Activities of Kriton ARSENIS

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)

(10a) The prohibition of bottom trawls from the targeting of deep-sea species should not act as a precedent for gear prohibitions in other Regulations.

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) Union waters of International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) sub- areas II to XI and of Fishery Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF) areas 34.1.1, 34.1.2 and 34.2, including the fishing activities or intended fishing activities carried out by fishing vessels flying the flag of, and registered in, third countries,

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) the vessel's master records in the logbook a percentage of deep-sea species equal or superior to 10% of the overall catch weight in the fishing day concerned., or

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Isabella LÖVIN, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Kartika Tamara LIOTARD, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike RODUST, Anna ROSBACH, Corinne LEPAGE, Chris DAVIES, Nils TORVALDS, Christofer FJELLNER, Sabine WILS, Guido MILANA, Jens NILSSON, Linda McAVAN, Ole CHRISTENSEN, Jean-Paul BESSET, Gesine MEISSNER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Fishing authorisations referred to in paragraph 1 for vessels using bottom trawls or bottom-set gillnets shall expire at the latest two years after the entry into force of this Regulation. After that date, fishing authorisations targeting deep-sea species with bottom trawls or bottom-set gillnets shall neither be issued nor renewed.

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Dolores GARCÍA-HIERRO CARABALLO, Isabella LÖVIN, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Jean-Paul BESSET, Kartika Tamara LIOTARD, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike RODUST, Anna ROSBACH, Corinne LEPAGE, Chris DAVIES, Gesine MEISSNER, Sabine WILS, Guido MILANA, Jens NILSSON, Linda McAVAN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2

2. Any fishing authorisation issued on the basis of an application made in accordance with paragraph 1 shall specify the characteristics, type and dimensions of the bottom gear to be used and limit the fishing activities authorised to the area in which the intended fishing activity, as set out in paragraph 1(a), and the existing fishing activity, as set out in paragraph 1(b), overlap. However, the area of the intended fishing activity can be extended beyond the area of the existing fishing activity if the Member State has assessed and documented, based on best available scientific advice, that such extension would not have significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems. This assessment shall be conducted in accordance with Annex IIa and the 2008 FAO International Guidelines for the Management of Deep-Sea Fisheries in the High Seas and shall be made publicly available. The Commission, in consultation with the Member State and the scientific advisory body, shall review this assessment to ensure that all areas where VMEs are known or likely to occur have been identified and that the proposed mitigation and management measures are sufficient to prevent significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems.

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Isabella LÖVIN, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Jean-Paul BESSET, Kartika Tamara LIOTARD, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Anna ROSBACH, Corinne LEPAGE, Chris DAVIES, Sabine WILS, Guido MILANA, Linda McAVAN, Jens NILSSON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. After two years following the entry into force of this Regulation, no fishing authorisation targeting deep-sea species, including in areas defined in Article 7(1)(b), shall be issued or renewed unless the Member State has assessed and documented, based on best available scientific advice, that the fishing activities concerned would not have a significant adverse impact on the marine ecosystem. That assessment shall be conducted in accordance with the 2008 FAO International Guidelines for the Management of Deep-Sea Fisheries in the High Seas including as set out in Annex IIa and shall be made publicly available. The Commission, in consultation with the Member State and the scientific advisory body, shall review this assessment to ensure that all areas where VMEs are known or likely to occur have been identified and that the proposed mitigation and management measures are sufficient to prevent significant adverse impacts on vulnerable marine ecosystems.

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 a (new)

Article 9 a Provisions to limit fishing effort displacement to other fisheries Vessels whose fishing authorisation to target deep-sea species expires and is not renewed may be provided with new fishing opportunities to catch species which are not fully or over-exploited provided that there are not detrimental to small-scale fisheries.

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Isabella LÖVIN, Dolores GARCÍA-HIERRO CARABALLO, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Jean-Paul BESSET, Kartika Tamara LIOTARD, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Ulrike RODUST, Anna ROSBACH, Corinne LEPAGE, Chris DAVIES, Sabine WILS, Guido MILANA, Jens NILSSON, Linda McAVAN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. When allocating the fishing opportunities for deep-sea species available to them Member States shall use transparent and objective criteria that shall include, inter alia: (a) selectivity of fishing methods, gears and practices with low by-catch and low impact on the marine ecosystem, with a particular focus on most vulnerable species and vulnerable marine ecosystems; (b) record of compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy and EU environmental requirements and with respecting catch and/or fishing effort limits designated by scientific advice; (c) quality employment (d) fuel emissions and energy efficiency of the fishing operation; and (e) use of video surveillance or an equivalent electronic monitoring equipment, (f) working conditions that comply with relevant international standards, notably the 2007 ILO Work in Fishing Convention.

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1

1. ~~Where annual fishing effort limits have replaced catch limits in accordance with Article 11(1),~~ Member States shall maintain or put in place, in respect of their flagged vessels the following accompanying measures:

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Chris DAVIES, Kriton ARSENIS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) if the Member State concerned does not notify to the Commission any measures adopted pursuant to Article 12 within three months after the date of entry into force of the fishing effort and catch limits.

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)

Article 13a Encounters with vulnerable marine ecosystems 1. Where, in the course of fishing operations, a fishing vessel encounters any quantity of any vulnerable marine ecosystem indicator species listed in Annex III, it shall immediately cease fishing, or refrain from engaging in fishing in the site concerned. It shall resume operations only when it has reached an alternative site at a minimum distance of five nautical miles from the fished area when the encounter occurred. 2. The fishing vessel shall immediately report each encounter with vulnerable marine ecosystems to the competent national authorities, who in turn shall notify the Commission, without delay. 3. Member States shall close the site concerned to fishing with bottom gears. These areas shall remain closed to bottom fishing until such time as the scientific advisory body carries out an assessment of the area and concludes that no vulnerable marine ecosystems are present.

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0179(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Dolores GARCÍA-HIERRO CARABALLO, Isabella LÖVIN, Jean-Paul BESSET, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Kartika Tamara LIOTARD, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY, Anna ROSBACH, Corinne LEPAGE, Chris DAVIES, Alain CADEC, Sabine WILS, Guido MILANA, Jens NILSSON, Linda McAVAN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Member States shall establish a programme of observer coverage to ensure the collection of reliable, timely and accurate data on the catch and bycatch of deep-sea species, encounters with vulnerable marine ecosystems and other relevant information for the effective implementation of the provisions of this regulation. Vessels using bottom trawls or botom-set gillnets with a fishing authorisation to catch deep-sea species, whether as target or by-catch shall carry 100% observer coverage. The rest of the vessels with an authorisation to catch deep-sea species shall carry 10% observer coverage.

2013/09/17
Committee: PECH

2012/0042(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Radvilė MORKŪNAITĖ-MIKULĖNIENĖ

Proposal for a decision
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) This Decision lays down the obligations of Member States in implementing these accounting rules and action plans. It does not lay down any accounting or reporting obligations for private parties including farmers and foresters.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Peter LIESE

Proposal for a decision
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) This Decision lays down the obligations of Member States in implementing these accounting rules and action plans. It does not lay down any accounting or reporting obligations for private parties including farmers and foresters.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Radvilė MORKŪNAITĖ-MIKULĖNIENĖ

Proposal for a decision
Article 1

This Decision sets out accounting rules for Member States applicable to emissions and removals resulting from land use, land use change and forestry activities. This Decision does not lay down accounting or reporting obligations for private parties. It also provides for Member State LULUCF Action Plans to limit or reduce emissions and to maintain or increase removals, and for the evaluation of those plans by the Commission.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2012/0042(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Peter LIESE

Proposal for a decision
Article 1

This Decision sets out accounting rules for Member States applicable to emissions and removals resulting from land use, land use change and forestry activities. This Decision does not lay down accounting or reporting obligations for private parties. It also provides for Member State LULUCF Action Plans to limit or reduce emissions and to maintain or increase removals, and for the evaluation of those plans by the Commission.

