51 Amendments of Maria do Céu PATRÃO NEVES related to 2011/2051(INI)
Amendment 24 #
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, energy and industrial raw materials, overall balance and 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 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the CAP reform of 2003 and the Health Check of the Common Agricultural Policy of 2008 have substantially increased the transparency and efficiency of the CAP and farmers’ own responsibility andought to contribute to a new architecture for the CAP that is more effective and transparent, characterised by greater market orientation; whereas this process must be continued and, as a counterpart, the administration of the CAP must be significantly further simplified in order to reduce the burden on farmers and administrations,
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas, on the one hand, only 6% of European farmers are aged under 35, and, on the other, 4.5 million farmers will retire in the next 10 years; whereas generational renewal should therefore be seen as one of the priority challenges for the future CAP,
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the European Parliament upholds the concept of multifunctional, broad-based agriculture spread throughout Europereiterates that the original and primary objective of agriculture is the production of food that at the same time guarantees the stabilisation of producers' incomes and a final price that is affordable for consumers, and that, over and above these objectives, it must also incorporate multifunctionality that is capable of guaranteeing territorial balance, as a guiding principle, 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,
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas Europe’s history has left it with a dense population spread across the whole of its territory; whereas this legacy represents an opportunity for Europe, in particular in terms of tourism, but also creates a need to maintain good environmental, economic and social conditions throughout Europe; whereas the agricultural sector is by far the best placed to take steps to achieve these objectives in rural areas,
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas because of the specific challenges, agriculturethe CAP, as a dynamic entity that must be governed by the principle of equity, applied to all the Member States, requires targeted measures which, in the context of enlargement, also take account of the specific situation in the EU-27,
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the European Union must still have sufficient instruments to be prepared for and intervene in market and supply criseis scenarios and market and price fluctuations in the agricultural sector in the future;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the incorporation of greneralwed and ambitious objectives into the CAP, particularly relating to consumer protection, environmental protection, climate protection, animal welfare and regional cohesion, entails increased production costs and is in principle to be welcomed, but this must not jeopardise the competitiveness of European farmers,
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas at a time of rapid upheaval in agricultural markets and numerous new priority challenges (e.g. EU 2020), farmers urgently need reliabillegal security, particularly regarding the financial framework, and the European Parliament has already called fortakes the view that the appropriations allocated to agriculture in the 2013 budget to benext financial planning period, maintaineding at least at the same level in the next financial planning periodn amount equivalent to the appropriations allocated up to 2013, should be set at the level necessary to continue to guarantee a strong and solid CAP that is capable of responding to the present and future challenges that this Community policy is set to face,
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas according to the latest Eurobarometer poll, 90% of EU citizens surveyed consider agriculture and rural areas to be important for Europe's future, 83% of EU citizens surveyed are in favour of financial support to farmers and, on average, they believe that agricultural policy should continue to be decided upon at European level,
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas a two-pillar CAP should be retained, with the respective well-defined characterisation as regards the pillars' structure and objectives, whilst at the same time favouring a harmonious relationship between the two; whereas the first pillar should guarantee quality food production in the EU, the stabilisation of farmers' incomes, the payment of compensation for environmental services provided to society and effective market regulation, whilst the second pillar should ensure the revitalisation of rural economies, preventing rural exodus and paying compensation for specific environmental services provided to society,
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas there should not be any differentiation in the treatment of farmers except according to size of holding and legal form for the purpose of direct paymentsrecognised objective, reliable, fair criteria that are consistent with the general objectives of the CAP, although the possibility of introducing a basic allowance for small farmers should not be excluded,
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas rural development is an important instrument of the CAP and whereas the new programmes should be geared even more strongly to the priority objectives of rural development and of farmers (employment, investment, competitiveness, the agricultural environment, water, climate change, innovationsupport for less favoured areas, water, climate change, biodiversity, innovation, farm start-ups and education),
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Insists that the costs of supporting a strong CAP are more than justified if compared to the costs to society of not supporting European agriculture;
Amendment 417 #
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 flat-rate area-based regional or national premiumdirect payment for decoupled payments in the next financing period; recognises, however,a timeframe that is sufficient to enable the various Member States to adapt to the future system; notes that the situations in the individual Member States are very disparate, requiring special measures per Member State or region;
Amendment 452 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that Member States which currently apply the simplified Single Area Payment Scheme (SAPS) should switch to the single farm payment system with entitlements; calls for support in making the conversiona reasonable adaptation period and the necessary measures to ensure that the transition can be made without added difficulties for the various Member States;
Amendment 457 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for an adequate basic allowance for small farmers, which in the 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 must not hamper the necessary structural changeonsiders it urgent, in the interests of transparency and legal security, to define the concept of small farmer at Member State level;
Amendment 476 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls for these Member States to decide, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle, what necessary budgetary allocation to be incorporated in the new subsidy system should be made available to their small farmers;
Amendment 494 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Recognises that young farmers encounter start-up problems, such as high investment costs or difficulty in gaining access to land and credit; stresses the need to devise targeted measures for young farmers, including under the first pillar;
