49 Amendments of Alejandro CERCAS related to 2008/0103(CNS)
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Experience drawn from the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) No 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001 shows that certain elements of the support mechanism need to be adjusted. In particular the decoupling of direct support shcould be extended and the functioning of the Single Payment Scheme shcould be simplified. It should also be noted that Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 has been substantially amended since its entry into force. In the light of these developments and in the interest of clarity it should be repealed and replaced by a new Regulation.
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) The savings madefunds obtained through the modulation mechanism introduced by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 are used to finance measures under the rural development policy. Since the adoption of that regulation the agricultural sector has been faced with a number of new and demanding challenges such as climate change, the increasing importance of bio- energy, as well as the need for a better water management and a more effective protection of biodiversity. The European Community, as party to the Kyoto Protocol, has been called to adapt its policies in the light of the climate change considerations. Furthermore, following serious problems related to water scarcity and droughts, water management issues should be further addressed. Protecting biodiversity remains a major challenge and while important progress has been made, the achievement of the European Community's biodiversity target for 2010 will require additional efforts12. The Community acknowledges the need to tackle these new challenges in the framework of its policies. In the area of agriculture, rural development programs adopted under Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2006 of 20 September 2005 on 1 Council Conclusion, Brussels, 18.12.2006, 16164/06. support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)13 are an appropriate tool to deal with them. To enable Member States to revise their rural development programmes accordingly without being required to reduce their current rural development activities in other areas, additional funding needs to be made available. However, the financial perspectives for the period 2007 to 2013 do not provide for the financial means to reinforce the Community's rural development policy as necessary. Under these circumstances it is appropriate to mobilise a large part of the financial resources needed by providing for a gradual increase of the reduction of direct payments through modulation.
Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The distribution of direct income support among farmers is characterised by the allocation of a large share of payments to a rather limited number of large beneficiaries. It is clear that larger beneficiaries do not require the same level of unitary support for the objective of income support to be efficiently attained. Moreover, the potential to adapt makes it easier to larger beneficiaries to operate with lower levels of unitary support. It therefore seems equitable to expect farmers with high amounts of support to make a particular contribution to the financing of rural development measures addressing new challenges. Therefore, it appears appropriate to establish a mechanism providing for an increased reduction of the highest payments the proceeds of which should also be used to deal with new challenges in the framework of rural development or in the framework of the first pillar to cope with specific situations. To ensure the proportionality of this mechanism the additional reductions should increase progressively according to the amounts of the payments concerned.
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The amounts resulting from the application of 5 percentage points corresponding to modulation reductions fixed in Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 should be allocated between Member States according to objective criteria. However, it is appropriate to establish that a certain percentage of the amounts should remain in the Member States where they have been generated. In view of the structural adjustments resulting from the abolition of rye intervention, it is appropriate to provide for specific measures for certain rye production regions financed with part of the amounts generated by modulation. However, the amounts raised by the application of any furtherthe new modulation reductionpercentages and maximum aid thresholds should be made available to the Member States where they have been generated.
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) The management of small amounts is a burdensome task for the competent authorities of the Member States. To avoid excessive administrative burden it is appropriate for Member States who so decide to be able to refrain from granting direct payments where the payment would be lower than the Community average support for one hectare or the eligible area of the holding for which support is claimed would relate to less than one hectare. Special provision should be made for those Member States whose farm structure differs significantly from the average Community one. Member States should be given discretion to opt for the implementation of one of the two criteria taking account of the particularities of the structures of their agricultural economies. As special payment entitlements were allocated to farmers with so-called "landless" holdings the application of the hectare-based threshold would be ineffective. Such farmers should therefore be subject to the averages support-based minimum amount.
