76 Amendments of Krisztina MORVAI
Amendment 154 #
2014/2222(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Calls on the Commission to urgently develop a legal and policy framework based on the principle of equal treatment, to decrease the huge differences that presently exist between the remuneration (payment gap) and working conditions of workers employed in identical or basically similar positions and by the same company (group) in different Member States, in violation of the most fundamental values of the EU, including non-discrimination and cohesion;
Amendment 148 #
2014/2059(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Highlights the rising number of workers, particularly young people, departing their countries of origin for other Member States in search of employment opportunities, and is deeply concerned about the persistent divergences between those Member States creating employment and those supplying a low-cost labour force; urges the Commission to develop a better legal framework for cross-border movement of workers in order to ensure freedom of movement while consecrating the principle of equal treatment and safeguarding wages and social standards; calls on the Commission to urgently develop a legal and policy framework based on the principle of equal treatment, to decrease the huge differences that presently exist between the remuneration (payment gap) and working conditions of workers employed in identical or basically similar positions and by the same company (group) in different Member States, in violation of the most fundamental values of the EU, including non-discrimination and cohesion; calls for the establishment in each Member State, either by law or through collective bargaining, of a minimum wage equivalent to at least 60 % of the respective national average wage;
Amendment 7 #
2012/2131(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas migrant women, including EU citizens who migrate between EU countries, are at major risk of discrimination, lacking access to social services and legal protection and being subject to physical, psychological, economic and sexual abuse;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
Citation 11 a (new)
Amendment 11 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas total input costs for EU farmers climbed on average by almost 40 % between 2000 and 2010, while farmgate prices increased on average by less than 25 %, according to Eurostat; whereas the increase in input costs within that decade reached 60 % for energy and lubricants, almost 80 % for synthetic fertilisers and soil improvers, over 30 % for animal feed, around 36 % for machinery and other equipment, almost 30 % for seeds and planting stock and nearly 13 % for plant protection products and pesticides; whereas, however, this trend accelerated at the beginning of the 1990s with the consolidation of the neoliberal agricultural policy;
Amendment 27 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, especially in the livestock sector, costs are also rising due to phytosanitary, hygiene and food security requirements, as a result of which the competitiveness of European producers will further decrease in comparison with those in third countries, who do not have to comply with these strict requirements;
Amendment 32 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas on average 42 % of total water supply in Europe is used by agriculture (Greece 88 %, Spain 72 %, Portugal 59 %) and whereas costs of irrigation and drainage have substantially increased as a result of freshwater depletion and unsustainable management and are expected to rise further due to climate change;
Amendment 60 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
La. whereas producers practising mixed farming make far greater use of the possibilities inherent in their holdings such as producing their own feedstuffs, crop rotation, using organic manure, mechanical weed control, etc. and can thus significantly reduce their dependence on external supplies of artificial fertiliser, soil improvers, pesticides and weed-killers as the prices of these rise;
Amendment 63 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas there is considerable potential in farming for saving energy and costs through improved energy efficiency and local renewable energy production (especially wind, solar, biogas, plant oil as fuel, use of waste products, etc.);
Amendment 95 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to encourage improved, sustainable agronomic practices and agricultural resource management, with the aim of reducing input costs and nutrient wastage and increasing innovation, resource efficiency and sustainability within farming systems;
Amendment 108 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses in particular the need for a European Food Prices Monitoring Tool which would deliver better transparency on input price development and allow farmgate prices to be linked to production costs and would also highlight the deficiencies in the agricultural and trade policies and other features requiring intervention;
Amendment 162 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to enable producers, in an effort to replace fossil energy, to provide fuel for their machinery in the form of plant oil made from oilseeds which they grow themselves, as well as feeding it, as a by-product rich in protein and other nutrients, to animals, thereby significantly reducing both their dependence on fossil energy and their input costs in terms of fuel and feedstuffs;
Amendment 174 #