Amendment 509 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
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 sectors and regions such as mountainless- favoured, mountain, low-density and outermost regions, where there are no effective alternatives to relatively labour-intensive livestock farmingthe current agricultural activities, 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, as well as social drawbacks, in particular depopulation, rural exodus and desertification; acknowledges, therefore, that production-based premiums might be defensible even after 2013 in these specific sectors and regions, with due regard for the Member State subsidiarity period even after 2013nciple;
Amendment 535 #
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 – 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), 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 –and sectors considered sensitive whose continued existence would otherwise not be guaranteed (e.g. the dairy sector, suckler cows, sheep, tomatoes, arable crops and rice); considers that the budget for Article 68 could cover up to 10% of direct payments;
Amendment 579 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to submit by 30 June 2016 a report setting out comprehensively how livestock farming in Europe can be safeguarded in the long term with regard to multifunctionality and regional aspects (such asless-favoured regions, mountain areas, Nordiclow-density regions and extremely remote areaoutermost regions) and also dealing with the question of how far the aims of the CAP can be realised in a more efficient, targeted way by means of decoupled, indirect support, e.g. premiums for extensive grassland or pasture land;
Amendment 607 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers that direct payments should be made only to active farmers, i.e. to professionals whose activities entail the mastery and pursuit of one or more of the steps required in a plant or animal biological cycle, and those whose activities are performed further to the act of production, who use an agricultural holding for this purpose or whose production emanates from a minimum of 50% of materials from an agricultural holding; realises that, under the system of decoupled direct payments, each farmer who uses farmland for production or who tends it in order to maintain GAEC should receive direct payments; calls on the Commission therefore to devise a definition of ‘active farmer’ which the Member States can administer without additional administrative effort, while it should be ensured that traditional farming activities (full-time and various degrees of part-time) are classified as active farming;
Amendment 612 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls on the European Commission to study the feasibility of flexibility mechanisms for granting direct payments, which could come in three forms: at Community budget level, the carryover of CAP funds not used in a given year and their transfer to a new financial tool (crisis management rapid-response reserve fund); at sectoral level, the transfer of some direct aid between the plant and animal sectors at times of major crisis (mutual solidarity mechanism); at farmer level, the placing in reserve of some of the direct aid not used in a given year (precautionary savings, multiannual investment plan, etc);
Amendment 632 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that better resource protection is an central element in sustainable farming, which should involve separate support for environmental measures going beyond the requirements of Cross Compliance (CC), which already entail many environmental measures, and being geared to multiannual applications, as a result of which greater environmental benefits can be attainedjustifies, within the framework of the new challenges and objectives of the EU 2020 strategy, special support for environmental measures going beyond the requirements of Cross Compliance (CC) and beyond the already existing agri-environmental programs; welcomes in this regard the proposed greening of the CAP, which meets this goal by effectively recognizing the environmental services delivered by farmers; considers that this greening should be applied through simple measures, widespread and accessible to as many farmers as possible, as a result of which greater environmental benefits can be attained; demands that the implementation of such measures is accompanied by a simplification of the cross-compliance rules; considers that farmers already participating to a great extent in agri-environmental programs should not be discriminated under the new system;
Amendment 672 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Consideralls 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 everywhereon the Commission to submit, as soon as possible, both the details of its proposed new scheme of direct payments as well as an impact assessment of the administrative and bureaucratic conditions related to the implementation of the greening component; observes that the greening should be pursued across Member States 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 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 payment; 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 proceduresthat are 100% EU- financed; considers that any recipient of these particular payments must implement a certain number of greening measures, chosen from a national or a regional list established by the Member State on the basis of a broader EU list; demands, in order to streamline the administrative procedures associated with these measures that all agricultural controls are, as far as possible, operated concomitantly;
Amendment 708 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for the resources allocated to greening to be reserved for recipients of direct payments and only disbursed in connection with greening, in the light of budgetary constraints;
Amendment 724 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Regards this model as making a substantial contribution to the simplification of the direct payments system and to the attainment of new compulsory environmental objectives; observes that, under this model, there is no need toPoints out that it is imperative that any model for greening the CAP that might be adopted should remove any and every possibility of stepping up the current rate of monitoring and the current monitoring capacities, as existing checks can be used, and that checks inwhich add to the bureaucratic burden on farmers and national administrations, contrary to the need for effective simplification; takes the view that, in the context of the first pillar, already existing checks should be used for conditionality, since with regard to the second pillar, checks can be combined in the basic and regenerationnational or regional programme; considers also that no new systems of payments or penalties need be introduced;
Amendment 739 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 774 #
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 802 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Considers that CC should be restricted to monitoring for compliance with fundamental and recognised standards and standards closely related to farming, which lend themselves to systematictraightforward and perhaps recurrent monitoring;
Amendment 807 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls for an end to disproportionate burdens imposed on livestock farming by CC, and particularlywithout prejudice to the basic principles of food safety and traceability, and for a critical review of certain hygiene and animal marking standards;