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Further to the integration of formerly coupled market support into the single payment scheme, the value of payment entitlements was, in those Member States opting for a historic implementation, based on the individual level of past support. With a growing number of years elapsing since the introduction of the single payment scheme and following the successive integration of further sectors into the single payment scheme, it becomes increasingly harder to justify the legitimacy of significant individual differences in the support level which are only based on past support. For this reason Member States that chose the historic implementation model should be allowed under certain conditions to review the allocated payment entitlements with a view to approximating their unit value while respecting the general principles of community law and the objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy. In this context Member States may take into account the specificities of geographical areas when fixing closer values. The levelling of payment entitlements should take place during an adequate transition period, depending on the pace of implementation chosen by each Member State, and within a limited range of reductions in order to allow farmers to reasonably adapt to the changing levels of support.
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, while introducing a decoupled single payment scheme allowed Member States to exclude certain payments from that scheme. At the same time Article 64(3) of that Regulation provided for the revision of the options provided for in Sections 2 and 3 of Chapter 5 of its Title III, in the light of market and structural developments. An analysis of the relevant experience shows that decoupling could introduces flexibility in the choice of producers, enabling them to take their production decisions on the basis of profitability and market response. This is particularly the case for the arable crops, hops and seeds sectors, and to a certain extent, also the beef sector. Therefore, the partially coupled payments in these sectors should be integrated into the single payment scheme. In order for farmers in the beef sector to gradually adjust to the new support arrangements provision should be made for a phasing-in of the integration of the special premium for male animals and the slaughter premiumerefore, it is desirable to authorise those Member States which so decide to continue decoupling aid. Since the partially coupled payments in the fruit and vegetable sectors were only recently introduced, and only as a transitional measure, no review of such schemes is necessary.
Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) However, as regards the suckler cow and sheep and goat sector it appears that maintaining a minimum level of agricultural production may still be necessary for ensuring a balance in some sectors and for the agricultural economies in certain regions and, in particular, where farmers cannot have recourse to other economic alternatives. Against this background, Member States should have the option to maintain coupled support at the current level or, for suckler cows, at a lower level. In that case, special provision should be made for the respect of the identification and registration requirements provided for by Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council1 and Council Regulation (EC) No 21/. OJ L 204, 11.8.2000, p. 1. OJ L 5, 9.1.20042, in particular with a view to secure the traceability of animals. 1 2p. 8.
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) Member States should be allowed to use up to 120% of their ceilings for granting specific support in clearly defined cases. Such support should allow Member States to address environmental issues and improve the quality and marketing of agricultural products. Specific support should also be available to buffer the consequences of the phasing-out of milk quotas and the decoupling of support in particularly sensitive sectors. Given the growing importance of an effective management of risks Member States should be given the option to financially contribute to the premiums farmers pay for crop insurance as well as to the financing of financial compensation of certain economic losses in case of animal or plant diseases. With a view to respect the Community’s international obligations the resources that could be used for any coupled support measures should be limited at an appropriate level. The conditions applicable to the financial contributions to crop insurance and animal or plant disease related compensation should be established accordingly.
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32 a (new)
Recital 32 a (new)
(32a) In view of the increasing importance of effective risk management, Member States should be offered the option of contributing financially to the payment of the agricultural insurance premiums paid by farmers, as well as to the funding of financial compensation for certain economic losses arising from animal and plant diseases.
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) The de-coupling of direct support and the introduction of the single payment scheme were essential elements in the process of reforming the common agricultural policy. However several reasons called in 2003 for maintaining specific support for a number of crops. Experience gained through the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 together with the evolution of the market situation indicates that schemes that were kept outside the single payment scheme in 2003 can now be integrated into that scheme to promote a more market-oriented and sustainable agriculture. This is the case in particular for the olive oil sector, where only marginal coupling was applied. It is also the case for the durum wheat, protein crops, rice, potato starch, and nuts payments, where the decreasing effectiveness of remaining coupled payments, supports the decoupling option. In the case of flax it is also appropriate to abolish the support for processing and to integrate the relevant amounts into the single payment scheme. As regards rice, dried fodder, potato starch and flax a transitional period should be provided for in order to ensure their shift to decoupled support to be as smooth as possible. As regards nuts, Member States should be allowed to continue to pay the national part of the aid in a coupled way in order to cushion the effects of decouplingould now, at Member States' discretion, be integrated into that scheme to promote a more market-oriented and sustainable agriculture.