2011/2114(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Repeats its call to include crop rotation and crop diversity in an EU-wide list of ‘greening’ measures to be rewarded within the CAP, given the positive effect the former have on climate change mitigation, soil and water quality and farmers’ finances (with significantly reduced use of fertilisers, soil improvers, plant protection products and pesticides which will reduce input costs for farmers), and to encourage a move to organic farming, which resolves the questions of feedstuff replacement, weed control and plant protection from its own resources and therefore depends less on input cost variations than traditional agriculture, so that consumers will be willing to pay more for controlled organic products;
Amendment 24 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the health of individual bees and colonies is affected by numerous lethal and sub-lethal factors, many of them interconnected; whereas the limited number of marketed medicines to fight the Varroa destructor mitebee diseases caused by the Varroa destructor, Nosema Ceranae and Nosema Apis are in many cases no longer efficient; whereas the toxic agents in certain pesticides, changing climatic and environmental conditions, loss of plant biodiversity, land use change, mismanaged beekeeping practices and the presence of invasive species weaken colonies' immune systems and favour opportunistic pathologies,
Amendment 34 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas beekeepers are primarily responsible for the health and well-being of their bees, though farming methods have a role to play too, and although this is only possible with the effective cooperation of society – in particular the agricultural community which practises chemical plant protection – and the recognition of common interests;
Amendment 47 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. whereas, in spite of the most rigorous precautions, bees and bee colonies can still be affected by various diseases which can often only be treated with antibiotics, as is the case with other animals kept for farming purposes;
Amendment 59 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Calls on the Commission to examine organic apiculture practices conducted in accordance with EU regulations, in order to reduce the problem of antibiotics and other residues, and to promote, by means of further research, information and funding, the promulgation of those elements shown to be effective;
Amendment 156 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for comprehensive scientific research, based on appropriate risk assessment, on the possible replacement of active substances in pesticides that are harmful to the pollinator oring insects and to aquatic animal stocks;
Amendment 181 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 184 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Calls on the Commission to establish in all Member States, with regard to the active ingredients of antibiotics with proven effectiveness in fighting bee diseases or which have recently been developed, uniformly-applicable measurement methods and maximum residue levels (MRL) for apiculture products, which must not proportionately exceed, given average consumption, the levels permitted for other animal products (milk, meat, eggs, etc.), and correspondingly-applied reference points for action (RPA), until new, effective veterinary medicines start to appear;
Amendment 189 #
2011/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Calls on the Commission to put in place or modify the annexes to Directive 2001/110/EC (Honey Directive) in order to improve the standards of EU production by establishing clear legal definitions for all apicultural products, including honey varieties, and defining the important parameters of honey quality, such as proline and saccarase content, low level of HMF or humidity, and adulteration (such as the glycerine content, sugar isotope ratio (C13/C14), pollen spectrum and aroma and sugar content of honey), and to apply these strictly and thoroughly to imported apiary products;
Amendment 12 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 22 a (new)
Citation 22 a (new)
- having regard to European Parliament resolution of 25 November 2010 on the situation in the beekeeping sector2
Amendment 17 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
- A. whereas the spirit informing the political response to the complex challenges of the future is more appropriately expressed in terms of its content by the Common Policy for Agriculture and Rural Areas than by the common agricultural policy with its restrictive content, and whereas the name of this common policy needs to be changed accordingly;
Amendment 23 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas a sustainable, productive and competitive European agriculture makes a significant contribution to the EU 2020 Strategy and to meeting new political challenges such as security of supply of food, the contribution of agriculture solely to its own energy needs, energy and industrial raw materials, climate change, the environment and biodiversity, health and demographic change in the EU and whereas in this context the situation brought about by the Lisbon Treaty must be taken into account,
Amendment 33 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas food security remains a central challenge for agriculture and can be much more reliably achieved in local, diverse systems, not only in the EU but globally, in particular in developing countries, as the world population is predicted to grow from 7 to 9 billion by 2050 and demand for food is projected to double by the same year according to the FAO,
