BETA


2015/2277(INI) New alliance for food security and nutrition

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead DEVE HEUBUCH Maria (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE) ZÁBORSKÁ Anna (icon: PPE PPE), GUERRERO SALOM Enrique (icon: S&D S&D), ZAHRADIL Jan (icon: ECR ECR), GOERENS Charles (icon: ALDE ALDE), CORRAO Ignazio (icon: EFDD EFDD)
Committee Opinion AGRI SCOTT CATO Molly (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE) Paul BRANNEN (icon: S&D S&D), Beata GOSIEWSKA (icon: ECR ECR), Giulia MOI (icon: EFDD EFDD), Sofia RIBEIRO (icon: PPE PPE), Miguel VIEGAS (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54

Events

2016/11/18
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2016/06/07
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2016/06/07
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 577 votes to 24 with 69 abstentions a resolution on the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition.

Parliament recalled that the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition in Africa (NAFSN) aims to improve food security and nutrition by helping 50 million people in sub-Saharan Africa out of poverty by 2020. The participating countries have negotiated Country Cooperation Frameworks (CCFs) setting out commitments to facilitate private investment in the agriculture sector in Africa.

Agricultural investment in Africa and fulfilment of the sustainable development goals (SDGs): Parliament observed that agricultural investment policies mostly focus on large-scale land acquisitions and on export-oriented agriculture that is usually unrelated to local economies . Recalling that large public-private partnerships (PPPs) risk creating dominant positions for large agricultural companies in African agriculture that crowd out local businesses, Parliament also stressed that mega-PPPs could contribute to poverty reduction and food security Agricultural investment policies should be linked to and should support the development of the local economy, including smallholders and family farming . Members regretted the fact that rural communities, farm workers, small farmers, fishermen and indigenous peoples, have not been taken into account in the decision-making process. Local civil society needs to be closely involved in NAFSN monitoring and evaluation.

Parliament recalled that NAFSN has made a commitment to promoting inclusive, agriculture-based growth that supports small-scale farming and helps reduce poverty, hunger and under-nutrition.

It called on governments and donors to suspend or review all policies, projects and consultancy arrangements that directly encourage and facilitate land grabbing . It urged the EU Member States to strive to transform NAFSN into a genuine tool for sustainable development and into an instrument of support for family farming and local economies in sub-Saharan Africa, recalling that family farmers and smallholders produce about 80 % of the world’s food and provide over 60 % of employment in the region.

For their part, the EU and its Member States, which, taken together, are the biggest development aid donor in the world, were called upon to:

ensure that EU-based investors respect, the rights of local communities and the needs of small farms, in following a policy based on social responsibility; support local African enterprises and stakeholders as primary actors; implement the recent WTO decision to eliminate agricultural export subsidies, which are distorting local markets and destroying livelihoods in developing countries; eliminate tariff barriers that act as a disincentive to African countries adding value to raw produce locally.

Participating countries were called upon to: (i) ensure a fair contribution to the tax base of participating countries; (ii) ensure that their respective governments retain the right to protect their agricultural and food markets through appropriate tariff and tax regimes; (iii) adopt policies that promote responsible trade.

Governance, ownership and accountability : Parliament stressed that NAFSN must step up good governance as regards natural resources, in particular by guaranteeing that people have access to their own resources and by protecting their rights in the context of contracts on deals relating to natural resources. In this context, it stressed the need for strong institutional and legal frameworks to ensure a fair sharing of risks and benefits. Parliament called for the EU to work with the UN towards the adoption by all countries, on a binding basis, of the Milan Charter and the commitments it contains.

Parliament noted that multinationals operating under NAFSN favour large-scale contract farming, which risks marginalising small-scale producers. It was therefore necessary to strengthen farmers' organisations so as to improve the bargaining position of farmers.

Access to land and security of tenure : Parliament warned that a pure focus on land titling often leads to insecurity for small-scale food producers and indigenous people, especially women. It underlined the need to have small-scale food producers in leading positions, allowing their own independent organisations to support them. It highlighted the fact that 1.2 billion people still live either without permanent access to land or else occupying property for which they have no formal claim. Members called on participating countries to enact binding national measures against land-grabbing, corruption based on land transfer and the use of land for speculative investment. They wanted to ensure legal certainty over land rights, including informal, indigenous and customary tenure rights.

Parliament called on the parties to NAFSN to put in place independent grievance mechanisms for those communities affected by land dispossession as a result of large-scale investment projects. It was also important to ensure that the principle of free, prior and informed consent is observed for all communities affected by land grabbing and that consultations are held to ensure the equal participation of all local community groups, in particular those that are most vulnerable and marginalised.

