44 Amendments of Vincenzo LAVARRA
Amendment 4 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas there is ever-increasing consumer interest not only in food safety but also in the origins and production methods of food products; whereas certain market operatorsthe European Union haves already responded to this trend, introducing a variety of food quality marksfour food quality and origin marks, namely Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), Protected Geographical Indication (PGI), Traditional Speciality Guaranteed (TSG) and Organic Farming;
Amendment 8 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the reflection process launched by the Commission on the Green Paper, and supports the criterion of promoting the quality of European agricultural products while not generating additional costs or burdens for producers;
Amendment 21 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the ongoing liberalisation of world agricultural markets is exposing EU producers to direct international competition, and that any additional measures that have to be complied with may be detrimental to competitiono price volatility, which is jeopardising the future of quality agriculture in Europe;
Amendment 27 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that farmers' markets, as outlets for local, seasonal produce run directly by farmers, should be encouraged because they ensure that a fair price is paid for quality produce, strengthen the link between product and place of production and encourage consumers to make informed, quality-based choices;
Amendment 37 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is concerned at the fact that the majority of European consumers are not sufficiently well-informed concerning the food chain, especially as regards products' and raw materials' origins; advocates mandatory indication of place of production of primary products via a 'made in the EU' or 'non-EU' label; believes such a system should also apply to processed food products and should account for the origins of the main ingredients and raw materials, specifying their place of origin as well as the place of final processing;
Amendment 47 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that the optional reserved terms should be promoted as an alternative to compulsory marketing standards; does not find it necessary for the Union to create its own definition of 'optional reserved terms', given that Member States' own legislation codifies those aspects and that the country of origin principle can be applied for the mutual recognition of the standards concerned without distorting the common marketpoints out that some optional terms have positive connotations for consumers and should be defined at European level in order to ensure fair competition on the internal market and the provision of accurate information to consumers;
Amendment 72 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls for the Community rules prohibiting the registration of marks with a designation similar to that of a PDO or PGI that has already been registered to be enforced;
Amendment 82 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Favours simplifying the procedure for registering designations of origin and reducing the time required for obtaining them; believes one means of achieving this would be to delegate responsibility to the competent national bodies;
Amendment 89 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Believes that the international protection of designations of origin should be guaranteenhanced in the world trade negotiations; calls on the Commission to ensure that the issue is on the agenda for the WTO talks and is recognised as such by all international partners; considers that the protected guaranteed under Article 23 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) should be extended to cover all agrifoods and that a multilateral register of geographical indications should be set up;
Amendment 95 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Takes the view that Community and national controls are essential with regard to protected designations of origin (PDOs) and protected geographical indications (PGIs), and advocates severe penalties to deter unauthorised use of those instruments; considers it essential to ensure automatic protection of designations of origin by Member States; favours simplifying the procedures for obtaining PDOs, as well as stringent controls by Member State authorities when certifying that all stages of the production process have taken placed in the geographical area concerned;
Amendment 100 #
2008/2220(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Advocates further action to disseminate information on these systems and popularise them, with Community financial support, both within the single European market and in third countries; believes that the Community cofinancing rate for European information and promotion programmes on quality European products needs to be increased;
Amendment 9 #
2008/0146(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The objectives of the CAP set out in Article 33 of the Treaty include the stabilisation of markets, assuring the availability of supplies and ensuring that supplies reach consumers at reasonable prices. The provision of Community aid under a School Fruit Scheme to supply fruit and vegetable and banana products, which should be as fresh as possible, seasonal, and obtainable at low cost, to pupils in educational establishments would meet these objectives. Further, the Scheme should bring young consumers to appreciate fruit and vegetables and therefore should enhance future consumption thereby promoting earnings in agriculture, also an objective of the CAP. In addition, under Article 35(b) of the Treaty, provision may be made within the framework of the common agricultural policy for joint measures, such as a School Fruit Scheme, to promote consumption of certain products.
Amendment 49 #
2008/0146(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 2 – point 1 – subpoint a
Article 2 – point 1 – subpoint a
Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007
Part II – Title I – Chapter IV – Section IVa – Subsection IIa – Article 103ga – paragraph 1
Part II – Title I – Chapter IV – Section IVa – Subsection IIa – Article 103ga – paragraph 1
1. Under conditions to be determined by the Commission, from the 2009/10 school year, Community aid shall be granted for supplying to pupils in educational establishments certain products of the fruit and vegetables, processed fruit and vegetables and bananas sectors to, which shall be as fresh as possible, seasonal, and obtainable at low cost, and shall be determined by the Commission, and may also be granted for certain related costs of logistics, distribution, equipment, communication, monitoring and evaluation.