Amendment 232 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) As a consequence of the possible integration of new schemes into the single payment scheme, provision should be made for the calculation of the new level of individual income support under that scheme. In the case of nuts, potato starch, flax and dried fodder, such increase should be granted on the basis of the support farmers received in most recent years. However, in the case of the integration of payments that were so far partially excluded from the single payment scheme, Member states should be given the option to use the original reference periods.
Amendment 237 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) Attention should be drawn to the situation as regards support for tobacco producers, a sector in which experience shows that it is advisable to extend coupled support until 2013 in order to avoid serious socio-economic repercussions in certain regions and better prepare producers for the transition to the new scheme.
Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. A Member State may decide that the aid application needs to contain only changes with respect to the aid application submitted the previous year. A Member State shall distribute pre-printed forms based on the areas determined in the previous year and supply graphic material indicating the location of those areas and, where appropriate, the positioning of olive trees.
Amendment 413 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where a Member State decides to make use of the option provided for in the first subparagraph, in the following year the competent authority shall take the actions required to ensure thatinform the farmer remediesof the findings of non-compliance concerned. The finding and the remedial action to be taken shall be notified to the farme, and the farmer shall in turn notify the actions taken to remedy the problem. For the purposes of monitoring the measures taken by the farmer, the competent authority shall take these farms into account when carrying out the risk analysis for on-the-spot-checks in the following year.
Amendment 420 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shallmay decide not to grant direct payments to a farmer in one of the following cases:
Amendment 429 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point (a)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point (a)
(a) where the total amount of direct payments claimed or due to be granted in a given calendar year does not exceed an amount set by the Member State that may not exceed EUR 2500, or
Amendment 437 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point (b)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point (b)
(b) where the eligible area of the holding for which direct payments are claimed or due to be granted does not exceed onean area set by the Member State that may not exceed two hectares. However, Cyprus may set a minimum eligible area of 0.3 hectares and Malta of 0.1 hectares.
Amendment 458 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point (a)
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point (a)
(a) any agricultural area of the holding, including the areas planted with short rotation coppice (CN code ex 0602 90 41), that is used for an agricultural activity or, in case areas are used as well for non agricultural activities, predominantly used for agricultural activities. The Commission, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 128(2) of this Regulation, shall lay down detailed rules on the use for non agricultural activities to be allowed on eligible hectares.
Amendment 474 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 3
Article 45 – paragraph 3
3. In case of a transfer of the special entitlements, the transferee shall not benefit from the derogation of paragraph 2 except in case of inheritance or anticipated inheritance or where he does not have the area necessary to activate them.
Amendment 511 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 - subparagraph 1
Article 55 – paragraph 1 - subparagraph 1
1. Member States that in accordance with Article 68(2)(a)(i) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 retained all or part of the component of national ceilings referred to in Article 41 of this Regulation corresponding to the suckler cow premium or the special premium referred to in Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 shall make, on a yearly basis, an additional payment to farmers.
Amendment 523 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – subparagraph -1 (new)
Article 64 – subparagraph -1 (new)
As from 2010, Member States which so decide may decouple the specific aid for producers of rice, protein crops, dried fodder and nuts.
Amendment 524 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64
Article 64
Member States shallmay integrate as from 2010 the support available under coupled support schemes referred to in points I, II, and III of Annex X into the single payment scheme in accordance with the rules laid down in this chapter.
Amendment 534 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States may decide by 1 August 2009 at the latest to use from 2010 up to 120% of their national ceilings referred to in Article 41 to grant support to farmers:
Amendment 546 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States may decide by 1 August 2009 at the latest to use from 2010 up to 10% of their national ceilings referred to in Article 41 corresponding to each of the sectors covered in Annex VI to Regulation No 1782/2003 to grant support to farmers:
Amendment 560 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) for distributing, among farmers in the same sector, the funds gained through a linear reduction in aid applied within that same sector.
