates anreinforcement and stronger implementation of the single annual audit so that farmers are not subjected to excessive or multiple controls by both the Commission and the European Court of Auditors in the same year; also calls for the bundling of the audit tasks of certifying bodies and other Member State bodies, the Commission and the European Court of Auditors;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that levels of control should be proportionate to the size of agricultural holdings, whilst safeguarding the use of EU funds;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Favours an integrated approach to controls, whereby all the controls required on a given farm are carried out at the same time wherever possible , so that the number of testing visits is kept lower and the concomitant financial and time cost for administrations and agriculture may be reduced;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates have been extremely low over a given period; calls at the same time, however, for advice on best practice and controls to be stepped up in Member States where the error rate is high or increasing;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for it to be made possiblea target to reduce the sample size for on-the-spot checks to 3% for all direct payments, as otherwise potential savings in the cost of controls will berisk being lost;
Amendment 95 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Believes that 100% coverage of rural areas with fast broadband, with significant awareness raising and training in its use, will be an essential tool to enable all farmers to benefit from the newest application and claims systems associated with the CAP;
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. FCalls for further efforts to be made to reduce the complexity of application systems and forms for farmers and favours the increased use of e- Government technology by the Member States in order to forestall errors in the application process.
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on Member States to ensure that the governmental/regional bodies dealing with the new CAP implementation communicate and work together effectively to the benefit of farmers implementing the policy on the ground.
Amendment 107 #
8b. Calls on the European Court of Auditors to acknowledge in its annual report on budget implementation by the Commission for 2015, the significant degree of change in the CAP –which could not apply retroactively – following the 2013 reform when it presents its error rate and accompanying remarks, and to highlight the degree to which Member States are responsible under shared management of funds.
Amendment 109 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Calls on all institutions and bodies responsible for implementation of the CAP to cooperate to overcome mistrust and anxiety linked to the considerable burden of audit and control which potentially puts at risk future development and innovation and the position of the EU agriculture sector in relation to other markets.