Awaiting committee decision
2014/2234(INI) Protecting the European Union's financial interests: towards performance-based controls of Common Agricultural Policy
Next event: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading 2015/09/07
Lead committee dossier: CONT/8/02280
Legal Basis RoP 052
Next event: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading 2015/09/07
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Opinion | AGRI | GIESEKE Jens (EPP) | |
| Lead | CONT | SARVAMAA Petri (EPP) | PARGNEAUX Gilles (S&D), CZARNECKI Ryszard (ECR), ALI Nedzhmi (ALDE), DE JONG Dennis (GUE/NGL), VALLI Marco (EFD) |
Legal Basis RoP 052
Subjects
Activites
-
2015/09/07
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
-
2015/07/14
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
-
2015/01/15
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Documents
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 164 |
2014/2234(INI)
2015/05/13
AGRI
120 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas the common agricultural policy has grown significantly in complexity in recent years
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the cost of controls is currently estimated at EUR 4 billion at Member State level, and
Amendment 100 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Favours the increased use of e- Government technology by the Member
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 102 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 103 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls for a charter of rights for farmers at EU level in order to build trust that there is an equivalence of standards and implementation across the EU, and a shortening of the ‘control chain’ with a clear division of areas of competency between Member State and the EU institutions.
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls on Member States to ensure that the governmental/regional bodies dealing with the new CAP implementation communicate and work together effectively to the benefit of farmers implementing the policy on the ground.
Amendment 106 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls on the Commission and European Court of Auditors to develop a supportive audit regime which encourages not only proper achievement but surpassing of the objectives of CAP regulation.
Amendment 107 #
8b. Calls on the European Court of Auditors to acknowledge in its annual report on budget implementation by the Commission for 2015, the significant degree of change in the CAP –which could not apply retroactively – following the 2013 reform when it presents its error rate and accompanying remarks, and to highlight the degree to which Member States are responsible under shared management of funds.
Amendment 108 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Insists that in any risk-based audit strategy, the scope of risk be extended to include risk to the environment and to public health and their associated costs, in addition to the risk to public funds in the EU budget.
Amendment 109 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 c (new) 8c. Calls on all institutions and bodies responsible for implementation of the CAP to cooperate to overcome mistrust and anxiety linked to the considerable burden of audit and control which potentially puts at risk future development and innovation and the position of the EU agriculture sector in relation to other markets.
Amendment 11 #
B. whereas the cost of controls is currently estimated at EUR 4 billion at Member State level, and
Amendment 110 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 c (new) 8c. Calls on the Commission to improve its guidelines on inspections, so as to ensure consistency of checks.
Amendment 111 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 d (new) 8d. Recalls the European Court of Auditors recommendation to turn cross- compliance measures into verifiable standards, with expected impacts defined beforehand and then measured.
Amendment 112 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 e (new) 8e. Recalls that the cost of ensuring cross- compliance and greening is far lower than the cost of their weak implementation, whereby extra costs would be incurred to clean up environmental pollution and solve public health crises.
Amendment 113 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 f (new) 8f. Stresses that efforts to reduce the burden of controls should pay particular attention to the needs of smaller-scale and family farms in the auditing process, aiming to minimise the number of inspections as far as possible, whilst ensuring sound spending of EU funds and correct implementation of relevant EU legislation.
Amendment 114 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 g (new) 8g. Recalls that, under Article 4.1(h) of the Regulation No 1307/2013 on direct payments, ‘permanent grassland and permanent pasture’ can include land used to grow ligneous forage species, which can be grazed and which forms part of established local practices where grasses and other herbaceous forage are traditionally not predominant in grazing areas; calls on Member States to ensure that farmers grazing in upland conditions are not discriminated against in eligibility rules for permanent grassland and permanent pasture or the value of entitlements.
Amendment 115 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 h (new) 8h. Demands greater clarity in the delegated act defining ‘active farmers’, ensuring that smaller-scale farmers and family farms are recognized as such.
Amendment 116 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 i (new) 8i. Argues for a better integration of the polluter pays principle as concerns penalties for non-compliance.
Amendment 117 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 j (new) 8j. Recalls that the Water Framework Directive and Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive shall be part of cross compliance measures as soon as the last Member State has implemented the farmer relevant aspects.