2012/07/20
Committee: ENVI

2011/2318(INI)

Isabella LÖVIN, Kriton ARSENIS, Nirj DEVA, Gabriele ZIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the SFAs respect essential and fundamental elements of human rights and democratic principles as provided for in Article 9 of the Cotonou Agreement;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Isabella LÖVIN, Kriton ARSENIS, Nirj DEVA, Gabriele ZIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Reiterates the request made by the LDRAC (the Long-Distance Fleet Regional Advisory Council) that a distinction be made between the cost of access for the EU fleet (to be covered at an acceptable level by ship-owners and representing a fair share of the value of the catches) and the compensation intended to help towards development and that that aid should reflect the importance of the fisheries sector in the fight against poverty;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Charles GOERENS, Kriton ARSENIS, Isabella LÖVIN, Nirj DEVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the SFAs concluded by the EU with developing countries are based on a true spirit of partnership under which the cost of access to fishery resources is a fair reflection of their value and developing countries’ fishery resources, ecosystems and marine biodiversity are sustainably conserved;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Isabella LÖVIN, Charles GOERENS, Kriton ARSENIS, Nirj DEVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Takes the view that European fleets’ catches in developing countries’ waters which are provided for in the SFAs should be based on the existence of a surplus which cannot be caught by local fishing fleets and that ‘local catches’ should be understood within the meaning of Article 70 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which stipulates that they also include the catches of coastal States whose geographical situation makes them dependent upon the exploitation of the living resources of the exclusive economic zones of other States in the subregion or region;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Charles GOERENS, Kriton ARSENIS, Isabella LÖVIN, Nirj DEVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Highlights the importance of the joint scientific groups responsible for providing scientific opinions on the state of fishing resources on the basis of the best information available and insists that those groups should have appropriate financial, technical and human resources to carry out their tasks and to work together with Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMO);

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Isabella LÖVIN, Kriton ARSENIS, Nirj DEVA, Gabriele ZIMMER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Would like to see the SFAs improve the integration of developing countries in the world economy and encourage investment and the development of the local private sector, ~~including small enterprises and~~with a particular focus on small- scale fish~~eries, by supporting processing and marketing activitie~~ing communities needs, and ensure that investments will not contribute to overfishing or to competition with local communities which depend on fisheries for their livelihoods;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Kriton ARSENIS, Ricardo CORTÉS LASTRA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Would like to see the SFAs improve the integration of developing countries in the world economy and encourage investment and the development of the local private sector, including small enterprises and small-scale fisheries, by ~~supporting processing~~the employment of local seamen, landings, supporting the development of processing industries and marketing activities;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Kriton ARSENIS, Ricardo CORTÉS LASTRA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the allocation for sectoral support in the SFAs is aimed at supporting the administrative and scientific capacity of third countries and boosts the EU's development cooperation objectives and is in line with the signatory country's national development plan; calls for this allocation not to replace the cooperation on fisheries provided for in other agreements or cooperation instruments but to complement it in a coherent, transparent, effective and better targeted way;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Charles GOERENS, Kriton ARSENIS, Isabella LÖVIN, Nirj DEVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission to include a governance clause in future SFAs which acknowledges not only the rights of developing countries to develop their local fisheries sectors sustainably, but also the principles of good governance, transparency and the fight against corruption;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Isabella LÖVIN, Charles GOERENS, Kriton ARSENIS, Nirj DEVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Points to the importance of the joint committees for proper implementation of SFAs and calls for those committees to be open to the fishery sector actors and parliamentarians developing countries and the EU in order to improve transparency and contribute to good governance at SFA level;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Isabella LÖVIN, Charles GOERENS, Kriton ARSENIS, Nirj DEVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to encourage third-country partners to gather and publish any relevant information, if not already available, on fishing activities carried out in their waters;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Kriton ARSENIS, Ricardo CORTÉS LASTRA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses the need to ensure policy coherence and full coordination between the EU's development policy and the CFP and to devote more human, technical and budgetary resources to the development of a sustainable fisheries sector in the context of its development cooperation policy with third countries; Calls on the Commission to launch scientific audits to assess fish stocks before negotiating new SFA Protocols in order to avoid overfishing, given that the fishing sector plays a major role in safeguarding food security in many developing countries;

2012/02/16
Committee: DEVE

2011/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that the EU should be active within the UN system to explore means for the global community to address the need for more integrated global ocean governance, regarding both living marine resources and other resources as well as pollution and the impacts of climate change on the oceans, including the protection and rehabilitation of precious blue carbon sinks;

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Asks that EU shall aim at concluding, as soon as possible, Sustainable Fisheries Cooperation Agreements with neighbouring countries where the EU provides funding and technical support in order to achieve a more concerted and coherent policy, with the aim of a harmonised and sustainable fisheries policy in all shared sea basins, therefore increasing the effectiveness of the CFP in all the regions concerned. These agreements shall be concluded in the spirit of a fair and equitable cooperation and the respect of human rights and shall aim at sharing responsibilities fairly between the Union and the respective partner country.

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11 b. In order to improve the cooperation with neighboring countries and to improve the management of shared stocks, the EU should aim at concluding sustainable fisheries cooperation agreements with these countries. These cooperation agreements should not aim at obtaining fishing rights for EU vessels but should aim at achieving a situation where the EU provides funding and technical support in exchange for the application of the same or comparable sustainable management rules as the EU in the third partner country.

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2318(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Believes that an effort should be made at EU level to monitor the activities of the EU fleets that operate in non- EU waters outside the framework of fisheries agreements, as these should respect the same guiding principles applied to those fishing in the EU. We believe that concrete measures should be put forward to ensure that working conditions for crew members domiciled outside the EU and working on-board vessels flying an EU flag should be equal to those of workers domiciled in the EU.

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2318(INI)

Linda McAVAN, Kriton ARSENIS, Kathleen VAN BREMPT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Believes that SFAs should contribute to the sustainable development in third partner countries and encourage the local private sector, with a particular emphasis on small-scale fisheries and SMEs and to this end calls for the increased employment of local fishermen and the development of local, sustainable processing industries and marketing activities;

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the Energy Roadmap 2050 indentifies that gas will be critical for the transformation of the energy system by helping to reduce emissions; whereas the Commission notes that shale gas and other ~~UFF will become a very~~unconventional gas sources have become potential important new sources of supply in or around Europe, but that it is impossible to anticipate to what extent shale gas in Europe will prove viable;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas there is no sufficient data on fracturing chemicals and environmental and health risks associated with hydraulic fracturing; whereas important analysis is still ongoing and there is a growing need for further and continuous research; whereas the existence and transparency of data, sampling and tests is paramount to high- quality research in support of proper regulation;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

E a. whereas EU Member States such as France and Bulgaria have already posed a moratorium on shale gas extraction due to environmental and public health concerns;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Calls for the inclusion of projects including hydraulic fracturing in Annex I of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Calls on the Commission to introduce a legislative proposal with regard to shale gas and shale oil extraction activities;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Linda McAVAN, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Kriton ARSENIS, Jo LEINEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Calls for the development by the European IPPC Bureau of clear and binding set of European Best Available Techniques Reference (BREF) for fracking operators;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Recognises the ~~relative~~significantly high water volumes involved in hydraulic fracturing; ~~points out, however, that such volumes are not as significant in comparison to the needs of other industrial activities~~acknowledges that requirements for water in shale gas extraction could put considerable pressure on water supplies at the local level given that water resources in many parts of Europe are already under pressure; highlights the need for advance water provision plans based on local hydrology;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Linda McAVAN, Kriton ARSENIS, Kathleen VAN BREMPT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls for strict implementation of existing waste water treatment standards and compulsory water management plans by operators, in cooperation with the competent authorities; stresses however that existing treatment plants are ill- equipped to treat hydraulic fracturing waste water and may be discharging pollutants to rivers and streams;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Considers that there should be a mandatory obligation to ~~declare~~fully disclose the composition and concentrations of the chemical contents of fracturing fluid; ~~maintains that full transparency and disclosure should be required of operators;~~and to make publicly available the REACH exposure scenarios and proposed risk reduction measures

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Linda McAVAN, Kathleen VAN BREMPT, Kriton ARSENIS, Jo LEINEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19 b. Calls on the Commission to swiftly finalise their study on the life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of shale gas extraction and production in order to correctly account for these emissions in the future;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Believes that public participation should be ensured through adequate public information campaigns before exploration and through public consultation of the local communities, as part of the authorization procedure, before the exploitation stages; calls for greater outreach and public education in UFF activities in order to ensure public understanding, acceptance and confidence in the regulation of these activities;

2012/05/29
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

- having regard to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS),

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

- having regard to the Composite Report on the Conservation Status of Habitat Types and Species as required under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive, (COM(2009) 358 final);

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas nearly 65 % of the habitat types and 52 % of the species listed in the Annexes of the Habitats Directive has an unfavourable conservation status;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas 88 % of fish stocks are fished beyond maximum sustainable yield;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)

Bc. whereas Europe's borders have already been breached by more than 11,000 alien species, at least 15 % of which are invasive and cause harm to biodiversity;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas genetic selection in forest tree species should not favour performance traits at the expense of adaptive ones;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

Cb. whereas payment for ecosystem services (PES) is a promising innovative financial tool for biodiversity conservation;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)

Cc. whereas a comprehensive Framework Directive on Soil is crucial for the EU to meet its new biodiversity strategy targets;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes and supports the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020, including its targets and actions; ~~consider~~stresses, nevertheless, that ~~some~~ actions should be further strengthened and more concrete measures should be deployed;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the urgent need for action, and the need to give higher political priority to biodiversity in order to meet the EU's 2020 headline target for biodiversity and global biodiversity commitments; emphasises that, with adequate financial resources and political will, the tools exist to halt the loss of biodiversity;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Whereas habitats and species are threatened by climate change; whereas nature conservation and biodiversity are crucial for mitigation of and adaptation to climate change,

