56 Amendments of Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO related to 2011/2051(INI)
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the European Union must still have sufficient instruments to be prepared for market and supply crises and market and price fluctuations in the agricultural sector in the future;, as well as the market management tools that act as a safety net in its normal operation,
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas effective measures should be taken to ensure a fair and equitable distribution of profits in the food chain, especially measures geared to promoting the concentration and commercial organisation of production that will help to improve farmers' bargaining power,
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
Pa. whereas, following the Commission communication, quality policy has now become an integral part of the future CAP, which means that developing and strengthening this policy, particularly in the case of geographical indications, will be decisive for the sustainable growth and competitiveness of European agriculture,
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution
Heading I (new) before paragraph 1
Heading I (new) before paragraph 1
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the communication from the Commission concerning a reform of agricultural policy; calls, however, for the principles set emphasises the need for a thoroughgoing reform of that common policy in order to take account below to be incorporated in the legislative proposalof the changed nature of the farming industry in the EU27 and the new international context of globalisation; calls for the continued implementation of a strong and sustainable CAP with a budget commensurate with the ambitious objectives to be pursued in an effort to meet the new challenges;
Amendment 415 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 464 #
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 theseIs strongly in favour of establishing a specific, simplified aid scheme for the very numerous small farmers in Europe, who help to stabilise rural development and employment; in view of the very considerable diversity of farm structures within the EU, calls for Member States to decide, in accordance with subsidiarity, what percentage of the direct payments to be incorporated in the new subsidy system should be made available to their small farmers; stresses, however, that thisto participate in defining these small farmers, adopting a common criterion: the predominant role of family labour; stresses that having the benefit of this scheme must not hamper the necessary structural change in order to modernise their farms;
Amendment 481 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 502 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers thait decoupling has essentially proved its worth, given the increased effect on income and greater autonomy in decision-making on the part of farmers and the associated simplification of the CAP, and calls for this also, in general, to apply to suckler cow and sheep premiums; recognises, however, that in certain sectors and regions such as mountain regions, where there are no alternatives to relatively labour-intensive livestock farming, there may be considerable economic and environmental drawbacks which cannot be reconciled with the aims of the Treaty; acknowledges,sirable, within the limits set by the Union’s WTO commitments, not to decouple all aid in support of certain types of production (suckler cow and sheep premiums, etc.) so as to enable Member States to cope with problems specific to their territory and enable the Union to preserve its rich heritage in therefore, that production- based premiums might be defensible within a narrowly defined framework for a limited period even after 2013ms of the diversity of types of production;
Amendment 504 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that decoupling has essentially proved its worth, given the increased effect on income and greater autonomy in decision-making on the part of farmers and the associated simplification of the CAP, and calls for this also, in general, to apply to; considers, however, that in some sectors certain coupled premiums, such as the suckler -cow and sheep premiums; recognisespremium, showever, that in certain sectors and regions such as mountain regions, where there are no alternativuld be maintained on a voluntary basis for the Member States; to relatively labour-intensive livestock farming, there may be considerable economic and environmental drawbacks which cannot be reconciled with the aims of the Treaty; acknowledges, therefore,akes the view, moreover, that, bearing in mind the high protein deficit in the Community, further consideration should be given to the decoupling of thate production- based premiums might be defensible within a narrowly defined framewtein crop premium and Community aid should be introduced for plant protein production through supporkt for a limited period even after 2013ll legumes, including protein crops;
Amendment 533 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls – without casting any doubt on the results of the 2008 Health Check of the CAP – for appropriations under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 primarily to be allocated for measures to promote territorial coherence and boost key sectors (e.g. the dairy and sheep sectors and suckler cows), for area-based environmental measures (e.g. organic farming) which to date have not been included in the second pillarfor regions, sectors or specific types of activity; considers that the budget for coupled measures under Article 68 could – subject to possible contrary results ofcommendations arising from an impact assessment – cover up to 10% of direct payments;
Amendment 558 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. ObservesIs conscious of the fact that, for historical reasons, farms in the European Union have a very diverse structure as regards size, employment arrangements and legal form; is aware that direct payments are moving away from a historical basis to area-based payments and that the provision of public goods is independent of farm size; rejects, therefore, measures which discriminate against particular types of farm, labour productivity and legal form; supports the principles of imposing ceilings and/or degressivity of direct aid in the light of the size of holding, except in the case of agricultural cooperatives or where employment is an important factor; stresses that in this way priority should be assigned to businesses which employ labour;