Amendment 63 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, because of the specific challenges, the agriculture, food and rural development sector requires targeted measures which, in the context of enlargement, also take account of the specific situation in the EU-27, particularly with regard to their greater need for resources to enable them to catch up in terms of competition, technology and infrastructure;
Amendment 71 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the European Union must still have sufficient instruments to be prepared for market and supply crises and market and price fluctuations in the agricultural sector in the future, particularly having regard to Community supply regulation instruments on both the supply and demand sides;
Amendment 123 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas there should not be any differentiation in the treatment of farmers according to size of holding and legal formthe legal form of their holdings for the purpose of direct payments, although a fixed ceiling should be introduced to counterbalance the competition-distorting effect of the linear hectare-based aid, and the possibility of introducing a basic allowance for small farmers should not be excludbe supported,;
Amendment 143 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas the per capita real income of farmers has fallen dramatically in the past two years, with smallholders and farmers in the new Member States being particularly prone to fall below the average, and, as a result of this constant decline, it has now fallen below the level it had attained nearly 15 years ago at the beginning of the reform process,
Amendment 157 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas, because the world economy is becoming integrated more rapidly, trade systems are as a rule being liberalised more by multilateral negotiations (the Doha Round) and whereas in relation to imports from third countries environmental, animal welfare, plant protection and consumer protection standards need to be raised to EU level and minimum employment standards should be complied with – even if it means applying the import restrictions adopted by the WTO,
Amendment 472 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for an adequate basic allowance for small farmers, which Member States can optionally determine – together with the introduction of a fixed ceiling – in those Member States where these farms help to stabilise rural development; calls for these Member States to decide, in accordance with subsidiarity, what percentage of the direct payments to be incorporated in the new subsidy system should be made available to their small farmers; stresses, however, that this must not hamper the necessary structural change;
Amendment 562 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Observes that, for historical reasons, farms in the European Union have a very diverse structure as regards size, employment arrangements and legal form; points out that, in the single market, this has been shown by statistical data to cause discriminatory competitive disadvantage and bankruptcy for smallholdings and for farms in the new Member States; is aware that direct payments are moving away from a historical basis to area-based payments and that the provision of public goods is independent of farm size; rejects, theretherefore calls urgently fore, measures which discriminate againstto put an end to the discriminatory situation affecting particular types of farm;
Amendment 658 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that resource protection should be directly linked to the granting of direct payments in order to attain these environmental objectives to the maximum without the need to introduce new, bureaucratic environmental conditions into the first pillar; consiwith particular regard to halting the reduction in biodiversity, including bee mortality, should be directly linked to the granting of direct payments, effectively as a condition for these payments, in orders that a flat- rate income payment, as envisaged in a top-up model in the first pillar, must cover costs and income losseso attain these environmental objectives to the maximum;
Amendment 665 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Considers that the critical level of bee mortality which is being experienced in Europe is a general indicator of a dangerous reduction in biodiversity; accepts the scientific view that one cause of this is the excessive use of chemicals in agriculture; considers that halting bee mortality by means of the scientifically- determined selective and reduced use of chemicals must be identified as a top priority of greening under the first pillar;
Amendment 68 #
2010/0362(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) There is a problem of price transmission along the chain, in particular as regards farm-gate prices. Conversely, during 2009 the supply of milk did not react to lower demand. Indeed, in some large producer Member States, in reaction to lower prices, farmers produced more than in the previous year and deposited most of the surplus in the less-developed, more volatile markets of the new Member States, the situation of whose producers thereby became increasingly difficult. Value-added in the chain has become increasingalmost exclusively concentrated in the downstream sectors, notably with dairieretail chains, and to a lesser extent in the downstream sectors, whilst producers have been unable to cover their production costs from returns from sales, thereby rendering them helpless.