Food security, nutrition and sustainable family farming : recalling that food security is based on healthy living soils and productive agro-ecosystems, Parliament called for means of replacing over-reliance on imported food with resilient domestic food production , prioritising local crops that meet nutritional requirements. It stressed the need for strategies to minimise food waste throughout the food chain, to protect agricultural biodiversity, and invest in agro-ecological farming practices in developing countries.

Parliament also called on African governments to:

avoid making food production systems over-dependent on fossil fuels; develop short food supply chains locally and regionally, as short supply chains are most effective in combating hunger and rural poverty; enable African farmers to access affordable, low-input technological solutions; encourage a wide variety of nutritious, local and seasonal food crops promote producer organisations such as cooperatives that strengthen small farmers’ bargaining positions.

Furthermore, Parliament stressed the right to water and recognised the role of access to water for farming needs.

It cautioned against over-reliance on producing biofuel feed stocks, which can have a detrimental impact on food security.

Regulatory reform in the seed sector : Parliament recalled that farmers’ right to produce, exchange and sell seeds freely underpins 90 % of agricultural livelihoods in Africa. However, a major challenge is the over-dependence of smallholders on seeds and plant protection products manufactured by foreign companies . Members deplored the corporate call to harmonise seed laws on the basis of the principles of distinctness, uniformity and stability (DUS), in the African context via regional institutions, which will hamper the development and growth of farmer-based seed systems at national and regional levels, since such systems usually do not breed or save seeds that fulfil the DUS criteria. They also recalled that while commercial seed varieties may improve yields in the short term, traditional farmers' varieties , landraces and associated knowledge are best suited for adaptation to specific agro-ecological environments.

Parliament urged the G8 member states not to support GMO crops in Africa.

At the same time, it called on participating countries to give farmers the option of avoiding input dependency, and to support farmers’ seed systems through maintaining local publically-owned seed banks.

Funding agricultural investment in Africa : Parliament called on donors to:

align Official Development Assistance (ODA) with the development effectiveness principles; support education, training and technical counselling for farmers; promote the forming of farmers’ organisations of a professional and economic nature.

It recalled that the purpose of development aid is to reduce, and ultimately to eradicate, poverty , and believed that ODA should focus on direct support to small-scale farming .

Parliament believed that the funding provided by G8 member states to NAFSN contravenes the objective of supporting domestic local companies which cannot compete with multinationals that already benefit from a dominant market position and are often granted business, tariff and tax privileges. It stressed that G7 member states should guarantee African countries the right to protect their agricultural sectors through tariff and tax regimes that favour family and smallholder farming.

Lastly, Parliament called on the EU to address all the deficiencies of NAFSN, and to ensure that actions taken under it are consistent with development policy goals.

Documents
2016/06/07
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2016/06/06
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2016/05/03
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Details

The Committee on Development adopted the own-initiative report by Maria HEUBUCH (Greens/EFA, ADE) on the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition.

Members recalled that the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition in Africa (NAFSN) aims to improve food security and nutrition by helping 50 million people in sub-Saharan Africa out of poverty by 2020. The participating countries have negotiated Country Cooperation Frameworks (CCFs) setting out commitments to facilitate private investment in the agriculture sector in Africa.

Agricultural investment in Africa and fulfilment of the sustainable development goals (SDGs): Members observed that agricultural investment policies mostly focus on large-scale land acquisitions and on export-oriented agriculture that is usually unrelated to local economies . They stressed that under those circumstances the ability of mega-PPPs to contribute to poverty reduction and food security must be improved. Agricultural investment policies should be linked to and should support the development of the local economy , including smallholders and family farming. Members regret the fact that rural communities, farm workers, small farmers, fishermen and indigenous peoples, have not been taken into account in the decision-making process. Local civil society needs to be closely involved in NAFSN monitoring and evaluation.

Members recalled that NAFSN has made a commitment to promoting inclusive, agriculture-based growth that supports small-scale farming and helps reduce poverty, hunger and under-nutrition.

They called on governments and donors to suspend or review all policies, projects and consultancy arrangements that directly encourage and facilitate land grabbing. They urged the EU Member States to strive to transform NAFSN into a genuine tool for sustainable development and into an instrument of support for family farming and local economies in sub-Saharan Africa, recalling that family farmers and smallholders produce about 80 % of the world’s food and provide over 60 % of employment in the region.

For their part, the EU and its Member States, which, taken together, are the biggest development aid donor in the world, were called upon to:

ensure that EU-based investors respect, the rights of local communities and the needs of small farms, in following a policy based on social responsibility; support local African enterprises and stakeholders as primary actors; implement the recent WTO decision to eliminate agricultural export subsidies, which are distorting local markets and destroying livelihoods in developing countries; eliminate tariff barriers that act as a disincentive to African countries adding value to raw produce locally.

