19 Amendments of Roselyne LEFRANÇOIS related to 2006/2059(INI)
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas conventional and organic agriculture must remain the favoured modes of production in the European Union, in the light of criteria of social, environmental and economic performance,
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas developments in biotechnologies have the potential to yield many benefits for agriculture, such as increased yi: - better-quality, healthy food (probiotics, lactic bacteria, anti-allergy products, non- toxic products); - new non-food products: second- generation biofuelds, better product quality,green chemistry (biolubricants, pharmacopeia, cosmetics, wood treatment products, starch-derived fibres, etc.); - reduced use of chemical fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides and fossil fuels and reduced soil erosion and pollution; - preservation of biodiversity; - improved natural functions of ecosystems (organic matter in soils, water cycle, etc.),
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas Community legislation is sometimeregarding the part of biotechnology which concerns genetically modified organisms is 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 coexistence of genetically modified crops and Commission has been incapable of presenting common coexistence measures; whereas this incapacity bears out the impossibility of developing new products without posing risks to the environment and health and above all without affecting conventional andor organic crops which would provide the basis for choice for both farmers and consumergrowing in the vicinity of crops consisting of genetically modified organisms,
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas, before being placed on the market, genetically modified products for use in agriculture necessarily have to pass very stringent assessments and the present authorisation process is slow and bureaucratichave to undergo an assessment procedure; whereas the decision taken unanimously by the Council of Ministers for the Environment on 8 December 2008 to ask the Commission and the European Food Safety Authority to revise the procedures for assessing applications for authorisation of genetically modified organisms so as to take account of socioeconomic criteria was opportune; whereas this revision is justified by the need to assess the environmental and health risks over a longer period,
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas 114 million hectares of genetically modified crops were grown worldwide in 2007 and this hectarage is very likely tocould be substantially increased in the following years, while the area under genetically modified cultivation in the EU is comparatively low, because the supposed benefits of this new technology have not been fully proven and the people of Europe have certain suspicions about it, being increasingly concerned about environmental protection and sustainable development issues,
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Encourages efforts to develop biotechnologies in the EU as one way of making agriculture viable and capable of providing a livingpreserving the quality of life of farmers, and takes the view that these biotechnologies facilitatemust permit the development of sustainable methods of production, increased yield, higher quality and more diverse products with reduced use of fertilisers and rational use of water; underlines the need for c which simultaneously combine economic, environvmentional and organic agriculture to remain successful on their marketssocial performance;
Amendment 89 #
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, entiretakes the view that these fields concern the sectors of food for human consumption and health (probiotics, cancer-fighting lactic bacteria, products derived from metagenomics, etc.), animal feedingstuffs, renewable energy and, lastly, novelew products will emerge; (biolubricants, pharmacopeia, cosmetics, wood treatments, new materials derived from starch and gluten, fibres, etc.);
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that biotechnology applications may helpassociated with agronomic and ecological sciences may assist the emergence of new types of sustainable production which will make it possible to reduce the use of pesticides, herbicides and fertilisers in crop cultivation;
Amendment 99 #
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 correctgreater cooperation between rich regions and the poorest regions, making use of biotechnology, could be an important factor in these developments; permit genuinely sustainable development based on exploiting local resources and preserving biodiversity and ecosystems;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the decisive importance, in the approval process, of protecting not only human health and the environment in the approval process and underlines the use of objective scientific criteria in this respectbut also new aspects, particularly those of a socioeconomic nature, in accordance with the statements made by Ministers for the Environment in their unanimous decision of 8 December 2008; underlines the use of objective scientific criteria and observance of a sufficient assessment period to prove that no risk exists;
Amendment 123 #
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 methodsnotes that, to date, the Commission has not wished to submit harmonised coexistence measures for the growing of genetically modified organised and/or has been incapable of doing so, which implicitly proves the practical impossibility of developing these new products without risks to the environment and health and without their affecting other types of cultivation, whether conventional or organic;
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 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Asks for clarificationStresses the importance of establishing strict rules concerning 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 and to what extent the authorities are aware of the risks being run;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses that the existence of publicly funded independent research must be guaranteed and R&D activity in all forms of production, particularly small biotechnology undertakings and plant- technology centres, must be equitably supported in order to maintain maximum competitiveness at the various levels of the food production chain;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. FearObserves that the existing complex and extensivprocedures for the implementation of the Community legislation on biotechnological trials and the long approval procedure for placing inventions on the market are creating real obstacles to European research and may lead to research activities and human resources being moved outsidecan be simplified but only on condition that it does not call into question the guarantee that these inventions will not create any risks to health and the environment and will not cause socioeconomic problems for citizens of the EU;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Considers that, for the part of biotechnology concerning genetically modified organisms, it must be possible for research - particularly public research - to be performed in a closed environment when their use has the purpose of promoting health; observes that it is currently difficult to envisage their being cultivated in open fields, in view of: - the insurmountable problem of their coexistence with conventionally and organically farmed crops, - inadequate knowledge of their medium- and long-term impact on health, the environment and socioeconomic factors, - the problems of biodiversity and economic monopoly which they pose;