83 Amendments of Miguel Angel MARTÍNEZ MARTÍNEZ
Amendment 29 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas global challenges remain and are expected to increase – hunger, lack of proper and safe sanitation, insufficient levels of primary education, and gender inequality;
Amendment 74 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for the EU to show leadership and responsibility in the process and to adopt a common and effective position on the principles and goals that should be part of the new post- 2015 development framework; points out, at the same time, that this framework must be universal and global in nature, promoting prosperity and well-being for all and signifying the direct and active involvement of developingall countries in its construction;
Amendment 106 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Insists that the post-2015 framework must include targets on accessibility, affordability, quality health care and also concrete work towards the establishment of basic health care systems that ensure prevention, treatment, care and support for all people, including the most marginalised and vulnerable groups such as minorities, prisoners, migrants, undocumented people, sex workers, and drug users;
Amendment 187 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20 a. Emphasizes the importance of having a budget of the Union that is capable of meeting the challenges facing it, especially in times of crisis and particularly in terms of financing for development; in this regard and in order for the EU budget to no longer be hostage to the single question of the level of payment appropriations, calls for the creation of own resources, such as a financial transaction tax, a share of which should go to Heading IV of the EU budget;
Amendment 193 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Considers that innovative sources of financing and new partnerships will play a crucial role in a new development landscape; and reiterates its call for a financial transaction tax as an additional source of financing for development;
Amendment 195 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Also reminds EU Member States that have agreed to establish the Financial Transaction Tax to devote part of those funds to the financing of global public goods, including the new development goals;
Amendment 216 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Points out that a new set of indicators other than GDP is necessary in order to overcome new challenges, and should therefore include the human development index, the poverty headcount ratio, the poverty gap index and the Gini coefficient, the Gender Development Index, the Gini coefficient, the Vulnerability Index and other multidimensional poverty indexes;
Amendment 223 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Calls on developing countries to establish a genuine business regulatory framework focusing on a business code of conduct, promotion of full and productive employment and decent work, respect for human rights, and social and environmental protectionstandards;
Amendment 255 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 – point a
Paragraph 39 – point a
a. the architecture of the post-2015 development agenda should reflect new global and national realities and challenges;
Amendment 273 #
2012/2289(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 – point e
Paragraph 39 – point e
e. it is indispensable to mobilise all possible financial recourses and innovative financing mechanisms for development, paying particular attention to: i) the fight against corruption, tax havens and tax evasion; ii) the responsibilities of emerging economies in the development agenda, also encouraging south-south and triangular cooperation; iii) the improvement of monitoring mechanisms; and iv) PCD;
Amendment 45 #
2012/2222(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. WelcomNotes with interest the fact that the Commission has voluntarily agreed to grant Parliament the same right of scrutiny over the documents which put the implestrategy documentings regulation forng to the 11th EDF into effect as over the general budget of the Union (for example, the documents implementing the DCI); points out also, however, the central role that the ACP- EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly should have the same level of involvement as the European Parliammust continue to play in exercising democratic control over all EDF strategy documents, in accordance with Article 17 of the Cotonou Agreement, in particular paragraph 2, third indent;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2198(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that even if rape as a weapon of war has been used frequently worldwide, nevertheless in recent years it has become particularly dramatic in a number of African conflicts. Calls for closer cooperation between the EU and the UN to strengthen prevention and mainstream women’s role in LRRD programmes;
Amendment 3 #
2011/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Amendment 8 #
2011/2120(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses the need to pay more attention to the outcomes of the work of the ACP - EU JPA, and to ensure coherence between its resolutions and the EP ones. Asks for more participation and involvement of MEPs, in its meetings and activities;