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Notes the limited EU public awareness on the importance of biodiversity conservation and the severe environmental as well as socio-economic costs associated with its loss; stresses the need for a more comprehensive communication strategy, in line with Aichi target 1;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Deplores the fact that the Soil Framework Directive is still under consideration; calls on the Member States to give this issue a higher political priority and act urgently so as to fill this legislative gap and protect soil biodiversity across the EU;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Stresses that biodiversity loss refers not only to species and habitats but also to genetic diversity; calls on the European Commission to develop a strategy for the conservation of genetic diversity;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Highlights the importance of mainstreaming biodiversity protection into all EU policies – such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries, regional policy and cohesion, energy, industry, transport tourism, development cooperation, research and innovation – in order to make the European Union's sectoral and budgetary policies more coherent;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Underlines that the EU biodiversity strategy should be fully integrated with the strategies for the mitigation of and adaption to climate change;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Notes that even with the full implementation of Target 1 of the new EU Biodiversity Strategy, the majority of EU habitats and species will still be left in an unfavourable conservation status; calls for the revision of Target 1, and stresses the need to adopt more ambitious targets in improving the conservation status of EU habitats and species;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Urges Member States to ensure that the process of designating Natura 2000 sites is finalised by 2012 in line with the Aichi Target 11; deplores greatly the delay in designating marine sites;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that the trade in European threatened species, in accordance with the IUCN Red List, must be subject to particularly strict regulation in order not to endanger further their survival and must only be authorized in exceptional circumstances;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Urges the Commission to adopt a specific Green Infrastructure Strategy by 2012 at the latest, with biodiversity protection in rural areas as a primary objective;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Urges the Commission to develop as a matter of high priority the ‘'No Net Loss’' initiative, drawing also on the standards which form part of the Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme; in this respect, notes the importance of applying such an approach to all EU habitats and species, and not solely to those already covered by the EU legislation;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Recalling that over half of Europe's territory is managed by farmers and that funding for the common agricultural policy (CAP) represents the largest single part of the EU budget, stresses that the CAP is an absolutely crucial tool for biodiversity conservation and the continuation of the associated ecosystem services it provides; calls, therefore, for a strong reorientation of the CAP towards the delivery of public goods;

2012/02/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Maintains that assistance to public and private actors protecting forest biodiversity of species, habitats and ecosystem services must increase in the new CAP, and eligibility must also be extended to areas connecting NATURA 2000 sites;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Calls for the inclusion of a new CAP measure "in situ and ex situ conservation of source-identified forest genetic material";

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Urges Member States to design their forestry policy in a way that takes fully into account the importance of forests in protecting biodiversity, in preventing soil erosion, in carbon sequestration and air purification and in maintaining the water cycle;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)

17b. Urges the Member States to include ecosystem-based measures to increase the resilience of forests against fires, as part of forest fire prevention schemes in their forest management plans;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Welcomes the Commission's proposals for the reform of the common fisheries policy (CFP), which should guarantee the implementation of the ecosystem approach and the application of updated scientific information serving as the basis for long- term management plans for all commercially exploited fish species; emphasises that only ~~sustainable fishing offers a future for the~~through ensuring the long term sustainability of fish stocks can we ensure the economic and social viability of the European fisheries sector;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement marine protected areas in which economic activities, including fishing, are the subject of strengthened ecosystem based management, making it possible to reconcile preserving the environment and practising sustainable fishing;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ~~step up efforts to ensure that catches fall below M~~ensure that scientifically based catch and/or effort limits, in accordance with the goal of restoring and maintaining populations of harvested species above levels which can produce the maximum Ssustainable Yyield ~~(MSY) levels~~ by 2015, a~~nd to incorporate ecological considerations into the definition of MSY~~re fully respected; to his end stresses that a lack of adequate scientific data should not be used as an excuse for inaction, in such cases fishing mortality rates should be decreased on a precautionary basis;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Stresses that the new CFP and all subsequent measures adopted by Member States shall be in full compliance with Directive 92/43/EEC, Directive 2009/147/EC and Directive 2008/56/EC;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Stresses that the aim of eliminating discards and by-catches of protected non- target species, including cetaceans, sea turtles and sea birds should be incorporated into the CFP and implemented as a matter of urgency; Moreover the new CFP should include a clear obligation to release non-target species with a high chance of survival;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Notes the establishment of fisheries reserves, areas in which fishing activities may be banned or restricted, is a particularly effective and cost-efficient measure to achieve the long term conservation of fish stocks; in this respect calls on Member States and the Council to designate fisheries reserves and the management rules to be established therein, with a particular focus on nursery grounds or spawning grounds for fish stocks;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Recognises that prevention is more cost-effective and environmentally desirable than measures taken following the introduction and establishment of an invasive alien species; calls therefore on the Commission and the Members States to ensure that, as supported in the Convention on Biological Diversity, prevention is a priority with the import, trade and keeping of invasive alien species regulated at the EU-level based on transparent, scientific guidelines;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Urges the Commission to come forward in 2012 with a legislative proposal which takes a holistic approach to the problem of invasive alien species, which includes requirements to monitor imports of exotic and native species and increased restrictions on the import and private ownership of threatened species;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)

24b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to effectively mainstream environmental sustainability in their relations with third countries and to take measures to reduce the negative impacts of EU consumption patterns on biodiversity, by incorporating initiatives for sustainable agriculture and wildlife trade in all trade agreements; supports the Commission's proposal to include a chapter on sustainable development including biodiversity goals in all new trade agreements;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Urges the Commission to report to Parliament and the Council on options for the introduction of payments for ecosystem services taking into account the role of biodiversity conservation;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Stresses the imperative need to ensure that the next Multiannual Financial Framework (2014-2020) supports the achievement of the six targets set out in the Biodiversity Strategy and that the funding for the LIFE programme is reinforced;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28a. Notes with concern that the number of projects financed under the LIFE+ programme each year is below the indicative allocation in various Member States; invites the Commission to assess the reasons for this under-implementation and where necessary to propose changes to the rules governing the programme, particularly as regards co-financing levels;

2012/02/14
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)

A c. whereas water is particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, which could lead to a decline in the quantity and quality of water available, particularly drinking water, as well as to a rise in the frequency and intensity of floods and droughts;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas water is a shared resource of humankind and access to water is a fundamental and universal right;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that an environmentally- and economically-sound water sanitation and wastewater management policy should tackle pollution at source before passing all pollutants to a costly end-of-pipe treatment and that the environmental impact assessment shall be taken into account during the marketing authorisation of all products resulting in emissions of chemicals in water; encourages the use of wastewater and by-products of end-of-pipe treatment as a new resource;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Notes that water is at the core of most ecosystem services and stresses the importance of proper water management in reaching biodiversity targets; ~~encourages~~stresses the need for reforestation and wetland restoration measures in the management of water resources; calls for better alignment of the objectives of the WFD with Natura 2000;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2297(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure the application of the ‘polluter pays’ and ‘user pays’ principles by means of transparent pricing schemes that aim at full cost recovery; underlines however that social issues should be taken into account when setting water tariffs for personal use and clean water shall be available at an affordable price for human needs; stresses that water pricing should reflect the environmental impact of wastewater treatment and calls on the Commission to ensure appropriate financing of wastewater treatment plants;

2012/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2292(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that small-scale fishing should be the subject of differentiated treatment, with management systems and models adapted to its specific characteristics and problems; This in no way excludes small- scale fisheries from the strict application of the rules and the achievement of the objectives set by the CFP;

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2292(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Rejects a definition of small-scale fishing that is restrictive and detached from reality; considers that the definition of small-scale fishing should cover a range of criteria, in addition to the strict boat-size criterion, including, inter alia, the impact of fishing techniques on the marine ecosystem, t~~ime spent at sea~~he selectivity of the fishing gear empolyed, the fishing capacity, the number of crew members, the number of days at sea per year, the duration of each fishing trip and the characteristics of the economic unit exploiting the resources;

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2292(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Draws attention to the importance of taking into account, not only the quantity of the fleet, but also its quality; considers that the future CFP should encourage the increased sustainability of the fleet in environmental, economic and social terms, by promoting the progressive prevalence of sectors and operators that use fishing techniques with less impact on resources and the marine environment, and that benefit the communities of which they are part in terms of generating jobs and of the quality of these jobs;

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2292(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Urges the Commission to work with the Member States, RACs and stakeholders to improve the definition of small-scale fishing in the EU;

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2292(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 – indent 1

– renewal and modernisation of fleets with a view to making them safer, and more economically and environmentally sustainable (selection of techniques, energy efficiency, etc.), without increasing the fishing capacity of the fleet;

2012/05/08
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that sustainable fishing restoring and maintaining stocks well above the levels that can produce Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) will be of huge environmental, social and economic advantage, as the environment will be less degraded, fishing communities will have a secure future, and the fisheries sector will be profitable without having to depend on public support to survive; Stresses that applying the ecosystem and precautionary approach to fisheries management and ensuring that the CFP contributes to achieving good environmental status in the marine environment by 2020, in line with the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, are vital in ensuring the long term environmental, economic and social sustainability of the European fishing sector;

