BETA

56 Amendments of Jacek WŁOSOWICZ

Amendment 104 #

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights the importance of supporting young people, especially those not in education, employment or training (NEETs), by promoting traineeships and apprenticeships, dual learning and, work- based learning and helping them to find tuition in a format which would appeal to them and which is attainable; considers these as valuable steps in the transition from education to professional life;
2013/07/03
Committee: CULT
Amendment 64 #

2013/2022(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas HAIs can occur as a result of time spent in healthcare establishments or, during the provision of any healthcare services, including home-based services or at home (in particular as a result of contamination of medical instruments or equipment);
2013/07/18
Committee: ENVI
Amendment 167 #

2013/2020(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Encourages all countries in the region to tackle the persistent reports of alleged arbitrary arrests, ill-treatment and abuses, even torture, despite legislation prohibiting such practices; expresses concern over the reports of alleged forced disappearances of convicted prisoners in Mauritania; is troubled by reports of extremely poor conditions in some of the region’s prisons, which inflict greatcompound the suffering onf their inmates;
2013/07/04
Committee: AFET
Amendment 30 #

2012/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
(6) Volunteers can strengthen humanitarian aid operations and contribute to the professionalization of humanitarian aid when they are adequately selected, trained and prepared for deployment so as to ensure that they have the necessary skills and, competences and abilities to help people in need in the most effective way.
2013/01/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 34 #

2012/0245(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) The Union's principles of equal opportunities and non-discrimination suggest that Union citizens and long-term residents in the Union of all walks of life and age should be able to engage as active citizens. GHowever, given the specific challenges posed by work related tof the humanitarian context and hence the need for adequate emotional maturity, participants of the EU Aid Volunteers should be aged over 18.
2013/01/16
Committee: EMPL
Amendment 51 #