Amendment 118 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 k (new) 8k. Argues for the setting up of specific thresholds for pesticides, taking into account the different problems facing individual river basins and ecologically sensitive regions.
Amendment 119 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 l (new) 8l. Calls for the Commission to submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report on the information communicated by the Member States in relation to the National Action Plans for the Sustainable Use of Pesticides, as requested in article 4.3 of Directive 2009/128/EC1 a ; recalls that this report shall contain methods used and the implications concerning the establishment of different types of targets to reduce the risks and use of pesticides. ___________ 1a Sustainable Use of Pesticides
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas expenditure on controls is additional to expenditure on the management and distribution of aid, which makes it essential to achieve full transparency regarding the true administrative costs of the CAP both to the European Union and to the Member States;
Amendment 120 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 m (new) 8m. Stresses that much administrative burden, on both farmers and administrators, could be reduced simply by improving the interoperability of databases in IACS (integrated administration and control system) as currently already applied in some Member States; notes that all Member States should ensure adequate investment in such systems and their hardware and software components, whether through independent financing or co-financing alongside EU funds.
Amendment 121 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 n (new) 8n. Requests that the Commission encourage the exchange of best practices, to ensure the smoothest controls and least disturbance for the farmers.
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas performance based controls may become a useful methodology, while stability and an enabling approach are needed on the part of administrative bodies in order to build trust with final beneficiaries; recalls however that a one- size-fits-all system cannot be imposed on the diverse types and scale of agricultural holdings in the EU;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas some Member States are trying to reduce the costs of red tape by eliminating some of the smaller beneficiaries of CAP subsidies;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Recital B b (new) Bb. whereas farmers are systematically denied any new budget heading, even when a crisis occurs, and it is absolutely out of the question to consider increasing the administrative costs of the CAP, including costs of controls;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Recital B b (new) Bb. whereas the 2013 reform has resulted in significant changes in the data required from farmers to accompany applications and justify claims, with new requirements which risk bringing about a higher error rate in the initial learning and adaptation phase;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Recital B b (new) Bb. whereas controls cause a delay in the payment of aid and, if a beneficiary has requested an advance from the bank, the latter asks for it to be reimbursed;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Recital C Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas the current system
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas the
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas the current system has
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas at the same time the number of farmers is constantly declining, while the number of staff administering agriculture and the CAP is constantly rising;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas it is important that operators are not burdened with a disproportionate amount of inspections;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas farmers respecting the common rules of CAP and EU environment policy provide public goods such as landscapes, farmland biodiversity and climate stability, which are of intrinsic value to society and the environment;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Recital C b (new) Cb. whereas controls on environmental performance are a means to guarantee the continuation of the public goods provided by agriculture, recognizing their value by linking them to payments, reflecting the ‘public money for public goods’ principle;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Recital C c (new) Cc. whereas cross-compliance and greening measures provide a sound baseline for sustainability of EU agriculture;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Recital C d (new) Cd. whereas controls on effective implementation of these rules allow to minimise the costs externalised to other areas of public spending due to environmental damage or dangers to public health;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the burden of controls is in proportion to the complexity of the CAP; calls, therefore, for complexity to be reduced in order to cut error rates, as well as reduc
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the burden of controls is in proportion to the complexity of the CAP; calls, therefore, for the complexity and number of controls to be reduced in order to cut error rates, restrict the bureaucracy and reduce the cost to the taxpayer and at the same time ensure that the budget is correctly spent;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the burden of controls is often viewed as being in proportion to the complexity of the CAP; calls, therefore, for complexity to be reduced in order to cut error rates, reduce the cost to the taxpayer and at the same time ensure that the budget is correctly spent and in this regard calls for a new examination of the cost of controls compared to how much additional of funding could be safeguarded by such controls;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas reforms of the common agricultural policy
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the burden of controls is in proportion, inter alia, to the complexity of the CAP; calls, therefore, for complexity to be reduced in order to cut error rates, reduce the cost to the taxpayer and at the same time ensure that the budget is correctly spent; recalls nonetheless that the complexity of the CAP is due to the diversity of farming in Europe, moreover that the aim of reducing the error rate must not be pursued to the detriment of the attainment of the objectives of the CAP, and that simplification must not result in a dismantling of the instruments that have been adopted;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the burden of controls is in proportion to the complexity of the CAP; calls, therefore, for
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the burden of controls is in proportion, inter alia, to the complexity of the CAP; calls, therefore, for
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the burden of controls is in proportion to the complexity of the CAP; calls, therefore, for complexity to be reduced in order to cut error rates, reduce the cost to the taxpayer, improve the efficiency of delivery of CAP payments and at the same time ensure that the budget is correctly spent;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Calls, in order to assess the effectiveness of this simplification, for the full cost of controls, management and distribution of the CAP (all costs to all countries in the European Union and the Member States) to be assessed and the findings published;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Calls, when use is made of the findings from checks and in the possible imposition of penalties, for a distinction to be drawn between unintentional omissions and cases of fraud, as omissions do not as a rule cause any financial damage to the taxpayer;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP with a view to reducing the error rate and expects strong measures from the better regulation programme in this respect;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP with a view to reducing the error rate and for instruments to be established which will make it possible to distinguish between error and fraud;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP with a view to reducing the error rate whilst ensuring that farmers are still able to deliver the vital food production which is at the heart of the policy and believes that continuing to tackle complexity and streamlining the operation of the CAP is one of the keys to attracting new entrants to agriculture and retaining them and their skills to ensure a thriving EU agricultural sector in the future;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas more complex rules lead to more errors on the ground;
Amendment 40 #
2. Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP that can be implemented and interpreted clearly, with a view to reducing the error rate;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls for a
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP with a view to reducing the error rate; welcomes the Commission’s decision to extend the deadline for direct payment requests by one month and considers it a step towards reducing the CAP error rate;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls on the Commission to submit in due course a detailed plan to reduce by 25% the costs of red tape in the CAP within the five following years;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls for a ceiling on the budget for control, so that the new CAP provisions do not cause any additional expenditure to be incurred;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls for clear guidance to be given to operators and for sanctions to be applied in a proportionate manner with a tolerance level for minor and inadvertent mistakes;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. In order to ensure smooth project implementation, payments shall not be interrupted when minor and/or clerical errors are identified;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Believes that development and administration of performance-based controls should, in no way, become a source of increased uncertainty to the EU’s security of food supply;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Urges that clearer guidance must be given to both national authorities and farmers in order to reduce the error rate;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls for, with regard to small farms divided into numerous plots, a much simpler system for processing applications;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas the objectives of the CAP have to be fulfilled, while the mutual understanding and trust between all EU institutions, national and regional bodies have to be ensured for the effective implementation of the CAP;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Calls for controls to be organised in such a way that the audit is carried out within a time frame that does not lead to late payments;
Amendment 51 #
3. Supports
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Supports Commissioner Hogan’s initiative of simplifying the CAP, as this would benefit farmers, paying agencies, EU institutions and taxpayers; also urges that amendments be made to the basic legislative act; calls on the Commission to come forward with concrete proposals regarding simplification of CAP;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Supports Commissioner Hogan’s initiative of simplifying the CAP, as this
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Supports the Commission
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Supports Commissioner Hogan’s initiative of simplifying the secondary legislation and guidelines of the CAP, as this would benefit farmers, paying agencies, EU institutions and taxpayers; a
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Supports Commissioner Hogan’s initiative of simplifying the CAP, as this would benefit farmers, paying agencies, EU institutions and taxpayers; also urges that amendments be made to the basic legislative act, particularly in areas requiring special additional measures in the absence of supporting evidence, in connection with the level of assistance decided in each case and shortcomings regarding the evaluation of specific (SMART) objectives or the reassessment of the single payment scheme (SPS) affecting the general principles of decoupling and simplification;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Supports Commissioner Hogan’s initiative of simplifying the implementation of the CAP, as this would benefit farmers, paying agencies, EU institutions and taxpayers;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls on Commissioner Hogan to supply figures concerning, on the one hand, the estimated cost of this simplification and, on the other hand, the benefits which it will confer;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Recital A b (new) Ab. whereas a more effective and efficient CAP reform requires simplification and less bureaucracy in order to meet CAP’s objectives;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls for the costs of CAP red tape and controls never to be reduced by eliminating aid to small beneficiaries;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls on the Commission to respond to requests for it to extend the eligibility of expenditure for the 2007-2013 RDPs by six months and thus make it easier to use up the remaining funds without excessive time pressure, as there is a higher risk that errors and irregularities will arise when project administration is rushed;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Calls for a simplified auditing method for small farms, which eliminates red tape;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates an single
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates a
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates an single annual audit so that farmers are not subjected to controls by both the Commission and the European Court of Auditors in the same year
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates
Amendment 69 #
4. Advocates a
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the cost of controls is currently estimated at an annual EUR 4 billion at Member State level, and are probably still rising, particularly with the introduction of ‘greening’;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Advocates
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Believes that levels of control should be proportionate to the size of agricultural holdings, whilst safeguarding the use of EU funds;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Favours an integrated approach to controls, whereby
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Favours an integrated approach to controls, whereby all the controls required on a given farm are carried out at the same time, so that the number of testing visits is kept lower
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Favours an integrated approach to controls, whereby all the controls required on a given farm are carried out at the same time, so that the number of testing visits is kept lower and the concomitant cost for administrations and agriculture reduced; stresses the need for an electronic register recording controls and administrative penalties and the electronic recording of procedures to verify and confirm the effectiveness of official controls;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Favours an integrated approach to controls, whereby all the controls required on a given farm are carried out at the same time, so that the number of testing visits is kept lower and the concomitant cost for
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Favours an integrated approach to controls, whereby all the controls required on a given farm are carried out at the same time, so that the number of
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates have been extremely low over a given period; calls at the same time, however, for controls to be stepped up in Member States
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates have been extremely low over a given period; calls at the same time, however, for controls to be stepped up in Member States where the error rate is high or increasing . Instead of ‘naming and shaming’ calls the Commission and the Member States to provide support to beneficiaries in order to rectify errors;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the cost of controls is currently estimated at EUR 4 billion at Member State level, and are probably still rising, particularly with the introduction of ‘greening’ in pillar one and the increased complexity and proliferation of schemes in pillar two which is needlessly adding to the error rate by farmers as alluded to in a report done by the commission ‘gold plating in the EAFRD’;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates have been extremely low over a given period, relying to a greater extent on national internal inspection committees; calls at the same time, however, for controls to be stepped up in Member States where the error rate is high or increasing;
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates have been extremely low over a given period; calls
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates have been extremely low over a given period; calls at the same time, however, for controls to be stepped up in Member States where the error rate is high or increasing, whilst taking into account a margin of tolerance in the first year of implementing complex new measures under the last CAP reform; in addition, urges that where minor or inadvertent errors have occurred the penalties should be proportionate;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates have been extremely low over a given period;
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates have been extremely low over a given period; recalls that
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Supports the approach of reducing controls in Member States where error rates
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Stresses, however, that, according to Special Report No 18/2013 of the Court of Auditors, the work of the independent certification bodies designated by the Member States does not provide sufficient safeguards either regarding the adequacy of on-the-spot checks or regarding the reliability of the statistical reports of the Member States, which are unreliable because of ineffective monitoring mechanisms, the incorrect implementation of the Commission guidelines and mistakes made by the paying agencies; recommends, therefore, a more rigorous management of administrative and on-the-spot checks and calls on the Member States to provide the Commission with reliable information on the results of the checks carried out, in order to enable it to better estimate the impact of the irregularities in payments made;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Calls on EU officials, with a view to improving the effectiveness of the management of payments, to pay extra attention and to monitor more closely the paying agencies in their respective Member States in order to remedy the weaknesses identified, in particular with regard to the paying agencies which, in recent years, have consistently achieved results that are below expectations; calls for, in extreme cases, paying agencies which consistently achieve results below expectations to have their accreditation withdrawn; in view of the unreasonable delays in the delivery of direct payments and EU co-financing to farmers, and given the administrative and bureaucratic sluggishness of some of the national government departments responsible for such matters, calls on the Commission to promote the establishment of regional paying agencies that are recognised under Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013, in order to address the structural weaknesses of EU agriculture;
Amendment 89 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 c (new) 6c. Calls on the Commission to amend the guidelines for certification bodies in order to verify more closely the compilation of statistical reports;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the cost of controls
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 d (new) 6d. Calls on the Commission to review the current reporting system that paying agencies are subjected to in order to ensure that it receives at the most appropriate time complete and relevant information that it could use in the discharge procedure;
Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 e (new) 6e. Calls on the Commission to take the necessary measures to arrive at a statistically valid estimate of irregularities in payments, based on the work of the paying agencies and the expanded role of the certification bodies;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for it to be made possible to reduce the sample size for on-the-spot checks to 3% for all direct payments, as otherwise
Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for
Amendment 95 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Believes that 100% coverage of rural areas with fast broadband, with significant awareness raising and training in its use, will be an essential tool to enable all farmers to benefit from the newest application and claims systems associated with the CAP;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Favours the increased use of e- Government technology by the Member States in order to forestall errors in the application process, which will require access to broadband internet for beneficiaries.