Amendment 51 #
2008/0146(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 2 – point 1 – subpoint a
Article 2 – point 1 – subpoint a
Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007
Part II – Title I – Chapter IV – Section IVa – Subsection IIa – Article 103ga – paragraph 1
Part II – Title I – Chapter IV – Section IVa – Subsection IIa – Article 103ga – paragraph 1
1. Under conditions to be determined by the Commission, from the 2009/10 school year, Community aid shall be granted for supplying to pupils in educational establishments certain products of the fruit and vegetables, processed fruit and vegetables and bananas sectors to be determined by the Commission and may also be granted fo; that Community aid must also cover certain related costs of logistics, distribution, equipment, communication, monitoring and evaluation.
Amendment 376 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. The remaining amount resulting from the application of Article 7(1) and the amounts resulting from the application of Article 7(2) shall be allocated (as a priority to operations which enable competitiveness to be increased and new jobs to be created) to the Member State where the corresponding amounts have been generated, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 128(2). They shall be used in accordance with Article 69(5a) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005.
Amendment 478 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – indent 1
Article 46 – indent 1
In duly justified cases, Member States may decide, by 1 August 2009 at the latest, and acting in compliance with the general principles of Community law, to move as from 2010 towards approximating the value of payment entitlements established under Chapter I to IV of Title III of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. To this end payment entitlements may be made subject to progressive modifications according to at least three pre-established annual steps and objective and non- discriminatory criteria.
Amendment 482 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 3 a (new)
In areas subject to public use requirements or other collective land management contracts, the value of payment entitlements may be redefined on the basis of the surface area of the farm, provided that the parameters of maximum environmental load are respected.
Amendment 495 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1
Article 49 – paragraph 1
1. In duly justified cases Member States applying Article 48 of this Regulation may decide, by 1 August 2009 at the latest, and acting in compliance with the general principles of Community law, to move as from 2011 towards approximating the value of payment entitlements established under this section or under Section 1 of Chapter 5 of Title III of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. To this end they may make such payment entitlements subject to progressive modifications according to at least two pre- established annual steps and objective and non-discriminatory criteria.
Amendment 583 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Amendment 701 #
2008/0103(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 82 – paragraph 2
Article 82 – paragraph 2
2. The aid shall be granted for a maximum of five consecutive years as from the marketing year in which the threshold of 50% referred to in paragraph 1 has been reached but no later than foruntil the marketing year 2013/2014.
Amendment 63 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Points to the need for risk categorisation also to cover issues relating to stocking density; points out that high stocking densities on large farms using industrial breeding methods are usuallymay in certain circumstances be detrimental to the welfare of the animals and, furthermore, significantl may increase the risk of disease and hamper disease controltransmission; takes the view that agricultural policy should, in a number of sensitive areas, encourage lower stocking densities and should not provide incentives for the establishment of large holdings; stresses, furthermore, that large, intensive livestock holdings should come under special veterinary, sanitary and environmental surveillance and that their siting should not adversely affect the local population or the environment;
Amendment 72 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Points to the heightened risks involved in long-distance transport of live animals, which spreads disease and hampers disease-control efforts; considers, in this connection, that restrictions should be placed on the transport of live animals and that thought should be given to placing an eight-hour ceiling on transport timespossibility of disease being transmitted over wider areas as a result of long-distance transport of live animals; considers, in this connection, that closer checks should be made on live animals at departure; considers the measures recently adopted on the maximum limits on transport time for individual animal species and the relevant transport arrangements to be positive;
Amendment 136 #
2007/2260(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Shares the view that better border biosecurity is particularly important in view of the fact that the EU is the world's largest importer of food, including animal products; considers that, in view of the risk of infection- carrying or diseased animals being brought into the EU, veterinary and sanitary checks at EU borders need to be particularly thorough and stringent and should make it possible to ascertain whether animals have been reared in accordance with animal welfare standards laid down in EU legislation;
Amendment 72 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Manufacturers’ compliance with the targets under this Regulation should be assessed at the Community level. Manufacturers whose average specific emissions of CO2 exceed those permitted under this Regulation should pay an excess emissions premium in respect of each calendar year from 2012 onwards. The premium should be modulated as a function ofccording to the extent to which manufacturers fail to comply with their target. It should increase over time. In order to provide a sufficient incentive to take measures to reduce specific emissions of CO2 from passenger cars, the premium should reflect technological costs. The amounts of the excess emissions premium should be considered as revenue for the budget of the European UnionThe premium should be similar to that paid in other sectors under the European emissions trading scheme (ETS).