Amendment 822 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Considers that the general market orientation of the CAP should be maintained and that the general structure of marke, restoring management tools that have proved to be effective in the past management instruments should likewise be retainedd implementing new instruments that will make it possible to combat price volatility and react in good time to crises caused by market instability;
Amendment 846 #
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 anow play a role as a minimum safety net; takes the view, however, 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, cannot be termed market management tools, given the very low price levels at which they are now triggered;
Amendment 859 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Considers that, in view of the anticipatedpossible environmental and, climate dangers and the risk of epidemics andand epidemiological events, and in view of considerable price fluctuations on agricultural markets, an additional risk prevention is of vital importance, and particularly at individual farm leveland intervention system, accessible to all farmers in the various Member States, is of vital importance;
Amendment 870 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. RecallBelieves that market-orientated production and direct payments are at the heart of any insurance against risk, and that it is farmers who arenot sufficient to guarantee a safety net against risk; takes the view that, in this light, responsibleility for risk prevention cannot be left to farmers alone, owing to the huge disparities between existing insurance schemes in the Member States; supports the Member States, in this context, in making national risk insurance instruments available to farmers, based on a basic system at European level that guarantees respect for the specific features of each Member State in accordance with the subsidiarity principle;
Amendment 899 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
Amendment 941 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Considers that private-sector insurance schemes, such as multi-hazard insurance, must be developed in view of increasing risks; is aware of the fact that, without public contributions to the financing (from the EU and Member States), this would be difficult; supports the adoption of an EU- wide and WTO-compliant environment to ensure that no distortions of competition occur among Member States; rejects, however, the introduction of EU-wide insurance systems;
Amendment 960 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
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)that a percentage of funding for these measures should be mandatory in the second pillar within the existing financing ceiling of the Member State concerned and that the Member States should be allowed, initially, justified cases and on the basis of national and regional needs, to use up to 2% of direct payments for risk management, stabilisation and prevention measures; considers that, in justified cases, Member States should be allowed to make additional resources available from national funds;
Amendment 969 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Calls on the Commission to examine the extent to which producer groups or sectoral associations can be extended to all producintegrate producer groups, farming organisations in general and sectoral associations sectors and incorporatedo as to safeguard their participation into the drawing-up of risk prevention schemes;
Amendment 994 #
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 foremphasises that this offer by the EU should be made contingent on the entry into force of the Doha agreement and reciprocity on the part of the EU’s trading partners; should the offer lapse, calls for the EU to retain the legal instrument of export credits which complies with WTO rulefunds, although these should be activated only for a limited period and used only in the event of a serious, short-term crisis, as an adjunct to the intervention instruments;
Amendment 1023 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Amendment 1038 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Observes that speculation in agricultural commodities should be combated; takes the view that coordinated international action is the only effective means of curbing such speculation; supports, in that connection, the proposal by the French Presidency of the G20 that the group should consider measures to combat the increasing volatility in the prices of agricultural raw materials; advocates a worldwide notification and coordinated action system for agricultural stocks; observes intended to provide food security; observes, therefore, that consideration should be given to maintaining stocks of vital agricultural commodities; emphasises that, if these objectives are to be achieved, storage capacities must be increased and market monitoring and surveillance instruments developed;
Amendment 1062 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Is aware of the importance of 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 within the framework of the common agricultural policy; takes the view, in this light, that farmers should be the main beneficiaries; calls 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;
Amendment 1091 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Calls in this context for additional measures to be proposed that will contribute to the rejuvenation and skills of the farming community, encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship in the agricultural sector;
Amendment 1120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Advocates therefore introducing targeted measures, to be decided by the Member States in the second pillar, to attain priority objectives of the EU (2020 Strategy); observes that these measures should be applied in addition to the basic programmes for greening of direct payments in the first pillar and that a reduced national cofinancing rate of 25% should apply, with a reduced national cofinancing rate of 10% for least- favoured, mountain and outermost regions;
Amendment 1149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
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 appropriate; calls on the Commission to retain the existing criteria for demarcation of disadvantaged areas;
Amendment 1184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
Amendment 1201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Calls for the smooth execution of appropriations in the second pillar to be guaranteed, at the level of the expected national rate notified to the Commission, and 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;
Amendment 1238 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56 a (new)
Paragraph 56 a (new)
56a. Stresses that development of the food quality policy, not least as regards geographical indications (AOP/IGP/STG), must be a priority axis of the CAP and that it must be deepened and strengthened to enable the EU to maintain its leading position in this field; considers that approval should be granted for the implementation of innovative instruments for the management, protection and promotion of quality products, enabling their harmonious development and ensuring they continue to make a major contribution to the sustainable growth and competitiveness of the European market;
Amendment 1242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56 b (new)
Paragraph 56 b (new)
56b. Considers it vital to maintain and develop the added value generated in rural areas in order to ensure their dynamism and viability; recommends, therefore, the creation of territorial supply-chain projects based on joint approaches, for any creative forms of production with added value, developing a link between the product and the area, and centring on economic and social development while taking into account the environmental or landscape value of the area in question;