2011/2081(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Recognises that governments have the primary responsibility for hampering freedom of the press and media, and are increasingly resorting to legal pressure, e.g. through the abuse of anti-terrorism legislation and laws on national security, treason or subversion, and the use of licences to broadcast on digital platforms in order to restrict press and media freedom;
2013/04/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 26 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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, energy and industrial raw materials, climate change, the environment and biodiversity, health, support to employment in rural areas and demographic change in the EU and whereas in this context the situation brought about by the Lisbon Treaty must be taken into account,
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 38 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas food is a strategic product and whereas farming, which produces our food, cannot be treated as an ordinary market-driven economic sector;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 52 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas the European Parliament upholds the concept of multifunctional, broad-based agriculture spreadupporting employment throughout Europe and whereas in its resolution of 8 July 2010 on the future of the CAP after 2013 it already laid the foundations for sustainable agriculture,
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 125 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L
L. whereas there should not be any differentiation in the treatment of farmers according to size of holding and legal form for the purpose of direct payments, although the possibility of introducingit is essential for a basic allowance for small farmers should not be excludto be introduced,
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 145 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital N a (new)
Na. whereas, according to Eurostat, employment in the agriculture sector decreased of 25% between 2000 and 2009 and that the aim of maintaining agricultural employment in disadvantaged areas should not be abandoned,
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 153 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital O
O. whereas, because the world economy is becoming integrated more rapidly, trade systems are as rule being liberalised more by multilateral negotiations (the Doha Round) and whereas in relation to imports from third countries should comply with environmental, animal welfare, plant protection and consumer protection standards need to be raisedequivalent to EU level and with minimum employment standards should be complied with,
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 424 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. In the case of direct farm payments, advocates moving away from historical and individual reference values and calls for a transition to a uniform area-based regional or national premium for decoupled payments, taking notably permanent and seasonal employment into account in the next financing period; recognises, however, that the situations in the individual Member States are very disparate, requiring special measures per region;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 430 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. In the case of direct farm payments, advocates moving away from historical and individual reference values and calls for a swift transition to a uniform area-based regional or national premium for decoupled payments in the next financing period; recognises, however, that the situations in the individual Member States are very disparate, requiring special measures per region;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 439 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Advocates keeping the second pillar in much the same size and form as it is today;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 443 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Takes the view that first- and second- pillar payments should be ruled out for land sown to GMO crops;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 444 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Takes the view that first- and second- pillar payments should be ruled out for farms engaging in intensive livestock production and all breeding activities that do not comply with animal welfare requirements;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 450 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that Member States which currently apply the simplified Single Area Payment Scheme (SAPS) should switch to the single farm paymentbe able to use it as an alternative to the system with entitlements; calls for support in making the conversionfor Member States changing system;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 470 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for an adequate basic allowance for small farmers, which Member States can optionally determine 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 should be combined with a simplification of the system and must not hamper the necessary structural change;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 523 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that decoupling has essentially proved its worth, given the increased effect on income and greater autonomy in decision-making on the part of farmers and the associated simplification of the CAP, and calls for this also, in general, to apply to suckler cow and sheep premiums; recognises, however, that in certain particularly labour intensive sectors and regions such as mountain regions, where there are no alternatives to relatively labour-intensive livestock farming, there may be considerable economic and environmental drawbacks which cannot be reconciled with the aims of the Treaty; acknowledges, therefore, that production-based premiums might be defensible within a narrowly defined framework for a limited period even after 2013;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 544 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Calls – without casting any doubt on the results of the 2008 Health Check of the CAP – for appropriations under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 primarily to be allocated for measures to promote territorial coherence and boost key sectors (e.g. the dairy and sheep sectors and suckler cows),, support rural employment and boost key sectors for area-based environmental measures (e.g. organic farming) which to date have not been included in the second pillar; considers that the budget for Article 68 could – subject to contrary results of an impact assessment – cover up to 10% of direct payments;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 567 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
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; 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, therefore, measures which discriminate against particular types of farm; takes the view, however, that capping of support for the largest farms should be considered, at least with reference to that portion of direct payments that serves as income support, and should be degressive above a given support threshold;
2011/03/21
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 653 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that resource protection should beis already directly linked to the granting of direct payments in order to attain these environmental objectives to the maximum without, which obviates the need to introduce new, bureaucratic environmental conditions into the first pillar; considers that a flat-rate income payment, as envisaged in a top-up model in the first pillar, must cover costs and income losses; is aware that good agricultural and environmental condition (GAEC) standards and other aspects of cross-compliance are not implemented in the same way in all the Member States; takes the view, accordingly, that harmonisation of GAEC standards and binding cross-compliance standards could make the first pillar greener and ensure a level playing field across the EU;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 688 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Considers therefore that any environmental advantages can be attained more effectively and directly by means of second-pillar measures adopted by the Member States, which should ideally build on existing agrienvironmental measures or should supplement measures which take into account climatic and geographical differences in the Member States; observes that resource protection programmes should be pursued everywhere by means of a priority catalogue of area-based measures in the second pillar which are subject to basic requirements, particularly in the fields of climate, environment and innovation (Annex I), and are 100% EU- financed; regards the further greening of direct payments in the first pillar as lying in the fact that any recipient of direct payments in the EU must implement at least two priority area-based resource protection programmes in order to be eligible for the complete farm paydirect payment (subject to penalties in the same way as under the cross-compliance arrangements); believes that the administration involved in these measures can be minimised by managing them in accordance with the system of the existing agrienvironmental programmes, thus avoiding duplication of monitoring and additional application and administration procedures;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 746 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Realises that, as a rule, resources from the firstsecond pillar (as for a top-up model) should be used to pay for this environmental component; believes, however, that Member States where direct payments lie below the EU average should be gihaven the option of making the payment by means of cofinancing from the first pillar or instead by means of financing entirely from the second pillar; observes that the Member States must notify the Commission of their decision on the financing by 31 July 2013; notes that individual Member States’ modulation resources should be used-pillar funds;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 759 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Advocates compensation for natural disadvantages in the secondfirst pillar and rejects a complementary payment with a view to simplifying the first pillar on account of the additional administrative work involvedCAP support system;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 842 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Considers that the health check approach should be pursued further, as these existing market instruments have also demonstrated their value as a safety net; takes the view that these market measures, and in particular intervention, should only be used as a safety net in case of price crises and potential market disruption;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 921 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
39. Continues to support the Commission’s proposal to lower the intervention thresholds for market crops to zero, maintaining a – possibly reduced – intervention threshold only in the case of wheat;deleted
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 957 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
41. Considers rather that these measures should be promoted optionally, by decision of the Member State, in the first pillar (now Article 69) within the existing financing ceiling of the Member State concerned and that Member States should be allowed, initially, on the basis of national and regional needs, to use up to 2% of direct payments for risk management, stabilisation and prevention measuressecond pillar; considers that, in justified cases, Member States should be allowed to make additional resources available from national funds;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 976 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
42. Calls on the Commission to examine the extent to which producer groups or sectoral associations can be extended to all production sectors, associated to market management and incorporated into the risk prevention schemes;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1005 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
45. Advocates that the 2006 sugar market reform be extended to 2020 in its existing form in order to develop a system for the subsequent period which can operate without quotas;deleted
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1024 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45a. States its opposition to irrational restrictions on agricultural production in the EU, such as the sugar market reform, which are undermining food security and pushing up consumer prices;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1076 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
48. Is aware of the importance of the second pillar, in view of its environmental, modernisation and structural improvement achievements and the need for further development of the agri-foods sector and a better quality of life in rural areas, but also for attaining political objectives, which should also benefit farmers; calls therefore for second- pillar measures to be better suited to their objectives, so that the effectiveness of growth, employment and climate measures and measures for the benefit of rural areas can be increased; considers that, in this context, particular attention should be devoted to assisting young farmers;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1083 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
48. Is aware of the importance of the second pillar, in view of its environmental, animal welfare, modernisation and structural improvement achievements, but also for attaining political objectives, which should also benefit farmers; calls therefore for second- pillar measures to be better suited to their objectives, so that the effectiveness of growth, employment and climate measures and measures for the benefit of rural areas can be increased; considers that, in this context, particular attention should be devoted to assisting young farmers;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1145 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
50. Advocates in this connection that the compensatory allowance for disadvantaged areas be retained in the second pillar; considers that it should be ascertained what cofinancing rate appears to be appropriatefirst pillar; calls on the Commission to retain the existing criteria for demarcation of disadvantaged areas;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1200 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
53. Calls for abrupt changes in the allocation of appropriations in the second pillar to be avoided, as Member States require certainty to enable them to plan and continuity of financing; calls, in this connection, for the current criteria for distributing funding among Member States to be retained;
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 1246 #