Amendment 81 #
2010/0362(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The use of formalised, written contracts even containing basic elements made in advance of delivery is not widespread in a number of Member States. However, they could increase awareness and reinforce the responsibility of the operators in the dairy chain to better take into account the signals of the market, improve price transmission and adapt supply to demand, as well as help avoid certain unfair commercial practices. In a number of new Member States, in addition to the existing, above- board agreements between processors and producers, retail chains take advantage of their dominant position to demand refunds from suppliers/processors which, in the form of slotting allowances and advertising costs, for example, can amount to 25%; the greater part of these costs is then passed to the most vulnerable players, the producers.
Amendment 96 #
2010/0362(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to ensure the rational development of production and so to ensure a fair standard of living for dairy farmers, their bargaining power vis-à-vis processors should be strengthened which should result in a fairer distribution of value-added along the supply chain. The final-distributor retail chains must also be involved in transparent pricing and the proportionate distribution of burden sharing. Therefore, in order to realise these objectives of the common agricultural policy, a provision should be adopted pursuant to Articles 42 and 43(2) TFEU to allow producer organisations constituted by dairy farmers or their associations to negotiate contract terms, including price, jointly for some or all of its members' production with a dairy. However, this is only possible if, when negotiating with retail chains, dairies have similar opportunities to recoup their costs and make a fair profit, thus enabling them to set a price which will cover the producers’ costs and guarantee them an honest livelihood. In order to maintain effective competition on the dairy market, this possibility should be subject to appropriate quantitative limits. Such producer organisations should therefore also be eligible for recognition under Article 122 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007. The Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU in respect of the conditions for approval of associations of producer organisations.
Amendment 109 #
2010/0362(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) In order to follow developments in the market, the Commission needs timely information on volumes of raw milk delivered and on the volumes distributed by the retail chains, to ensure that the information system is complete. Only in this way can the VAT fraud observable in distribution between Member States be avoided. Article 192 of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 provides a basis for the exchange of information between the Member States and the Commission. However, provision should be made to ensure that processors deliver such information to the Member States on a regular basis. The Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU in respect of the scope, content, format and timing of such declarconditions for approval of associations of producer organisations.
Amendment 239 #
2010/0362(COD)
Proposal for a regulation - amending act
Article 1 – point 9
Article 1 – point 9
Regulation (EC) 1234/2007
Article 185 e – paragraph 1
Article 185 e – paragraph 1
(1) Processors of raw milk and the retail chains shall declare to the competent national authority the quantity of raw milk that has been delivered to them each month– and of milk and milk products sold – each month, with an indication of the place of origin, fat content and precise details of the supplier, thereby creating a closed chain of accountability with the aim of ensuring precise data processing and avoiding VAT fraud in trade between the Member States.
Amendment 16 #
2010/0208(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Under this set of legislation, GMOs for cultivation shall undergo an individual risk assessment before being authorised to be placed on the Union market. The aim of this authorisation procedure is to ensure a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, the environment and consumer interests, whilst ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 19 #
2010/0208(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Once a GMO is authorised for cultivation purposes in accordance with the EU legislative framework on GMOs and complies, as regards the variety that is to be placed on the market, with the requirements of EU legislation on the marketing of seed and plant propagating material, Member States are not authorised to prohibit, restrict, or impede its free circulation within their territory, except under the conditions defined by EU legislation, and except where, under such legislation or Article 2(2) of the TFEU, the Member State is entitled to restrict or prohibit the commercial cultivation of the GMO in question.
Amendment 20 #
2010/0208(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Experience has shown that cultivation of GMOs is an issue which is more thoroughly addressed by Member States, either at central or at regional and local level. Contrary toBy comparison with issues related to the placing on the market and the import of GMOs, which should remain regulated at EU level to preserve the internal market, cultivation has been acknowledged as an issue with a strong local/regional dimension. In accordance with 2. Article 2(2) TFEU Member States should therefore be entitled to have a possibility to adopt rules concerning the effective cultivation of GMOs in their territory and the marketing of propagating material for this purpose after the GMO has been legally authorised to be placed on the EU market.