Amendment 8 #
2011/2051(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the widespread concern on the decreasing but accumulatedprogress achieved on the PAC reform, decreasing its negative impacts of CAP on developing countries; regrets that the Commission communication on the CAP towards 2020 does not mention such impacts; calls for the new CAP to include the principle of "do no harm" to developing calls for the new CAP to include the principle of "do no harm" to developing countries in line with the Policy Coherence for Development objective of the Treaty of Lisbon. countries as a core objective;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2051(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for the post-2013 CAP to eliminate all export subsidies and to decouple direct payments from production, so as to create a level playing field between EU and developing countries' agricultural products; asks the Commission to finance transitional schemes for crops asks the Commission to implement these changes, with adequate transitional periods, in order to avoid negative impacts in European rural areas, and to promote organic and sustainable farming practices; affected by this decoupling, aimed at promoting organic and sustainable farming practices;
Amendment 27 #
2011/2051(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. To alleviate the accumulated negative impacts of CAP on developing countries, c(del)Calls on the EU through its trade and development policies to promote sustainable farming practices and food sovereignecurity in developing countries; allowing them to diversify food production, safeguarding food security for LDCs and Net Food Importing Developing Countries, eliminating land grabbing, securing the property rights of smallholders, indigenous farmers, ending seed monopolies and dependency on specialised pesticides are essential; are essential;
Amendment 47 #
2011/2051(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Asks for a radical change to be made to thewell balanced negotiating text of the EU- Mercosur agreement, in response totaking into account the Commission's impact assessment that warns of a widespread increase of ils. Calls for feasibleg al logging and illegal industrial farming, at the expense of the rural communities and the environment, and the loss of millions of rural jobs in Europe, hindering the effectiveness of the CAPternatives, to promote the development of Mercosur countries and to reduce impact on European producers.
Amendment 18 #
2011/2047(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 g (new)
Paragraph 1 g (new)
1g. Reminds, as recognised by the Consensus on Development, that accountable participatory governance is a key enabler of development;
Amendment 45 #
2011/2047(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that Policy Coherence for Development (PCD) is crucial to the implementation of a high-impact development policy and to the achievement of the MDGs; calls on the Commission to define clearly responsibilities and leadership from the highest levels for enforcing the Treaty obligation of PCD, and calls for sufficient resources to be set aside for this purpose in the Commission, the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the EU delegations;
Amendment 56 #
2011/2047(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reiterates its position that the collective target of devoting 0.7% of the Union’s Gross National Income (GNI) to ODA by 2015 must be met; urges the Commission and Member States to find new sources of development funding; such as the financial transaction tax; opposes any broadening of the definition of ODA;
Amendment 74 #
2011/2047(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Acknowledges that economic growth can be an important driver of development; stresses, however, that the impact of growth on poverty eradication will be much higher if inequality is reduced; insists, therefore, that EU development assistance must be geared towards pro-poor growth through the adoption of measures which specifically focus on the poor in order to foster an increase in their share of national wealth and allow them to become a driving force for genuine inclusive growth;
Amendment 106 #
2011/2047(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Recalls that investing in children and youth is a long-term investment in sustainable human development;
Amendment 5 #
2011/2027(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that many petitions refer to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, even when the Charter is not applicable to Member States’ acts, whilst others invoke the values on which the EU is founded; is concerned that citizens feel misldeceived about the actual scope of application of the Charter, and considers it very important that the Charter’s applicability be examined carefully in the context of petitions, complaints and own-initiative infringement cases; stresses that the subsidiarity principle, which is a basic pillar of the European Union, needs to be properly explained to ensure that citizens are not confused about the Charter’s applicability;
Amendment 8 #