2011/2051(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
57. Observes that there is a need for action with regard to national tax law applicable to farms in order to distribute the tax burden more evenly over a period of years;deleted
2011/03/22
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 4 #

2010/2106(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that forests not only are essential to the environment, but also contribute to the achievement of social and economic objectives, for example by providing timber, improving the general living environment and protecting crops; forests are a major source of funding for rural communities, revenue being generated by activities relating to forestry, hunting and tourism;
2010/11/09
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 14 #

2010/2106(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that agriculture is vulnerable to climate change, the manifestations of which have been increasing in number, frequency and intensity, deforestation having been taking place in numerous regions of Europe; forests also play an important role in terms of protecting the soil from water and wind erosion, watercourse regulation, water quality standards and the protection of vital springs, all of which are of relevance to agriculture;
2010/11/09
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 26 #

2010/2106(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that active forest management is important for its contribution to rural economies and job creation, as well as EU energy strategy; the great potential of forests as a renewable source of energy is currently being underexploited; accordingly welcomes the Commission’s public consultation initiative regarding the role of agriculture and forestry in achieving climate-change objectives; calls on the Commission to propose ways of extending these strategies to include the reduction of carbon emissions and carbon sequestration by means of land use and land-use change and forestry (LULUCF);
2010/11/09
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 39 #

2010/2106(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that agriculture and forestry can be made to function as an integrated whole; while the aspects relating to production are essential, they are not inconsistent with the protection of forests or the other benefits deriving from them; it is necessary to strike the correct balance between the two and ensure interaction between them; it is necessary to ensure interaction between the two sectors, for example through the more efficientective allocation of available funding; European forestry policy, particularly under the second pillar of the CAP, must be continued with an adequate level of funding under the post- 2013 CAP;
2010/11/09
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 75 #

2010/2106(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
9. Points out that forestry is closely related to agriculture, given that most forest owners in Europe are also farmers; recognises, however, that forestry is an independent sector of the rural economy, especially in areas that are beyond the reach of agriculture or are particularly valuable for nature conservation and leisure activities;
2010/11/09
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 97 #

