71 Amendments of Britta REIMERS related to 2011/2051(INI)
Amendment 67 #
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,
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P b (new)
Recital P b (new)
Pb. whereas there should be support of adaption for the infrastructure to the strong requirements of the demographic change in the rural areas,
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WBroadly welcomes the cCommission Communication from the Commission concerning a reform of agricultural policy; calls, however, for the principles set out below to be incorporated in the legislative proposals"The CAP towards 2020: meeting the food, natural resources and territorial challenges of the future", in particular option 2 for reform; calls, however, for the Commission to clarify as soon as possible its overall strategy for a viable and sustainable CAP for the future;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls for the CAP to remain structured around two pillars; Points out that pillar 1 should remain fully financed by the EU budget and yearly based, while multiannual programming, a voluntary and contractual approach and co- financing should continue to apply under pillar 2;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Insists that the two pillar structure should serve the purpose of clarity, each pillar complementing the other without overlapping; the first pillar should deliver EU-wide objectives which require 'across- the-board' action whereas the second pillar should be outcome-oriented and flexible enough to easily accommodate national, regional and/or local specificities;
Amendment 432 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
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 in the next financing period; recognises, however, that the situations in the individual Member States are very disparate, often requiring special measures per regionfic regional adjustments through targeted measures;
Amendment 454 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Insists, in line with the Commission Communication, that direct payments be distributed to active farmers only, defined according to appropriate objective and non-discriminatory criteria granting the possibility of support to all natural or legal persons whose agricultural activity forms a significant part of their economic activities, or whose principal business or company object consists of exercising an agricultural activity, in line with Article 28(2) of Regulation EC No. 73/2009;
Amendment 455 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Does not believe that the Commission's proposal to introduce an upper ceiling for direct payments would deliver its objectives as it would simply result in the administrative splitting up of large agricultural holdings for pure accountancy purposes; is of the opinion that a degree of degression in the amounts large-scale farms receive from the basic direct payments could be envisaged;
Amendment 456 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 479 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 490 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls for the introduction of a second-tier of direct payments consisting of 25 to 30% of the basic direct payments in each Member State to be used as an EU-wide incentivisation scheme targeted at enhancing sustainability by improving both resource and production efficiency, making EU agriculture more competitive, in line with the recently published Commission's 'Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050';
Amendment 495 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Calls for a list of EU agreed measures to be established that will deliver the above-mentioned sustainability element of the first pillar with the twin- objective of enhancing farm environmental sustainability throughout Europe while improving farm competitiveness2; __________________ 2 See Annex 2 for an indicative list of measures
Amendment 497 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 d (new)
Paragraph 14 d (new)
14d. Believes that the EU has a role to play in meeting the challenges of food security and energy security, and therefore needs to ensure that agriculture plays a full role in meeting both these challenges; Believes therefore, that it is inappropriate for compulsory set-aside to be included in the list of sustainability measures as proposed by the Commission;
Amendment 498 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 e (new)
Paragraph 14 e (new)
14e. Calls, however, for farmers to have the freedom to opt in to the measures if they want to receive the sustainability payment, and there will be no additional penalties if they choose not to;
Amendment 499 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 f (new)
Paragraph 14 f (new)
14f. Believes that any controls put in place to check the implementation of the payments received under the sustainability top-up should be accommodated within the current integrated agricultural control system (IACS), so as to avoid the duplication of control systems under pillar 1, and that when on-farm checks are necessary, they take place at the same time as the checks already carried out for cross-compliance requirements and direct payments entitlements, or at the same time as checks on compliance with agri- environmental measures under pillar 2;
Amendment 500 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 g (new)
Paragraph 14 g (new)
14g. Believes that compensation for natural disadvantages should still lie in the second pillar; however calls, in line with the Commission's proposals to strengthen the fight against land abandonment and to guarantee local food production for local communities across the EU, for the possibility to be left to Member States to top up the support received by farms situated in areas with natural handicaps through an additional support scheme under pillar 1 using up to 10% of the national basic direct payments;