Participating countries were called upon to: (i) ensure a fair contribution to the tax base of participating countries; (ii) ensure that their respective governments retain the right to protect their agricultural and food markets through appropriate tariff and tax regimes; (iii) adopt policies that promote responsible trade.

Governance, ownership and accountability : Members stressed that NAFSN must step up good governance as regards natural resources, in particular by guaranteeing that people have access to their own resources and by protecting their rights in the context of contracts on deals relating to natural resources. In this context, they stressed the need for strong institutional and legal frameworks to ensure a fair sharing of risks and benefits.

The committee noted that multinationals operating under NAFSN favour large-scale contract farming, which risks marginalising small-scale producers. It was therefore necessary to strengthen farmers' organisations so as to improve the bargaining position of farmers.

Access to land and security of tenure : Members warned that a pure focus on land titling often leads to insecurity for small-scale food producers and indigenous people, especially women. They underlined the need to have small-scale food producers in leading positions, allowing their own independent organisations to support them. They highlighted the fact that 1.2 billion people still live either without permanent access to land or else occupying property for which they have no formal claim. Members called on participating countries to enact binding national measures against land-grabbing, corruption based on land transfer and the use of land for speculative investment. They wanted to ensure legal certainty over land rights, including informal, indigenous and customary tenure rights.

Members called on the parties to NAFSN to put in place independent grievance mechanisms for those communities affected by land dispossession as a result of large-scale investment projects.

Food security, nutrition and sustainable family farming : recalling that food security is based on healthy living soils and productive agro-ecosystems, Members called for means of replacing over-reliance on imported food with resilient domestic food production, prioritising local crops that meet nutritional requirements. They stressed the need for strategies to minimise food waste throughout the food chain, to protect agricultural biodiversity, and invest in agro-ecological farming practices in developing countries.

Members also called on African governments to:

avoid making food production systems over-dependent on fossil fuels; develop short food supply chains locally and regionally, as short supply chains are most effective in combating hunger and rural poverty; enable African farmers to access affordable, low-input technological solutions; encourage a wide variety of nutritious, local and seasonal food crops promote producer organisations such as cooperatives that strengthen small farmers’ bargaining positions.

Furthermore, the committee stressed the right to water and recognised the role of access to water for farming needs.

It cautioned against over-reliance on producing biofuel feed stocks, which can have a detrimental impact on food security.

Regulatory reform in the seed sector : Members recalled that farmers’ right to produce, exchange and sell seeds freely underpins 90 % of agricultural livelihoods in Africa. However, a major challenge is the over-dependence of smallholders on seeds and plant protection products manufactured by foreign companies . They deplored the corporate call to harmonise seed laws on the basis of the principles of distinctness, uniformity and stability (DUS), in the African context via regional institutions, which will hamper the development and growth of farmer-based seed systems at national and regional levels, since such systems usually do not breed or save seeds that fulfil the DUS criteria. They also recalled that while commercial seed varieties may improve yields in the short term, traditional farmers' varieties , landraces and associated knowledge are best suited for adaptation to specific agro-ecological environments.

Members urged the G8 member states not to support GMO crops in Africa .

At the same time, Members called on participating countries to give farmers the option of avoiding input dependency, and to support farmers’ seed systems through maintaining local publically-owned seed banks.

Funding agricultural investment in Africa : Members called on donors to:

align Official Development Assistance (ODA) with the development effectiveness principles; support education, training and technical counselling for farmers; promote the forming of farmers’ organisations of a professional and economic nature.

They recalled that the purpose of development aid is to reduce, and ultimately to eradicate, poverty, and believed that ODA should focus on direct support to small-scale farming .

Members stressed that G7 member states should guarantee African countries the right to protect their agricultural sectors through tariff and tax regimes that favour family and smallholder farming, and called on the EU to address all the deficiencies of NAFSN, and to ensure that actions taken under it are consistent with development policy goals.

Documents
2016/04/20
   EP - Vote in committee
2016/04/06
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/02/24
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2016/01/28
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2015/11/09
   EP - SCOTT CATO Molly (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in AGRI
2015/11/06
   EP - HEUBUCH Maria (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in DEVE
2015/10/29
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament

Documents

Activities

Votes

A8-0169/2016 - Maria Heubuch - § 2/1 #

2016/06/07 Outcome: +: 419, -: 254, 0: 1
IT FR GB BE ES DE SE PT AT EL FI MT DK LT CZ EE RO CY NL IE LU BG HR SK SI HU LV PL
Total
65
72
52
20
45
91
18
20
18
18
11
6
13
10
21
6
27
5
24
9
6
17
11
11
8
17
6
47
icon: S&D S&D
173