Amendment 24 #
2010/0208(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) In this context, it appears appropriate to grant to Member States, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, more freedom to decide whether or not they wish to cultivate GMO crops or market such propagating material on their territory without otherwise changing the system of Union authorisations of GMOs and independently of the measures that Member States are entitled to take by application of Article 26a. of Directive 2001/18/EC to avoid the unintended presence of GMOs in other products.
Amendment 25 #
2010/0208(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Member States should therefore be authorised to adopt measures restricting or prohibiting the cultivation of all or particular GMOs in all or part of their territory, and respectively amend those measures as they deem appropriate, at all stages of the authorisation, re-authorisation or withdrawal from the market of the concerned GMOs. This should apply as well to genetically modified varieties of seed and plant propagating material which are placed on the market in accordance with relevant legislation on the marketing of seeds and plant propagating material and, in particular, in accordance with Directives 2002/53/EC and 2002/55/EC. Measures should refer to the cultivation of GMOs only and not to the free circulation and import of genetically modified seeds and plant propagating material, as or in products, and of the products of their harvest. Similarly they should not affect the cultivation of non genetically modified varieties of seed and plant propagating material in which adventitious or technically unavoidable traces of EU authorised GMOs are found.
Amendment 35 #
2010/0208(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) According to the legal framework for the authorisation of GMOs, the level of protection of human/animal health and of the environment chosen in the EU cannot be revisduced by a Member State and this situation must not be altered. However Member States may adopt measures restricting or prohibiting the cultivation of all or particular GMOs in all or part of their territory on the basis of grounds relating to the public interest other than those already addressed by the harmonised set of EU rules which already provide for procedures to take into account the risks that a GMO for cultivation may pose on health and the environment. Those measures should furthermore be in conformity with the Treaties, in particular as regards the principle of non discrimination between national and non national products and Articles 34 and 36 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as well as with the relevant international obligations of the Union, notably in the context of the World Trade Organisation.
Amendment 42 #
2010/0208(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) On the basis of the subsidiarity principle, the purpose of this Regulation is not to harmonize the conditions of cultivation in Member States but to grant freedom to Member States to invoke othermore stringent grounds than scientific assessment of health and environmental risks to ban cultivation of GMOs on their territory. In addition one of the purposes of Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations27 which is to allow the Commission to consider the adoption of binding acts at EU level would not be served by the systematic notification of Member States' measures under that Directive. Moreover, since measures which Member States can adopt under this Regulation cannot have as a subject the placing of the market of GMOs and thus does not modify the conditions of placing on the market of GMOs authorised under the existing legislation, the notification procedure under Directive 98/34/EC does not appear the most appropriate information channel for the Commission. Therefore, by derogation, Directive 98/34/EC should not be applicable. A simpler notification system of the national measures prior to their adoption appears to be a more proportionate tool for the Commission to be aware of these measures. Measures which Member States intend to adopt should thus be communicated together with their reasons to the Commission and to the other Member States one month prior to their adoption for information purposes.
Amendment 13 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, to date, the Common Agricultural Policy has met its goals with regard to achieving better productivity in the food chain, contributing to a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, market stabilisation and the provision of food supplies to EU consumers at reasonable prices, but could contribute only partly to a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, as seen in points E, G and Graph 5.
Amendment 41 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas there are currently 13.6 million people employed directly in the agricultural, forestry and fishery sectors, with an additional 5 million people working in the agri-food industry, where the EU is the world'’s largest producer of food and beverages; whereas this represents 8.6% of total EU employment which is however decreasing steadily, and accounts for 4% of the EU's GDP,
Amendment 53 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the economic crisis has had a serious negative effect on agriculture, with farm income decreasing by 12.2% on average representing a wide dispersion ranging from + 8% in Malta to – 32% in Hungary between 2008 and 2009 and unemployment in rural areas increasing in the last year; whereas as a direct effect of the economic crisis, consumption in Europe decreased on average by 10.55% between 2008 and 2009, and in some Member States this reduction exceeded 20%; whereas other effects of the economic crisis have been a lack of access to credit for farmers and a strain on the public finances of the Member States, weakening their ability to provide co- financing,
Amendment 99 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the EU must continue to ensure food security for its citizens as well as help feed the world's poor;when in the European Union today over 40 million poor people who do not have enough to eat, and help the poorest countries - whereas the number of hungry people now exceeds 1 billion and in the European Union today there are over 40 milli- to produce their own food instead of depending on pfoor people who do not have enough to eat,d aid which is just worsening the farmers situation;
Amendment 130 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that CAP market instruments are now used as safety nets to help manage market volatility and ensure a certain degree of stability and that, moreover, since the adoption of decoupled Single Farm Payments there has been a resolute move away from trade-distorting measures in line with WTO requirements; however the CAP after 2013 should not only reflect the requirements of the WTO, but should also supply management measures whenever they need to help balancing price volatility and market instability which endanger the remunerative income and the existence of farmers;
Amendment 135 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 174 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that food security remains the central challenge for EU agriculture as the world population is predicted to grow from 6 to 9 billion by 2050 and demand for food will double by 2050 according to the FAO (especially in emerging economies such as China or India); Should rather help poorer countries to produce their own food instead of being dependent on aid which exacerbates the situation of farmers and has to challenge the emerging countries that have standards constituting a threat both in terms of economic and social dumping, on environmental issues, quality and even human rights.
Amendment 253 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Is of the opinion that a strong European Common Agricultural Policy is needed to ensure that EU farmers remain competitive on the world market against well subsidised trading partners; while more emphasis the need to strengthen the farmers positions within the EU internal and local markets than before, when clear comparative advantages exist for them; believes that the EU cannot afford to rely on other parts of the world to provide for European food security and in the same time not ensuring secure livelihood even for its smallest farmers in the context of climate change, political instability in certain regions of the world and potential outbreaks of diseases or other events potentially detrimental to production capacity, therefore the food production needs to be gradually “relocalized”;
Amendment 263 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Stresses the need of supporting the idea of developing rural affairs banks. Such banks would offer long-term low- rate credit to key rural groups.
Amendment 301 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Believes that rural unemployment should be tackled by providing opportunities for diversification and new income sources, however it lays down as basic principle that the land and agriculture activities are irreplaceable basic sources of job creation directly or indirectly in the rural area;
Amendment 313 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Points out, most importantly, that in the future European agricultural policy must remain a common policy and that only a harmonised level of support – which takes into account the diverse needs of the regions and member states instead of a „one fits for all” approach - across the EU with a common set of objectives and rules can deliver the appropriate level playing field for farmers and a properly functioning Single Market with fairly compensated competitive conditions for agricultural products within the EU;
Amendment 317 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Recognises that farmers deliver a range of public goods which the market does not reward them for; therefore insists that they must be fairly rewarded and further incentivised to continue delivering higher- quality products, better animal welfare conditions and additional environmental benefits, In addition to creating more jobs, to preserve our countryside throughout Europe;
Amendment 331 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Recalls, therefore, that unless farming activity is preserved across the EU, no provision of public goods will be possible; especially in sustainable family farms.
Amendment 360 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 – subparagraph a (new)
Paragraph 30 – subparagraph a (new)
a) Stresses that land privatisation legislation in new member states prepared the ground for arable land speculation through the use of proxy fronting ownership agreements; The Eu must prevent from such massive and unfair practices which allows ownership of huge farmland, and guarantee a purchasing right first for local farmers, especially the young ones.