2011/2027(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that whilst the Commission is correct in pointing out that it is primarily the duty of Member States’ judicial systems to act on infringements of EU law, citizens often face considerable difficulties related to national court procedures, some being prohibitivelywhich can prove expensive, many or too lengthy to be of actual relevance, and others simply not trustworthy;
Amendment 878 #
2011/0294(COD)
add the following multimodal platforms to the comprehensive network: – Pontevedra – Zalia – Torrelavega – Júndiz – Monzón – El Vallés – El Prat – El Gorguel – Ciudad Real – Albacete – San Roque – Mérida – Ponferrada/El Bierzo – Castellón – Alicante – Benavente – Zamora – Miranda de Ebro – Burgos – Palencia – Área Central – Aranda de Duero – Soria – Arévalo – Ávila – Segovia
Amendment 879 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Volume 16/33
Annex I – Volume 16/33
add the following rail freight transport sections to the core network: – Almería – Málaga – Algeciras (along the coast) – Granada – Motril – Castejón – Logroño – Miranda – León – Gijón / Avilés – Palencia – Santander – Madrid – Cáceres – Mérida – Mérida – Badajoz – Portuguese border – Mora – Ciudad Real – Mérida
Amendment 881 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Volume 16/33
Annex I – Volume 16/33
Amendment 888 #
2011/0294(COD)
add the following airports to the comprehensive network: – Murcia/Corvera – Lleida – Huesca/Pirineos – Logroño – Albacete – Córdoba
Amendment 891 #
2011/0294(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Volume 17/33
Annex I – Volume 17/33
add the following rail passenger transport sections to the core network: – Madrid – Toledo – Madrid – Alcázar – Albacete – Murcia – Almería – Málaga – Algeciras (along the coast) – Avilés – Oviedo – Bilbao – Santander – Oviedo – El Ferrol – A Coruña – Castejón – Logroño – Miranda – Mora – Alcázar – Linares – Moreda/Jaén/Córdoba – Ourense – Vigo (via Cercedo) – Ourense – Monforte – Lugo – A Coruña – Palencia – Santander – Segovia – Ávila – Sevilla – Cádiz – Sevilla – Huelva – Portuguese border – Valencia – Alicante (along the coast) – Motilla – Albacete – La Encina – Santiago – Vigo – Portuguese border – Granada – Motril – Antequera – Málaga – Madrid – Ávila – Salamanca – León – Monforte – Torralba – Soria – Castejón – Plasencia – León – Gijón
Amendment 894 #
2011/0294(COD)
add the following high-quality road sections to the comprehensive network: – Valladolid – Aranda de Duero – Soria – Ourense – Santiago – Ourense – Guntín – Ponferrada – Ourense – Monforte – Chantada – Astorga – León – Burgos – Burgos – Logroño – Pamplona – Ávila – Salamanca – León – Valladolid – Segovia – Valladolid – Ávila – Maqueda – Toledo – Ocaña – Tarancón – Cuenca – Teruel – Alfajarín – Fraga -Catalayud – Daroca – Alcolea del Pinar – Monreal del Campo – Badajoz – Zafra – Córdoba – Baena – Granada – Huelva – Jabugo – Zafra – Estepa – Lucena – Baena – Jaén – Úbeda – Blanca – Avarán – La Font de la Figuera – Alicante – Alcoy – Játiva – Elche – Cartagena – Vera – Figueras – Puigcerdá – Ávila – Villacastín – San Rafael – Segovia
Amendment 3 #
2011/0139(NLE)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
The Committee on Development calls on the Committee on Fisheries, as the committee responsible, to propose that Parliament withholdgive its consent.
Amendment 39 #
2010/2269(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Amendment 4 #
2010/2203(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1a (new)
Paragraph 1a (new)
1a. Notes that the future of EU investment policy towards developing countries, needs to have a strong focus on fostering investment flows that create decent employment and reduce poverty;
Amendment 16 #
2010/2203(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the importance of ensuring that investment treaties are consistent with all other policies affecting developing countries, notably featuring clauses on human rights, gender equality, the environment, decent work, transparency and the fight against illicit capital flows;
Amendment 17 #
2010/2203(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5a (new)
Paragraph 5a (new)
5a. Notes that there is a balance to be found between the objective of promoting EU competitiveness through market access and investment protection and allowing developing countries' right to regulate to pursue their own development agendas;
Amendment 24 #
2010/2203(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7a (new)
Paragraph 7a (new)
7a. Also encourages the transfer of EU new green technologies to developing countries, as the best way to promote green and sustainable growth;
Amendment 28 #
2010/2203(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9a (new)
Paragraph 9a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission actively to promote corporate social and environmental responsibility (CSR, based on international standards such as the OECD Guidelines on multinational enterprises and the United Nations Global Compact), in order to permit effective monitoring of the impact – social, environmental and in terms of respect for human rights – of the operations of transnational undertakings and their subsidiaries in developing countries;
Amendment 17 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The small contribution of subsidised coal to the overall energy mix no longer justifies the maintenance of such subsidies with a view tof securing the supply of energy on a Union level, provided this is not secured by other means.