Amendment 97 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Favours the increased use of e- Government technology by the Member States in order to forestall errors in the application process; encourages the Commission to create a programme to help educate older farmers.
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Favours the increased use of e- Government technology by the Member States in order to forestall errors in the application process; underlines the robust investments in broadband networks in rural areas and calls the Member States to endeavour for digitalisation of the application process.
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
source: 557.044
2015/06/11
CONT
44 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 4 a (new) - having regard to the 2013 annual activity report of the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP with a view to reducing the error rate and for instruments to be established which will make it possible to distinguish between error and fraud ;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Supports the Commission's initiative of simplifying the CAP with immediate examination of measures which can be implemented quickly , as this would benefit farmers, paying agencies, EU institutions and taxpayers; also urges that at the mid-term review, proposals for amendments to the basic legislative act be brought forward for consideration for the reform for the next funding period;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. F
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Fears that the most likely error rate determined by the Court of Auditors will increase in the common agricultural policy direct payments area during the period 2014-2020, owing in particular to the fact that the next framework for cross- compliance
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Fears that the most likely error rate determined by the Court of Auditors will increase in the common agricultural policy direct payments area during the period 2014-2020, owing in particular to the fact that the next framework for cross- compliance does not yet correspond to a reduction in the level of needless complexity of this policy for the managing authorities or for the beneficiaries;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls for an integrated approach to CAP controls so that costs can be cut;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Welcomes the fact that the Commission is giving priority to a new CAP simplification exercise and that it is proposing, firstly, to simplify a number of delegated and implementing acts;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Favours strongly an improvement of the quality rather than an increase in the number of controls in agriculture by the Member States, the Commission and the Court of Auditors;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas the objectives of the CAP have to be fulfilled, while the mutual understanding and trust between all EU institutions, national and regional bodies have to be ensured for the effective implementation of the CAP;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Favours an improvement of the quality
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Favours an improvement of the quality and constituency of inspections rather than an increase in the number of controls in agriculture by
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Also emphasises that controls are a guarantee that money from the EU budget earmarked for the funding of CAP instruments is being properly spent;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls that the objective of the single audit scheme is to put in place a single chain of audits from the final beneficiaries to the European Union institutions, and that auditing procedures, including error-rate calculation procedures, should be harmonised;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Points out that in the EU legislator’s view the payment scheme should be integrated with the control system, i.e. that the results of controls should be taken into account in determining the criteria for the calculation of payment entitlements;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Encourages the Commission and the Member States, as a guideline, to find ways to optimise and combine CAP - related inspections in a way that chosen beneficiaries would, whenever possible, be subjected to only one round of controls annually;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Calls on the Commission to amend the guidelines for certification bodies in order to verify more closely the compilation of statistical reports;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Calls for the introduction of an ongoing monitoring and control system in those Member States affected by the shortcomings of paying agencies and the provision of support to remedy the problems identified;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Expects the Commission to
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Expects the Commission to urgently make full use of the process of simplification of the CAP, especially with regard to the burdensome and complex regulations governing cross-compliance and greening which ultimately impacts upon farmers across Europe;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas farmers are incentivised to provide services such as landscapes, farmland biodiversity and climate stability
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Expects the Commission to make full use of the process of simplification of the CAP, especially with regard to the burdensome and complex regulations governing cross-compliance and greening, by reducing or grouping together issues relating to regulation;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Reminds the Commission that the risk of unintentional errors owing to complex regulation is in the end borne by the beneficiary; calls for a reasonable, proportional and effective policy on sanctions to support this approach, such as avoiding double sanctioning for the same error under both the payment scheme and cross-compliance; stresses that any sanctions should be imposed on those responsible and not the entire population;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Emphasises that criteria should be developed in order to define which Member States are identified as best/worst performers
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Insists that the definition of performance in respect of controls should be based on a checklist and primarily entail the quality of the Member States' checks and administrative systems, i.e. the efficiency, consistency and reliability of the managing and certifying authorities;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17.
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Calls the best performing Member States to share their experience with the worst performing Member States;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Encourages the Member States to develop further e-government initiatives aiming at reducing the error rate by preventing mistakes in the application phase as a mid- to long-term objective; believes that full data transparency and accessibility are essential to prevent and combat any abuse; calls in this connection on the Commission to make mandatory the publication of documentation provided by all beneficiaries;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas the cost of controls and providing advice to stakeholders and farmers may be currently estimated at EUR 4 billion at Member State level; emphasizes the need to minimize the cost of controls and their bureaucracy burden;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Calls on Member States to ensure that the governmental/regional bodies dealing with the new CAP implementation communicate and work together effectively to the benefit of farmers implementing the policy on the ground.
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Considers the potential benefits in the long term of developing and adopting industrial internet -based solutions in both farming and controls, especially as regards integrated solutions for beneficiaries and paying agencies, to be numerous; expects this to impact positively on the consistency, reliability and cost-efficiency of controls; urges the Commission to adopt and execute pilot projects in this field; reminds that this approach is dependent on Member State commitment aiming to deliver fast broadband connections to rural areas throughout the EU;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Stresses that the withholding of funds on a systematic basis is appropriate only in cases of fraud, corruption, terrorism and organised crime;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Invites the Commission to cooperate with all relevant stakeholders, including, but not limited to, the Court of Auditors, the Member States and the beneficiaries' organisations, in preparing a long term strategy that would seek to address non- policy -related ways to keep the burden of the beneficiaries and inspectors from increasing further following future CAP reforms and changes to the basic acts;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B b (new) Bb. whereas performance based controls may become a useful methodology, while stability and an enabling approach are needed on the part of administrative bodies in order to build trust with final beneficiaries; recalls however that a onesize- fits-all system cannot be imposed on the diverse types and scale of agricultural holdings in the EU;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C – introductory part C. whereas greening measures introduced by the last reform of the common agricultural policy aim to
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. Considerando che la DG Agri1 a ha ritenuto necessario imporre 51 riserve a livello di agenzie di pagamento; __________________ 1a2013 Annual Activity Report Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Shares the opinion expressed by the European Court of Auditors that ‘the arrangements for the common agricultural policy spending for the period 2014-2020 continue to be complex'1
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Believes a significant reduction of all CAP subsidies is necessary and possible;
source: 557.418
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2015-07-24Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2 |
|
| activities/3/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in plenary scheduled |
| activities/4 |
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
2015-07-16Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/committees |
|
| activities/1/type |
Old
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading |
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
2015-07-02Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/date |
Old
2015-07-13T00:00:00New
2015-07-14T00:00:00 |
2015-07-01Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/date |
Old
2015-07-14T00:00:00New
2015-07-13T00:00:00 |
2015-05-13Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/1/shadows |
|
| committees/1/shadows |
|
2015-04-02Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/date |
Old
2015-06-25T00:00:00New
2015-07-14T00:00:00 |
2015-03-31Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2/date |
Old
2015-06-08T00:00:00New
2015-09-07T00:00:00 |
2015-03-28Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2/date |
Old
2015-05-05T00:00:00New
2015-06-25T00:00:00 |
2015-03-27Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/date |
2015-03-23T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
| committees/0/date |
2015-03-23T00:00:00
|
| committees/0/rapporteur |
|
2015-03-26Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
2015-03-12Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
| activities/2 |
|
2015-01-20Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|