2012/04/17
Committee: DEVE

2011/2290(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Recalls that the world's oceans not only provide nutrition, food security and livelihood for 500 million people worldwide and at least 50 % of their animal protein for 400 million people in the poorest countries through fisheries, but are also crucial in climate change mitigation, as blue carbon sinks represent the largest long-term sink of carbon, provide transport, and are home to some 90 % of the habitat for life on earth;

2012/04/17
Committee: DEVE

2011/2290(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that imported fisheries and aquaculture products should be subject to the same environmental, food safety and social standards as European domestic production, and is of the view that developing countries will need financial and technical assistance in order to reach the same standards;

2012/04/17
Committee: DEVE

2011/2290(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Emphasises that the EU should promote sustainable resource management in third countries and thus calls on the EU to step up actions to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing activities and stresses that Sustainable Fisheries Agreements should be more focused on scientific research and data collection, monitoring, control and surveillance; To this end the EU should direct the appropriate financial, technical and human resources support to third partner countries;

2012/04/17
Committee: DEVE

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the common fisheries policy (wild fisheries and aquaculture sector) needs a thorough and ambitious reform if the EU is to ~~lay the foundations of a socio-economically viable and~~ensure the long-term environmentally sustainab~~le fisheries industry in the Union~~ility, which is a prerequisite for securing the economic and social viability of the EU fishing sector;

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that incentives should be offered to those who fish sustainably using environment~~-friendly fishing~~ally sustainable, low impact and selective fishing gears and methods, in order to ensure ~~positive~~the widespread use of such fishing practices;

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Is convinced that the reform of the CFP must establish the right instruments to support an ecosystem-based fisheries management; believes, therefore, that the multiannual management plans must take account of such an ecosystemic approach; , to this end, in order to secure the reversal of the collapse of the fishing sector, and to conserve living aquatic resources and marine ecosystems, and as part of a precautionary approach, Member States shall establish a coherent network of fish stock recovery areas, in which all fishing activities are prohibited, including areas important for fish productivity, in particular nursery grounds, spawning grounds and feeding grounds for fish stocks. Member States shall identify and designate as many sites as are necessary to establish the coherent network of fish stock recovery areas amounting to between 10% and 20% of territorial waters in each Member State and shall notify the Commission of these sites. The establishment of the sites shall be gradual over time.

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. S~~upports the management of fisheries resources on the basis of MSY, in order to phase out overfishing and achieve sustainable stock conservation~~tresses that the Common Fisheries Policy shall apply the precautionary approach to fisheries management, and shall ensure that the sustainable exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintains populations of all stocks of harvested species above levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield, or the relevant proxy, by 2015;

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes that the objective of achieving MSY based on fishing mortality (FMSY) should be established immediately, as this will in any case put the vast majority of stocks on the right track; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement this objective in an operational manner, based on sound scientific data and taking account of the socio-economic consequences;deleted

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Underlines, however, the difficulties involved in implementing the MSY principle, in particular in the case of mixed fisheries or where scientific data on fish stocks are unavailable or unreliable;~~ Where, despite targeted measures to achieve stock recover, the target of maintaining or restoring fish stocks above levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield by 2015 can not be reached for one or more stocks: (a) owing to data gaps, proxy standards in accordance with Commission Decision 2010/477/EU on criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status of marine waters for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (Directive 2008/56/EC) may be adopted and fishing mortality shall be further reduced on a precautionary basis. Member States and the Commission shall evaluate and address research and knowledge barriers to ensure that additional information will become available as soon as possible. (b) owing to the severe depletion of the stock, additional management measures shall be introduced in the context of multiannual plans, including but not limited to a further reduction in fishing mortality, closed areas and closed seasons, with a view to restore and maintain population above levels capable of producing the maximum sustainable yield as fast as biologically possible and by 2020 at the latest. (c) owing to the mixed nature of the fishery, the management shall be guided by the scientific advice relating to the most vulnerable target species in terms of their spawning stock biomass, age and size distribution and other relevant descriptors,

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Emphasizes that the Common Fisheries Policy shall contribute to the achievement and maintenance of good environmental status by 2020 at the latest as set out in Directive 2008/56/EC, including in particular that all stocks of harvested species exhibit a population age and size distribution that is indicative of a healthy stock, and descriptors 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, and 10.

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses the need ~~for more scientific research~~to strengthen and to finance scientific research through the EMFF, in order to develop tackle and fishing techniques in such a way as to avoid bycatches of non-targeted species and promote other sustainable fishing methods; underlines the importance of addressing the management of mixed fisheries to this end;

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Calls on the Commission to conduct pilot projects aimed at the improvement of gear selectivity on a regional fishery, by the end of 2014. The results that emerge shall be included in the long-term management plan of each fishery in the form of the compulsory use of the most selective gear available.

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Expresses its doubts over the proposals relating to the market in bycatches, and stresses that, in case of implementation, adequate safeguards, including the establishment of a price ceiling, should be provided in order to avoid the emergence of a parallel market that would paradoxically encourage fishermen to increase their catch;

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23 a. Stresses that when allocating individual fishing opportunities a Member State shall give priority access to fishing vessels that fulfil transparent and objective criteria. The transparent criteria will be set by the Council and the Parliament, will be made publicly available and will include but not be limited to: (a) the employment of more selective fishing methods, gears and practices with low by-catch and low impact on the marine ecosystem; (b) have a good record of compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy and with respecting catch and/or fishing effort limits designated by scientific advice (c) ensure increased, good quality employment, provided that this does not have negative environmental impacts; (d) the use of vessels and fishing methods that have low fuel emissions and are energy efficient; and (e) the use of video surveillance or an equivalent electronic monitoring equipment, (f) working conditions that comply with relevant international standards, notably the 2007 ILO Work in Fishing Convention.

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Believes strongly that the reformed CFP must not be removed from the socio- economic and environmental context in which it exists; considers that the fisheries and aquaculture sectors must be seen as important direct and indirect sources of job creation in our maritime regions, which underpin their economy as a whole;. To this end the CFP should contribute to enhance the standard of living of the communities depending on fisheries, granting better working standards for fishermen, in particular through compliance with the health and safety legislation and of the rules established by the collective labour agreements

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5

III - Regionalisation and multi-annual plans

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 b (new)

31 b. Believes that the reform should be an opportunity to significantly move towards a renewed cooperation between the scientific community, industry and social partners, in orde to implement the process of regionalization.

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Believes, more generally, that the role of the RACs should be strengthened; in this respect, ~~urges the Commission to table a new proposal aimed at strengthening the participation of stakeholders and small- scale fisheri~~stresses that the RACs should promote a balanced representation of all stakeholders, including representatives from all segments of the fishing sector, the processing industry, scientists, local authorities, NGOs, control agencies and civil society representatives, thus leading to genuine regionalisation in the CFP; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission's proposal to set up a Black Sea Advisory Council;

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Stresses that an ambitious and real reform of the CFP can only be successful if sufficient financial means are available for the next ten years, in order to support all the reform measures and tackle the socio- economic and environmental problems that may occur;

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 d (new)

34 d. Asks that EU shall aim at concluding, as soon as possible, Sustainable Fisheries Cooperation Agreements with neighbouring countries where the EU provides funding and technical support in order to achieve a more concerted and coherent policy, with the aim of a harmonised and sustainable fisheries policy in all shared sea basins, therefore increasing the effectiveness of the CFP in all the regions concerned. These agreements shall be concluded in the spirit of a fair and equitable cooperation and the respect of human rights and shall aim at sharing responsibilities fairly between the Union and the respective partner country.

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 e (new)

34 e. In order to improve the cooperation with neighboring countries and to improve the management of shared stocks, the EU should aim at concluding sustainable fisheries cooperation agreements with these countries. These cooperation agreements should not aim at obtaining fishing rights for EU vessels but should aim at achieving a situation where the EU provides funding and technical suppor in exchange for the application of the same or comparable sustainable management rules as the EU in the third partner country.

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2290(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 f (new)

34 f. Believes that an effort should be made at EU level to monitor the activities of the EU fleets that operate in non- EU waters outside the framework of fisheries agreements, as these should respect the same guiding principles applied to those fishing in the EU. We believe that concrete measures should be put forward to ensure that working conditions for crew members domiciled outside the EU and working on-board vessels flying an EU flag should be equal to those of workers domiciled in the EU.