Amendment 575 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to submit by 31 December 2016 a report setting out comprehensively how livestock farming in Europe can be safeguarded in the long term with regard to multifunctionality and regional aspects (such as mountain areas, Nordic regions and extremely remote areas) and also dealing with the question of how far the aims of the CAP can be realised in a more efficient, targeted way by means of decoupled, indirect support, e.g. premiums for extensive grassland or pasture landvery practical proposals for helping the livestock farming sectors in the medium and long term to cope with the rising prices of raw materials used in animal feed; calls on the Commission, moreover, in view of the difficulties which certain types of livestock farm focusing on quality and sustainability encounter in gaining access to area-based premiums, to take into account their specific character and to propose a special support scheme to avoid excluding them from the new support system;
Amendment 599 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers that direct payments should be madereserved only tofor active farmers; realises that, under the system of decoupled direct payments, each farmer who uses farmland for production or who tends it in order to maintain GAEC should receive direct payments; calls on the Commission therefore to devise a definition of ‘active farmer’ which the Member States can administer without additional administrative effort, while it should be ensured that traditional farming activities (full-time and various degrees of paonsiders that ‘active farmer’ means any natural or legal person whose principal activity is the exercise of an agricultural activity and/or is linked to an agricultural activity (agro- tourism, forestry, etc.); considers it necessary to specify that the definition of an active farmer should exclude cases in which the administrative costs would previously have been higher than the amount of support- time) are classified as active farming; hat certain beneficiaries would have been able to receive;
Amendment 613 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Considers it important that the CAP, like all other EU policies, be involved in the 2020 Strategy, and that it seems logical under such circumstances that the redistribution of direct aid take account of factors such as employment, the environment and combating climate change;
Amendment 625 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading before paragraph 20
Subheading before paragraph 20
III. Resource protection and environmental policy component
Amendment 634 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that better resource protection is an element in sustainable farming, which should involve separate support for environmental measures going beyond the requirements of Cross Compliance (CC), which already entail many environmental measures, and being geared to multiannual applications, as a result of which greater environmental benefits can be attained;
Amendment 659 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that resource protection should be directly linked to the granting of targeted direct payments in order to attain these environmental objectives to the maximum without the need to introduce new, bureauthat provide incentives to maximise environmental benefits and sustainability, without however creatic environmental conditions into the first pillar; considers that a flat- rate income payment, as envisaged in a top-up model in the first pillar, must cover costs and income lossng insurmountable practical hurdles for farmers or additional red tape for administrative authorities;
Amendment 664 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Takes the view that the link between the basic payment and the green component must be founded on the existence of a menu of green measures in the first pillar that is sufficiently wide to cover all the Community's types of and approaches to farming;
Amendment 666 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 692 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Rejects the option of a uniform flat- rate direct payment for the whole of the EU and recommends inclusion of the proposals already put forward in the European Parliament's own-initiative report on the future of the CAP after 2013, which provided much of the inspiration for the Commission Communication; considers that this system of direct payments should be applicable to all hectares of farmland and could combine the following three objectives; - the provision of basic aid to ensure not just the socio-economic viability of the competitive and multifunctional model for European agriculture, but also high- quality and wide-scale food safety, the supply of basic public goods, and agricultural activity that provides employment in rural areas, with safety in the workplace criteria obviously governing this employment; - the payment of supplementary aid for enforcing simple, best-practice obligations to protect the environment (protection of soil, water, biodiversity, etc.) and combat global warming adapted to the climate and natural features of each region; some of these already exist through the GAEC, but are not harmonised among Member States, such as mandatory plant cover, environmental set-aside, compulsory rotation, crop diversity (including protein crops), rates of soil organic matter, tillage restrictions, or the presence of hedges, permanent pasture, grazing land and extensively managed crops of great environmental interest; - the provision of specific aid to compensate for natural handicaps in order to maintain agricultural activity in mountain regions, environmentally- sensitive regions, regions within the Natura 2000 network and the outermost regions; this aid would supplement and complement second-pillar aid granted to less-favoured areas;
Amendment 706 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 721 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 735 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 752 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 768 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that direct payments are no longer justified without cross compliance (CC) and therefore that the CC systemonditions and therefore that a cross compliance system that is less complicated in practice and at administrative level (controls) should apply to all recipients of direct payments;
