10 Amendments of John Stuart AGNEW related to 2018/2037(INI)
Amendment 379 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that even the flexibility that Member States currently enjoy in defining basic rules may risk distorting competition within the single market and granting unequal access to support for famers in different Member States or even in different regionsnational level support for farmers, including different personal and business taxation rules, national level income support, and food promotion initiatives, which enable Member States to give support to farmers outside of the structure of the CAP;
Amendment 386 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that in order to address the substantial amount of criticism of the CAP, policy objectives and tools should be more clearly defined and accountable; further, more flexibility should be given to Member States to utilise CAP budgets to tackle major issues facing the farming industry that fall outside of EU competency, such as adjustment to changing consumer preferences, for example in declining meat consumption, measures to protect soil health, public and mental health issues, and access to labour;
Amendment 404 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that subsidiarity for Member States should only be granted within a common set of rules and tools agreed at EU level as part of a uniform approach to all programming efforts and eligibility criteria, should cover both of the CAP’s pillars and ensure, in particular, a European approach in Pillar I and thus a level playing fieldin defining appropriate income support under Pillar 1, and recognizing the ability to co-finance farm income support through national measures either directly or in-kind, should be part of a uniform approach to all programming efforts and eligibility criteria.;
Amendment 523 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers it necessary to maintainrevise the current two-pillared architecture, particularly Pillar I, which is dedicated to income support for farmers, as using one policy instrument for multiple policy goals (income support, environmental enhancement, food safety etc) reduces effectiveness and accountability; considers it necessary, at the same time, to compensate for the provision of public goods on the basis of uniform criteria, while allowing Member States to take specific approaches to reflect local conditions;
Amendment 559 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the current CAP architecture can only deliver its objectives if sufficiently funded, but notes the high level of cost in implementation and poor uptake of existing measures under Pillar 2 in particular; calls, therefore, for the CAP budget to be maintainrevised in the next MFF at at least the current level in order toin order to improve public accountability and achieve the ambitions of a revised and efficient CAP beyond 2020;
Amendment 602 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that more targeted support for family farms is necessary and can be achieved by introducing a compulsory higher support rate for small farms; considers, moreover, that support for larger farms should be digressive, reflecting economies of scale, with the possibility, but notes that the terms "family farm" and "small farm" are highly subjective and do not correlate with positive outcomes for taxpayers on all occasions; considers, moreover, that a distinction should be made between income support, which should be capped, and environmental compensation or investment, which should be accessible based on area of land occupied; further, that the level for capping toshould be decided by the Member States based on nationally determined average incomes and regionalized incentives for socially valuable farming types such as in remote or upland areas;
Amendment 771 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that, provided that a level playing field in the single market can be guaranteed, voluntary coupled support (VCS) payments generally should be maintainavoided, as a tool to counteract specific difficulties, particularly those arising frommarket distorting and disregarding of changing consumer preferences, however they may have a limited role in addressing the structural competitive disadvantage of less- favoured and mountainous regions, as well as those which are more temporary in nature and arise from a shift away from the old entitlement scheme, for example;
Amendment 819 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that generational renewal is a challenge faced by famers in many Member States and that each national strategy must therefore address this issue through a comprehensive approach, including top-ups in Pillar I and targeted meain a manner appropriate to that Member State, noting that the structure of family businesses, inheritance taxation issures in Pillar II, as well as by means of new financial instruments and national measures, in order to incentivise, use of Pillar 1 income support as a pension payment and the underlying profitability of the farm enterprise are key determinants of the ability of farmers to pass on their farming operations;
Amendment 949 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission to introduce a new and comprehensiveonsiders that a legal framework which allows the integration of the various types of environmental actions at present, such as cross compliance, greening and the good agricultural and environmental conditions (GAEC) standards, as well as agri-environment measures (AEMs) for rural development, so thatinto a single CAP Pillar would mean farmers can deliver effectively and with less bureaucracy on environmental care, biodiversity and climate action, while ensuring that Member States have adequate control and taking into account local conditions;
Amendment 1167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Insists on the necessity ofWelcomes measures designed to reduce operational risk for farmers by strengthening the position of producers within the food supply chain, in particular by guaranteeing them a fair share of the added valueencouraging farm diversification and integrated supply chains, the use of technology to adapt output to meet consumer demand, by fostering inter- sectoral cooperation, and strengthening transparency in the markets and crisis prevention;