Amendment 21 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Title
Title
on State aid to facilitate the closuretransition to competitivity of uncompetitive coal mines
Amendment 22 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The small contribution of subsidised coal to the overall energy mix no longer justifies the maintenance of such subsidies with a view of securing the supply of energy on a Union level, as long as this result cannot be guaranteed by other means.
Amendment 23 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
Amendment 23 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
Amendment 24 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Considering the scarcity of autochthonous energy sources in the EU, the Union's policies for promoting renewable fuels and fossil fuels with low carbon content in order to generate electricity justify the support to coal mines. The categories of aid permitted by Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002 should not be maintained indefinitely. In any event, all public aid aimed at reducing the effects of pollution caused by coal, should be maintained. Those mines that, after a ten-year period, are able to achieve competitiveness and require a financial boost from the public sector to enable them to make technological investments for environmental purposes, will also be exempt from the elimination of aid.
Amendment 26 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Indigenous energy sources in the EU being scarce, the Union’s policies of encouraging renewable and lower carbon fossil fuels for power generation do justify support for coal mines. The categories of aid permitted by Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002 should not be maintained indefinitely. In any event, State aid intended to reduce the pollutant effect of coal should be maintained. Mines that after this 10-year period are capable of being competitive but still need State assistance with regard to implementation of environmental technology investments should be exempted from this discontinuation of subsidies.
Amendment 29 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Without prejudice to the general State aid rules, Member States should be able to take measures to alleviate the social and regional consequences of the possible closure of those mines, that is to say the orderly winding down of activities in the context of an irrevocable closure plan and/or the financing of exceptional costs, inherited liabilities in particular.
Amendment 29 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) A minimum level of coal production, together with other measures, especially those aiming at the promotion of renewable energy sources, will contribute to the maintenance of a quota of primary energy sources, which will allow energy security in the Union to be reinforced significantly. In addition, a quota of autochthonous sources of primary energy will help to promote environmental goals in relation with sustainable development. In this framework of boosting autochthonous energy sources in Europe in order to counterbalance the continent's huge dependence on energy sources from outside its borders, consideration should be given to complementing autochthonous energy sources, which in many Member States are represented solely by coal, with non-fossil ones.
Amendment 33 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. Aid shall cover only costs in connection with coal for the production of electricity, the combined production of heat and electricity, the production of coke and the fuelling of blast furnaces in the steel industry as well as in connection with research and investments in technology aimed at reducing coal polluting emissions, where such use takes place in the Union.
Amendment 35 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the operation of the production units concerned must form part of a closure plan the deadline of which does not extend beyond 31 OctoDecember 201420 ;
Amendment 36 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the production units concerned must be closed definitively in accordance with the closure plan, in the event that they have not become competitive and provided that their continued operation is not necessary to meet Union's energy needs;
Amendment 40 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) the overall amount of closure aid granted by a Member State for any particular undertaking must follow a downward trend, where the reduction between successive periods of fifteen months must not be less than 33 percent of the aid provided . This aid reduction shall not be applicable to the mines that have succeeded in becoming competitive during the initial fifteen month period of the closure planis period and which require public investments aimed only at reducing the polluting effects of coal ;
Amendment 42 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) A minimum level of coal production, together with other measures, in particular to promote renewable energy sources, will help to maintain a quota of primary energy sources, which will significantly boost the European Union's energy security. Furthermore, a quota of indigenous primary energy sources will also serve to promote environmental objectives within the framework of sustainable development. Within this context of boosting the Union’s indigenous energy sources in order to counteract the continent’s huge energy dependence, supplementing non-fossil indigenous energy sources with fossil ones needs to be considered, coal being the sole source of indigenous fossil energy in some Member States.