Amendment 142 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. The excess emissions premium under paragraph 1 shall be calculated using the following formula: Excess emissions x number of new passenger cars not in accordance on average with the manufacturer’s specific emissions target x excess emissions premium prescribed in paragraph 3. Where: ‘Excess emissions’ means the positive number of grams per kilometre by which the manufacturer’s average specific emissions exceeded its specific emissions target in the calendar year rounded to the nearest three decimal places; and ‘Number of new passenger cars’ means the number of new passenger cars for which it is the manufacturer and which were registered in that year. produced by the manufacturer and registered in that year; and ‘Number of new passenger cars not in accordance on average with the manufacturer’s specific emissions target’ means the number of new passenger cars produced by the manufacturer and registered in the year concerned whose emissions exceed a threshold set at such a level that the average emissions from all of the manufacturer’s registered vehicles with emissions below that threshold correspond to the manufacturer’s specific target.
Amendment 150 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. The excess emissions premium, shall be: (a) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2012, 20 euros; (b) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2013, 35 euros; (c) in relation to excess emissionset at a level comparable to the premiums laid down in othe caler sectors undaer year 2014, 60 euros; and (d) in relation to excess emissions in the calendar year 2015 and subsequent calendar years, 95the European emissions trading scheme (ETS), shall be 20 euros..
Amendment 160 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – title and paragraph 1
Article 9 – title and paragraph 1
Amendment 184 #
2007/0297(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1
Annex I – paragraph 1
1. For each new passenger car, the permitted specific emissions of CO2, measured in grams per kilometre shall be determined in accordance with the following formula: Permitted specific emissions of CO2 = 130 + a × (M – M0) Where: M = mass of the vehicle in kilograms (kg) M0 = 1289.0 × f f = (1 + AMI)6 Autonomous mass increase (AMI) = 0 % a = 0.0457230
Amendment 11 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the development and use of agricultural biotechnology may offers an opportunity to develop both economically and environmentally sustainable farming and food production,
Amendment 20 #
2006/2059(INI)
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 yields, better product quality, reduced use of chemical fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides and fossil fuels and reduced soil erosion and pollution,
Amendment 47 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the use of new technologies, for example in new crops for medicinal or other non-food purposes, could offers new production opportunities, particularly in sectors where conventional production has ceased to be economically profitable,
Amendment 55 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas genetically modified products for use in agriculture necessarily have to pass very stringent assessments and the present authorisation process is slow and bureaucraticGMO- related environmental risk assessment procedures and methods must be further harmonised,
Amendment 67 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the success of the production of second-generation biomass-based bio-fuels is conditional on support for biotechnological research into processing,
Amendment 87 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Encourages efforts to develop biotechnologies in the EU as one way ofwith a view to making agriculture viable and capable of providing a living, and takes the view that these biotechnologies facilitateing 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 conventional and organic agriculture to remain successful on their markets;
Amendment 91 #
2006/2059(INI)
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, entirely novel products will emerge;
Amendment 98 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. BelievHopes that biotechnology applications may help to reduce the use of pesticides, herbicides and fertilisers in crop cultivation in future;
Amendment 108 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Supports the viewHopes that biotechnologies may offein future play a part in the search for attractive alternative methods of energy production in rural areas and that biomass, biogas and bio-fuels can help in the diversification of the energy sources, thus increasing income in rural areas;
Amendment 130 #
2006/2059(INI)
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 #
2006/2059(INI)
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 #
2006/2059(INI)
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 #
2006/2059(INI)
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 139 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Asks for clarificationUrges the Commission and the Member States to adopt a legislative framework concverning 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;
Amendment 156 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 171 #
2006/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Emphasises the need to conduct balanced and transparent discussions and assessments involving all the parties concerned, including EU citizens;(Does not affect English version.)