2010/2106(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that the EU should support sustainable forest management through funding for forestry activities of benefit to it; special attention should be given in this respect to forestry undertakings, most of which are small or medium sized; they must be encouraged to modernise and restructure in order to meet the new challenges arising from climate change and the economic crisis; appropriate legal solutions should be sought enabling forestry to develop in a sustainable way and to fulfil its productive, protective and social functions in accordance with the expectations of advanced societies;
2010/11/09
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 101 #

2010/2106(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
14. Reiterates its concerns regarding forest fires, which are a serious problem, and the need to take action to prevent any deterioration in the composition of forests as a result of excessive forestation.;
2010/11/09
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 28 #

2010/0267(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 73/2009
Article 2 a
In order to take into account new legislation that may become necessary, tThe Commission shall, by means of a delegated act, amend Annex I.
2011/03/23
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 31 #

2010/0267(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 73/2009
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4
In order to take into account new legislation that may become necessary, tThe Commission shall, by means of a delegated act, amend Annex V.
2011/03/23
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 33 #

2010/0267(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 8
Regulation (EC) No 73/2009
Article 12 – paragraph 5
5. In order to guarantee the proper functioning of the farm advisory system, the Commission may adopt, by means of delegated acts, provisions aiming at rendering such system fully operational. These provisions may relate, amongst others, to the scope of the farm advisory system and the accessibility criteria for farmers.
2011/03/23
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 45 #

2010/0267(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 65 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 73/2009
Article 122 – paragraph 3
(65a) In Article 122, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: ‘3. For all new Member States the single area payment scheme shall be available until 31 December 2015. New Member States shall notify the Commission of their intention to terminate the application of the scheme by 1 August of the last year of application.’
2011/03/23
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 47 #

2010/0267(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 69 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 73/2009
Article 129
(69a) Article 129 is amended as follows: (a) Paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: ‘By way of derogation from Article 122, the new Member States applying the single area payment scheme may decide, by 1 August 2011, to grant from 2012 a separate soft fruit payment. It shall be granted on the basis of objective and non- discriminatory criteria such as the payments received under the transitional soft fruit payment provided for in Article 98 and in respect of a representative period of at least one year, to be fixed by that Member State but no later than 2011.’ (b) Paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: ‘From 2012, Member States applying this article may grant national aid in addition to the separate soft fruit payment. The total amount of Community and national aid shall not exceed the following ceilings: - Bulgaria: EUR 960 000, - Latvia: EUR 160 000, - Lithuania: EUR 240 000, - Hungary: EUR 680 000, - Poland EUR 19 200 000.’
2011/03/23
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 7 #

2009/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K
K. whereas the proposed eight biophysical criteria and the proposed threshold value of 66% of the area are not anticipated to be suitable in all cases for determining the actual handicap, as this partly depends on the crop grownmany factors, including those linked to biophysical constraints which interact with each other,
2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 44 #

2009/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Considers that the discussions and studies so far conducted by the Member States on the question of new methods of delimiting LFAs point to the need to change the definition of some criteria (e.g. soil texture) and to introduce additional biophysical criteria (e.g. soil acidity), in order to ensure that the new LFAs include all areas with natural handicaps affecting agricultural production in a manner consistent with the Council regulation;
2010/02/09
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 79 #

2009/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that the system of fines for farmers for errors in payment claims should be commensurate with the importance of the infringement, and that penalties should not be applied in the case of unimportant mistakes, and particularly not in the case of errors that are not the fault of the farmer;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 80 #

2009/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Highlights the need to avoid penalising farmers twice for the same infringement and recognises that the imposition of an administrative fine should rule out criminal responsibility for the same infringement, except in the case of deliberate and intentional fraud;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 81 #

2009/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Points out that any administrative fines, including the obligation to pay back any payments obtained by the farmer, should not be based on circumstances objectively beyond the farmer’s control, and particularly not on unforeseeable events;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 82 #

2009/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. Points out the problem of farmers with spouses who run separate agricultural holdings, who should therefore have separate rights and obligations with respect to claims for CAP payments;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 111 #

2009/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Recognises that farmers should have the possibility to lodge objections against the controls, and that those objections should be investigated objectively without delay;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI