BETA

14 Amendments of Rolandas PAKSAS related to 2011/2307(INI)

Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. points out that no country alone can resolve the decline of biodiversity, particularly within marine ecosystems, and that Member States must collaborate and coordinate their efforts more effectively in order to solve this global problem; emphasizes that strong implementation of biodiversity policy benefits both society and economy;
2012/01/09
Committee: PECH
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Agrees with the Commission analysis that biodiversity loss is not only costly for society as a whole, but also for economic actors in sectors that depend directly on ecosystem services and on the long-term availability and diversity of natural assets; agrees furthermore that nature-based innovation and action to restore ecosystems and conserve biodiversity has a significant potential to create new skills, jobs and business opportunities; notes that the enormous economic value of biodiversity offers a worthwhile return on the invaluable investment allocated to its conservation;
2012/01/17
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that our natural heritage is a major ecological asset which contributes to human wellbeing; takes the view that all EU Member States should cooperate and coordinate their efforts to ensure a more effective use of natural resources and limit damage to the biodiversity; stresses that landowners should play the main role in managing natural resources and restoring biodiversity;
2012/02/08
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Urges the Commission to consider the way to deal with those species and habitats whose economic value cannot be directly calculated, as well as those on whose functional economic value a price cannot be put;
2012/01/09
Committee: PECH
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission further to intensify their efforts in integrating biodiversity into the development, implementation and funding of other EU policies, thereby making the EU’s sectoral and budgetary policies more consistent and ensuring compliance with binding commitments on biodiversity protection; calls for an increase in funding for nature conservation measures, at both European and national level;
2012/01/17
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers it particularly important to maintain the status of all protected habitats and species registered up to 2020 in the EU, including locations situated in Natura 2000 area and beyond in order to ensure a favourable conservation status for all habitats and species up to 2050;
2012/01/17
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. stresses that in order to achieve the six new EU Biodiversity Strategies by 2020, the objectives need to follow already laid down EU regulations and to manage related initiatives and programs appropriately, in particular the network of protected sites Natura 2000 and the LIFE +; calls for adequate funding for Natura 2000 sites in the new financial period;
2012/01/09
Committee: PECH
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that one reason why we have failed to reverse the continuing trend of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation globally is our incomplete understanding of the complexity of biodiversity and the interactions of its parts with each other and with the living environment, including the value of biodiversity for current and future human generations; reiterates that biodiversity science is the necessary backbone for any kind of policy implementation; considers that the failure to stop biodiversity loss is unacceptable both ethically and economically because future generations will be unable to benefit from the normal functions of ecosystems and the well- being created by natural assets.
2012/01/17
Committee: ITRE
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls for specific measures aimed at preserving biodiversity to by elaborated and applied; believes that specific measures relating to habitats and species should be applied to farms on a case-by- case basis;
2012/02/08
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Evaluates positively and supports the EU Biodiversity Strategy to the year 2020, including its aims and activities; nonetheless considers that some measures need to be better developed and its strategy directed more towards implementation;
2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Considers it necessary to strike a balance between European biodiversity strategy and rural development projects within the Member States so as to ensure the conservation of biodiversity; notes that agriculture should slow the process of eutrophication and loss of biodiversity in aquatic ecosystems;
2012/02/08
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises the importance of the inclusion of aspects of biodiversity protection in all areas of EU policy; notes that until now biodiversity policy has been insufficiently integrated into EU economic and financial policy;
2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need to organise biodiversity awareness and information campaigns for all ages and social categories; believes that farmers have a major role in the conservation of biodiversity, and that they should therefore be encouraged and motivated to participate actively in the relevant programmes; takes the view that education and professional training, particularly in farming and related sectors, should be concentrated more on the protection of biodiversity.
2012/02/08
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to devote particular attention to species and habitats the economic value of whose “functions” is priceless, since efforts to preserve biodiversity in the future will be directed at those areas that over a short period of time will produce economic benefits, or be expected to do so;
2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI