Activities of Ivari PADAR
Plenary speeches (64)
Comprehensive European education, research and remembrance of the totalitarian past (topical debate) ET
Implementation of the EU Youth Strategy (debate) ET
Summer-time arrangements (debate) ET
Review of the Estonian Presidency (debate) ET
Amendments to various Regulations in the field of agriculture and rural development (debate) ET
Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products (A7-0276/2013 - Linda McAvan)
Situation in Ukraine (debate)
Plant breeding (A7-0044/2014 - Marit Paulsen)
Recommendation for a decision, pursuant to Rule 88(2) and (3) of the Rules of Procedure, on the draft Commission regulation concerning the country of origin or place of provenance for fresh, chilled, and frozen meat of swine, sheep, goats and poultry (B7-0087/2014)
Situation in Ukraine (RCB7-0138/2014, B7-0138/2014, B7-0139/2014, B7-0140/2014, B7-0158/2014, B7-0161/2014, B7-0163/2014, B7-0164/2014)
Compliance with the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy (A7-0468/2013 - Isabelle Thomas)
Small agricultural holdings (A7-0029/2014 - Czesław Adam Siekierski)
A 2030 framework for climate and energy policies (debate)
Review of the Lithuanian Presidency (debate)
Consumer programme 2014-2020 (A7-0214/2012 - Robert Rochefort)
Food crisis, fraud in the food chain and the control thereof (A7-0434/2013 - Esther de Lange)
Plastic waste in the environment (A7-0453/2013 - Vittorio Prodi)
Financing, management and monitoring of the CAP - European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development - Common organisation of the markets in agricultural products - Direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the CAP - Transitional provisions on support for rural development (debate)
Financing, management and monitoring of the CAP (A7-0363/2013 - Giovanni La Via)
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (A7-0361/2013 - Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos)
Common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (A7-0366/2013 - Michel Dantin)
Direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the CAP (A7-0362/2013 - Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos)
Transitional provisions on support for rural development (A7-0326/2013 - Albert Deß)
Agricultural and fishery statistics (A7-0148/2013 - Paolo De Castro)
Common provisions on European funds - European Social Fund - European Regional Development Fund and the 'investment for growth and jobs' goal - European Regional Development Fund and the 'European territorial cooperation' goal - Cohesion Fund - European grouping of territorial cooperation (debate)
Portable batteries and accumulators containing cadmium (debate)
Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products (A7-0276/2013 - Linda McAvan)
Programme of activities of the Lithuanian Presidency (debate)
Review of the Irish Presidency, including the MFF agreement (B7-0332/2013, RCB7-0334/2013, B7-0334/2013, B7-0335/2013, B7-0339/2013, B7-0340/2013)
Adoption by Latvia of the euro on 1 January 2014 (A7-0237/2013 - Burkhard Balz)
Contribution of cooperatives to overcoming the crisis (A7-0222/2013 - Patrizia Toia)
Fight against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax havens (A7-0162/2013 - Mojca Kleva Kekuš)
Specific tasks for the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions - European Banking Authority and prudential supervision of credit institutions (debate)
2012 progress report on Serbia (B7-0090/2013)
Current situation in Cyprus (debate)
Decision on the opening of, and mandate for, interinstitutional negotiations on direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the CAP - 2011/0280(COD) - Decision on the opening of, and mandate for, interinstitutional negotiations on common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) - 2011/0281(COD) - Decision on the opening of, and mandate for, interinstitutional negotiations on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) - 2011/0282(COD) - Decision on the opening of, and mandate for, interinstitutional negotiations on financing, management and monitoring of the CAP - 2011/0288(COD) (debate)
Preparations for the European Council meeting (7-8 February 2013) (debate)
Programme of activities of the Irish Presidency (debate)
Credit rating agencies (A7-0221/2012 - Leonardo Domenici)
Explanations of vote
Explanations of vote
Explanations of vote
New EU-Russia agreement (debate)
Explanations of vote
Current management of the sugar sector (debate)
Direct payments to farmers (debate)
Explanations of vote
Enlargement report for Iceland (debate)
Technical requirements for credit transfers and direct debits in euros (debate)
Preparing forests for climate change (short presentation)
Industrial policy for the globalised era (debate)
A new Energy Strategy for Europe 2011 - 2020 (debate)
Future of the CAP after 2013 (debate)
Adoption by Estonia of the euro on 1 January 2011 (debate)
Energy performance of buildings (recast) (debate)
Preparation for the European Council meeting (25-26 March 2010) (debate)
Difficult monetary, economic and social situation of Eurozone countries (debate)
Results of the Swedish Presidency - Outcome of the European Council on 10 and 11 December 2009 (debate)
Responses to relaunch the economy in the Member States of the European Union in Central and Eastern Europe
Preparation of the European Council to be held on 10 and 11 December 2009 (debate)
Climate change and developing countries in the framework of the UN Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen (debate)
Outcome of the referendum in Ireland (debate)
Crisis in the dairy farming sector (debate)
Presentation of the work programme of the Swedish Presidency (debate)
Shadow reports (4)
REPORT on the proposal for a Council decision on the adoption by Latvia of the euro on 1 January 2014 PDF (188 KB) DOC (96 KB)
REPORT on ‘Towards an integrated European market for card, internet and mobile payments’ PDF (230 KB) DOC (143 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 975/98 of 3 May 1998 on denominations and technical specifications of euro coins intended for circulation PDF (140 KB) DOC (176 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the issuance of euro coins PDF (183 KB) DOC (226 KB)
Shadow opinions (8)
OPINION on a comprehensive European industrial policy on artificial intelligence and robotics
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum requirements for water reuse
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2008/106/EC on the minimum level of training of seafarers and repealing Directive 2005/45/EC
OPINION on the implementation of Directive 2009/128/EC on the sustainable use of pesticides
OPINION on the implementation report on the EU Youth Strategy
OPINION on innovative financing at a global and European level
OPINION Green Paper on forest protection and information in the EU: preparing forests for climate change (SEC(2010)163 final)
OPINION on developing the job potential of a new sustainable economy
Written explanations (18)
Protection of the Union's budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States (A8-0469/2018 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Petri Sarvamaa) ET
Olin ettepaneku poolt, sest õigusriigi austamine ja kõik Euroopa Liidu väärtused on peamised põhimõtted, millele Euroopa projekt on üles ehitatud. Liikmesriikide valitsused, kes ei austa neid põhiväärtusi, millele nad on alla kirjutanud, lähevad oma tegudega ELi põhimõtetega vastuollu. Selle määruse eesmärk on kaitsta ELi põhimõtteid ja ka ELi eelarvet. Valitsused, kes ei austa õigusriigi põhimõtteid, sekkuvad kohtusüsteemi, teevad finantspettused ja korruptsiooni lihtsamaks, võivad eelnõu kohaselt ELi rahalised vahendid kaotada. Sõltuvalt puuduste ulatusest ja eelarve haldamise menetlusest võib Euroopa Komisjon otsustada ühe või mitme meetme kasuks, sealhulgas maksete peatamine, eelfinantseerimise vähendamine või kohustuste peatamine. ELi otsusest olenemata peab liikmesriigi valitsus siiski vastavat programmi või fondi rakendama ning tegema ise makseid lõplikele toetuste saajatele, sealhulgas teadlastele ja kodanikuühiskonna organisatsioonidele. Kui EL on tuvastanud, et liikmesriik on puudujäägid parandanud, vabastatakse külmutatud summad. Valitsused, kes õigusriigi põhimõtteid ei rakenda, ei peaks saama kasutada ELi rahalisi vahendeid nii nagu nad ise soovivad.
Situation in the Sea of Azov (RC-B8-0493/2018, B8-0493/2018, B8-0494/2018, B8-0495/2018, B8-0496/2018, B8-0497/2018) ET
Mõistagi toetasin antud resolutsiooni, mis kutsub üles Vene Föderatsiooni võimuesindajaid lõpetama laevade ja kaupade vaba liikumise takistamist Aasovi merel ja austama ÜRO 1982. aasta mereõiguse konventsiooni. Venemaa peab arvestama, et rahvusvaheliste lepete räige rikkumine võib tuua täiendavaid sanktsioone ning vastavate meetmete rakendamise, mistõttu kannatab ennekõike ja veelgi enam nende endi majandus. Näiteks miks peaks NATO liige Türgi lubama Vene sõjalaevadel liikuda läbi Bosporuse väina Mustast merest Vahemerre ja vastupidi, kui Vene Föderatsioon ei järgi mereõiguse konventsiooni? Tulenevalt eelmainitud konventsioonist on ka Eestil ja Soomel õigus nihutada oma merepiiri, mis tähendaks, et Soome lahel puuduks territooriumiväline „koridor” ehk meie piirid seisaksid vastastikku. See annaks omakorda meile sisuliselt õiguse kontrollida nö sissepääsu Venemaa Euroopa sadamatesse. Arvestades ajaloolist kogemust, oleks Venemaa enda huvides lõpetada oma naabrite suhtes agressiivne poliitika ning naasta rahvusvahelise õiguse järgimise juurde.
Reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment (A8-0317/2018 - Frédérique Ries) ET
Toetasin raportit, sest määrus toob olulisi muudatusi meie ellu, vähendades plastide kasutust suurel määral. Inimkond lähtub üha rohkem ühekordse kasutamise mentaliteedist: 85% merereostusest on plast ning poole sellest moodustavad ühekordselt kasutatavad plasttooted ja veerandi kalapüügivahendid. See mõjutab ookeanide heaolu ning ka mereelustikku, sh kilpkonni, vaalalisi, linde, aga ka kalu ja karpe, kes neelavad alla plasttooteid, mis ohustavad nende elu ning võivad mõjutada ka inimeste tervist, kuigi see mõju on veel teadmata. Selle määruse eesmärk on keelata alates 2021. aastast ühekordselt kasutatavad plastesemed, nagu nõud, söögiriistad, kõrred, õhupallide pulgad, vatitikud ja joogisegamispulgad. Need tooted moodustavad rohkem kui 70% merekeskkonna reostusest. Mitmete teiste toodete tarbimise osas, millel puudub alternatiiv, peavad liikmesriigid tarbimist vähendama (2025. aastaks 25% võrra). Nende hulka kuuluvad ühekordselt kasutatavad burgerite ja võileibade karbid jne. Lisaks peavad liikmesriigid seadma eesmärgid, et vähendada sigarettide plastfiltrite kasutamist 2025. aastaks 50% ja 2030. aastaks 80% võrra, kuna üks sigaretiots võib teele visates laguneda kuni kaksteist aastat. Ka peavad liikmesriigid tagama, et vähemalt 50% plasti sisaldavatest kaotatud või mahajäetud kalapüügivahenditest kogutakse kokku aasta jooksul. Selle määruse rakendamine on oluline, et kaitsta merekeskkonda ja vähendada plastidest tulenevat keskkonnakahju.
Harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages (A8-0307/2018 - Miguel Viegas) ET
Hääletasin direktiivi muutmise poolt, sest alkohoolsete jookide aktsiisimaksude ühtlustamine on tähtis nii Euroopa ettevõtjatele kui ka maksuasutustele. Mul on hea meel, et komisjoni ettepanek aitab väikeseid ja keskmise suurusega ettevõtteid, vähendades nende halduskoormust, ning püüab lahendada probleeme seoses väiketootjate jaoks ette nähtud vähendatud aktsiisimäärade kohaldamisega. Tulevikus võiks loota, et erinevused liikmesriikide aktsiisimäärades hääbuvad ja samas kaob ka sellega seotud maksudest kõrvalehoidumine.
Integrated farm statistics (A8-0300/2017 - Maria Gabriela Zoană) ET
Selleks, et otsustajatel oleks võimalik teha kaalutletud ja kvaliteetseid otsuseid põllumajanduse valdkonnas, on vaja head statistikat ja asjaomast teavet. Praegune olukord, kus Euroopa tasandil puudub piisavalt ühtne ja võrreldav statistika, andmeedastus on aeglane, põllumajandusettevõtetel on suur andmete edastamise koormus ning otsuseid tehakse tihtilugu aegunud andmetega, ei ole normaalne. Nt eelmine põllumajandusloendus toimus 2010. aastal ning järgmine korraldatakse 2020. aastal, mistõttu tuleb uue ÜPP vastuvõtmisel lähtuda vanadest andmetest. Euroopa Liidus on põllumajanduslikus kasutamises ligi pool maismaapinnast, mis mõjutab olulisel määral keskkonda ja kliimamuutusi, ning sellest sõltuvad paljud maakogukonnad. Arvestades eelöeldut ei saa me lähtuda otsuste tegemisel ”kõhutundest” ehk oletustest ning seetõttu toetasin ka antud raammäärust, millega kehtestatakse põllumajandusettevõtete tasandi Euroopa statistika raamistik. Tänu nimetatud raamistikule ühendatakse põllumajandusettevõtete struktuuri käsitlev teave omakorda tootmisviiside, maaelu arengu meetmete, põllumajanduse keskkonnaaspektide jm kesksete muutujatega, mis annab hea tervikpildi tegelikust olukorrast.
Violation of rights of indigenous peoples in the world (A8-0194/2018 - Francisco Assis) ET
Arvestades asjaolu, et maailmas on üle 5000 põlisrahva, kellel pole oma riiki ning keda valitsetakse enamuse poolt, kes tihtilugu ei austa nende pärandkultuuri ja inimõigusi, siis on suur ime, et väike Eesti rahvas saab elada omas riigis iseseisvana. Meie – eestlased – teame, mis tunne on, kui sind valitsetakse suurrahvaste poolt, kes on võtnud sinult maa ja inimväärikuse. Just seetõttu peame me seisma üheskoos Euroopa Liiduga selle eest, et kaitsta selliseid rahvaid läbi rahvusvahelise õiguse ja survemeetmete, et põlisrahvad saaksid omal maal väärikalt elada, kartmata erinevat survestamist. Kahjuks on üks levinum põlisrahvaste diskrimineerimine viis katse neid assimileerida, tuues nende piirkondadesse uuskoloniste ning võttes nendelt kallima vara – maa. Olukord Tiibetis, Uiguurias, Krimmis, Kurdistanis, Lääne-Myanmaris, Lääne-Saharas ja mujalgi on rohkem kui murettekitav. EL peab kaubanduspoliitikas senisest rohkem arvestama põlisrahvaste inimõiguste olukorraga riikides, millega tehakse majanduslikku koostööd. ELi põhiväärtused, nagu inimõiguste kaitse, ei tohi jääda vaid paberile ning samuti ei tohi silma kinni pigistada seal, kus see on majanduslikult kasulikum. Toetasin antud raportit, milles pööratakse detailset tähelepanu põlisrahvaste õiguste rikkumisele ning tehakse vastavasisulised ettepanekud olukorra parandamiseks.
Composition of the European Parliament (A8-0207/2018 - Danuta Maria Hübner, Pedro Silva Pereira) ET
Toetasin nõusoleku andmist Euroopa Ülemkogu otsuse eelnõule, millega vähendataks pärast Suurbritannia lahkumist EList Euroopa Parlamendi koosseisu 751 liikmelt 705 liikmeni. Pean positiivseks, et Eesti kuulub nende 14 liikmesriigi hulka, mis saavad juurde lisakohti, kuna olime varasemalt rahvaarvu arvestades nt võrreldes Malta, Küprose ja Luksemburgiga alaesindatud. Eesti on ka üks väheseid Ida-Euroopa riike, kus rahvaarv juba mitmendat aastat ei vähene (vastupidiselt nt meie lõunanaabritele Lätile ja Leedule). Loodan, et uus lisakoht annab Eestile võimaluse olla veelgi häälekam ja esindada paremini meie huve ainukeses rahva poolt valitud ELi institutsioonis – Euroopa Parlamendis. Kuna Euroopa Parlamendis on 29 erinevat komisjoni (koos alaliste ja erikomisjonidega), siis ainult 6 liikmega on raske kõiki olulisi teemavaldkondi ära katta, seetõttu on Eestile üks lisakoht veelgi olulisem kui mõnele Euroopa suurriigile.
State of play of recreational fisheries in the EU (A8-0191/2018 - Norica Nicolai) ET
Toetasin raportit, milles juhiti tähelepanu harrastuskalapüügi olulisusele ning selle majanduslikule ja keskkonnamõjule.Harrastuskalureid on ELis hinnanguliselt sama palju kui Rootsis elanikke (9 miljonit) ning nende panus ELi majandusse on sama suur kui käesoleva aasta Eesti riigieelarve (10,5 miljardit eurot). Arvestades, kuidas minu koduriigis Peipsi ääres ja Läänemere rannikul elavad kalurid on majanduslikult kannatanud kalapüügikvootide vähenemise tõttu, siis tuleks ennekõike lähtuda nende rannikul elavate inimeste huvidest. Tänu nendele on hoitud elus seda hinnalist pärandkultuuri – kalapüügioskust.Ka harrastuspüük peab lähtuma sellest, et kannatajateks ei oleks rannikul elavad kohalikud kogukonnad. Harrastuspüük peab pakkuma ennekõike võimalusi kohalikele, et oma elujärge parandada, nt läbi turismimajanduse edendamise. Harrastuspüügis tuleb leida tasakaal keskkonna, majanduslike huvide ja pärandkultuuri kaitse vahel. Selleks et seda teha, on meil vaja mõistagi usaldusväärseid andmeid, mis tugineksid ühtsele metoodikale ja tagaksid seeläbi parema erinevate mõjude hindamise.
Implementation of the Ecodesign Directive (A8-0165/2018 - Frédérique Ries) ET
Hääletasin antud raporti poolt, milles käsitletakse ökodisaini direktiivi (2009/125/EÜ) rakendamist, sest see kinnitab, et direktiiv on olnud tõhusaks vahendiks üleminekul jätkusuutlikumale ja väheste heitgaasidega majandusele. Kooskõlas ringmajanduse põhimõtetega tuleks toodete keskkonnaaspekte kaaluda nende koostise, vastupidavuse, lahtivõtmise, rekonstrueerimise ja ringlussevõetavuse põhjal. Rakendusraportis antakse soovitusi, kuidas ökodisaini kohaldamist parandada. Raportis soovitatakse, et ökodisaini direktiivi kohaldamisalasse tuleks lisada rohkem tarbekaupu. Näiteks käsitletakse info- ja kommunikatsioonitehnoloogiat, sealjuures mobiil- ja nutitelefone puudutavaid meetmeid, rõhutades, et selliste toodete puhul, mida vahetatakse sageli välja, tuleb parandada nende kestlikkust. Ka juhitakse erilist tähelepanu vett tarbivatele toodetele, mille keskkonnakaitse ja kokkuhoiu eesmärk võib anda häid tulemusi ka tarbijatele. ELi ökodisaini käsitlevad õigusaktid tuleb laiahaardelisemaks muuta, et hõlmata rohkem igapäevaseid tooteid, ning samuti tuleb kiirendada innovaatiliste lahenduste leidmist ökodisaini tootmisel. Sellised lahendused aitavad vähendada nii jäätmete kui ka kasvuhoonegaaside kogust.
The future of food and farming (A8-0178/2018 - Herbert Dorfmann) ET
Toetasin antud raportit ELi ÜPP reformimiseks, kuigi seal sätestatu oleks võinud olla põllumajanduse otsetoetuste võrdsustamise küsimuses konkreetsem. Baltimaadest pärit parlamendiliikmete ettepanek oli ühtlustada otsetoetused juba 2021. aastal ning hoolimata sellest, et raportis täpset aastat siiski ei mainitud, võib rahul olla, et seal rõhutatakse, kui oluline on õiglane otsetoetuste jaotus liikmesriikide vahel, kuna see on ühtse turu toimimiseks hädavajalik. Samuti pean positiivseks, et hoolimata ELi netomaksjate survest ÜPP nn renatsionaliseerimiseks, kus liikmesriigid hakkaksid otsetoetusi kaasrahastama, luues täiendavat ebavõrdsust Euroopa põllumajandustootjate vahel, ei leidnud see idee vähemasti parlamendi toetust. Oluline on ka ÜPP kahesambalise jaotuse säilitamise rõhutamine ja ettepanek tagada nendevaheline paindlikkus ning teise ehk maaelu arengu samba tugevdamine.
Prospects and challenges for the EU apiculture sector (A8-0014/2018 - Norbert Erdős) ET
Mesindus on väga oluline valdkond, nt 76% ELi toidust sõltub tolmlemisest. Seega on mesindustöötajate pakutud agroökoloogiline teenus asendamatu meie põllumajandustootjatele, et tagada toidujulgeolek. Arvestades eelöeldut ja asjaolu, et põllumajanduses kasutatavad pestitsiidid on põhjustanud mesilaste massilise suremise, on meie mesinike senisest suurem toetamine läbi mesindusprogrammide igati vajalik. Siinkohal on tervitatav koostöö teadusasutustega, et aretada mesilasliike, mis on vastupanuvõimelisemad haigustele ja võõrliikidele, ning kaitsta paremini olemasolevaid. Toetasin antud raportit, mis annab hea suuna selleks, et kaitsta ja edendada valdkonda, mis tagab Euroopa toidujulgeoleku.
Composition of the European Parliament (A8-0007/2018 - Danuta Maria Hübner, Pedro Silva Pereira) ET
Toetasin antud raportit, milles sätestatakse Euroopa Parlamendi kohtade jaotus liikmesriikide vahel pärast Ühendkuningriigi lahkumist EList.Siinkohal on hea meel tõdeda, et Eesti on nende poolte ELi liikmesriikide hulgas, kelle parlamendiliikmete arv suureneb. Eesti saab ettepaneku järgi juurde ühe koha ehk kokku seitse kohta, kuna võrreldes mitme teise liikmesriigiga ei ole meie rahvaarv oluliselt vähenenud. Samuti olime varem Malta, Küprose ja Luksemburgiga võrreldes alaesindatud.Mis puudutab minu sotsiaaldemokraatide fraktsiooni ja liberaalide ettepanekuid kehtestada üleeuroopalised nimekirjad, siis ma olin nendele vastu, kuna see põhjustaks Euroopa Parlamendi liikmete ja Euroopa institutsioonide kaugenemise oma kodanikest. Raske on uskuda, et saadikud, kes on valitud üle Euroopa, suudavad tegeleda ja hoida kontakti kõikide Euroopa piirkondadega. Hiigelsuure valimisringkonna tõttu muutuvad nad kahjuks pealiskaudsemaks ning seetõttu kannatab ka otsuste kvaliteet. Samuti tekitab selline kombineeritud süsteem asjatuid pingeid parlamendi sees, kus osa liikmeid oleksid justkui I ja II kategooria saadikud. Nüüd on n-ö pall ELi nõukogu käes, et otsustada, mida teha ülejäänud 46 jagamata kohaga, mis jäävad üle pärast Brexitit.
Setting up a special committee on the Union’s authorisation procedure for pesticides, its responsibilities, numerical strength and term of office (B8-0077/2018) ET
Toetasin antud raportit, millega luuakse Euroopa Parlamendi erikomisjon, mis analüüsiks ja kontrolliks pestitsiididele ELis lubade andmist. Arvestades eri osapoolte väljendatud muret, mis on seotud glüfosaadi hindamisega, eelkõige seoses sellega, kas on toimunud sõltumatu ja objektiivne hindamine Euroopa Komisjoni ja vastavate teadusasutuste poolt, siis on Euroopa Parlamendi täiendav järelevalve igati õigustatud ja vajalik.Kuna kaalul on inimeste tervis ja keskkond, siis tuleb lähtuda ettevaatusprintsiibist. Tegemist on tõsiste süüdistustega, mis puudutavad lubade andmise puudulikku menetlemist ning teaduslikku vettpidavust, mistõttu peab järelevalve olema usaldusväärne ja laiapõhjaline. Lisaks Euroopa Parlamendi liikmetele tuleks kaasata võimalikult palju tunnustatud teadusasutusi ning lähtuda faktidest, mitte emotsioonidest. Tuleb arvestada, et valearvestused võivad meile väga kalliks maksma minna, nii inimeste tervisele kui ka põllumeestele, kui keelatakse liiga kergekäeliselt vajalikud taimekaitsevahendid.
Promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (A8-0392/2017 - José Blanco López) ET
Eelmise taastuvenergia direktiivi uuesti sõnastamise ettepanek on oluline ning lahutamatu osa puhta energia paketist. Raportis olid üksikud ettepanekud, millel oleksid olnud suured tagajärjed puidu kasutamise piirangute näol, näiteks ümarpuidu kasutamine energeetilistel eesmärkidel. Kuna mets ja metsasektor mängivad Eesti taastuvenergias olulist rolli, siis seetõttu ma selliseid muudatusi ei pooldanud. Hääletasin raporti poolt, sest see ajakohastab antud direktiivi, millega pakutakse välja uus eesmärk 2030. aastaks taastuvenergia osakaalu kohta ELi energiaallikate osas, ning kehtestab meetmed taastuvate energiaallikate edendamiseks transpordis. Raportiga tehakse ettepanek kehtestada liidus siduv eesmärk suurendada 2030. aastaks taastuvenergia osakaalu energia lõpptarbimises 35 %-ni. See eesmärk tuleb saavutada kõigi liikmesriikide ühiste jõupingutuste abil uute siduvate riiklike eesmärkide kehtestamisega. Samuti õnnestus investoritele anda kindlust, tõsta transpordisektori kui ka kütte- ja jahutussektori süsinikdioksiidi heitkoguste vähendamise eesmärke. Kui Euroopa soovib täita Pariisi kohustusi ning võidelda kliimamuutuse vastu, tuleb teha rohkem ning see raport on samm nende eesmärkide suunas.
Rules on the exercise of copyright and related rights applicable to certain online transmissions of broadcasting organisations and retransmissions of television and radio programmes (A8-0378/2017 - Tiemo Wölken) ET
Hääletasin selle raporti mandaadi vastu, sest see oli käest lastud võimalus lubada meie kodanikele paremat digitaalset juurdepääsu tele- ja raadioprogrammidele kogu liidus.Üks viiest eurooplasest on huvitatud piiriülese sisuga materjalist, reaalsuses aga kuvatakse kaks kolmandikku filmidest ainult ühe riigi televisioonis. Ringhäälinguorganisatsioonid edastavad iga päev uudiseid, poliitika- või meelelahutusprogramme, mis sisaldavad erinevat kaitstud infosisu, nt audiovisuaalseid või muusikateoseid, ning see nõuab paljudelt õiguste omajatelt loa saamiseks keerulise menetluse läbimist.Satelliitedastuse osas on loa saamise korda lihtsustatud, kohaldades päritolumaa põhimõtet, mille kohaselt võivad ringhäälinguorganisatsioonid luba taotleda ainult ühes liikmesriigis, kuid see põhimõte ei kehti internetipõhiste teenuste jaoks.Seepärast oli see määrus võtmetähtsusega, sest oleks võimaldanud päritoluriigi printsiibi laiendamist digitaalsetele programmidele ning seeläbi andnud ELi kodanikele võimaluse palju rohkem teiste liiduriikide digitaalprogramme jälgida. Kahjuks aga oli hääletatud määruse sisu palju kitsendavam kui komisjoni algne ettepanek ning isegi piiritletum kui praegune hetkeolukord. Päritoluriigi põhimõtet laiendati ainult uudiste ja päevasündmuste jaoks, mis ei ava võimalust filmidele, sarjadele jne ega muuda hetkeolukorda, sest uudised on juba suuremas osas avalikud teistele riikidele. Ka on see kitsendav nendele, kes juba pakuvad digitaalvõimalusi sarjade, filmide ja muu vaatamiseks.Ei pooldanud digitaalse turu kinnihoidmist ning kultuuri lukustamist. Me peame parandame piirülese digitaalse TV-sisu juurdepääsetavust.
2018 budgetary procedure (A8-0359/2017 - Siegfried Mureşan, Richard Ashworth) ET
Hääletasin selle raporti poolt, kuna Euroopa Liidu eelarvel on oluline roll toetada ELi poliitika ja prioriteetide elluviimist.2018. aasta eelarveprojekti eesmärk on saavutada õige tasakaal käimasolevate programmide ja uute väljakutsete rakendamise vahel. On tervitatav, et tähelepanu keskmes on majanduskasv ja töökohtade loomine Euroopa Liidus: 354 miljonit eurot eraldatakse väikestele ja keskmiste suurusega ettevõtetele ning 2,3 miljardit Erasmuse programmi stipendiumiteks. Palju ressursse on panustatud selleks, et Euroopa noortel oleks võimalus reisida, saada konkurentsivõimelisemaks, omandada paremaid oskusi ning olla seeläbi tööturul aktiivsemad.Ka toetatakse ELi asutusi, kes võitlevad terrorismi vastu ja õigluse poolt: Euroopa Politseiametile (Europol) eraldatakse 120 miljonit. Lisaks suurendati Euroopa Varjupaigaküsimuste Tugiameti (EASO) (mis toetab liikmesriike pagulaskriisiga tegelemisel) ressursse.Samuti on hea meel tõdeda, et noored talunikud saavad 34 miljonit täiendavat toetust, et vähendada noorte tööpuudust maapiirkonnas. Vahendeid kliimat ja keskkonda säästvate põllumajandustavade toetamiseks suurendati 95 miljoni võrra. Kokkuvõttes on tegemist hea eelarvega, mis seab prioriteediks noored, sh ettevõtjad ja põllumajandustootjaid, kes otsivad uut eluviisi, ning sellist lähenemist tuleb igati toetada, et tagada jätkusuutlik EL.
Administrative cooperation and combating fraud in the field of value added tax (A8-0306/2017 - Luděk Niedermayer) ET
Hääletasin selle raporti poolt, kuna tegemist on tõsise kogu Euroopa Liidu probleemiga: praegu kaotame igal aastal 150 miljardi ulatuses käibemaksutulusid. Taoline summa oleks kindlasti teretulnud riikide eelarvetes, et seda kasutada kodanike huvides, näiteks tervishoiuks või koolituseks.On üsna lihtne seda ettepanekut toetada, sest Euroopa käibemaksusüsteem vajab uuendamist, ning siin pakutakse välja lahendusi eriti piiriülese e-kaubanduse probleemidele, aidates takistada selle valdkonna pettuseid. Seatakse reeglid informatsioonile, mida liikmesriigid peavad koguma, säilitama ja tegema digitaalselt kättesaadavaks teistele liikmesriikidele. Määratakse ka juurdepääsuõigused antud informatsioonile ning luuakse halduskoostöövahendeid käibemaksupettuste vastu võitlemiseks. Kuna ostude tegemine muutub pidevalt üha digitaalsemaks ja e-kaubanduse osakaal vaevalt peatselt langema hakkab, on eriti oluline võtta konkreetseid samme pettuste takistamiseks e-kaubanduse valdkonnas.
Deployment of cohesion policy instruments by regions to address demographic change (A8-0329/2017 - Iratxe García Pérez) ET
Toetasin oma fraktsioonikaaslase põhjalikku algatusraportit, mis soovitab ELi vahendite (eelkõige ÜPP, EFSI, Ühtekuuluvusfondi ja Euroopa ühendamise rahastu) paremat kooskõlastamist, et tagada terviklikum lähenemine demograafilistele muutustele.Raportis on hästi kirjeldatud nelja peamist probleemi ELi demograafilises arengus, milleks on vananemine, hõre asustustihedus, sündimuse ja rahvastiku vähenemine.Mis puudutab hõredat asustustihedust, siis ma ei näe selles probleemi, kui inimesed tahavad elada linnakärast eemal hajaasustatud piirkonnas, kus on kaunim elukeskkond. Selleks et elu hõredalt asustatud piirkonnas toimiks, on aga vaja jätkusuutlikku kohalikku omavalitsust, kes saab vajalikku tuge riigilt ning vajaduse korral ka ELilt, et tagada toimiv taristu ja transpordiühendus. Viimase ülevalpidamine on aga mõistagi hajaasustatud piirkonnas väga kallis, mistõttu pole ka nt suurte tühjade busside kasutamine mõistlik.Siinkohal toetan igati raportis olevat soovitust teha rohkem koostööd avaliku ja erasektoriga antud vallas. Nt hõredalt asustatud Laeva vallas Tartumaal maksis vallavalitsus bensiinikompensatsiooni neile vallaelanikele, kes tõid oma autoga enda ja naabrite lapsi kooli. Viimase näite näol on tegemist väga keskkonnasõbraliku ja rahaliselt ökonoomse lähenemisega, mida tuleks rohkem propageerida. Kokkuvõtteks: Euroopa on pindalalt liiga väike, et lubada endale ääremaid!
Amendments (268)
Amendment 6 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 14 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 22 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the right to respect for private life and the protection of personal data, as enshrined in Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and in Article 16 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), apply to all areas of robotics and AI and that the Union's legal framework for data protection must be fully complied with in the area of AI systems, including i.a. big data analytics, machine learning, Internet of Things and robotics;
Amendment 27 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to ensure that any EU framework on AI guarantees personal data protection, including the principles of lawfulness, fairness and transparency, data protection by design and default, purpose limitation, storage limitation, and data minimisation and accuracy in compliance with Union data protection law;
Amendment 30 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that any EU framework on AI ensures the privacy and confidentiality of communications of individuals by integrating privacy by design and default into the development of these technologies;
Amendment 31 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Calls on the Commission to promote strong and transparent cooperation between public and private sectors and the academia to enforce knowledge sharing, and to promote education and training of AI professionals on ethical standards and implications;
Amendment 32 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. Calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with technical researchers to investigate, prevent, and mitigate potential harmful effects of malicious uses and to develop tools, policies, and norms appropriate to AI applications; further encourages the cross-border cooperation in their identification; notes that best practices should be identified in research areas with more mature methods for addressing dual-use concerns, such as security and privacy, and that they should be applied to the area of AI;
Amendment 33 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4 d. Highlights the fact that malicious use of AI could threaten digital security, physical security, political and societal security and public safety, as it could be used to conduct large-scale, finely- targeted and highly-efficient attacks, lead to mass surveillance and generally diminish the right of individuals to choice and self-determination;
Amendment 38 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that European standards for AI must be based on the principles of digital ethics, human dignity, respect for fundamental rights, data protection and security, aiming at incorporating these principles by design, thus contributing to building trust among users; emphasises the importance of capitalising on the EU’s potential for creating a strong infrastructure for AI systems rooted in high standards of data and respect for humans;
Amendment 42 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to establish the European AI Alliance tasked with developing draft AI ethical guidelineinteracting with the High-Level Expert Group of Artificial Intelligence (AI HLEG) in developing comprehensive AI ethical guidelines and policy recommendations; highlights the importance of active participation in global alliances and AI fora to enable knowledge sharing and a comprehensive understanding on an international fora of concerns relating to data privacy, transparency and security in developing and deploying AI systems; calls on the Commission to complete the work and publish the guidelines in coordination with the Member States, and to continue working towards an EU-wide approach;
Amendment 53 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that any AI system must be developed with respect for the principles of transparencalgorithmic transparency and accountability, allowing for human understanding of its actions; notes that in order to build trust in and enable the progress of AI, users must be aware of how their data is used and when they are communicating or interacting with an AI system; believes that this will contribute to better understanding and confidence among users when dealinteracting with machines; stresses that the explainability of decisions must be an EU standard in accordance with Articles 13, 14 and 15 of the GDPR; stresses that individuals have the right to a final determination being made by a person;
Amendment 65 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the importance of the quality and accuracy, as well as the representative nature of data used in the development and deployment of algorithms, as their standard of AI systems relies on the data used to train them; notes that the use of low quality, outdated, incomplete or incorrect data may lead to poor predictions and in turn discrimination and bias, as well as purely incorrect conclusions or false outcomes, and that it is therefore important in the age of big data to ensure that algorithms are trained on representative samples of high quality data in order to achieve statistical parity.;
Amendment 68 #
2018/2088(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Highlights the importance of designing and enforcing a comprehensive set of auditing rules and guidelines for developing and deploying AI systems; underlines that a coordinated approach is necessary to ensure risk-based evaluations are carried out frequently for AI systems and their components; stresses the importance of developing safety and flagging mechanisms aimed at mitigating risks of infringement by AI systems;
Amendment 161 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas it is essential to ensure a level playing field for farmers in all Member States, fair standard of living across regions and Member States, affordable prices for citizens and consumers, and access to quality food and healthy diets, while delivering on the commitments for environmental care, climate action, and animal and plant health and welfare;
Amendment 183 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas there is a need for an updated and fairer system of payments, as in many Member States the currentthe system of entitlements is based in many Member States on historic benchmarksreferences, which are now almostnearly 20 years old and which constituteserve as an obstacle to generational renewal and hindeaccess for young farmers’ access to farm land, as given the fact that new entrants do not possess entitlements and are thus at a disadvantaged;
Amendment 365 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the intention to simplify and modernise the CAP, but emphasisunderlines that the integrity of the sSingle mMarket and a truly common and adequately financed by the EU policy must be the overriding priorities of reform;
Amendment 415 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that subsidiarity for Member States should only be granted within a common general set of rules and tools agreed at EU level as part of a uniform approach to all programming efforts and eligibility criteria, should cover both of the CAP’s pillars and ensure, in particular, a European approach in Pillar I without national co-financing and thus a level playing field;
Amendment 499 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to avoid renationalisation of CAP and grant more flexibility to Member States and regions within the framework of the agricultural de minimis rules ;
Amendment 535 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers it necessary to maintain the current two-pillared architecture, particularly Pillar I, which is dedicated to income support for farmers; considers it necessary, at the same time, to compensate for the provision of public goods on the basis of uniformgeneral criteria, while allowing Member States to take specific approaches to reflect local conditions;
Amendment 553 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the current CAP architecture can only deliver its objectives if sufficiently funded; calls, therefore, for the CAP budget to be maintained in the nextonly if it remains a common, modern and well- funded EU policy which supports sustainable development of agriculture and is crucial for providing safe, high quality and diverse food, jobs and growth in rural areas; which contributes to further levelling of developmental gaps in agriculture and rural areas and which reflects social and economic cohesion in its financial and programming dimension as well as proposed instruments and thus calls for maintaining the CAP budget in the post-2020 MFF at at least athe current levels in order to achieve the ambitions of a revised and efficient CAP beyondafter 2020;
Amendment 619 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that more targeted support for family farms is necessary and that this can be achieved by introducing a compulsory higher support rate for small farms; considers, moreover, that and, at the same time and reflecting economies of scale considering different agricultural structures, support for larger farms should be digressive, reflecting economies of scale, with the possibility for capping to be decided by the Member States;
Amendment 673 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls forStresses that the existing system for calculating direct payments in Pillar I, which is often based on historic entitlements, to and not most recent data, should be replaced by an EU-wide uniform method of calculating payments, in order to based on support paid per hectare, in order to ensure a level playing field for farmers in all Member States and make the system simpler and more transparent;
Amendment 708 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Is certain that both the Basic Payment Scheme(BPS) and the Single Area Payment Scheme (SAPS) should continue to apply and all Member States should be allowed to choose between them;
Amendment 740 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for a fair and equal distribution of direct payments between Member States, which must take into account socio-economic differences, different production costs and the amounts received by Member States under Pillar II;
Amendment 761 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Amendment 764 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Underlines that all EU farmers have to meet the same standards and requirements and are facing the same challenges;
Amendment 780 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that, provided that a level playing field in the single market can be guaranteed, voluntary coupled support (VCS) payments should be maintained, and used as a tool to address needs of sensitive sectors and in a wider scope to address specific objectives related to environment, climate or quality and marketing of agricultural products, counteract specific difficulties, particularly those arising from the structural competitive disadvantage of less- favoured and mountainous regions, as well as those which are more temporary in nature and arise from a shift away from the old entitlement scheme, for example;
Amendment 795 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. In case of direct payments related to voluntary coupled support (VCS), more support should be given to small and medium-sized farms, and socio-economic considerations, that could be used in addition to statistical production figures, need to be taken into account;
Amendment 822 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that generational renewal is a challenge faced by farmers in many Member States and that consequently each nNational sStrategy must therefore address this issue through a comprehensive approach, including top-ups in Pillar I1 and targeted measures in Pillar II, as well as by means of new financial instruments and national measures, in ordernd also via national measures and wider use of new financial instruments as a tool to grant access to capital in the circumstances of limited resources, to incentivise famers to pass on their farming operations;
Amendment 857 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Recalls that the investment support(non-repayable) should primarily be used in areas of EU-level added value;
Amendment 878 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines the importance of rural development, including the LEADER initiative, in, to improve the synergy of different policies and to enhance competitiveness, promotes effective and sustainable economies and enhances development of rural areas, to supporting multi-functional agriculture and in fostering additional entrepreneurial activities and opportunities, in order to generate income from agri-tourism, and to secure community-supported agricultureby financially strengthening Pillar II, thus increasing potential to generate income, to tackle depopulation, unemployment, poverty and theo provision of social services in rural areasmote social inclusion;
Amendment 940 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission to introduce a new and comprehensive legal framework which allows the integration of the various types of environmental actions at present, such as cross compliance, greening and the good agricultural and environmental conditions (GAEC) standards, as well as agri-environment measures (AEMs) for rural development, so that farmers can deliver effectively and with less bureaucracy on environmental care, biodiversity and climate action, receiving equal awards for provision of comparable services of public interest, while ensuring that Member States have adequate control and taking into account local conditions;
Amendment 1165 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Insists on the necessity tof strengthening the position of the producers within the food supply chain, in particular by guaranteeing them a fair share of the added value, by fostering inter-sectoral cooperation, and strengthencombating unfair trade practices (UTPs) in the food supply chain as a minimum by introducing EU legislative document as well as promoting transparency in the markets and crisis preventiontackling crises;
Amendment 1207 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to allow and indeed encourage – particularly in the dairy sector –Underlines the importance of new Omnibus regulation to encourage active crisis management instruments, such as voluntary sector agreements to manage supply in quantitative terms among producers, producers organisations and processors, and to examine the possibility of extending such instruments to other sectors;
Amendment 1252 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Believes that the compliance of farming in partner states with good and sustainable farming practices, climate measures and other means to minimise environmental impact of farming, which are applied in the EU, shall become an obligatory threshold for allowing access of goods manufactured in the third states to enter the EU market;
Amendment 1283 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Calls for initiatives to promote EU production, safety and environmental standards and quality production schemes, through both labelling and marketing activities on internal and third-country markets, also ensuring consumers’ interest to be sure that goods marketed under the same brand have the same composition irrespectively of the market and comprehensive awareness in case if altered recipes are used;
Amendment 113 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 8
Article 4 – paragraph 8
8. As regards the amounts transferred from the Cohesion Fund, 350% of these amounts shall be made available immediately to all Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund to finance transport infrastructure projects in accordance with this Regulation, with priority to cross-border and missing links. Until 31 December 2023, the selection of projects eligible for financing shall respect the national allocations under the Cohesion Fund with regard to 750% of the resources transferred. As of 1 January 2024, resources transferred to the Programme which have not been committed to a transport infrastructure project shall be made available to all Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund to finance transport infrastructure projects in accordance with this Regulation.
Amendment 141 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) Under the specific objective referred to in Article 3(2)(a)(ii): actions, or specific activities within an action, supporting new and existing transport infrastructure on the TEN-T Network in order to adapt it to military mobility requirements with the purpose of enabling a civilian-military dual-use of the infrastructure.
Amendment 167 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) for works relating to the specific objectives referred to in Article 3 (2) (a), the amount of Union financial assistance shall not exceed 30 % of the total eligible cost. The co-financing rates may be increased to a maximum of 650 % for actions relating to cross-border links under the conditions specified in point (c) of this paragraph, for actions supporting telematic applications systems, for actions supporting new technologies and innovation, for actions supporting improvements of infrastructure safety in line with relevant Union legislation and for actions located in outermost regions. The co-funding rates may be increased to a maximum of 65% for the specific objective referred to in Article 3 (2) (a) (ii) in case of Member States benefitting from the transfer from the Cohesion Fund;
Amendment 184 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. The grant agreement may be terminated on the basis of the grounds specified in paragraph 1. In such case, the Commission will make the unused funds available to other projects without delay.
Amendment 270 #
2018/0218(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point c – point i
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point c – point i
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 a – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 23 a – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) for school fruit and vegetables: EUR 1350 608 466000 000 per school year; Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02013R1308- 20180101&from=FR)
Amendment 245 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
For the purposes of Article 63(5) and (6) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/… [the new Financial Regulation] ('the Financial Regulation'), the person in charge of the accredited paying agency shall, by 15 February of the year following the financial year concerned, (with exception of point (b)) draw up and provide the Commission with the following:
Amendment 351 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 361 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
In the event that available appropriations referred to under the first subparagraph are not sufficient, financial discipline may be used to fill up the yearly crisis reserve as a last resort.
Amendment 382 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The adjustment rate determined in accordance with this Article shall only apply to direct payments in excess of EUR 2 000 to be granted to farmers in the corresponding calendar year.
Amendment 598 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 6
Article 53 – paragraph 6
Amendment 717 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Small farms remain a cornerstone of Union agriculture as they play a vital role in supporting rural employment and contribute to territorial development. In order to promote a more balanced distribution of support and to reduce administrative burden for beneficiaries of small amounts, Member States should have the option of offering to small farmers the possibility of replacing the other direct payments by providing a round some payment for small farmers. In line with the principle of proportionality, Member States must be given the option of exempting small farmers who participate in conditionality checks using a simplified system.
Amendment 919 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) Support for direct payments under the CAP Strategic Plans should be granted within national allocations to be fixed by this Regulation. These national allocations should reflect a continuation of the changes whereby the allocations to Member States with the lowest support level per hectare are gradually increased to close 50% of the gap towards 90% ofach the Union average. In order to take into account the reduction of payments' mechanism and the use of its product in the Member State, the total indicative financial allocations per year in the CAP Strategic Plan of a Member State should be allowed to exceed the national allocation.
Amendment 1543 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Member States may supplement the output and result indicators set out in Annex I by other indicators or a more detailed breakdown of these indicators, in order to adapt them to the specificities of their strategic plans at national and regional level.
Amendment 1837 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall reduce the amount of direct paymentsbasic income support for sustainability to be granted to a farmer pursuant tounder this Chapter for a given calendar year exceeding EUR 60 000 as followwhich exceeds the payment level justified by social economic analyses:
Amendment 2509 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Coupled income support may only be granted to the followingagriculture sectors and productions or specific types of farming therein where these are important for economic, social or environmental reasons: cereals, oilseeds, protein crops, grain legumes, flax, hemp, rice, nuts, starch potato, milk and milk products, seeds, sheepmeat and goatmeat, beef and veal, olive oil, silkworms, dried fodder, hops, sugar beet, cane and chicory, fruit and vegetables, short rotation coppice and other non-food crops, excluding trees, used for the production of products that have the potential to substitute fossil materials.
Amendment 2591 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) other sectors referred to in points (a) to (h), (k), (m), (o) to (t) and (w) of Article 1(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, as well as protein crops, potatoes, rabbits and cotton.
Amendment 2601 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Member States shall choose in their CAP Strategic Plans the sectors in which they implement the types of intervention laid down in Article 60. For each sector, they shall choose one or more objectives from among those laid down in Article 59 and the types of intervention as laid down in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 60. For each type of intervention, the Member States shall substantiate their choice of sectors, objectives, types of intervention and interventions.
Amendment 2673 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i (new)
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i (new)
(i) administrative costs, including personal costs for concentration of supply and the placing on the market of the products;
Amendment 2787 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 7 – point a
Article 44 – paragraph 7 – point a
(a) at least 210% of expenditure under operational programs covers the interventions linked to the objectives referred to in points (de) and (ef) of Article 421a or operational programmes include two or more environmental actions;
Amendment 2838 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) 5% of the value of the marketed production for the first operational programme of a producer organisation, including recognised producer organisation which is the result of a merger between two recognised producer organisations.
Amendment 2849 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
(da) operational program is implemented by a recognised producer organisation for the first 5 years after the year of recognition, including recognised producer organisation, which is the result of a merger between two recognised producer organisations.
Amendment 3160 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) administrative costs, including personal costs for concentration of supply and the placing on the market of the products;
Amendment 3190 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 60 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) measures of supporting animal health and welfare;
Amendment 3201 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 a (new)
Article 60 a (new)
Article 60a 1. In each sector selected from the other sectors referred to point (f) of Article 39, Member States may grant support for interventions set out their CAP Strategic Plans through forms of cooperations between producers. Member States shall designate in their CAP Strategic Plans the forms of cooperation to be used. 2. Support for interventions relating to the objectives set out in points (a), (b) and (h) of Article 59 shall only be granted to producer organisations or associations of producer organisations recognised under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. 3. Support for interventions referred to in points (b), (c), (f) and (h) of paragraph 1 of Article 60 may also be granted to interbranch organisations recognised under Regulation (EU) NO 1308/2013. 4. Support for interventions by associations of producer groups or by producer organisations shall not cover the same interventions as those by their member organisations. Member States shall consider interventions by associations of producer organisations together with interventions of member organisations. To that end Member States shall ensure that: (a) the interventions of an association of producer groups or of producer organisations are entirely financed by contributions of those member organisations of that association; (b) there is no duplication of funding. 5. Member States shall ensure that the support for the interventions referred to in points (e), (f) and (g) of paragraph 2 of Article 60 does not exceed one third of the total expenditure of the chosen sector(s) as set out in their CAP Strategic Plan.
Amendment 3244 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 1
Article 63 – paragraph 1
1. The Union financial assistance shall be equal to the amount of the financial contributions referred to in point (a) of Article 62(1) actually paid and limited to 50%limited to 50% of the actual expenditure incurred for the types of interventions referred to in Article 41b. The remaining part of the actual expenditure incurredshall be borne by the forms of cooperations referred to paragraphs 1 to 3 of Article 60a.
Amendment 3245 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 63 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The 50% limit provided for in paragraph 1 shall be increased to 60% for producer organisations or associations of producer organisations recognised under Regulation 1308/2013 for the first 5 years after the year of recognition.
Amendment 3246 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 63 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The 50% limit provided for in paragraph 1 shall be increased to 60% for producer organisations or associations of producer organisations recognised under Regulation 1308/2013 for the first 5 years after the year of recognition.
Amendment 3250 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 63 – paragraph 2
Article 63 – paragraph 2
2. The Union financial assistance shall be limited to 5% of the value of marketed production of eachthe producers organisatioed in for association of producer organisations. ms of cooperations referred to in paragraphs 1 to 3 of Article 60a.
Amendment 3405 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 9
Article 65 – paragraph 9
9. Where support under this type of interventions is granted to agri- environment-climate commitments, commitments to convert to or maintain organic farming practices and methods as defined in Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 and forest environmental and climate services, Member States shall establish a payment per hectare. For genetic resources related and other management commitments, other defined units may be used.
Amendment 3496 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 68 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) purchase of land exceeding 10% of the total eligible expenditure for the operation concerned, with the exception of land purchase for environmental conservation orand land purchased by young farmers through the use of financial instruments;
Amendment 3684 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2
Article 70 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall grant support under this type of interventions in order to promote risk management tools, which help genuine farmers manage production and income risks related to their agricultural activity which are outside their control and which contribute to achieving the relevant specific objectives set out in Article 6. These tools may consist of multi-risk management systems.
Amendment 3742 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 5
Article 70 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for covering losses of at least 20% of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry, except support provided for insurance premiums schemes.
Amendment 3765 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 1
Article 71 – paragraph 1
1. Member States may grant support for cooperation under the conditions set out in this Article and as further specified in their CAP Strategic Plans to: (a) prepare and to implement Operational Group projectoperations of the European Innovation Partnership for agricultural productivity and sustainability as referred to in Article 114 and prepare and implement LEADER, referred to as community-led local development in Article 256 of Regulation (EU) [CPR], and to; (b) promote quality schemes, and their use by farmers; (c) promote producer organisations or producer groups or; (d) promote other forms of cooperation.
Amendment 3886 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 1
Article 80 – paragraph 1
1. Expenditure shall be eligible for contribution from the EAGF and the EAFRD from 1 January of the year following the year of the approvalthe presentation of the CAP Strategic Plan byto the Commission by a member state.
Amendment 3894 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 80 – paragraph 3
Article 80 – paragraph 3
3. Expenditure shall be eligible for a contribution from the EAFRD if it has been incurred by a beneficiary and paid by 31 December [202930]. In addition, expenditure shall only be eligible for a contribution from the EAFRD if the relevant aid is actually paid by the paying agency by 31 December [202930].
Amendment 3945 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 85 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 85 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) 7085% of the eligible public expenditure in the less developed regions;
Amendment 4045 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 86 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The EAFRD contribution may be increased to 6% for CAP Strategic plans where the total amount of Union support for rural development is up to EUR 90 m1.5 billion.
Amendment 4048 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 86 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 4071 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 86 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
The indicative financial allocations for the coupled income support interventions referred to in Subsection 13 of Section 21 of Chapter II of Title III, shall be limited to a maximum of 103% of the amounts set out in Annex VII.
Amendment 4184 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 88 – paragraph 1
Article 88 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall set out, in their CAP Strategic Plan, an indicative financial allocation for each area-based intervention. For each relevant intervention, the multiplication of the planned unit amount, without the application of the percentage of variation referred to in Article 89, and the planned outputs, shall equal this indicative financial allocation.
Amendment 4237 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 92
Article 92
Amendment 4311 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 95 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 95 – paragraph 1 – point h
Amendment 4387 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 99 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 99 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) the annualmidterm planned outputs for the intervention, and where relevant, a breakdown per uniform or average unit amount of support;
Amendment 4391 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 99 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
Article 99 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
(g) twhe annualre applicable, the planned unit amount of support, its justification and a justified maximum upper variation of that unit amount as referred to in Article 89. Where applicable, the following information shall also be provided:
Amendment 4393 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 99 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 99 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) the resulting annuotal financial allocation for theper intervention, as referred to in Article 88. Where applicable, a breakdown on amounts planned for grants and amounts planned for financial instruments shall be provided. Where applicable the resulting annual financial allocation for the relevant intervention, as referred to in Article 88;
Amendment 4403 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 100 – paragraph 1
Article 100 – paragraph 1
1. The target plan referred to in point (e) of Article 95(1) shall consist of a recapitulative table showing the targets as referred to in point (a) of Article 97(1), indicating where necessary the break-down in annual milestones.
Amendment 4451 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 104 – paragraph 1
Article 104 – paragraph 1
Amendment 4726 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 120 – paragraph 1
Article 120 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall adopt implementing acts o, within three cmontenths of the performance framework. Such acts shall include the list of context indicators, other indicators needed for the appropriate monitoring and evaluation of the policy,entry into force of this Regulation, delegated acts with detailed rules on the performance framework, in accordance with Article 138. Such acts shall include the methods for the calculation of indicators and the necessary provisions to guarantee accuracy and reliability of the data collected by Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 139(2).
Amendment 4731 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 121 – paragraph 1
Article 121 – paragraph 1
1. By 15 February 2023 and 15 February of each subsequent year until and including 2030, the Member States shall submit to the Commission an annual performance report on the implementation of the CAP Strategic Plan in the previous financial year. The report submitted in 2023 shall cover the financial years 2021 and 2022. For direct payments as referred to in Chapter II of Title III, the report shall cover only financial year 2022The dates shall derive from the position referred to in Article 91.
Amendment 4781 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 121 – paragraph 9
Article 121 – paragraph 9
9. Where the reported value of one or more result indicators reveals a gap of more than 235% from the respective milestone for the reporting year concerned, the Commission may ask the Member State to submit an action plan in accordance with Article 39(1) of Regulation (EU) [HzR], describing the intended remedial actions and the expected timeframe.
Amendment 4811 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 123
Article 123
Amendment 4840 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 124
Article 124
Attribution of the performance bonus 1. of the year 2026, the performance bonus withheld from a Member State’s allocation following the second paragraph of Article 123 shall be attributed to this Member State if the result indicators applied to the specific environmental- and climate-related objectives set out in points (d), (e) and (f) of Article 6(1) in its CAP Strategic Plan have achieved at least 90% of their target value for the year 2025. 2. months of the receipt of the annual performance report in the year 2026 adopt an implementing act without applying the Committee procedure referred to in Article 139 to decide for each Member State whether the respective CAP Strategic Plans have achieved the target values referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article. 3. in paragraph 1 are achieved, the amount of the performance bonus shall be granted by the Commission to the Member States concerned and considered to be definitely allocated to financial year 2027 on the basis of the decision referred to in paragraph 2. 4. in paragraph 1 are not achieved, the commitments for financial year 2027 relating to the amount of the performance bonus of the Member States concerned shall not be granted by the Commission. 5. When attributing the performance bonus, the Commission may take into consideration cases of force majeure and serious socio-economic crises impeding the achievement of the relevant milestones. 6. implementing acts laying down the detailed arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining the attribution of the performance bonus to Member States. Those implementing actsrticle 124 deleted Based on the performance review The Commission shall within two Where the target values referred to Where the target values referred to The Commission shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 139(2).
Amendment 4935 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 141 – paragraph 1
Article 141 – paragraph 1
The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 138 supplementing this Regulation with measures to protect any acquired rights and legitimate expectations of beneficiaries to the extent necessary for the transition from the arrangements provided for in Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013 and (EU) No 13078/2013 to those laid down in this Regulation. Those transitional rules shall in particular lay down the conditions under which support approved by the Commission under Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 may be integrated into support provided for under this Regulation, including for technical assistance and for the ex post evaluations.
Amendment 114 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The multiannual financial framework set out in Regulation (EU) xx/xx6 provides that the Union budget must continue to support fisheries and maritime policies. The EMFF budget should amount, in current prices, to EUR 6 140 000 000. EMFF resources should be split between shared, direct and indirect management. EUR 5 311 000 000 should be allocated to support under shared management and EUR 829 000 000 to EUR 6 866 943 600 in 2018 constant prices (i.e. EUR 7 739 176 524 in current prices). EMFF resources should be split between shared, direct and indirect management. EUR 5 939 794 374 in 2018 constant prices (i.e. EUR 6 694 261 648 in current prices) should be allocated to support under shared management and EUR 927 149 226 in 2018 constant prices (i.e. EUR 1 044 914 876 in current prices) to support under direct and indirect management. In order to ensure stability in particular with regard to the achievement of the objectives of the CFP, the definition of national allocations under shared management for the 2021- 2027 programming period should be based on the EMFF 2014-2020 shares. Specific amounts should be reserved for the outermost regions, control and enforcement and collection and processing of data for fisheries management and scientific purposes, while amounts for permanent cessation and extraordinary cessation of fishing activities should be capped. _________________ 6 OJ C […], […], p. […].
Amendment 405 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. The financial envelope for the implementation of the EMFF for the period 2021-2027 shall be EUR 6 140 000 000866 943 600 in 2018 constant prices (i.e. EUR 7 739 176 524 in current prices).
Amendment 415 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. The part of the financial envelope under shared management as specified in Title II shall be EUR 5 311 000 000939 794 374 in 2018 constant prices (i.e. EUR 6 694 261 648 in current prices) in accordance with the annual breakdown set out in Annex V.
Amendment 453 #
2018/0210(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The part of the financial envelope under direct and indirect management as specified in Title III shall be EUR 829 000 000927 149 226 in 2018 constant prices (i.e. 1 044 914 876 in current prices).
Amendment 68 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 62
Recital 62
(62) In order to set out an appropriate financial framework for the ERDF, the ESF+ and the Cohesion Fund, the Commission should set out the annual breakdown of available allocations per Member State under the Investment for jobs and growth goal together with the list of eligible regions, as well as the allocations for the European territorial cooperation goal (Interreg). Taking into account that the national allocations of Member States should be established on the basis of the statistical data and forecasts available in 2018, and given the forecasting uncertaintiess well as the NUTS level 2 regional division which entered into force on 1 January 2018, the Commission should review the total allocations of all Member States in 2024 on the basis of the most recent statistics available at the time and, where there is a cumulative divergence of more than +/- 5 %, it should adjust those allocations for the years 2025 to 2027 in order for the outcomes of the mid-term review and the technical adjustment exercise to be reflected in programme amendments at the same time.
Amendment 82 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) the NUTS 2 regions, newly created between 2016 and 2018;
Amendment 84 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Each Member State shall organise a partnership with the competent regional and local authorities in operation at that time. That partnership shall include at least the following partners:
Amendment 86 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) regional and local authorities or associations thereof;
Amendment 95 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the socio-economic situation of the Member State orand region concerned;
Amendment 96 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the NUTS 2 regions, established between 2016 and 2018;
Amendment 126 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. The ERDF, the ESF+ and the EMFF mayshould support community-led local development and allocate at least 15 % of their funds to it.
Amendment 184 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 102 – paragraph 1
Article 102 – paragraph 1
1. The ERDF, the ESF+ and the Cohesion Fund shall support the Investment for jobs and growth goal in all regions corresponding to level 2 of the common classification of territorial units for statistics ('NUTS level 2 regions', including those newly created between 2016 and 2018) established by Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 868/2014.
Amendment 185 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 102 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 102 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The classification of regions under one of the three categories of regions shall be determined on the basis of how the GDP per capita of each region, measured in purchasing power standards ('PPS') and calculated on the basis of Union figures for the perio2014-2016 and 20146-20168, relates toas well as the average GDP of the EU-27 for the same reference period.
Amendment 187 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) 565 % for the transition regions; which have exceeded 75 %, but not more than 80 % of GDP per capita on the basis of average purchasing power; 55 % for the transition regions which have exceeded 80 %, but not more than 90 % of GDP per capita on the basis of average purchasing power;
Amendment 84 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20a) In this context, it is essential to cooperate and to further harmonise waste recycling systems between Member States in order to prevent cross-border trade from damaging the environment.
Amendment 24 #
2018/0162(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) A broad debate involving social partners, Member States, training institutions and other stakeholders is necessary to investigate the possibility of creating a voluntary system of harmonised certificates going beyond the STCW in the level of training, in order to increase the competitive advantage of European seafarers. Such a STCW+ could establish “maritime certificates of excellence” based on European maritime postgraduate courses, which would provide European seafarers with skills above and beyond those required at international level. The courses would allow staying abreast of the fast-changing technology in the sector, such as shipboard technology and shore based support systems.
Amendment 25 #
2018/0162(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10 b (new)
Recital 10 b (new)
(10b) The education of European seafarers as masters and officers should be supported by exchanges of students between Maritime Education and Training Institutions across the Union.
Amendment 28 #
2018/0162(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive 2008/106/EC
Article 5b – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 5b – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. By [insert date 5 years after the entry into force], the Commission shall present an evaluation of the impact of the mutual recognition of certificates issued by Member States on the employment of European seafarers.
Amendment 33 #
2018/0162(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a
Directive 2008/106/EC
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to meet the standards of medical fitness, including physical and mental health, prescribed by Article 11; and
Amendment 221 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
that a half-year transition period should apply to existing contracts.
Amendment 276 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) “food products” means products listed in Annex I to the Treaty intended for use as food, as well as products not listed in that Annex, but processed from those products for use as foodfood as defined in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002;
Amendment 280 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) “perishable "food products” means food products that will become unfit for human consumption unless they are stored, treated, packaged or otherwise conserved to prevent them from becoming unfit with a short time limit for storage" means food whose time limit for storage is less than [30] days.
Amendment 315 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part
(a) a buyer pays a supplier for perishable food products with a short time limit for storage later than 30 calendar days after the receipt of the supplier’s invoice or later than 30 calendar days after the date of delivery of the perishable food products with a short time limit for storage, whichever is the later. This prohibition shall be without prejudice:
Amendment 351 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) a buyer unilaterally and retroactively changes the terms of the supply agreement concerning the frequency, manner, timing or volume of the supply or delivery, the quality standards or the prices of the food products;
Amendment 405 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the buyer demands other expenditure of the supplier apart from that referred to in paragraph 2(b), (c), (d) and (e) of this article.
Amendment 497 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) the buyer imposes on, and demands from, the supplier penalty payments exceeding three times the value of the transaction.
Amendment 525 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Each Member State shall designate a public authority to enforcenational competent authority to supervise compliance with the prohibitions laid down in Article 3 at national level ("enforcement authority").
Amendment 671 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall adopt and publish, by six months after the entry into force of the Directive at the latest,[date 12 months from the date of entry into force] the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They, and shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisionsbegin to apply those provisions on that date.
Amendment 676 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
They shall apply those provisions from 12 months after entry into force of this Directiveforthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.
Amendment 678 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
For existing supply contracts concluded before the date of entry into force of this Directive, Member States may provide for a transitional period of not more than 6 months beyond the date of entry into force of this Directive for compliance with the rules laid down in the Directive.
Amendment 200 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17 – point c
Regulation (EC) No 810/2009
Article 24 – paragraph 2 c
Article 24 – paragraph 2 c
2c. Without prejudice to paragraph 2, a multiple entry visa valid for up to five years mayshall be issued to applicants who prove the need or justify their intention to travel frequently and/or regularly, such as seafarers, provided that they prove their integrity and reliability, in particular the lawful use of previous visas, their economic situation in the country of origin and their genuine intention to leave the territory of the Member States before the expiry of the visa for which they have applied.
Amendment 220 #
2018/0061(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Regulation (EC) No 810/2009
Article 25 a – paragraph 5
Article 25 a – paragraph 5
5. Where, on the basis of the analysis referred to in paragraphs 2 and 4, the Commission decides that a country is not cooperating sufficiently, and that action is therefore needed, it may, taking also account of the Union’s overall relations with the third country concerned and the importance of allowing certain categories of professional travellers such as seafarers to continue to benefit from the full facilitations offered by the code, adopt an implementing act, in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 52(2):
Amendment 8 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Expresses its satisfaction with the overall degree of progress shown by the Member States in implementing Directive 2009/128/EC; urges the Commission to promote theadopt harmonisation ofed risk indicators at EU level and to oblige the Member States to provide more comprehensive information in their National Action Plans, which must be coherent and include measurable and achievable goals and targets, and to collect more reliable data on the health impacts of exposure to pesticides;
Amendment 19 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that many Member States have changed their initial targets, focusing more on reducing the risks that pesticide use entails, rather than on actual reductions in the quantities used; rRegrets the fact that in many Member States there is no real commitment to integrated pest management (IPM) and thus developing a more environmentally-sustainable agriculture with lower costs for farmers;
Amendment 57 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the fact that European waters are becoming cleaner and cCalls for greater investment in practices that prevent pesticides from reaching surface and deep water, as monitoring of waters indicates that Europe’s waters are merely in a satisfactory condition;
Amendment 66 #
2017/2284(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights the need to focus on precision and digital agriculture and to provide funding for this from the budget for the Common Agricultural Policy among other sources, so as to prevent the dispersion of pesticides in areas where they are not needed; underlines the need for research into new low-risk substances and into the equipment and technology that could render them more efficient and reduce the potential exposure of farmers, operators and the general public.
Amendment 5 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, according to Eurostat, youth unemployment stood at 18.7% in 2016, even exceeding 40% in some countrieswith the average rate disguising vast differences between Member States, even exceeding 40% in some countries, preventing a one-size fits all solution across the EU;
Amendment 24 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the overall lack of investment in young people’s rights will contribute to the aggravation of phenomena such as declining populations, early school leaving, the lack of professional qualifications or, the dismantling of social security systems and widespread job insecurity;
Amendment 29 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the problems that young people face in employment, education and training, social and political engagement are not uniform, with some groups being affected more disproportionately than others; whereas more effort is needed to support people furthest or entirely detached from the labour market;
Amendment 34 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas career orientation and access to both information on employment opportunities and educational paths are essential for future educational development and transition to the labour market;
Amendment 43 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that an inclusive youth policy is inseparable from the defence and promotion of decent work, grounded in collective labour agreements, with non- precarious labour relations, adequate salaries and wages, high-quality, free, universal public services, and programmes facilitating political and cultural participation, parenthood, well-being and creativity;
Amendment 71 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Argues that individuals’ transition into the labour market is facilitated by a comprehensive education and training system that ensures they acquire cross- cutting skills that promote critical thinking, universality and multicultural dialogue, thus fostering employability not through early specialisation, but rather by enabling the attainment of a wide variety of qualificationsand versatility in professional life;
Amendment 104 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Encourages a strong involvement of NGOs, local and regional authorities to help young people and especially vulnerable groups (e.g. NEETs, migrants and refugees, young people with disabilities, school drops-outs) find gainful employment, education or training, and assist them with engaging in political decision-making and civic society;
Amendment 108 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Underlines the need to offer proper learning and training content and decent working conditions for traineeships and apprenticeships to ensure their crucial role in the transition from education to professional life; considers that in order to ensure the delivery of quality placements, the existence of an apprenticeship or a traineeship contract is fundamental to delineate roles and responsibilities of all parties specifying the length, the learning objectives and tasks corresponding to clearly identified skills to be developed, the employment status, adequate compensation/remuneration including for overtime, social protection and security schemes under the applicable national law, applicable collective agreements, or both;
Amendment 114 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Reaffirms the importance of a continued structured dialogue between decision-makers and young people and therefore advocates for a better involvement of youth and civil society organisations as important intermediaries between young people;
Amendment 115 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Calls for a promotion and better facilitation of cross-border professional and vocational opportunities and mobility among young people, and for providing them with skills and competences for life, including language skills, while also broadening their opportunities and chances to participate in both the labour market and society;
Amendment 117 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Stresses that combating youth unemployment, especially among NEETs, should continue to be a top priority of the new generation of the youth strategy and calls therefore for a doubling of the Youth Employment Initiative envelope while ensuring quick and simplified deployment of funds and transforming it into a more stable EU financing instrument;
Amendment 120 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 f (new)
Paragraph 3 f (new)
3f. Suggests the establishment of an EU hotline against the violation of the rights of young people so that young people can report any negative experience of participation in YEI and YG measures to the Commission directly, enabling the collection of information and the investigation of reports and abusive practices in the deployment of EU-funded policies;
Amendment 121 #
2017/2259(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 g (new)
Paragraph 3 g (new)
3g. Recalls that the first principle of the European Pillar of Social Rights declares that everyone has the right to quality and inclusive education, training and life-long learning in order to maintain and acquire skills that enable them to participate fully in society and manage successfully transitions in the labour market; consequently stresses the importance of prioritising and ensuring social investment in education and training in the new programming period of the Multiannual Financial Framework for 2020-2026.
Amendment 15 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that it is essential to invest in universal, quality education and training to foster social inclusion, equal opportunities and a culture of mutual respect and fundamental values; calls therefore on Member States and the Commission to strengthen education and training programmes at all levels in order to improve access to quality learning for all students, regardless their social, cultural, geographical or economical background, to avoid labour market and societal segmentation, to fight inequalities and to enable processes of upward social mobility and convergence throughout Europe;
Amendment 18 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Recalls that the first principle of the European Pillar of Social Rights states that everyone has the right to quality and inclusive education, training and life-long learning in order to maintain and acquire skills that enable them to participate fully in society and manage successfully transitions in the labour market; therefore stresses the importance to ensure that social investment, especially in education and training for all, is prioritised in the new programming period of the Multiannual Financial Framework for 2020-2026;
Amendment 29 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on Member States to increase cooperation between education and training providers, both formal and non-formal and the world of work, including a close dialogue with social partners, in both the development of curricula and the creation of apprenticeships and internships with a real educational value;
Amendment 33 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the Commission and Member States to promote the renewed EU agenda for higher education among HEIs, regional and local authorities, employers, with a view to addressing HEIs and students needs and challenges, creating links with local and regional actors, reaching out to the local communities, fostering local and regional development and innovation, building inclusive and connected higher education systems, strengthening collaboration with the world of work and addressing the regional skills needs;
Amendment 47 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Recalls1a the importance of improving or introducing procedures for the recognition of informal and non- formal education, drawing on the best practices of Member States which have already introduced tools of that kind; notes, in this regard, the importance of policy response aimed at groups furthest from the labour market; __________________ 1a See text adopted. P8_TA(2017)0360
Amendment 70 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Member States to internationalise education systems and expand student mobility programmes to better prepare students for the EU labour market, in which a lack of skills in foreign languages and cultures is the first barrier to mobility; stresses that mobility programmes have contributed to European integration and have a positive impact on employment;
Amendment 78 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights that, in the context of societal and labour market evolution, thinking in e education systerms of ‘jobs/positions’ is obsolete and is of the opinion that ‘task/should equip people with the right set of skills’, categories should be used instead, in both the education process and the recognition of education and qualificationsompetencies and knowledge to become active European citizens and to be successful in the labour market; stresses that developing and strengthening skills is a continuous process, which follows through all levels of education into the labour market;
Amendment 95 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights that the high number of NEETs could be reduced by preventing early school leavingAcknowledges that in the EU, 6.3 million young people (11.5% of those aged 15-24) were neither in employment, education or training (NEET) in 2016; highlights that the high number of NEETs could be reduced by preventing early school leaving; believes that completion of secondary education should be free and obligatory and calls on the Member States to increase their efforts to give people who have dropped out from primary or secondary school a chance of reenrolment and completion of their studies;
Amendment 110 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to make vocational and educational training more visible, to ensure that it is accessible to all, gender balanced and non-discriminatory, to guarantee sufficient financing and enhance its quality and attractiveness, and to promote VET, dual education, work- based learning and reality-based learning at every level and form of education, including universities,higher education in order to ensure stronger ties between the education and labour markets and to provide flexible paths between different types of educations; calls for the policyromotion of apprenticeships and entrepreneurship policies for young people to be developed, to make their entry into the labour market smoother; highlights the importance of quality education and vocational training in raising the status of work-based vocations;
Amendment 119 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Stresses the need to improve career guidance and promote apprenticeship and training possibilities through awareness raising initiatives for students, their parents, adult learners, education and training providers, employers and public employment services;
Amendment 123 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Underlines the need to offer proper learning and training content and decent working conditions for traineeships and apprenticeships to ensure their crucial role in the transition from education to professional life; stresses that traineeships and apprenticeships should never be used as a replacement for jobs or considered as a cheap or even unpaid labour force;
Amendment 127 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Considers that in order to ensure the delivery of quality placements, the existence of an apprenticeship or a traineeship contract is fundamental to delineate roles and responsibilities of all parties specifying the length, the learning objectives and tasks corresponding to clearly identified skills to be developed, the employment status, adequate compensation/remuneration including for overtime, social protection and security schemes under the applicable national law, applicable collective agreements, or both;
Amendment 129 #
2017/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls the importance of life-long learning in opening up new possibilities for active inclusion and enhanced social participation and in developing adult skills and qualifications to ensure people’s active participation in the labour market through upskilling and reskillingespecially for the low skilled, the unemployed, people with special needs, older generations and migrants through upskilling and reskilling; encourages the Commission to support the Member States in developing training and educational programmes facilitating active inclusion of adults returning to the labour market.
Amendment 152 #
2017/2128(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses that glyphosates do not end up in the environment only due to farmers’ activities, as they are also widely used in forestry, to treat roadside verges and on railways and greenery;
Amendment 343 #
2017/2117(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Invites the Commission and Member States to consider rural development measures to protect herds from attack from predators (including such predators as jackals, which are not a protected species under the Habitats Directive) and look into reviewing the Habitats Directive, with the aim of controlling the spread of predators in certain grazing areas;
Amendment 7 #
2013/2104(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the fact that the primary role of State aid control is to ensure a level playing field in the internal market; fully supports the SAM overall aim of tailoring State aid rules to the need to promote economic growth, foster economic, social and territorial cohesion and stimulate job creation in the EU; notes that it is particularly relevant to promote economic growth in the most disadvantaged regions of the EU; points out that in the current times of economic and social crisis, public investment is essential as part of an overall strategy for growth and employment;
Amendment 14 #
2013/2104(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission, however, to ensure that promoting economic growth through State aid will not lead to an increase in public debt; underlines the need for simplification of rules and less, but better targeted, State aid;
Amendment 15 #
2013/2104(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that regional aid can only play an effective role if it is used sparingly and proportionately, and is concentrated on the most disadvantaged regions of the EU where it is needed the most; believes, consequently, that State aid policy and cohesion policy are, to a large extent, complementary and mutually reinforcing; in this regard, urges the Commission to ensure that State aid modernization will be consistent with the proposed changes in the General Regulation on the Structural Funds and to prevent areas belonging to the same category and experiencing similar economic difficulties from being treated unequally;
Amendment 18 #
2013/2104(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. In light of the upcoming changes in the General Regulation on the Structural Funds for period 2014-2020, stresses that changes in cohesion policy legislation, especially the new categorization of regions, need to be carefully taken into account when modernizing not only RAG but also other horizontal or sector-specific guidelines for State aid; insists on establishing real synergies between all State aid instuments and cohesion policy to eliminate any disturbing discrepancies and ensure maximum consistency of the two policies;
Amendment 1 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that, while the EU budget cannot be exempted from budget discipline that affects all national budgets,Strongly deplores the across the board cuts adopted by the Council compared to the Commission's proposals in both commitments and payments; is astonished by the inability of the Council to justify these cuts and to set clear political priorities; is of the opinion that the efforts to rationalizeincrease efficiency of external relations budget should primarily take the form of a search for synergies, and control of increases or, if necessary, scaling down of programs without European added-value; stresses, however, that EU's vital foreign policy interests shall not be jeopardised;
Amendment 6 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls its critical assessment1 of the Draft Budget proposed by the Commission which already falls short of delivering all Union's political priorities in the field of external relations; is therefore determined, beyond the restoration of the Draft Budget 2013 as proposed by the Commission, to endow the EU budget with the necessary means to deliver its political priorities, including through the use of all means available in the 17 May 2006 IIA, in particular points 21 to 23, and point 27; ______________ 1 Text adopted, P7_TA-PROV(2012)0289 - 4.7.2012 - on the mandate for the trilogue on the 2013 Draft Budget (2012/2016(BUD))
Amendment 9 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is of the opinionReiterates that Eastern and Southern neighbours and particularly the developments in the Southern Mediterranean remain a priority, and that the Draft Budget represents an adequate basis for the Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument, based on the more for more principle and to guarantee an efficient and ambitious rolefollowing the Arab Spring remain a priority, based on the more for more principle and to guarantee an efficient and ambitious role of the EU; rejects, in this regard, the decrease of both in commitments and payments appropriations for the European Neighbourhood and Partnership (ENP) financing proposed by the Council; recalls that the Council agreed in 2011 with the content of the Joint Communication on a new response to a changing Neighbourhood, acknowledging the need to provide greater support to partners engaged in building deep and sustainable democracy; is strongly convinced that the Commission's originally proposed increase in commitments for ENPI by EUR 51,7 million, is the minimum needed for promoting security, democracy and prosperity in the Neighbourhood region, where economic development and stability are in the direct interest of the EUnion;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points that cuts in both commitment and payment appropriations proposed by Council for administrative expenditures linked to all Multi annual programs (DCI, IPA, ENPI, EIDHR, IFS, ICI) will jeopardize the good implementation of these programs; underlines that these appropriations are used, amongst other, for enabling the external staff at delegations to carry out activities of devolved programme management in the Union delegations in third countries, as well as for information systems, and other back-up activities directly linked to the achievement of the objective of a respective programme; believes that these cuts lead to reduction of the quality of performance by staff in Union's delegations;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the savings achieved by the EEAS in 2012, and the continuation of this trend in 2013, and takes note of the necessary phasing-in period; considersnotes, however, that, despite high structural expenses (in great majority payroll), the Service cannot be exempted from the scaling down exercise that should apply to all EU institutions, and proposes therefore to limit the variation over 2012 budget to a more appropriate level. the Union delegations' network needs to be enhanced to meet the Union's political priorities and in times of austerity to substitute for weakened Member States embassies; rejects, in this regard, the decrease in both commitments and payments appropriations in of the EEAS budget (- 28 Million EUR);
Amendment 22 #
2012/2092(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Recalls that the Instrument for Stability provides funds in situations of crisis or emerging crises, when timely financial help cannot be provided from other EU sources; considers that the proposed reduction by Council of both payments and commitments appropriations for the IfS’s for 2013 is disproportionate and inconsistent with political priorities and ignores the fragile political climate in many regions in our neighbourhood and beyond; reminds that proposed decrease in commitments appropriation refers to the amount already decreased by the Commission in the Draft budget as compared to Financial programming (-41,4 million EUR); advocates that this amount must not be further decreased in order to ensure immediate Union response to crisis situation.
Amendment 32 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Expresses concern at unduly tight regulation of internet and mobile payment markets at this stage because such payment methods are still in the process of development; asks the Commission to adopt a radically different andn appropriate approach to these new payment methods in any future proposal, ensuring high level consumer protection, especially for vulnerable consumers;
Amendment 37 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that each payment method has its costs; asks the Commission, therefore, also to consider in the future the cost of cash payments for all market players compared to other payment methods;
Amendment 41 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that actions towards common technical standards shall be taken in the light of the importance, effectiveness and sufficiency of the standards currently in place in Europe;
Amendment 42 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that standardisation should not impose barriers to competition and innovation, but should instead remove obstacles to ensure a level-playing field for all parties; hence recommends that standards must be open to allow for innovation and competition in the market, as mandating a single or closed standard would limit market development and innovation, impose a disproportionate restriction, and would not be conducive to a competitive level playing field;
Amendment 46 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Underlines that, given the fast growing but, at present, immature phase of market development for electronic and mobile payments, imposing mandatory standards in these key areas for the enhancement of the digital single market in Europe would entail the risk of negative effects for innovation, competition and market growth;
Amendment 48 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls on the European Commission to propose legislation on SEPA governance, covering the main features of payment services, legal aspects, including consumer rights and competition rules, while the development of technical and security standards would be the tool to support the implementation of the legislation;
Amendment 54 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that any standardisation and interoperability requirements should be aimed at enhancing the competitiveness of the European payments market and should not impose unnecessary barriers in comparison with the global market; furthermore believes that common standards should be sought primarily at global level, in close cooperation with the key economic partners of the EU;
Amendment 77 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that MIFs can currently be justified as a means to finance the four- party card payment systems; nNotes that the level of MIFs is sometimesusually higher than what the financing of the four- party payment system requires;
Amendment 80 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission to propose a reform of the business model for card payments which satisfies the following criteria: - is transparent and fair, - does not distort competition in the payments market by creating barriers to entry of new market players;
Amendment 89 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 94 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the transparency of MIFfees should be regulated both in internationalat European and in national schemes, and that this could, together with easier access to cross-border acquiring, lead to lower MIFfees as merchants could freely choose which payment schemes they wish to join;
Amendment 95 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Recalls that Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 establishing technical and business requirements for credit transfers and direct debits in euros points out that no MIF can be applied after 1 February 2017; calls for the same approach for card payments;
Amendment 98 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 103 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that there are crucial differences between the three-party and business model for three-party schemes may raise competition issues similar to those of four-party payment schemes and that each scheme should be treated according to its specificities, though ultimately in an equal manner;
Amendment 108 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that co-badging could be beneficial to consumers as it would result in fewer cards and a wider range of choices, and would encourage competition; however, points out that co-badging should not be used as a bypass for domestic schemes by a pre-decided use of the domestic brand;
Amendment 110 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that the customer and the issuing PSP should mutually agree on co- badging and that it should not be made mandatory, while the ultimate choice of brands on the payment card should belong to the consumer;
Amendment 119 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes the ban on surcharges for the use of card payments in some Member States; calls on other Member States to consider requiring more transparency on surcharges in order to ensure that the customer knows how much of the surcharge comes from, for example, the MIF and how much is further imposed by the merchant Commission to propose a general ban on surcharging at EU level for all payment services;
Amendment 120 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Notes that surcharging solely based on the payment choice made by a customer risks to be arbitrary, might be abused to raise additional revenue rather than covering cost, and overall is not beneficial to the development of the single market, as it inhibits competition and increases market fragmentation and confusion for the consumer;
Amendment 123 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 137 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that the security of face-to- face card payments is already high and the gradual change from magnetic cards to chip cards will improve the level of security even further;
Amendment 144 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Does not, therefore, support third-party access to a customer's bank account information before secure systems are developed, built andunless the system is demonstrably secure and has been thoroughly tested; notes that in any future regulation special attention should be paid to security, data protection and consumer rights; considers, in particular, that it should be clearly specified which parties can have access to which information and under which conditions the data can be stored and that these provisions need to be subject to a contractual relationship between the entities involved;
Amendment 149 #
2012/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Believes that consumer refund rights should be strengthened, both in the case of unauthorised payments and in the case of undelivered (or non delivered as promised) goods or services, and that effective Collective Redress and Alternative Dispute Resolution systems are indispensable tools for the protection of consumers, also in the field of electronic payments;
Amendment 3 #
2011/2179(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the concept of a macro- regional strategy, which, on the basis of the experience gained in existing macro- regions (Baltic Sea and Danube regions), can encourage Member States, regions, local authorities and third countries to manage resources in such a way as to foster growth, prosperity, security and sustainable protection of the environment in areas sharing common geographic, historic and cultural characteristics; calls also for more synergy effects between the different macro-regional strategies;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2179(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission and Council to take into account EU macro- regional strategies when deciding on budgetary envelopes such as cohesion and structural funds, research and development, and in particular regional cooperation; in addition, calls on the Commission and Council to evaluate whether macro-regional strategies need direct funding to guarantee successful implementation;
Amendment 7 #
2011/2179(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that a coordinated policy between the EU and non-EU member countries within the macro-regional strategies should be encouraged for the common concerns (environment, migration etc) with the support of the neighbourhood policies;
Amendment 8 #
2011/2179(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Welcomes the macro-regional strategy as a tool to encourage dialogue and increase relations and cooperation in the framework of the EU neighbourhood policy, both in the Eastern and Southern dimensions;
Amendment 9 #
2011/2179(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Welcomes the events of the Arab Spring and considers them to be a powerful incentive to develop new and active neighbourhood policies linking these, at least in part, with a macro- regional strategy;
Amendment 22 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. stresses that the essential nature of all on-line activities, in particular the fact that they operate across national borders, as well as the need to mitigate the social and public risks arising from gambling, requires that they be dealt with and regulated in a coordinated manner at European level;
Amendment 25 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – point a (new)
Paragraph 2 – point a (new)
(a) Stresses that, irrespective of the cross- border character of on-line gambling, all action must be based on the European Union’s internal market rules;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – point b (new)
Paragraph 2 – point b (new)
(b) Stresses the country-of-origin aspect of consumer protection, with a view to fully protecting consumers’ rights;
Amendment 64 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. takes the view that the proliferation offact that on-line gambling is universally unregulated may represents a threat to the integrity of sport; stresses that keeping sporting events credible and honest is vital to the sports industry as a whole; considers that the European Union must play a more prominent role in safeguarding the integrity of sport, a goal to be pursued by all federations, associations and stakeholders;
Amendment 75 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – point a (new)
Paragraph 5 – point a (new)
(a) Considers it a priority to overcome fraud and corruption in sport, and therefore believes that information and know-how should be disseminated and that common rules and punishments should be applied where offences are committed; stresses that to this end there is a need for effective mutual cooperation between parties in the public and private sectors, between the European Commission, Europol and the appropriate institutions of the Member States, and also among undertakings which organise on-line gambling;
Amendment 85 #
2011/2084(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. stresses that on-line gambling is a major source of funding for the sports industry; recalls that on-line betting is one form of the commercial exploitation of sporting events; calls on the Commission to look at ways in which revenues from sports betting might be routinely used to safeguard the integrity of popular sport and develop it; calls on the Commission to ensure that there is a high level of legal security, particularly regarding application of the rules on state aid.
Amendment 471 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for an adequate basic allowance for small farmers, which Member States can optionally determine in those Member States where these farms help to stabilise rural development; calls for these Member States to decide, in accordance with subsidiarity and within the framework of their total direct payments, what percentage of the direct payments to be incorporated in the new subsidy system should be made available to their small farmers; stresses, however, that this must not hamper the necessary structural change;
Amendment 525 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Stresses that Member States have the right to reallocate funds within the overall allocation in such a way as to avoid over- compensation for public goods, such as keeping the land in good condition;
Amendment 748 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Realises that resources from the first pillar (as for a top-up model) should be used to pay for this environmental component; believes, however, that Member States where direct payments lie below the EU average should be given the option of making the payment by means of cofinancing from the first pillar or instead by means of financing entirely from the second pillar; observes that the Member States must notify the Commission of their decision on the financing by 31 July 2013; notes that individual Member States’ modulation resources should be used;
Amendment 818 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. to guarantee uniform interpretation and application of standards for compliance with requirements in all Member States;
Amendment 1101 #
2011/2051(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Calls on the Commission to create conditions for producer groups to increase their market power;
Amendment 570 #
2011/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 93 – paragraph 3
Article 93 – paragraph 3
Amendment 184 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Due to the successive integration of various sectors into the single payment scheme and the ensuing period of adjustment granted to farmers, it has become increasingly difficult to justify the presence of significant individual differences in the level of support per hectare resulting from use of historical references. Therefore direct income support should be more equitably distributed between Member States, by reducing the link to historical references and having regard to the overall context of the Union budget. To ensure a more equal distribution of direct support, while taking account of the differences that still exist in wage levels and input costs, the levels of direct support per hectare should be progressively adjusted. Member States with direct payments below the level of 9a current level of direct payments per hectare below 80 % of the EU average should close one third of the gap between their current level and this level. This convergence should be financed proportionally by all Member States with direct payments above the UnionMember States with a level of direct payments above 80% but below the EU average should close this gap by 10 %. This convergence should be financed proportionally by all Member States with direct payments above the Union average. However, the maximum level of direct payments per hectare in the Member States should not exceed 120% of the EU average. In addition, all payment entitlements activated in 2019 in a Member State or in a region should have a uniform unit value following a convergence towards this value that should take place during the transition period in linear steps. However, in order to avoid disruptive financial consequences for farmers, Member States having used the single payment scheme, and in particular the historical model, should be allowed to partially take historical factors into account when calculating the value of payment entitlements in the first year of application of the new scheme. The debate on the next Multiannual Financial Framework for the period starting in 2021 should also focus on the objective of complete convergence through the equal distribution of direct support across the European Union during that period.
Amendment 389 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 3 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c – indent 3 a (new)
- carrying out a minimum activity to be established by Member States with the purpose of nature conservation under Natura2000 or equivalent nature conservation programmes.
Amendment 454 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(h a) ´historical pasture and meadow`: land traditionally used to grow grasses or other forage that has not been ploughed or reseeded for seven years or longer and includes all species which can be grazed or harvested for animal fodder
Amendment 677 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point c
Amendment 681 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt implemented acts in accordance with Article 56 for the purposes of laying down criteria to establish when a farmer's agricultural area is to be considered as mainly areas naturally kept in a state suitable for grazing or cultivation.
Amendment 1418 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Farmers complying with the requirements laid down in Article 29(1) of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 as regards organic farming shall be entitled ipso facto to the payment referred to in this Chaptershall be entitled ipso facto to payment referred to in this Chapter when they fall within the following categories: - farmers which have at least 20 % of forest areas; - farmers with more than 50 % of the eligible agricultural area covered by grassland; - farmers which are 100 % certified as using sustainable farming methods, including of integrated farming.
Amendment 1470 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 5
Article 29 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1489 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Farmers who are granted the agri- environment-climate payment pursuant to Article 29 of regulation (EU) No [...] [RD R] shall be entitled ipso facto to the payment referred to in this Chapter. The first subparagraph shall apply only to the units of a holding that are used for the agri-environment-climate commitments in accordance with Article 29 of Regulation (EU) No [...] [RDR].
Amendment 1550 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The first paragraph shall not apply to farms: - where the arable land is entirely used for grass production or other herbaceous forage, entirely left fallow, entirely cultivated with crops under water for a significant part of the year or a combination of these, or; - where the arable land of the farmer covers up to 50 hectares and more than 50% of the eligible agricultural area of the holding is covered by permanent crops.
Amendment 1625 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall ensure the maintenance of the ratio of the land under permanent grassland in relation to the total agricultural area. That obligation shall apply at national or regional level. The reference ratio shall be established as relation between the land under permanent grassland and total agricultural area declared by the farmers in 2014.
Amendment 1643 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Farmers shall be allowed to convert a maximum of 5 % of their reference areas under permanent grassland. That limit shall not appMember States shall ensure that the ratio under this Article shall not decrease to the detriment of land under permanent grassland by more than 10 % relatively into the case of force majeure or exceptional circumstancesratio for the relevant reference year.
Amendment 1667 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 55 laying down rules concerning the increase of reference areas under permanent grassland as laid down in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1, the renewal of permanent grassland, the reconversion of agricultural area into permanent grassland in case the authorised decrease referred to in paragraph 2 is exceeded, as well as the modification of the reference areas under permanent grassland in case of transfer of land. For the purposes of paragraph 2, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 55 laying down rules on maintenance of permanent grassland, in particular to ensure that measures are taken to maintain the ratio, including individual obligations to be respected such as obligation to reconvert areas into permanent grassland where it is established that the ratio of land under permanent grassland is decreasing.
Amendment 1728 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. FWhere the arable land and area covers more than 20 hectares, farmers shall ensure that at least 7 % of their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2), excluding areas under permanent grassland and permanent crops, is ecological focus area such as land left fallow, terraces, landscape features, buffer strip like hedges or stone walls, buffer strips, land planted with nitrogen-fixing crops, land cultivated according to environmentally friendly methods and afforested areas as referred to in article 25(2)(b)(ii).
Amendment 1735 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Farmers shall ensure that at least 7 % of their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2), excluding areas under permanent grassland, is ecological focus area such as land left fallow, terraces, landscape features, buffer strips, semi-natural habitats and afforested areas as referred to in article 25(2)(b)(ii). In order to be counted as ecological focus areas, these areas shall not be ploughed, sown, fertilised or sprayed but may be grazed, harvested or mown at appropriate season that is compatible with biodiversity conservation needs.
Amendment 1763 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 32 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the minimum percentage indicated in paragraph 1 is reduced to: - 5% in cases of joint undertakings of groups of farmers putting in place continuous, adjacent ecological focus areas; - 1,5% in the Member States with at least 45% of their total terrestrial area covered by forests or; - 1,5% in the Member States where utilised agricultural area constitute is less than 35% of the total terrestrial area.
Amendment 1799 #
2011/0280(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegatedimplementing acts in accordance with Article 556 to further define the types of ecological focus areas referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and to add and define other types of ecological focus areas that can be taken into account for the respect of the percentage referred to in that paragraph.
Amendment 1234 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
For Member States which acceded to the Union before 2013, whose GDP per capita is below 75% of the EU 27 average, and whose average real GDP growth 2008- 2010 was lower than the EU 27 average, the cohesion policy allocation shall not be lower than in the period 2007-2013.
Amendment 43 #
2011/0273(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Article 176 of the Treaty provides that the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) is intended to help to redress the main regional imbalances in the Union. In accordance with Article 174 of the Treaty, the ERDF contributes to reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions, among which particular attention should be paid to regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps such as regions with very low population density and island, cross-border and mountain regions.
Amendment 184 #
2011/0273(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) all thematicup to 2 objectives may be selected for interregional cooperation programmes pursuant to Article 2(3)(a).
Amendment 83 #
2010/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. NotStresses the need for increasing transparency in the wholesale markets and notes the absence of a coherent regulatory oversight of wholesale markets; welcomes, in this context, the announcement of the Commission to present a proposal on transparency and integrity of traded energy markets; underlines that in order to achieve these goals in principle one single supervisory authority should take the responsibility for energy and emissions trading at national level, cooperating closely with other authorities of the relevant Member State and similar bodies of other Member States;
Amendment 86 #
2010/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Notes that most of current power exchanges are designed separately from each other and for the national context; furthermore underlines that the 3rd package does not address the cooperation among the power exchanges nor the regulatory oversight of transnational power exchanges; calls on the Commission to address these shortcomings;
Amendment 228 #
2010/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Supports the introduction of further tax and non-tax based market mechanisms to improve the energy efficiencysaving as a way of stimulating the competitiveness of the EU economy; calls on the Commission and the Council to prioritise sufficient amount of funding at the EU and national level for energy saving measures;
Amendment 241 #
2010/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Calls on the Member States to agree on a common methodology for measuring national energy efficiency and savings targets and monitoring progress on achieving these targets; stresses that binding legal targets can only be included once a common methodology is agreed of 20% energy saving by 2020 should be adopted and enforced immediately;
Amendment 243 #
2010/2108(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Supports a multi-level governance and decentralised approach to energy policy and energy efficiency, including the Smart Cities initiative; calls on the further development of Smart Cities initiative with the aim to develop integrated policy response for sustainable urban environment; Stresses that these initiatives have to backed with credible funding;
Amendment 180 #
2010/2107(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Recalls the obligation of the Member States under the 3rd energy package to develop innovative pricing formulas such as mandating directly or through national regulatory authorities electricity undertakings to introduce tariffs which increase for greater levels of consumption with the express objectives of stimulating energy efficient behaviour, reducing household demand for electricity and related reductions in domestic CO2 emissions, as well as lowering the cost of energy to households suffering energy poverty;
Amendment 13 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s view that forests should be seen as a major contributor to solving the climate crisis; emphasises that sustainable forest management is of pivotal importance for the EU in achieving its climate and biodiversity goals and delivering necessary ecosystem services, such as biodiversity;
Amendment 16 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Points out that the EU and all of the Member States have signed the Convention on Biological Diversity, implying a need for them to adopt a holistic approach to ecosystem management while taking into account that the component parts of ecosystems are all interconnected, even outside protected areas; notes that the EU and the Member States have not done enough to halt biodiversity loss in Europe;
Amendment 21 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Points out that in some Member States forestry is already firmly based on the principle of sustainability, whereas in others sustainability principles have not been assimilated as fully into forestry; maintains that the EU must ensure that every Member State helps to implement SFM (sustainable forest management) in the true sense; points out that the EU could set up a knowledge centre to provide the necessary information to Member States;
Amendment 25 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that, in the light of climate challenges, European forestry initiatives should be aimed at ‘adaptenabling’ forests to adapt to climate change, rather than ‘protecting’ them, thus bringing the terminology into line with tha and that, at the same time, EU policy should seek to protect mfore commonly used in other climate change policiessts more effectively, especially where, for example, high-quality habitats are concerned;
Amendment 30 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes the potential added value of European coordination of forest information and supervision of climate change adaptation targets, mitigation targets, renewable energy targets and best practices for multifunctional and sustainable forest management, in particular in view of the cross-border nature of the challenges faced; also calls for an integrated EU land use policy to be established in order to bring forestry, agriculture, renewable energy, biodiversity, and other environment- related issues under one umbrella;
Amendment 31 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points out that one of the biggest challenges facing Europe is pests and forest diseases; notes that the EU should tackle this challenge by means of a Community-wide cooperation and information initiative;
Amendment 35 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes the importance of global cooperation on standard setting, best practices and technology transfers, especially in the context of the REDD system; also points out that a fair share- out of the benefits of REDD cannot be achieved without prior reform in the area of forest management;
Amendment 39 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need to respect the principle of subsidiarity and the role of local and national governments in forestry policy; takes the view that, owing to the diversity ofpoints to the climate challenges facing different parts of Europe and to the disparities in forest ownership and the differences in Community ecosystem conditions and objectives within the Union, a common EU policy runs the risk of being too broad to be useful in achieving the necessary climate adaptation;forest ownership:
Amendment 50 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Points out that forestry is a natural part of integrated rural and regional policy, a fact which should be taken into account in the discussions on the future of the CAP after 2013, and that it is also necessary to determine the need for measures relating to forestry;
Amendment 72 #
2010/2106(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses the need for enhanced coordination and information efforts within the EU and between the EU and the Member States, and takes the view that this could be achieved in part if the Commission were to bring all of its forestry-related activities together within one single unit, preferably within DG Enterprise or DG Agriculture.
Amendment 13 #
2010/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges the divergent forms of carbon tax that already exist in some Member States and warns against the risk they pose to competitiveness in the Single Market and interference with the EU ETS; believes in the greater benefit of introducing carbon taxation in a coordinated manner; calls on the Commission to further examine possible instrumentsafter thorough impact assessment bring forward legislative proposal for coordinating carbon taxation for non-ETS sectors at EU level;
Amendment 16 #
2010/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that the EU-coordinated approach will remove the risks on competitiveness in Internal Market, while gradual shift of the tax burden to pollution activities could in the long run reduce other taxes and labour costs, thus increasing EU´s competitiveness;
Amendment 21 #
2010/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that any innovative form of EU- coordinated climate change taxation should have its revenues earmarked for financing R&D and measures aimed at reducing carbon emissions, stimulating energy efficiency, tackling energy poverty and improving energy infrastructure in the EU;
Amendment 28 #
2010/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes the merits of 'EU project bonds' initiative where project companies enhance the credit rating of bonds issued by themselves; 'EU project bonds' could address the shortage of investment and access to finances e.g. in EU infrastructure, including energy infrastructure;
Amendment 29 #
2010/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls for the revision of the Energy Taxation directive to include measures encouraging greater energy savings, thus, enabling Member States to save not only on energy costs but on social compensatory costs related to that; calls for the establishment of EU framework providing and guaranteeing long term low interest rate credits and financial tools for energy saving projects; encouraging community-based decision making approach on energy saving projects;
Amendment 37 #
2010/2105(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges Member States not to adopt unilateral measures affecting the competitiveness of European industries, while recognising that a number of Member States have already introduced a carbon tax.
Amendment 25 #
2010/2012(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 29 #
2010/2012(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the significance of promoting EU-wide logos, trust marks and quality marks that will help consumers in identifying reputable online traders and will support EU companies in their efforts to reach beyond their home market; while ensuring proper enforcement of trust marks;
Amendment 38 #
2010/2012(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that cross-border web searching and advertising within the EU should be encouraged, thus improving information for consumers and traders and enhancing their ability to make cross- border comparisons and identify cross- border offers; to this end, calls for close cooperation with the industry and for the promotion of the .eu domains;
Amendment 49 #
2010/2012(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that the furCalls on the Commission in the context of the revision of the scope of universal service directive to consider ther development of fast and inexpensivaffordable broadband access, which is essential to the development of e- commerce, as lack of Internet access remains one of the most significant barriers to European citizens’ use of e-commerce.
Amendment 6 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that a transition to a green economy will require adequate training and educational programmes, in some cases universities need to consider offering entirely new study fields and majors and urges the Member States urgently to address the skill gap that already exists between available workers and the needs of green industries;
Amendment 6 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that a new sustainable economy for the EU must ensure a balanced economic and social development, taking account of the characteristics of individual Member States,; calls for an ambitious sustainable industrial policy, with an emphasis on resource efficiency; highlights that the degree of development of their industries, accumulated knowledge, and the need to guaranteen economy needs to offer prospects for decent, well-paying jobs, with rights andthe focus on the protection of the environment;
Amendment 7 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Highlights that current economic crises, global energy crises, adaptation to climate change, increasing demand for metals and minerals arising from the growth of the global population and increasing consumption by the emerging economies call for urgent action towards a low-carbon and resource-efficient economy; considers that while the short- term emphasis should focus on energy- conserving measures using existing technology, the medium-term strategy should minimize the use of carbon-rich materials as a source of energy altogether. In the long term, however, radical eco- innovation is required to rethink and develop whole new systems to deliver goods and services using a small fraction of natural resources;
Amendment 8 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls for engaging industry in eco innovation, as entrepreneurs have a very important role to play in the wider spread of the eco-innovation; notes, in this regard, that informing the entrepreneurs and demonstration of new business opportunities is crucial for the success of dematerialising economies and developing sustainable industries;
Amendment 10 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes the absence of a coherent EU strategy which encompasses eco- innovation, and considers that the current EU environmental framework is focused on pollution reduction rather than the efficient use of resources;
Amendment 11 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to devise arrangements making for wider dissemination of a resource-saving economic model on the basis of more specific provision in the Community budget to that end; believes, as regards funding under the common agricultural policy, that one option to consider should be a shift from direct support so as to enable more substantial allocations than hitherto to be channelled into rural development and the development of environmentally sustainable agriculture; also considers it essential to bring critical assessment to bear on regional development funding with a view to financing initiatives related to eco-innovation; points to the need for better interaction between structural funding, the seventh framework programme, and the CIP;
Amendment 20 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes it is vital to ensure a new Community framework with a suitable and sufficient budget in order to support public-sector research and make its results available in an accessible and non- bureaucratic form with a view to innovation by microbusinesses and SMEs, in the areas of energy efficiency, use of new energy sources and production processes, and recycling and better use of resources and in the context of creating jobs with rightdecent, well-paying jobs;
Amendment 23 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that all European countries levy environmental taxes, but these make up only 2.6% of EU GDP; likewise points out that environmental tax revenue originates mainly from energy taxation; proposes that the Commission consider gradually widening the taxable base to include minerals used in building materials, metals, industrial minerals, and other fossil fuels, following the widespread practice in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy, and the Czech Republic;
Amendment 28 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Calls on the Commission to develop a European Technology Platform for resource-light industries, with a focus on reducing the use of resources in production processes, and to develop new markets for European manufacturing industries;
Amendment 30 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Calls on the Commission to establish a European Trust Fund for Eco- Entrepreneurship, following the successful example of the UK Carbon Trust, to support system innovation driven by new companies;
Amendment 31 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Insists on the need to pay particular attention to those affected by deindustrialisation (in the wake of concentration in industries in crisis or thanks to abandonment by the multinationals)Points out that the transition to a new sustainable economy is a complex phenomenon, which calls on the need to pay particular attention to those affected by deindustrialisation, introducing support mechanisms and integrated interventions, targeted on development, characterised by innovation, and capable of creating jobs with rightdecent, well-paying jobs and reducing social inequalities and regional asymmetries;
Amendment 42 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that opting for energy efficiency can help boost industrial diversification and create jobs with rights have a great potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions a large scalend create jobs;
Amendment 45 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that transition to a new sustainable economy and changes in companies' or sectors' production processes should be accompanied by adequate training and lifelong instreducation for workeral programmes, and that this will also generate new jobs; urges the Commission and the Member States to address the skills gap that already exists between the available workforce and the needs of new sustainable industries;
Amendment 55 #
2010/2010(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Insists onStresses the importance of the public sector leading by example, adopting progressive procurement standards, providing incentives and information, especially in the areas of energy, construction of infrastructures and equipment, transport and communications, for creating jobs with rights.
Amendment 11 #
2010/0204(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
CIT-staff carrying out cross-border transport within the meaning of the present Regulation shall be guaranteed the relevant minimum rates of pay, including overtime rates, in the host Member State in analogy with the provisions laid down in Article 3(1)(c) of Directive 96/71/EC. If the relevant minimum rates of pay in the host Member State are higher than the wage paid to the employee in the Member State of origin, the relevant minimum rates of pay, including overtime rates, of the host Member State shall apply for the whole working day. If transport is carried out in several host Member States during a day and more than one of these have higher relevant minimum rates of pay than the wage applied in the Member State of origin, the highest of those minimum rates of pay, including overtime rates, shall apply for the whole working day. , and any other statutory or contractual or extra- contractual benefits, including but not limited to risk premiums in force in the host Member State. If a collective labour agreement is in force in the host Member State, that agreement shall apply. If the relevant minimum rates of pay in the host Member State are higher than the wage paid to the employee in the Member State of origin, the relevant minimum rates of pay, including overtime rates and any other statutory or contractual or extra- contractual benefits including but not limited to risk premiums, of the host Member State shall apply for the whole working day. If a collective labour agreement is in force in the host Member State, that agreement shall apply. If transport is carried out in several host Member States during a day and more than one of these have higher relevant minimum rates of pay than the wage applied in the Member State of origin, the highest of those minimum rates of pay, including overtime rates and any other statutory or contractual or extra-contractual benefits including but not limited to risk premiums, shall apply for the whole working day. If a collective labour agreement in force in the host Member State provides for the highest minimum rates of pay, including overtime rates and any other statutory or contractual or extra-contractual benefits including but not limited to risk premiums, that agreement shall apply.
Amendment 26 #
2009/0169(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) At the end of the strategic phase, the Commission, assisted by independent expert should evaluate the maturity and the readiness of the initiative to enter the implementation phase should verify that the Strategic Research Agenda, Stakeholder Consultation Platforms and implementation modalities are in place for the initiative to enter the implementation phase. The Commission should, if appropriate, make recommendations for improving the Strategic Research Agenda. The transition to the implementation phase should be seamless and without delays.
Amendment 47 #
2009/0169(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part and point a
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – introductory part and point a
3. The CommunityUnion financial contribution for the implementation phase shall be provided under the following conditions: (a) a positive evaluationconditional upon: (a) the establishment by the Participating States of the sStrategic phase carried out by the Commission with the assistance of independent experts; this evaluation shall cover the progress made towards the achievement of objectives and deliverables set out in Article 2(3) and Annex IResearch Agenda, Stakeholder Consultation Platforms and the implementation modalities referred to in Article 2(3), as well as the progress made towards the achievement of objectives and deliverables set out in Annex I, section 2. The Commission shall, if appropriate, make recommendations for improving the Strategic Research Agenda;
Amendment 61 #
2009/0169(COD)
Proposal for a decision
Annex I – section 3.4
Annex I – section 3.4
The implementation phase of BONUS-169 is co-funded by the Participating States and the CommunityUnion over a minimum five-year period until the full life-cycle of all BONUS-169 funded projects is closed, provided that commitments from the Community are done up to 2013 and all obligations to report to the Commission are fulfilled. The CommunityUnion contribution during the implementation phase shall match the cash, and in-kind infrastructure contributions of the Participating States to BONUS-169 projects made through the BONUS EEIG as well as the running costs incurred by the BONUS EEIG in the implementation phase. These running costs cannot exceed EUR 5 million. The Community financial contribution and the cash contribution of the Participating States to BONUS-169 shall be pooled and administered centrally by the BONUS EEIG. Subject to the conditions agreed in the annual financial agreements referred to in Article 5(2) the CommunityUnion financial contribution shall be disbursed on the basis of evidence of payment of the cash contribution of the Participating States to the BONUS-169 beneficiaries or EEIG and of provision of in- kind infrastructure contributions for BONUS-169 projects. The proper use of BONUS-169 funding by the beneficiaries is the responsibility of the BONUS EEIG, and shall be established by the independent financial auditing of projects to be carried out by the BONUS EEIG, or on its behalf.
Amendment 47 #
2009/0128(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
(3a) If during the maintenance process of the coin processing machine it is discovered that the coin processing machine is defective, the further handling of that machine, whether repair or destruction, shall take place in accordance with rules set out by the competent authorities.
Amendment 48 #
2009/0128(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall perform annually on-the-spot controls in the institutions with a view to verifying the proper functioning of a representative number of coin- processing machines used through detection tests. Where appropriatestaff of the institutions controlled is expected to check manually the authenticity of euro coins put back into circulation, Member States shall obtain assurance from those institutions that their staff expected to check the authenticity of euro coins is duly trained in manual authentication. is duly trained for that purpose. Member States shall adopt training guidelines so as to ensure common standards.
Amendment 51 #
2009/0128(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12a Review By 31 December 2015, the Commission shall review the implementation of this Regulation and shall, where appropriate, come forward with a proposal for a revised definition of ‘euro coins unfit for circulation’, taking due account of factors such as electrical and/or magnetic characteristics, size and visual features.