Amendment 506 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that decoupling has essentially proved its worth, given the increased effect on income andallowing 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 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, ensuring farmers respond to market signals, placing the vast bulk of the CAP into WTO green box and the associated simplification of the CAP, therefore calls for decoupling to continue to apply as a general guiding principle for direct payments;
Amendment 524 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Recognises, however, that in certain sectors and regions such as disadvantaged regions (hill and mountain farming, specific climatic areas, etc.), where there are no alternatives to livestock farming, there may be considerable economic and environmental drawbacks which cannot be reconciled with the aims of the Treaty; Furthermore, given the move from a historical to an area support model, considers that an adequate margin for flexibility should be left to Member States; acknowledges, therefore, that production- based premiums remain defensible at WTO level, as part of the fight against land abandonment and in order to boost certain national priorities such as encouraging organic production or specific grassland-based livestock production;
Amendment 529 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls – without casting any doubt on the results of the 2008 Health Check of the CAP –fore for appropriations under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 primarily to be allocated within WTO limits for measures to promote territorial coherence and boost keykey and vulnerable sectors (e.g. the dairy and sheep sectors and suckler cows), or 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, protein crops programmes, extensive grazing systems);
Amendment 555 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 572 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 593 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 623 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading before paragraph 20
Subheading before paragraph 20
Amendment 626 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 646 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 667 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 699 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 716 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 733 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 753 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 773 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that direct payments are no longer justified without cross compliance (CC) and therefore that the CC system should apply to all recipients of direct payments19;
Amendment 782 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Points out that the cross-compliance system makes the granting of direct payments subject to compliance with statutory requirements and the maintenance of farmland in good agricultural and environmental condition, and remains one of the appropriate means of optimising the provision of baseline eco-system services by farmers and meeting new environmental challenges by securing the provision of basic public goods; notes, however, that the introduction of cross-compliance has raised a whole range of problems relating to administrative issues and acceptance by farmers, who had the impression that they were losing a degree of freedom in their work; calls therefore for the administrative burden on farmers to be reduced through a simplified implementation system for cross- compliance requirements;
Amendment 784 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27b. Rejects, therefore, the introduction of burdensome and unclear requirements derived from the water framework directive into the cross-compliance system until clarification is established as regards the state of play of implementation of this directive in all Member States;
Amendment 785 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Paragraph 27 c (new)
27c. Believes that genuine efforts are being made to simplify the system and reduce the administrative red-tape placed on farmers; calls however for a simplified, more proportionate and risk-based approach by the Commission and Member States to the implementation of regulatory controls, the conduct of compliance audits and the system of penalties;
Amendment 786 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 d (new)
Paragraph 27 d (new)
27d. Is ready to consider the introduction of a small farmers' scheme under pillar 1, only if the primary objective of such a system is to simplify administrative procedures and paper work for small farmers and as long as it does not undermine competitiveness or frustrate the necessary modernisation of EU agriculture; such a scheme could consist of taking recipients of direct payments out of the mainstream basic direct payments system when they are currently below a certain amount of annual support; Takes the view that such a scheme should be voluntary on Member States and allow them sufficient flexibility to determine who is eligible as a 'small farmer' in each country;
Amendment 787 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 797 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 809 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 820 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading before paragraph 32
Subheading before paragraph 32
Market instruments and safety netsafety net and trade relations
Amendment 848 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
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 minimum safety net in case of extreme price crises and potentialmajor market disruption;
Amendment 856 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
Amendment 869 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Recalls that market-orientated production and direct payments are at the heart of any insurance against risk, and that it is farmers who are responsible for risk prevention; supports the Member States, in this context, in making national risk insurance instruments available to farmers;
