17 Amendments of Jean-Paul DENANOT related to 2014/2234(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the objectives of the CAP have to be fulfilled, while the mutual understanding and trust between all EU institutions, national and regional bodies have to be ensured for the effective implementation of the CAP;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the cost of controls isand providing advice to stakeholders and farmers may be currently estimated at EUR 4 billion at Member State level, and are probably still rising, particularly with the introduction of ‘greening’; emphasizes the need to minimize the cost of controls and their bureaucracy burden;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the 2013 reform has resulted in significant changes in the data required from farmers to accompany applications and justify claims, with new requirements which risk bringing about a higher error rate in the initial learning and adaptation phase;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the current system has reachedto deal with an estimated 15 million transactions each year, paid to around 8 million beneficiaries, and includes a million on- the-spot-checks involving millions of reference parcels of land and consequently risks reaching its limits and action is therefore needed;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the burden of controls is in proportion, inter alia, to the complexity of the CAP; calls, therefore, for complexity to be reduced in order to cut error rates, reduce the cost to the taxpayer and at the same time ensure that the budget is correctly spent; recalls nonetheless that the complexity of the CAP is due to the diversity of farming in Europe, moreover that the aim of reducing the error rate must not be pursued to the detriment of the attainment of the objectives of the CAP, and that simplification must not result in a dismantling of the instruments that have been adopted;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP with a view to reducing the error rate and for instruments to be established which will make it possible to distinguish between error and fraud;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP with a view to reducing the error rate whilst ensuring that farmers are still able to deliver the vital food production which is at the heart of the policy and believes that continuing to tackle complexity and streamlining the operation of the CAP is one of the keys to attracting new entrants to agriculture and retaining them and their skills to ensure a thriving EU agricultural sector in the future;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that development and administration of performance-based controls should, in no way, become a source of increased uncertainty to the EU’s security of food supply;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Supports Commissioner Hogan’s initiative of simplifying the secondary legislation and guidelines of the CAP, as this would benefit farmers, paying agencies, EU institutions and taxpayers; also urges that amendments be made to the basic legislativecknowledges, however, the importance of legal stability of the basic acts;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Advocates an single annual audit so that farmers are not subjected to controls by both the Commission and the European Court of Auditors in the same year; also calls for the bundling of the audit tasks of certifying bodies, the Commissthat the administrative burden arising from audits be lightened, so that farmers are not subjected to multiple controls in the same year; stresses that error rates do not as such constitute an indicator of fraud or waste of public funds, and are derived from a different approach, which is concerned with financial corrections and the European Court of Auditorpplied in the context of conformity clearance procedures;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that levels of control should be proportionate to the size of agricultural holdings, whilst safeguarding the use of EU funds;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Favours an integrated approach to controls, whereby all the controls required on a given farm are carried out at the same time wherever possible , so that the number of testing visits is kept lower and the concomitant financial and time cost for administrations and agriculture may be reduced;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates have been extremely low over a given period; calls at the same time, however, for advice on best practice and controls to be stepped up in Member States where the error rate is high or increasing;
Amendment 95 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Believes that 100% coverage of rural areas with fast broadband, with significant awareness raising and training in its use, will be an essential tool to enable all farmers to benefit from the newest application and claims systems associated with the CAP;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Favours the increased use of e- Government technology by the Member States in order to forestall errors in the application process, which will require access to broadband internet for beneficiaries.
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on Member States to ensure that the governmental/regional bodies dealing with the new CAP implementation communicate and work together effectively to the benefit of farmers implementing the policy on the ground.
Amendment 109 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Calls on all institutions and bodies responsible for implementation of the CAP to cooperate to overcome mistrust and anxiety linked to the considerable burden of audit and control which potentially puts at risk future development and innovation and the position of the EU agriculture sector in relation to other markets.