2012/05/09
Committee: PECH

2011/2175(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Is aware that to some extent the food loss and waste are unavoidable phenomena which, once they have occurred, have to be taken care of with the best means available to us and which require not only investments ~~not only~~ in technology but also changes in our behaviour, with the aim of avoiding the least desirable options, i.e. landfill and incineration;

2011/10/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2175(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that the GHG emissions associated to the production, packaging and transportation of food that is thrown away, are needless additional emissions; notes that improving the efficiency of the food supply chain, so as to prevent food waste and eliminate edible food waste, is a key action towards climate change mitigation;

2011/10/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2175(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Notes that the issue of food waste should be addressed under the scope of Resource Efficiency and calls on the Commission to deliver specific initiatives targeting food waste under the Resource Efficient Europe flagship;

2011/10/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2175(INI)

Kriton ARSENIS, Karin KADENBACH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses that the potential of food waste for energy recovery purposes, should not affect, or delay, action towards tackling the food waste problem as such;

2011/10/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Regrets the delayed action of the Commission with regard to the presentation of a new legislative proposal on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from electromagnetic fields after the postponement of the implementation of Directive 2004/40/EC and calls for the rapid implementation of the relevant legislation when adopted;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Karin KADENBACH, Kriton ARSENIS, Michèle RIVASI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Points out that chemicals are not evaluated under REACH for endocrine disruption; Therefore, calls on the Commission to propose provisions in order to take hormone disruption into account;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Welcomes the fact that the available data confirm the declining trend in occupational accidents; points out, however, that the number of occupational accidents is still too high;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Karin KADENBACH, Kriton ARSENIS, Michèle RIVASI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 g (new)

7g. Stresses the need for the continual improvement of data collection in order to guarantee the EU-wide comparability of data;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2147(INI)

Karin KADENBACH, Kriton ARSENIS, Michèle RIVASI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 i (new)

7i. Is in favour of a legislative initiative to protect workers against tobacco smoke at work, since comprehensive protection is currently not guaranteed;

2011/10/06
Committee: ENVI

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Calls on the Member States to assign an important role to physical activity, from an extremely early age, in national education programmes, considering the fact that currently one in seven children in the EU are overweight or obese; calls on the Council to draw up a recommendation along those lines;

2011/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)

2d. Takes specific notice that, given that the EU population is ageing, physical activity can have a positive impact on the health of the elderly;

2011/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that doping poses serious health risks on both professional and amateur athletes; takes the view that anti- doping action currently suffers from a lack of coherence and coordination amongst Member States and stakeholders; calls for an exchange of information and good practices between national administrations, anti-doping organisations and laboratories; points out that the European Union must ensure protection of the physical and moral integrity of sportsmen and sportswomen;

2011/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2011/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Stresses the pressure exerted on the growing number of children and adolescents involved in sporting activities;

2011/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2011/2087(INI)

Kriton ARSENIS, Bairbre de BRÚN, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to look into the appropriateness of a directive on foodstuffs intended for the expenditure of intense muscular effort, providing consumers with a satisfactory level of information, particularly in connection with anti-doping rules; calls on the Commission to draw up a preventive anti-doping strategy targeting young sportsmen and sportswomen, either professionals or amateurs;

2011/07/18
Committee: ENVI

2011/2072(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes that special attention should be given to the Arctic zone due to its fragility and importance in mitigating climate change;

2011/05/23
Committee: ENVI

2011/2072(INI)

Kriton ARSENIS, Bairbre de BRÚN, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Urges the Commission and the Members States to strengthen inspection methods and effective mutual cooperation and to establish an EU ‘Control the controllers’ system based on minimum binding EU safety rules;

2011/05/23
Committee: ENVI

2011/2072(INI)

Kriton ARSENIS, Bairbre de BRÚN, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Considers that oil and gas operators must be required, in the licensing procedure~~, to demonstrate they~~ and throughout the operational period, to have sufficient insurance or other financial guarantees in place to secure restoration and compensation in relation to environmental damage caused – whether through industry mutual schemes, such as OPOL, or through mandatory insurances;

2011/05/23
Committee: ENVI

2011/2071(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Calls for the adoption of specific legislation or of an interinstitutional agreement in order to ensure the democratic legitimacy and effectiveness of the European Semester;

2011/06/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2071(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1 a. Notes that the Annual Growth Survey includes recommendations with regard to the main EU policy priority actions; stresses, therefore, the need for the addition of a new annex on sustainable development;

2011/06/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2071(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that resource efficiency and energy efficiency are fundamental to promoting sustainable growth and combating climate change, and are therefore, in the medium and long term, key components of competitiveness while contributing significantly to the exit from the current economic crisis;

2011/06/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2071(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Stresses the need for setting an annual material EU efficiency target in order to reduce resource use and points out that it is essential to decouple resource use from economic growth;

2011/06/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2071(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. SUnderlines the link between the economic and the environmental crisis and stresses that the European Semester of ex-ante economic policy coordination must reflect promotion of the transition to an environmentally sustainable economy;

2011/06/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2071(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Notes that GDP does not account for human and social capital, natural resources and ecosystem services, major transformations like those ensuing from climate change, nor the principle of a fair and equitable access to resources for present and future generations as a prerequisite of sustainability; stresses, therefore, the need GDP to be integrated with new data and indicators;

2011/06/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2071(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Welcomes the suggestion of the current Annual Growth Survey to eliminate environmentally harmful subsidies and calls for the assessment of the implementation of this policy during the European Semester of 2012.

2011/06/21
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the ~~over-use~~increasing demand for, and the over-exploitation of natural resources leads to environmental degradation and destruction of the earth's finite natural capital;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas ~~intense resource use and~~the resource scarcity resulting from intense use, the price speculation in the commodities markets and the dramatically increased global consumption are pushing up prices of raw materials, with real commodity prices having increased by 147% since the turn of the century; whereas the EU is likely to face severe challenges in securing access to, and the uninterrupted supply of, key resources;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Csaba Sándor TABAJDI, Marisa MATIAS, Karin KADENBACH, Vittorio PRODI, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas realising and monetising the value of nature and the ecosystem services it provides is crucial for a transition to a resource efficient economy;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls for the creation of Joint Task Forces for the three key areas of ~~food,~~ housing ~~and~~, mobility and food and drink: these should consist of experts from the Commission, Member States, industry and civil society and develop European Resource Efficiency Action Plans with clear ~~benchmark~~resource reduction actions within one year;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Csaba Sándor TABAJDI, Marisa MATIAS, Jo LEINEN, Vittorio PRODI, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Calls on the Commission to develop a chain of custody system, subjected to appropriate impact assessments, that instructs producers throughout the entire chain to use a transparent system to record the use of resources, allowing for more intelligence in the use of resources;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Csaba Sándor TABAJDI, Marisa MATIAS, Jo LEINEN, Karin KADENBACH, Vittorio PRODI, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Calls on the Commission to encourage more partnerships between actors throughout the value chains based on a good understanding of the value chain's characteristics, challenges and hurdles.

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Csaba Sándor TABAJDI, Marisa MATIAS, Jo LEINEN, Vittorio PRODI, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Calls on~~Urges the Commission and Member States to stimulate the reuse of products and the use of secondary materials ~~market~~ and to foster the demand for reuse and recycled raw materials by developing end-of- waste criteria and economic incentives, such as reduced VAT rates for secondary materials~~, by 2013; calls also therefore for the creation of a ´Schengen area´ for waste in order to move waste for recycling more freely between the Member States~~;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Marisa MATIAS, Csaba Sándor TABAJDI, Jo LEINEN, Vittorio PRODI, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Urges the European Commission to research the development of a hierarchy model to ensure the highest added value of resource use without compromising the environment in analogy with the Report on an effective raw materials strategy for Europe (2011/2056(INI)); calls on the EC to map the competition for the same materials and to address non-essential consumption of resources;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Satu HASSI, Bas EICKHOUT, Nessa CHILDERS, Marisa MATIAS, Jo LEINEN, Vittorio PRODI, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Urges the Commission to examine the effects of a tax on resources and virgin raw materials, and in particular on any side effects, such as non sustainable substitution, tax evasion or a shift of economic activities to third countries and to present proposals for EU instruments to this effect in line with the resource efficiency priority; the taxation of resources must serve the purpose to promote reuse and recycling instead of the extraction of virgin materials and would help shift the tax burden from labour to resources;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Daciana Octavia SÂRBU, Nessa CHILDERS, Marita ULVSKOG, Jo LEINEN, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Reiterates that more vigorous monitoring of the implementation of waste legislation is needed;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Marita ULVSKOG, Jo LEINEN, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Urges the Commission to ~~boost research and~~stimulate disruptive thinking to force breakthroughs in - technological- innovation ~~to speed up~~in order to accelerate the transition to a ~~green~~sustainable economy; underlines that the ‘´Innovation Union~~’ is one of the engines~~` and more specifically the ´Horizon 2020 Framework program` and the ´European Innovation Partnership on Raw Materials` are engines to drive for a resource-efficient Europe;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Urges the Commission and Member States to ~~develop and use clear and measurable indicators for economic activity that take account of climate change, biodiversity and resource efficiency~~introduce concrete legislative initiatives necessary to meet binding, resource reduction targets, supported by funds and financial mechanisms by the end of 2012;3

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to extend the scope of the eco-design directive to non- energy related products and to come forward with additional eco-design requirements on the performance of products, including recycl~~ed content~~ability, end-of- life recycling, durability and reusability, in order to improve their environmental impact and promote recycling markets;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Satu HASSI, Bas EICKHOUT, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Marita ULVSKOG, Jo LEINEN, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Emphasises that resource efficiency is a cross-cutting issue; calls on the Commission to integrate this agenda into other policies, especially the overarching governance economic policies, such as Europe 2020.

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Marita ULVSKOG, Jo LEINEN, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Endorses the Flagship Initiative on a Resource Efficient Europe and the Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe and its 2050 vision, including its milestones; calls on the Commission to bring forward swiftly all legislative and other initiatives necessary to achieve the milestones and to ensure that all EU policies are aligned to them; recalls the fact that decoupling economic growth from resource consumption is essential to improve Europe's competitiveness and reduce its resource dependency;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Marita ULVSKOG, Jo LEINEN, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Calls on the Commission, by the end of 2012, to identify those priority products or services that contribute the most to key global consumption areas water, land, materials and carbon to be coherent with the consumption indicators as laid down in the Resource Efficiency Roadmap.

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Karl-Heinz FLORENZ, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Jo LEINEN, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines the urgency of taking action now to support innovation and investment in new techniques and business models, such as a leasing society, and to create the incentives that will bring both short- and long- term benefits for the economy; emphasises the key role of the private sector in delivering green economic growth;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Daciana Octavia SÂRBU, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Jutta HAUG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Is concerned about the increasing application of nano-technology - e.g. silver in nano-particles for anti-bacterial use - which may lead to irretrievability of these materials; calls for careful study of the environmental impact before the technique is more widely taken up;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Underlines that Europe as a recycling society needs to reuse and recycle to a large extent its own waste and produce secondary raw materials in the most efficient way: accordingly, a EU-wide proximity principle should be extended to all recovery operations optimising the distance from the source to the recovery installation;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Notes that for the transition to a resource-efficient economy to be realised, market prices should reflect fully the degree of resource scarcity as well as all the costs entailed in the production process; calls for the implementation of the life cycle approach in the accounting process and the internalisation of the external environmental costs according to the polluter-pays principle;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Bas EICKHOUT, Satu HASSI, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Jo LEINEN, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on the Commission and Member States to develop incentives that encourage companies and public bodies to measure, benchmark and continuously improve their ~~resource efficiency~~water-, land-, material- and carbon footprints, as well as measures to extend the producer responsibility principle and to remove barriers that hold back resource efficiency;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Emphasizes the importance of the role that citizens and civil organisations play in bringing about a change in transforming the economy; stresses the need to develop awareness strategies and strategies to alter consumer behaviour and to avoid rebound effects;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Underlines the need to secure a sustainable European supply of raw materials necessary to meeting the needs of a growing recycling sector, expanding Europe's open economy and generating jobs;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls for stronger requirements on Green and Sustainable Public Procurement (GPP) for products with significant environmental impacts and urges the Commission to assess where GPP could be linked to EU- funded projects; calls for efforts to promote joint procurement and networks of public procurement officers in support of GPP by the end of this year;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Reiterates the value of including resource use in product information and eco-labels and urges the Commission to integrate all existing labels as far as possible, thus providing a complete overview for consumers on e.g. resource use, energy use, corporate social responsibility, source of origin, eco- innovation, material use and recyclability;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Urges Member States to ensure full implementation of the EU waste acquis, including minimum targets, through their national waste prevention and management strategies; reiterates that targets that have already been set in several Directives regarding the collection and separation of waste, should be further elaborated and set for the highest and most qualitative recovery of materials in each of the phases of recycling: collection, dismantling, pre-processing and recycling/refinery;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Urges the Commission to investigate opportunities in setting up EU-wide extended producer responsibility schemes to drive performance in all Member States including those where reuse and recycling rates are much lower than the EU average;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to streamline the waste acquis ~~and to introduce a progressive landfill ban~~, recalls the Parliaments decision on the report on an effective raw materials strategy for Europe (2011/2056(INI)) to introduce a general ban on waste landfill throughout the EU, and urges the Commission to extend this ban by introducing an incineration ban on recyclable waste at the latest by the end of this decade, accompanied by appropriate transition measures;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Calls on the Commission to further develop standards for the treatment of waste on the basis of Life Cycle Analysis thinking and the waste hierarchy to further reduce the amount of recoverable and recyclable waste going to the landfill until its phasing out at the end of this decade;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)

13b. Calls on the Commission to present measures for securing environmentally sound collection, pre-processing and recycling of raw materials per category;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Bas EICKHOUT, Satu HASSI, Vittorio PRODI, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Urges Member States to shift towards environmental taxation in public revenues ~~accounting for an EU average of more than 10% by 2020, in line with the best performing Member States~~; emphasises that this will allow for cuts in other taxes such as on labour, increase competitiveness and create a level playing field;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Urges the Commission ~~and Member States~~ to present concrete plans to be adopted by 2014 for phasing out all environmentally harmful subsidies before 2020;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Karl-Heinz FLORENZ, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Endorses the Commission's commitment in the Roadmap to developing market-based instruments to enable negative externalities to be included in market prices thereby reflecting the true cost of using resources and their environmental impacts;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Marisa MATIAS, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls on the Commission to ~~start pilot projects for several resources, e.g. phosphorous,~~make use of best practices in the field of resource efficiency, e.g. in the field of phosphorous, and, if best practices for certain resources do not yet exist or need improvement, start pilot projects for scarce resources to reach 100% reuse in 2020~~; emphasises that these~~. These best practices and pilot projects should receive direct funding from structural funds, and the Common Agricultural Policy;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the importance of sustainable agriculture, pasture farming, water efficient grazing systems, dietary changes to reduce animal protein intake and diminishing imported land use;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Emphasizes that nutrient losses to the environment through agricultural production creates heavy external costs for ecosystems, human health and the climate, calls for the Commission to introduce modern nutrient management techniques to reduce nutrient losses as production intensifies;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Supports the proposal by the Commission to establish a ~~lead indicator complemented by a~~ set of indicators on land, water, materials and carbon; u~~nderlines that these must be based on a footprint approach that takes the full life cycle impacts into ac~~rges the Commission to ensure that these four consumption-driven indicators are the land-, water-, material- and carbon footprint, thus integrating hidden flows as well as the possible transfer of environmental pressures to third countries;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2068(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Welcomes the initiative of the Commission on the Transparency Directive, following the US Dodd-Frank bill and urges the Commission to include sustainability criteria;

2012/03/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2056(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Calls on the Commission to introduce a) the reduction of the EU's consumption of raw materials, b) the reduction of the EU's dependency on imported raw materials and c) the creation of a sustainable and equitable system to manage the world's natural resources, as further key objectives of the Raw Materials Initiative;

2011/05/26
Committee: DEVE

2011/2056(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Notes that lower consumption levels, prevention of waste generation and re-use are key components for the transition to a resource efficient economy;

2011/05/30
Committee: ENVI

2011/2056(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to fully consider the development benefits that export restrictions and taxes on raw material entail for developing countries, given that export taxes are an important source of income, especially for Least Developed Countries, reducing the domestic price of industrial inputs and thus providing economic incentives to establish domestic processing industries and also enhance environmental protection by preventing the unlimited exploitation of natural resources;

2011/05/26
Committee: DEVE

2011/2056(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls for a legislative proposal to deprive EU companies that do not apply EU standards when operating in developing countries from any form of European funding and expresses its strong concern regarding the numerous well-documented cases of EU companies violating environmental and labour standards and human rights;

2011/05/26
Committee: DEVE

2011/2056(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the promotion of more disclosure of financial information and the country-by-country reporting for extractive industries envisaged by the Commission;

2011/05/26
Committee: DEVE

2011/2056(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses the importance of the development, promotion and implementation of a life cycle approach for RM, thus internalising the external environmental costs associated with the extraction and the use of raw materials, extending the highest quality and life of such materials, and the need for indicators to measure efficient and effective resource use, and points to the importance of the full implementation of the Ecodesign Directive in this regard;

2011/05/30
Committee: ENVI

2011/2056(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Asks~~Calls on the EIB and the Commission to ~~consider more rigorously~~make the support of the extractive industries sector in developing countries conditional upon whether such projeducts contribute to poverty eradication, sustainable development and inclusive growth ~~when deciding on supporting the extractiv~~, respect the rights of indigenous people iand~~ustries sector in~~ ensure food security for developing countries;

2011/05/26
Committee: DEVE

2011/2056(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Underlines that a new indicator which goes beyond GDP and which measures resource consumption and resource productivity is essential for the decoupling of economic growth from material use;

2011/05/30
Committee: ENVI

2011/2056(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Urges the EC to examine the effects of a tax on mineral resources, unused extracted raw materials, non-energy RM, water and land use, and in particular on any side effects, such as non sustainable substitution, tax evasion or a shift of economic activities to third countries; points out that a tax on resources would render resources more valuable, resulting in better use, re-use and recycling of RM and lower export of resources.;

2011/05/30
Committee: ENVI

2011/2051(INI)

Kriton ARSENIS, Karin KADENBACH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes the widespread concern on the ~~decreasing but accumulated~~accumulated direct and indirect negative impacts of CAP on developing countries; regrets that the Commission communication on the CAP towards 2020 does not mention such impacts, thus not upholding the EU´s legal obligations for Policy Coherence for Development and its commitment to the achievement of MDGs; calls on the new CAP to include the principle of "do no harm" to developing countries as a core objective; and create appropriate mechanisms which ensure it is upheld,