Amendment 883 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Considers that a multi-stageinimum safety net comprising private storage, and public intervention, market disruption instruments and an emergency clause would confer the greatest possible benefit; calls for private storage and public intervention to be permitted for specific sectors where market disruptions are of limited duration; calls furthermo should be available to tackle market crisis and believes the Commission must have the powers and the resources to react quickly to a major crisis; considers there for a market disruption instrument and an emergency clause to be established for all sectors in common, making it possible for the Commission, under certain circumstances, in the event of crises to take action over a limited period which goes beyond the existing instrumene, that a special reserve budget line which could be swiftly activated should be made available in future EU budgets to provide a rapid reaction tool in the event of severe crises in the agricultural markets;
Amendment 902 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Considers that the use of these instruments which have been described should be triggered only by a political assessment by the EU legcould be complemented by new economic and financial tools that are innovative and flexible such as futures markets or private mutualislatureion funds;
Amendment 929 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
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;
Amendment 935 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
Amendment 949 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 966 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 985 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
Amendment 992 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Acknowledges that in the WTO negotiations the EU has offered to abolish export refunds, albeit with the proviso that other trading partners (particularly the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) also bring their export support into line with WTO rules; calls for the EU likewise to formulate a system for export credits which complies with WTO rulesReaffirms the EU commitment to phase-out export refunds by 2013 if this move is reflected in WTO partners abandoning in parallel similar measures and measures having equivalent effect, in particular the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand;
Amendment 1003 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44 a. Recalls that EU farmers are required to produce food to the highest safety, environmental, quality and animal welfare standards and should be rewarded for doing so; believes that imports from third countries should, respecting WTO rights and obligations, meet equivalent standards to ensure fairer competition; calls on the Commission to uphold the interests of European farmers in the context of multilateral and bilateral trade agreements negotiated on behalf of the EU;
Amendment 1014 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Advocates that the 2006 sugar market reform be extendreviewed toin 2020 in its existing form in order to develop a system for the subsequent period which can operate without quotas15 with a view to bringing in further reforms by 2020;
Amendment 1040 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Observes thatAsks for solutions to be formulated at global level to tackle abuses of speculation in agricultural commodities should be combated; adand extreme price voclates a worldwide notification system for agricultural stocks; observesility as they potentially put food security at risk; insists in thatis consideration should be given to maintaining stocks of vital agricultural commoditietext that the EU should adopt a coordinated approach with its trade partners in order to avoid further markets disruptions;
Amendment 1057 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading before paragraph 48
Subheading before paragraph 48
Pillar 2: Rural development
Amendment 1061 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Is aware of the importance ofPoints out that rural development under the second pillar, in view of its environmental, 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 grows now an integral part of the CAP architecture and should remain an important element of the future CAP through a well-equipped rural development strategy with a reinforced focus on growth and innovation in rural areas, improving th,e 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 farmernvironment, mitigating and adapting to climate change, modernising and restructuring agriculture, strengthening cohesion in EU rural areas, revitalising disadvantaged areas and areas at risk of abandonment, improving agricultural added-value and competitiveness and creating new jobs in rural areas;
Amendment 1124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)
Paragraph 49 a (new)
49 a. Calls, in line with the Commission Communication, for a more outcome- oriented approach through a general move towards the use of delivery tools that set goals and empower farmers and rural communities to choose their own systems to meet multiannual targets and objectives, such as outcome agreements and simple contracts;
Amendment 1134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 c (new)
Paragraph 49 c (new)
49 c. Emphasises in the context of the EU 2020 Strategy that research and development, the use of new technologies and best agricultural practices are crucial to develop sustainable intensive and precision farming techniques in order to improve competitiveness and increase production and agricultural productivity while reducing the use of scarce resources such as water, land and energy; takes the view that investment in agricultural innovation should be further encouraged with a view to increase the use of the best available technologies on farms, inter alia through the CAP and EU research and development framework programmes, in order to address new challenges, starting with feeding a projected global population of 9 billion people in 2050 while making a better use of resources;