Amendment 566 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to address specific disadvantages affecting farmers in the dairy, beef, sheep and goatmeat and riceother sectors in economically vulnerable or environmentally sensitive areasreferred to in Title IV of this Regulation, as the Member States deem appropriate,
Amendment 576 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) in the form of contributions to cropagricultural insurance premiums in accordance with the conditions set out in Article 6927a (new) of Council Regulation (EC) No (...) amending Regulations (EC) No 320/2006, (EC) No 1234/2007, (EC) No 3/2008 and (EC) No [...]/2008 adapting the common agricultural policy,
Amendment 579 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 68 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) mutual funds for animal and plant diseases in accordance with the conditions set outlaid down in Article 7027a (new) of Council Regulation (EC) No (...) amending Regulations (EC) No 320/2006, (EC) No 1234/2007, (EC) No 3/2008 and (EC) No [...]/2008 adapting the common agricultural policy.
Amendment 584 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Amendment 595 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 68 – paragraph 3 – point a
Amendment 605 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4
Article 68 – paragraph 4
4. Support under the measures referred to in paragraph 1(a), (b) and (e) shall be limited to 2.510% of the national ceilings referred to in Article 41 Member States may set sub-limits per measure.
Amendment 611 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) in paragraph 1(a), (b) and (d) shall take the form of annual additional payments,
Amendment 614 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point b
Amendment 616 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point d
Article 68 – paragraph 5 – point d
(d) in paragraph 1(e) shall take the form of compensation payments as specified in Article 70. 27a (new) of Council Regulation (EC) No (...) amending Regulations (EC) No 320/2006, (EC) No 1234/2007 and (EC) No [...]/2008 adapting the common agricultural policy.
Amendment 621 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 8 − introductory part
Article 68 – paragraph 8 − introductory part
8. Member States shall raisecollect the funds needed to cover the support referred to:
Amendment 622 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – point a
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – point a
(a) in paragraph 1(a), (b), (c) and (d): (i) by proceeding to linear reduction of the entitlements allocated to farmers and/or, (ii) by reducing the national ceilings corresponding to sectors with coupled payments, (iii) from the funds provided for in Article 9(4), (iv) from the national reserve, .
Amendment 623 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – point b
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – point b
(b) in paragraph 1(e) by proceeding, if necessary, to linear reduction of one or several of the payments to be made to the beneficiaries of the relevant payments in accordance with this title and within the limits set out in paragraphs 1 and 3the amounts referred to in point (a)(i) and (ii) of this paragraph.
Amendment 624 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – point b a (new)
Article 68 – paragraph 8 – point b a (new)
(ba) Where a Member State has made retentions in accordance with Article 69 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, it may continue to use those funds for the sectors in which it applied in accordance with the criteria laid down in paragraph 1(a) of this article.
Amendment 688 #
Amendment 742 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – line 5 – column 2
Annex I – line 5 – column 2
Title IV, Chapter 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/20031, Section 1a of this Regulation
Amendment 768 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex X –part I – indent 2
Annex X –part I – indent 2
Amendment 769 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex X – part I – indent 3
Annex X – part I – indent 3
Amendment 773 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex X – part I – indent 4
Annex X – part I – indent 4
Amendment 777 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex X – part I – indent 5
Annex X – part I – indent 5
Amendment 783 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex X – part I a (new)
Annex X – part I a (new)
Ia From 2010, where a Member State does not take the decision referred to in Article 64(1) (new) of this Regulation: - the protein crop premium provided for in Chapter 2 of Title IV of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003; - the crop specific payment for rice provided for in Chapter III of Title IV of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and Section 1 of Chapter 1 of Title IV of this Regulation, in accordance with the time schedule provided for in Article 72(2) of this Regulation; - the area payment for nuts provided for in Chapter 4 of Title IV of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003; - the aid for processing dried fodder provided for in Subsection I of Section I of Chapter IV of Title I of Part II of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007;
Amendment 788 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex XI – table 5
Annex XI – table 5