Amendment 45 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. If the production units to which aid is granted pursuant to paragraph 1 are not closed at the date fixed in the closure plan as authorised by the Commission, they have not become competitive and their continued operation is not necessary in the light of the energy autonomy conditions of that State, the Member State concerned shall recover all aid granted in respect of the whole period covered by the closure plan.
Amendment 51 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) In accomplishing its task, the European Commission should ensure that normal conditions of competition are established, maintained and complied with. With regard to more especially to the electricity market, aid to the coal industry should not be such as to affect electricity producers' choice of sources of primary energy supply. Consequently, the prices and quantities of coal should be freely agreed between the contracting parties in the light of prevailing conditions on the world market. In any event, and to prevent social or environmental dumping, the Community authorities should ensure that the social and environmental standards in mines in non-EU countries producing coal for marketing in the Union equate to the standards required of European coal mines.
Amendment 56 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. Aid shall cover only costs in connection with coal for the production of electricity, the combined production of heat and electricity, the production of coke and, the fuelling of blast furnaces in the steel industry, research and technology investment designed to reduce pollutant emissions from coal, where such use takes place in the Union.
Amendment 58 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) the operation of the production units concerned must form part of a closure plan the deadline of which does not extend beyond 31 OctoDecember 201420;
Amendment 62 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
b) the production units concerned must be closed definitively in accordance with the closure plan if they have not become competitive by that date and provided that the Union’s energy needs do not require their continued existence;
Amendment 66 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f
f) the overall amount of closure aid granted by a Member State for any particular undertaking must follow a downward trend, where the reduction between successive periods of fifteen months must not be less than 33 percent of the aid provided in the initial fifteen mon. This reduction in aid shall not apply to mines that, having managed to be competitive in this period, still require public sector investment solely for the period of the closure planurpose of reducing pollution produced by coal;
Amendment 74 #
2010/0220(NLE)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. If the production units to which aid is granted pursuant to paragraph 1 are not closed at the date fixed in the closure plan as authorised by the Commission, have not become competitive and the energy sufficiency situation in the Member State concerned does not require their continued existence, the Member State concerned shall recover all aid granted in respect of the whole period covered by the closure plan.
Amendment 10 #
2009/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas, although the Commission can fully check compliance with EU law only when a final decision has been taken by national authorities, it is important, particularly in relation to environmental matters, to verify at an early stage that local, regional and national authorities correctly apply all relevant procedural requirements under EU law,
Amendment 18 #
2009/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that petitions received in 2009, almost 40% of which were deemed inadmissible, continued to focus on environment, fundamental rights, justice and the internal market; in terms of geographical focus, most of the petitions concerned the Union as a whole – followed by Germany, Spain, Italy and Romania – demonstrating that citizens do keep a watchful eye on the Union’s work and turn to it for action;
Amendment 30 #
2009/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Welcomes the increased involvement of Member States in the activity of the Committee on Petitions and the presence of their representatives at meetings; and believes that such cooperation should be strengthened as the national authorities are primarily responsible for enforcing European legislation once it has been transposed into their legal order;
Amendment 34 #
2009/2139(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Draws attention to the conclusions in its resolution on the impact of extensive urbanisation in Spain1 and asks the Spanish authorities to continue to provide an assessments of the measures taken in that regard, as they have been doing up to now;
Amendment 9 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3a (new)
Paragraph 3a (new)
3a. Advocates greater monitoring and coordination between the Commission and the Member States so as to ensure that imported food products meet the EU's quality and food safety standards, as well as its environmental and social standards;
Amendment 12 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4a (new)
Paragraph 4a (new)
4a. Stresses that as things stand the private certification systems do not provide more information on the quality of the products concerned: rather, they are in many cases becoming a financial and administrative burden as regards farmers' access to the market;
Amendment 22 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls in this respect on the Commission to conduct a study on the various options available for giving European producers the possibility of displaying on their products their commitment to quality, food safety and respect of all European standards of production, including through the option of a European Union quality logo, which should be made available onexclusively to agricultural goods resulting entirely from European production; production in the EU, and which, since it would certify compliance with the legislation subject to official controls, should in no circumstances involve any additional cost to operators or any financial or administrative burden on the Member States exercising the controls;