2011/03/29
Committee: DEVE

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for CAP funding to be based on a model which includes payments linked to natural handicaps, including insular and mountainous regions, and green-point payments or payments for vulnerable regions;

2011/03/22
Committee: ENVI

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. To alleviate the accumulated negative impacts of CAP on developing countries, calls on the EU through its trade and development policies to promote sustainable farming practices and food sovereignty in developing countries; considers ~~safeguard~~ensuring food security for LDCs and Net Food Importing Developing Countries, eliminating land grabbing, not undermining and securing the property rights of smallholders, female farmers, indigenous farmers and communities, ending seed monopolies and dependency on specialised pesticides to be essential,

2011/03/29
Committee: DEVE

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that food is not merely a commodity but access to healthy, nutritious and adequate food is foremost a universal human right; calls on the post- 2013 CAP to incorporate food sovereignty for developing countries and access to healthy food as further core objectives,

2011/03/29
Committee: DEVE

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Takes the view that, in the context of tackling international speculation in agricultural commodity prices, the new CAP should establish appropriate mechanisms and rules to govern the trade of agricultural commodity derivatives and enhance transparency; the EU should lead by example, by establishing domestically local auctioning agricultural markets and local distribution systems, which increase the bargaining power of smallholders in the global food supply chain,

2011/03/29
Committee: DEVE

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Believes that under the revised CAP consideration should be given to ~~new ‘carbon credit’ instruments~~options for the payment of ecosystem services, with particular attention to GHG reduction and carbon sequestration, because agriculture offers enormous potential for combating climate change;

2011/03/22
Committee: ENVI

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the new CAP to include a new measure for the restoration of "pollinator-friendly" habitats and reward farmers and land owners for protecting and conserving agricultural biodiversity; notes that the Farmland Bird Indicator, the Butterfly Indicator and the HNV Farming Area Indicator should be monitored at a national and regional level;

2011/03/22
Committee: ENVI

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the new CAP to promote the conservation of genetic diversity, comply with Directive 98/58/EC on Animal Welfare, and abstain from funding the production of food from cloned animals, offsprings or their descendants;

2011/03/22
Committee: ENVI

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that the new CAP complies with Farmers’ Rights and other obligations under the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture; calls for specific measures to discourage the use of non-reproducible seeds and to promote the in situ and on- farm conservation of genetic material, free access to local seed banks and the use of local seeds;

2011/03/22
Committee: ENVI

2011/2051(INI)

Kriton ARSENIS, Karin KADENBACH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Encourages more EU-funded projects in which farmers and researchers can work together to restore traditional farming practices and find innovative ways of cultivating land in an environmentally sustainable manner;

2011/03/22
Committee: ENVI

2011/2051(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Underlines the need to include resource efficiency considerations in the CAP through support for reprocessing of organic agricultural waste for soil fertilisation, as well as for the prevention of the dispersal of agricultural plastic waste;

2011/03/22
Committee: ENVI

2011/2048(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the fact that the Commission regards public procurement as an important component in the transition to a sustainable economy, increased innovation, resource efficiency and achieving the targets of the EU 2020 Strategy;

2011/06/20
Committee: ENVI

2011/2048(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Notes that the EU public sector consumption accounts annually for approximately 17% of EU´s gross domestic product; reiterates the potential of their purchasing power in promoting resource efficiency, sustainable production and consumption patterns and innovation;

2011/06/20
Committee: ENVI

2011/2048(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Expresses its concern on the ineffective implementation of EU´s voluntary Green Public Procurement (GPP) instrument;

2011/06/20
Committee: ENVI

2011/2048(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the widespread desire of local, regional and national operators to award contracts that support sustainable development and local sourcing; notes that there is much evidence to show that the directive and its implementation are making this more difficult;

2011/06/20
Committee: ENVI

2011/2048(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Advocates that environmental considerations should be included in all public procurement contracts; stresses that the Public Procurement Directive should be amended to make it clearer that it is both desirable and possible for public operators to impose environmental conditions, welfare conditions for farm animals, where relevant, and take account of environmental impact when awarding contracts;

2011/06/20
Committee: ENVI

2011/2048(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Prefers to encourage and facilitate sustainable and green procurement by public operators rather than setting mandatory quotas for it in smaller-scale contracts; considers, however, that mandatory quotas should apply to larger- scale contracts; still considers that ~~the greatest obstacle to more environmentally friendly public procurement is not so much lack of willingness as unclear and inflexible legislation~~mandatory quotas will foster innovation, resource and energy efficiency, as well as the transition to a sustainable EU economy;

2011/06/20
Committee: ENVI

2011/2047(INI)

Corina CREȚU, Ricardo CORTÉS LASTRA, Kriton ARSENIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Insists that access to basic social services, in particular to health and education, which are crucial sectors for reaching the MDGs and for facilitating sustainable growth, must remain a cornerstone for EU aid;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Underlines that tackling inequality – including gender – reinforces the human rights based approach championed in the European Consensus on Development and leads to faster poverty reduction;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Reiterates its position that the collective target of devoting 0.7% of the Union’s Gross National Income (GNI) to ODA by 2015 must be met; urges the Commission and Member States to find new sources of development funding; ~~opposes any~~underlines that a financial transaction tax could raise billions of Euros, part of which could be directed to development aid; opposes any alteration or broadening of the definition of ODA, as set by the OECD;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Reiterates that the EU should channel its aid into the LDCs with special attention to the situation of women, children and people with disabilities;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Supports efforts to promote ~~industrial~~sustainable economic development, provided that social and environmental standards are observed;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Emphasises that the provision of basic social services is crucial to pro-poor growth; calls for 20% of all EU assistance to be earmarked for basic social services, as defined by the OECD, with a special focus on free and universal access to primary health care and basic education;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Reiterates its view that the EU must support partner countries in developing fair, transparent and effective tax systems to generate the revenues needed for social protection and pro-poor policies;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Acknowledges that the development of the private sector in developing countries is crucial to creating employment opportunities, delivering services and enhancing wealth creation; stresses that, in keeping with the pro-poor agenda, EU development aid should focus on encouraging recipient countries to create an environment conducive to the development of small, medium-sized and micro- enterprises and on the removal of barriers to formalisation, access to capital and affordable credit and that services and capacity-building should be targeted in particular on poorer entrepreneurs;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Welcomes the proposal to focus development cooperation on sustainable renewable energy; insists that access to energy for the poor and in connection with the provision of public services and local development must be prime objectives of EU-supported projects;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. ~~Supports~~Recognizes that tackling climate change and achieving key development objectives are mutually supportive goals; emphasizes the need for more systematic efforts to mainstream ecosystem-based climate change adaptation and mitigation and disaster risk reduction measures and the need to ensure that all EU development projects do not oppose global climate change mitigation efforts;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Reiterates its position that mainstreaming cannot replace the provision of new and additional resources which the EU and other donors have ~~promised~~committed towards developing countries ~~affected by climate change~~mitigation efforts and adaptation needs;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates its position that the EU should focus its development assistance on ensuring food security for developing countries and promoting sustainable, local, small-scale and organic agricultural production; emphasises the need to ensure, in particular, access for small farmers to the means of production (land, seeds, credit, consultancy and advisory services), to processing and marketing opportunities and to local and cross-border markets;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2047(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Insists that the EU should also address the root causes of food insecurity, including food-price speculation ~~and~~, ‘land grabbing’ and seed monopolies; reiterates that the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy must take into account the Treaty obligation of PCD and incorporate the principle of ‘do no harm’ to developing countries as a further core objective;

2011/04/18
Committee: DEVE

2011/2034(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Stresses that planning of energy infrastructure projects should comply fully with the precautionary principle; action plans should be subject to thorough environmental impact assessments on a case-by-case basis which take into account local and regional environmental conditions;

2011/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2034(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines the fact that substantial investments need to be made in energy infrastructure in order to achieve our goal for a low carbon economy by 2050; notes that not making these investments would result in much higher costs in terms of environmental deterioration, rising energy prices, the loss of competitiveness, increased energy insecurity and dependency, as well as a decrease in employment and welfare. These investments could come from both private and public sources, whereas revenues from a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT), a green/carbon tax and from the auctioning of allowances of the revised ETS could be used to bridge the funding gap and to boost investments, for instance to adapt our energy grids to the requirements of renewable energies;

2011/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2034(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that significant risks are linked to energy infrastructure such as operational (e.g. congestions, continuity of supply), natural (e.g. earthquakes, floods), environmental (e.g. pollution, habitat and biodiversity loss) or anthropogenic/political (e.g. safety, terrorism); therefore calls for decisions on smart grids development to be based on weighting both benefits and costs, as foreseen by EC Directive 2008/114 on critical infrastructures; suggests to the Member States to draw-up a mapping of risks as a tool for decision-making and monitoring the results of smart grids implementation in order to improve interconnectivity of grids;

2011/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2034(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Notes that apart from the capital and operational costs, significant environmental costs arise from the construction, operation and decommissioning of energy infrastructure projects; emphasises the importance of accounting for these environmental costs in the cost-benefit analysis using the life cycle costing approach

2011/05/04
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)

- having regard to Article 222 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the solidarity clause,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas climate change increases the frequency and severity of natural disasters, often cutting across states borders and resulting in severe economic, environmental and social damage,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the Solidarity Clause under Article 222 of the TFEU establishes the obligation for Member States to assist each other in the event of a natural or man made disaster on EU territory,

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Underlines the need for collection and dissemination of solid and comparable information on the frequency of occurrence, risks and the associated consequences of disasters; notes that preventing disasters is often more cost- effective than combating them;

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2023(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Notes that disasters often have a cross-border nature and calls for an enhanced cooperation at EU level, in line with the principle of solidarity; notes further that coordinated action through the dissemination of technical and scientific information, and the sharing of best practices are essential elements of an effective disaster prevention and response policy;

2011/05/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas, due to the economic crisis, emissions from sectors in the EU emissions trading system (ETS) have been considerably lower than projected, and below the level of initial allocation, hence resulting in a surplus of unused allowances and a low carbon price

2011/03/31
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Notes that the opportunity cost of not acting now is higher than the additional €11 billion required for moving to a 30% GHG reduction target by 2020;

2011/05/02
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that delaying climate action would result in higher costs for achieving the 2050 target due to stranded investment in high-carbon capital stock ~~and~~, slower technological learning and the loss of EU´s competitiveness in the global clean energy market, which is forecast to be worth €10 trillion;

2011/05/02
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Calls for the introduction of a minimum carbon price in the EU-ETS, below which fluctuations can not occur; notes that such a "price floor" should be fixed at an appropriate level which triggers investments in clean energy technologies;

2011/05/02
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15b. Underlines that a financial transaction tax of 0.05% will raise billion of Euros part of which could be used towards financing the 30% GHG reduction target by 2020 and the transition to a zero carbon economy;

2011/05/02
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Dan JØRGENSEN, Kriton ARSENIS, Marita ULVSKOG, Åsa WESTLUND, Nessa CHILDERS, Vittorio PRODI, Kathleen VAN BREMPT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Reiterates that EU reduction targets need to be primarily achieved within the EU; recalls that the use of international offsets replaces investment into the EU economy and delays domestic reductions in the EU; calls upon the Commission and Member States to complement the current system of production based direct emission accounting with consumption based accounting, analysing if emissions have indeed been reduced instead of exported; henceforth calls upon the Commission to come forward with a proposal, as changing consumption patterns and resource efficiency are the real answer to mitigating climate change.

2011/05/02
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Dan JØRGENSEN, Kriton ARSENIS, Åsa WESTLUND, Jo LEINEN, Vittorio PRODI, Nessa CHILDERS, Kathleen VAN BREMPT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 – subparagraph 3 (new)

Options and tools to move beyond the 20% target Urges the Commission to actively monitor the spending of auctioning revenues by Member States and report on this on an annual basis to the European Parliament.

2011/05/02
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Is convinced that the advantage of acting earlier contributes to significant long-term benefits for Europe's competitiveness, by shaping appropriate expectations and maintaining a strong position in a rapidly growing global market for clean technologies;

2011/04/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Takes note of the potential government revenue losses arising from the 2008 financial crisis and the resulting surplus of emission allowances in the EU ETS; stresses that tightening the amount of polluting allowances through a higher GHG reduction target in the EU ETS is vital for EU governments to recover part of these losses;

2011/04/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Judith A. MERKIES, Dan JØRGENSEN, Jo LEINEN, Åsa WESTLUND, Marita ULVSKOG, Kriton ARSENIS, Vittorio PRODI, Nessa CHILDERS, Kathleen VAN BREMPT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Emphasises that the co-benefits of emissions reductions only occur for emissions reductions achieved inside the EU and where there is a strong emphasis on increased energy efficiency investment; Stresses that the proposed approach in the new Energy Efficiency Action plan regarding the Member States' voluntary or mandatory targets is not sufficient. Reiterates that the European Parliament calls for mandatory energy efficiency targets for Member States, which have gained even more importance in light of the recently published Roadmap to a low carbon economy.

2011/04/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Notes further that a higher GHG reduction target within the EU, will strengthen even further EU´s position and bargaining power in the UNFCCC negotiations, and stimulate the discussions towards an international climate change agreement;

2011/04/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/2012(INI)

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Notes that nuclear electricity prices do not reflect the risks arising from nuclear power and radioactive waste disposal; calls for an atomic tax to be imposed to nuclear energy generation reflecting the socio-economic and environmental risks associated with its deployment,

2011/04/01
Committee: ENVI

2011/0429(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Åsa WESTLUND, Justas Vincas PALECKIS, Dan JØRGENSEN, Jo LEINEN, Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Pavel POC

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) The review of the priority substances list has been supported by an extensive consultation with experts from the Commission services, Member States, stakeholders and the Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) and a thorough examination of the toxicity of the substances and their occurrence across the EU.

2012/11/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/0429(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Csaba Sándor TABAJDI, Jo LEINEN, Justas Vincas PALECKIS, Åsa WESTLUND, Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Pavel POC

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) Numerous Union acts have been adopted since the adoption of Directive 2000/60/EC, which constitute emission control measures in accordance with Article 16 of that Directive for individual priority substances. Moreover, many environmental protection measures fall under the scope of other existing Union legislation. Therefore, priority should be given to implementing and revising existing instruments rather than establishing new controls. The report on the outcome of the regular review of Annex X to Directive 2000/60/EC provided for in Article 16(4) of that Directive should review the measures adopted at the Union level and in Member States and assess whether those measures achieve the quality standards for the priority substances or the cessation objective for the priority hazardous substances. The Commission should accompany this report, if appropriate, with relevant proposals on concrete measures for the achievement of the quality standards and the cessation objective along with intermediate timetables. The inclusion of a substance in Annex X to Directive 2000/60/EC is without prejudice to the application of the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC.

2012/11/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/0429(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Csaba Sándor TABAJDI, Åsa WESTLUND, Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Pavel POC, Jo LEINEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) A high level of coordination between the Committee established by Article 21(1) of Directive 2000/60/EC and the committees and bodies established under the scope of other existing Union legislation regarding the evaluation, assessment, authorisation or other review of mutually relevant substances or groups of substances is needed. Such coordination should ensure an adequate evaluation of the risk to or via the aquatic environment in order to achieve the objectives established under Article 4 of Directive 2000/60/EC and the introduction of measures and controls on the discharges, emissions and losses of the substances to mitigate those risks pursuant to the relevant legislation. Or. en (See Amendment 222 to Annex II a (new))

2012/11/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/0429(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Åsa WESTLUND, Dan JØRGENSEN, Jo LEINEN, Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Pavel POC

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8

(8) Additional substances posing a significant risk to or via the aquatic environment at Union level including pharmaceutical substances have been identified and prioritised using the approaches specified in Article 16(2) of Directive 2000/60/EC and need to be added to the list of priority substances. The latest available scientific and technical information has been taken into account in deriving the EQS for these substances. For the derivation of EQS in the regular review of Annex X to Directive 2000/60/EC provided for in Article 16(4) of that Directive, combination effects should be taken into account.

2012/11/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/0429(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Dagmar ROTH-BEHRENDT, Csaba Sándor TABAJDI, Jo LEINEN, Justas Vincas PALECKIS, Åsa WESTLUND, Judith A. MERKIES, Nessa CHILDERS, Pavel POC

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 a (new)

(8a) The pollution of waters and soils with pharmaceutical residues is an emerging environmental problem. Current evaluation and control of the risk to or via the aquatic environment of medicinal products does not provide adequate attention to Union environmental objectives. An ongoing Commission study on the risks of environmental effects of medicinal products aims therefore at providing an analysis of the relevance of the current legislative framework to, and its effectiveness at, protecting the environment and human health via the aquatic environment, and finally an identification of possible measures to better address the problem.

2012/11/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/0429(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Dagmar ROTH-BEHRENDT, Csaba Sándor TABAJDI, Jo LEINEN, Justas Vincas PALECKIS, Åsa WESTLUND, Nessa CHILDERS, Pavel POC

Proposal for a directive
Recital 8 b (new)

(8b) This proposal aims at ensuring a better quality of water for public health and biodiversity reasons. The pharmaceutical substances which have been prioritised are identified due to a significant risk that they pose to or via the aquatic environment at Union level and not due to a risk on public health via human consumption.

2012/11/13
Committee: ENVI

2011/0364(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 5

2003/1185/EC
Article 6 – paragraph 1

– The number and nature of cases of non- compliance detected, including a full identification of the vessel(s) involved and the penalty applied for each case of non- compliance.

2012/07/25
Committee: PECH

2011/0364(COD)

Julie GIRLING, Kriton ARSENIS, Chris DAVIES, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA

2011/0229(COD)

Kriton ARSENIS, Andrés PERELLÓ RODRÍGUEZ, Edite ESTRELA