Amendment 1136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 d (new)
Paragraph 49 d (new)
49 d. Believes that farmers can actively contribute to biodiversity, landscape management and environmental protection, as well as climate change adaptation and mitigation, in a cost- effective way; calls for the CAP to provide the opportunity for the vast bulk of agricultural land to be covered by agri- environmental schemes to further incentivise a majority of farmers for the delivery of additional eco-system services while encouraging more sustainable, lower-input production models such as organic farming, precision farming, the development of high-nature-value farming and sustainable intensive agricultural practices; recalls in this context that the agri-environmental programmes must be designed so as to closely fit national and regional priorities and specificities, and be clearly differentiated from the sustainability element of the first pillar in their objectives, scale and tools;
Amendment 1140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Advocates in this connection thatfor the compensatory allowance for disadvantaged areas to be retained in the second pillar; considers that it should be ascertained what cofinancing rate appears to be appropriate; calls on the Commission to retain the existing c, independently of the voluntary national top-up under pillar 1; Believes that this will ensure that agricultural activity takes place so that land continues to be managed and local food is produced for local communities across the EU, thereby reducing the threat of land abandonment and ensuring a balanced territeoria for demarcation of disadvantaged areasl management as well as a rational development of agricultural production across the EU;
Amendment 1162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50 a (new)
Paragraph 50 a (new)
50 a. Stresses that less favoured areas are often of high value in terms of the cultivated landscape, biodiversity preservation and provision of environmental benefits, as well as rural areas dynamism; Asks the Commission, therefore, to orientate its compensatory programmes for these specific areas towards these goals through a careful choice of biophysical selection criteria; Recalls in this context that the European Parliament, in its resolution of 5th May 2010, asked for additional criteria to be considered such as 'isolation' to address difficulties arising from distance from the market, remoteness and limited access to services, as well as the inclusion of a 'field-capacity days' criterion to address the interaction between soil types and climate and notably reflect maritime climate difficulties;
Amendment 1169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Stresses at the same time, however, that rural structures differ widely in the Member States and therefore require different measures; calls therefore for flexibility to allow the Member States to adopt voluntary measures, thwhich could be co-financing rate for which should be based on the rates current at the timeed by the EU on the condition that these measures have been notified to the Commission and approved;
Amendment 1189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Advocates that, in the case of measures which are of particular importance to Member States, an optional increase of 25% inthe national financing in the second pillar (top- up) should be possible; Stresses however, that these top-ups should not lead to a renationalisation of pillar 2 or increase the gap in Member States' ability to co- finance their priorities;
Amendment 1196 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
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 fair redistribution of second pillar funds to be achieved between Member States, according to objective criteria that must reflect the diversity of needs in European rural areas and the different priority objectives to be achieved by different Member States; Advocates for these changes to be achieved after a transition period in parallel with the changes made to first pillar funds distribution and so as to avoid sudden changes that may be disruptive;
Amendment 1208 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Advocates that it should not be compulsory for national cofinancing to come from public funds; considrequests the Commission to offers that at least 10 percentage points of any nationale opportunity on a regional or local level for using a system of private co-financing instead of public co-financing should come from public funds;; making sure that there is no change of an efficient control instrument to an exclusion criterion for the participation in the second pillar for financially weak regions in Europe;.
Amendment 1218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Calls for simplification and a review of the cross-compliance rulerequirements and controls for the second pillar, considers simplification of the current indicator system to be necessary and takes a critical view of the introduction of quantitative targets;
Amendment 1228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Welcomes the move towards greater coordination at EU level of EU funds; advocates, however, that the funds be preserved as politically autonomous instrumentbetween rural development programmes and cohesion policy in particular, with a view to avoiding duplication, contradictory objectives and overlapping; recalls however, that the scale of the projects under EU cohesion policy and rural development programmes is different and therefore advocates for the funds to remain distinct and for rural development programmes to maintain their focus on rural communities;
Amendment 1243 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading before paragraph 57
Subheading before paragraph 57
Amendment 1247 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57