Amendment 369 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Insists that EU agriculture must remain competitive against fierce competition from well-subsidised trade partners; therefore believes that competitiveness should still be a fundamental objective of the CAP post-2013 to ensure that the EU has the raw materials to produce high- value European food products and they continue to win a greater share of the world market, as well as ensuring fair trade and remunerative prices for farmers;
Amendment 373 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Recalls that EU farmers produce food to the highest safety, quality, employment and animal welfare standards; believes that imports from third countries should meet the same requirements to ensure fair competition;
Amendment 386 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Insists that the maintenance of farming activity across the whole of Europe is fundamental to maintain diverse and local food production and prevent the threat of land abandonment across EU territory; Therefore, the CAP should ensure greater flexibility for Member States allowing them to use the resources available in a differentiated way according to their specific needs;
Amendment 396 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 – subparagraph a (new)
Paragraph 34 – subparagraph a (new)
a) Considers that the food market should be more localized to support a policy close to people and their communities to help them define their own agricultural policies and consumption, promote local production, using local consumer cooperatives and facing the importation of cheap mass-products and food substitutes of very poor quality
Amendment 423 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Calls for a fairer distribution of CAP payments, with the launch of a high ceiling of payments based on the surface, and insists that it should be fair to farmers in both new and old Member States8 ;
Amendment 438 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Believes that viable farming businesses and sustainable family farms are fundamental to sustaining thriving rural communities;
Amendment 489 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Believes that the new CAP must be simple to administer and reduce red tape and administrative burdens on farmers by moving towards the use of delivery tools such as outcome agreements and simple contracts and calls for measures which ensure the client friendly approaches from the authorities and their executives;
Amendment 561 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – point 1
Paragraph 48 – point 1
(1) Believes that in order to reduce the disparities in the distribution of direct support funds between Member States, the hectare basis alone will not be sufficient and, therefore, calls for additional objective criteria such as a purchasing power coefficient, hectare based and other ceilings, to be used to achieve an overall balanced distribution;
Amendment 699 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58 a (new)
Paragraph 58 a (new)
58 a. Calls for a clearer support of the CAP to defend a more traditional and localized agriculture, the protection of the identity and specific way of living and producing of populations on national, regional and local levels.
Amendment 711 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 a (new)
Paragraph 59 a (new)
59 a. Believes that a special effort must be made in the protection of our precious water-resources and waterways through the passing of new water-utility legislation and by further water protection measures; existing water works that have been privatised should be returned to state ownership.
Amendment 723 #
2009/2236(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
Paragraph 60
60. Believes that 'green growth' should be at the heart of a new rural development strategy focussing on creating new green jobs through: the development of biomass, biowaste, biogas and small-scale renewable energy production as well as encouraging the production of second-generation biofuels and the direct use of plant oil as fuel in the farms of all Member States, investing in modernisation and innovation as well as new research and development techniques for adaptation to and mitigation of climate change, providing training and advice to farmers for applying new techniques and to assist young farmers entering the industry, and adding value to high-quality products through promotion and marketing measures;
Amendment 1 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas support for small and medium-sized farms, whose production and consumption levels meet local requirements, sustains both traditional and empirical farming methods and ensure they are applied in accordance with the highest standards of quality and safety;
Amendment 2 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas it has been proven that small and medium-sized farms are more environmentally friendly since they produce less CO2, due, amongst other things, to their considerably lesser transportation needs, and since such farms strengthen local identity, biodiversity and animal welfare in Europe;
Amendment 21 #
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 Europeana diverse range of Member State 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, in addition to certificates, designations of origin and standards that already exist within the Member States, and which should be made available only to agricultural goods resulting entirely from European production;
Amendment 138 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. requests that the simplification of standards and the new European Union quality logo do not lower the anti-GMO alert level in the Member States;
Amendment 155 #
2009/2105(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. requests that the simplification of standards and the enhancement of the credibility of the EU quality logo complement already-existing certificates, designations of local, regional or national origin in the Member States;