Finland S&D

1

Malta S&D

3

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

3

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
66

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Romania ALDE

2

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
45

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
48

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

3
icon: EFDD EFDD
34

France EFDD

1

Germany EFDD

1

Sweden EFDD

2

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Czechia EFDD

For (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1
icon: ENF ENF
38

United Kingdom ENF

For (1)

1

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Germany ENF

For (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Netherlands ENF

4

Poland ENF

For (1)

Against (1)

2
icon: NI NI
14

France NI

Against (1)

3

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

2

Hungary NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Poland NI

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
60

Italy ECR

2

Greece ECR

For (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Czechia ECR

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

2

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: PPE PPE
196

Finland PPE

Against (1)

2

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

2

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

A8-0169/2016 - Maria Heubuch - § 25/1 #

2016/06/07 Outcome: +: 418, -: 250, 0: 3
IT FR GB ES BE DE SE EL PT AT FI MT RO DK LT EE CZ CY NL LU BG IE HR SK HU SI LV PL
Total
65
72
51
45
20
91
18
18
20
18
11
6
27
13
10
6
21
5
24
6
17
7
11
11
17
8
6
47
icon: S&D S&D
171

Finland S&D

1

Malta S&D

3

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
66

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Romania ALDE

2

Estonia ALDE

3

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
46

Sweden GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
46

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
34

France EFDD

1

Germany EFDD

1

Sweden EFDD

2

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Czechia EFDD

For (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1
icon: ENF ENF
38

United Kingdom ENF

For (1)

1

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Germany ENF

For (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Netherlands ENF

4

Poland ENF

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2
icon: NI NI
14

France NI

Against (1)

3

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Hungary NI

2

Poland NI

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
60

Italy ECR

2

Greece ECR

For (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

2

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1
icon: PPE PPE
196

Belgium PPE

For (1)

4

Finland PPE

Against (1)

2

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

2

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

A8-0169/2016 - Maria Heubuch - § 34 tiret 2 #

2016/06/07 Outcome: +: 601, -: 55, 0: 14
DE FR IT ES RO NL PT BE SE AT EL HU CZ BG GB SK IE FI HR PL LT SI DK LU EE MT LV CY
Total
89
72
65
45
27
25
20
20
18
18
18
17
21
17
51
10
9
11
11
47
10
8
13
6
6
6
5
5
icon: PPE PPE
195

Finland PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
169

Netherlands S&D

3

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Finland S&D

1

Croatia S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

3

Latvia S&D

1

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
66

Romania ALDE

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
49

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

3

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
46

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: ENF ENF
38

Germany ENF

For (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

United Kingdom ENF

Abstain (1)

1

Poland ENF

For (1)

Against (1)

2
icon: EFDD EFDD
34

Germany EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

France EFDD

1

Sweden EFDD

2

Czechia EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
14

Germany NI

2

France NI

Against (1)

3

Hungary NI

2

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1

Poland NI

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
59

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

2

Greece ECR

For (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Slovakia ECR

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

A8-0169/2016 - Maria Heubuch - Résolution #

2016/06/07 Outcome: +: 577, 0: 69, -: 24
DE FR IT ES RO GB PL PT BE AT BG HU CZ SE NL EL FI HR DK LT IE SI SK LU EE MT CY LV
Total
90
71
65
45
27
50
47
20
20
17
17
17
21
18
25
18
11
11
13
10
9
8
11
6
6
6
5
6
icon: PPE PPE
195

Greece PPE

Against (1)

3

Finland PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
172

Netherlands S&D

3

Finland S&D

1

Croatia S&D

2

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

3

Cyprus S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
66

Romania ALDE

2

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
49

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

3

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
45

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: ENF ENF
37

Germany ENF

Abstain (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1

Poland ENF

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Austria ENF

3

Netherlands ENF

4
icon: EFDD EFDD
33

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

France EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
59

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Bulgaria ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Greece ECR

For (1)

1

Finland ECR

Abstain (1)

2

Croatia ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Latvia ECR

Abstain (1)

1
icon: NI NI
14

Germany NI

2

France NI

Abstain (1)

3

United Kingdom NI

Abstain (1)

1

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

Hungary NI

2
AmendmentsDossier
267 2015/2277(INI)
2016/02/05 AGRI 152 amendments...
source: 576.821
2016/02/24 DEVE 115 amendments...
source: 577.081

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0/shadows/4
name
KOULOGLOU Stelios
group
European United Left - Nordic Green Left
abbr
GUE/NGL
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE576.686
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/DEVE-PR-576686_EN.html
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE577.081
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/DEVE-AM-577081_EN.html
docs/2/docs/0/url