5 Amendments of Elisabeth JEGGLE related to 2010/2206(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3a (new)
Paragraph 3a (new)
3a. Believes that future rural and regional development programmes should effectively support the tourism sector. Special attention should be given to the promotion of knowledge transfer and cross-border exchanges of best practice, building upon the work of existing European networks such as NECSTouR;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6a (new)
Paragraph 6a (new)
6a. Considers that there is a need to improve farmers’ marketing capacity and their access to local markets, thus enabling the catering sector to buy the local produce that they need more easily;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recognises the importance of the ‘ICT and tourism’ platform proposed by the Commission, but believes that greater efforts are needed to equip rural areas with the latest IT infrastructure (e.g. broadband Internet connection services) and provide training in how to use it, as well as further development, for instance in the framework of the CIP programme, of multilingual IT resources which could facilitate international tourism;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Deplores the fact that no official statistics are kept on rural and farm tourism, and that the only information available is based on estimates; welcomes the measures being contemplated to consolidate the social and economic knowledge base in the field of tourism, in respect of which additional financial outlay and red tape should be eschewed insofar as possible;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Proposes, in view of the success of the ‘European capitals of culture’ and the ‘European heritage label’ initiatives, that a similar initiative be developed to devise a European label for rural areas of tourist interest; calls for that label to be the centrepiece of the promotion measures contemplated.points out that a European label must be awarded on the basis of objective evaluation criteria, that current national quality marks must continue to exist and that the requisite level of transparency must be ensured for consumers; calls for use of that label to be voluntary;