Amendment 29 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that sectoral marketing standards still retainplay an important role in the production chain, and consequently they should be kept; they render transparent the changes on the market and allow purchasers to compare prices, sizes and quality of products and ensure a level playing-field in European competition and a common language for operators;
Amendment 33 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7a (new)
Paragraph 7a (new)
7a. Calls for the restoration of marketing rules for fruit and vegetables that can supply uniform standardisation parameters and objectives which, at all stages of the food chain, can strengthen the transparency of commercial operations and establish consumer- friendly quality criteria;
Amendment 35 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 49 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Supports the introduction of additional optional reserved terms, especially in terms of the provision of a clear definition and usage of the terms "mountain products" and "low carboncal products"; further expresses support for the harmonisation at Community level of the term "mountain products", which is currently regulated in only a few Member States;
Amendment 57 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is in support of providing the consumer with the maximuma suitable amount of information available; is in favour of the introduction of comprehensive and compulsory legislationexamining the possibilities which could be offered by new Community rules for "place of farming"- labelling in certain agri-food sectors; considers that this mayshould be done in a manner that takes into account the costs of such a Europe-wide operation, as well as the specificities of particular sectors, such as that of processed agricultural good while also examining viability on a sector-by-sector basis;
Amendment 65 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 102 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for the mandatory provision ofit to be permitted to provide information through labelling (and all other means available) with regard to the "place of farming" of raw materials, where this is different from the place indicated by the geographical indication and to the name of the producer when the product is marketed under the private trade name of a retailer;
Amendment 115 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Further demands thorough ex-officio protection of geographical indications, as an obligation for authorities in all Member States; wishes to see this specifically addressed through a revision of Regulation (EC) 510/2006 of 20 March 2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs12 and through a better definition of the control procedures applicable at all stages, both 'before' and 'after', of the marketing of products; _________________________ 1 OJ L 93, 31.3.2006, p. 12.
Amendment 129 #
Amendment 130 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Reaffirms its belief that organic farming and integrated production offers European farmers a major growth opportunity; supports recent efforts to develop a new EU organic logo, applicable to all EU farmed products;
Amendment 134 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Takes the view that greathere standardisation is needed in the typology of control and certification bodies and procedures for organic products, sohould be a genuine single market in organic products, towards which goal the introduction of a compulsory Community logo represents a major contribution; in thatis consumers are provided with an assurance of safety and reliability in the form of the new EU logo, guaranteeing comparable production, control and certification criteria at Community level and helping to resolve problems and further promote the internal market;nection, expresses its support for the framework established in Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2092//911, and hopes that, even though it has recently come into force, it will fulfil all of its legislative potential as soon as possible; _______________________________ 1 OJ L 189, 20.7.2007, p. 1.
Amendment 148 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27a (new)
Paragraph 27a (new)
27a. Supports promoting systems for producing quality food products using sustainable criteria, as in the case of integrated production; calls for the Community regulation of this area, with a view to unifying the criteria existing in the different Member States, to be backed up by a suitable promotion campaign informing the consumer of the main features of integrated production in Europe;
Amendment 151 #
Amendment 152 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27a (new)
Paragraph 27a (new)
27a. Supports the drawing-up of European guidelines for best practice for the operation of the private certification systems concerned with agricultural product quality; these guidelines should be met by all operators and should include a set of concepts aimed at helping the productive sector develop the value added of its products, encouraging the mutual recognition of certification systems and the participation of producers in drawing up those systems, and applying those systems through producers' associations with a view to reducing the costs of certification and implementation;
Amendment 38 #
2006/0206(COD)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 43 #
2006/0206(COD)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The exchange of information shall inter alia analyse the results of the consideration given to Almadén as the site for the safe storage of existing metallic mercury stocks or metallic mercury sub- produced by European industry in accordance with Article 2.
Amendment 45 #
2006/0206(COD)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Six months before the ban on exports comes into force in accordance with Article 1, the Commission shall evaluate the effectiveness and impact of the compensation measures undertaken in order to allow the area affected by the closure of mercury mines to achieve viable economic and social alternatives.