Amendment 789 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls, in view of the greater concentration of direct payments on resource protection and environmental measures, for a substantial reduction of the scope of CC; calls on the Commission to make significant progress in simplifying and harmonising rules on monitoringonsiders that attaching conditions to direct aid was a necessary first step towards the CAP taking the environment, public health, and animal health and welfare into account; considers, however, that this mechanism has raised a whole range of problems relating to administrative issues and acceptance by farmers in their work; thinks that this system should be simplified and adapted to what farmers are actually able to do; considers, finally, that any future response to environmental challenges and combating climate change will require the gradual and voluntary adoption of new technical production methods, the practical arrangements for which will be included in the conditions governing the distribution of first-pillar direct aid;
Amendment 801 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Considers that CC should be restricted to monitoring for compliance with fundamental and recognised standards and standards closely related to farming, which lend themselves to systematic monitoringthe monitoring of CC should be linked more to fundamental evaluation criteria, based on the obligation to achieve results and closely related to farming; believes that farmers themselves should be more involved in this monitoring, given their observation skills and practical experience, and this would have the effect of setting an example and motivating less efficient farmers in particular;
Amendment 805 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls for an end to disproportionate burdens imposed on livestock farming by CC, and particularly for a critical review of certain hygiene and animal marking standardsCC to be applied in a way that is adapted to the livestock sector which is currently in a very fragile situation as it has already made considerable efforts in terms of investment to upgrade the standards of buildings, installations and equipment;
Amendment 821 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Considers that the general market orientatimarket policy is one of the CAP should be maintained and that the general structure of market management instruments should likewise be retained; instruments which, through price management, plays an important role in determining farm incomes; acknowledges, however, that by virtue of the specific nature of agricultural supply and demand, agricultural markets, which are inherently very unstable, can cause serious problems for producers, processors and consumers which may go so far as to call into question the ability of agriculture to achieve its primary, strategic objective, food security; considers, therefore, that it is important to be able to take action to counter excessive price volatility in the context of the CAP and on world markets;
Amendment 852 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Emphasises that the CAP should incorporate a certain number of flexible and effective market instruments which act as a safety net, fixed at appropriate levels and available in the event of serious market disruption; points out that some of these instruments exist already, but can be adapted, whilst others can be created as needed; considers that, in view of the widely differing conditions in the individual sectors, differentiated sectoral solutions are preferable to across-the- board approaches;
Amendment 855 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)
Paragraph 33 b (new)
33b. Takes the view that these instruments should include specific supply- management instruments which, if employed fairly and on a non- discriminatory basis, can provide effective market management and prevent crises relating to overproduction, at zero cost to the Union budget;
Amendment 858 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Considers that, in view of the anticipatedincrease in environmental and climate dangers and the increased risk of epidemics and considerable price fluctuations on agricultural markets, additional risk prevention is of vital importance, particularly at individual farm levelhealth problems, risk management measures must be introduced to complement the range of measures intended to combat excessive price fluctuations; given the multiannual nature of such instruments, endorses the Commission’s proposal to include them among the second-pillar measures;
Amendment 895 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
Amendment 915 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
Amendment 925 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 933 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39a. Calls on the Commission to take specific measures, within the framework of the future CAP, to help improve the balance between the various actors in the food chain, taking particular account of primary production; considers it necessary to provide a stimulus for producers to join cooperatives or other types of producer organisations of a relevant size that will enable them to improve their market position;
Amendment 939 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Considers that private-sector insurance schemes, such as multi-hazard insurance, must be developed in view of increasing risks; is aware of the fact that, without public contributions to the financing (from the EU and Member States), this would be difficultconsiders, likewise, that any instrument introduced at Community level will need to ensure the survival of risk management systems that have been successfully introduced in the Member States; supports the adoption of an EU- wide and WTO-compliant environment to ensure that no distortions of competition occur among Member States; rejects, however, the introduction of EU-wide insurance systems;
Amendment 951 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 970 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Calls on the Commission to examine the extent to which the role of producer groups or sectoral associations can be extended to all production sectors and incorporated into the risk preventionin managing markets and promoting quality can be extended to all production sectors; calls for measures of this kind to take particular account of products covered by quality-label schemes;
Amendment 987 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Takes the view, therefore, that the Commission should devise common rules on support from Member States for risk management systems, possibly by creating common rules in the common market organisation, in order to keep to a minimum any distortion of competition and trade; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to notify all measures to introduce risk management and to submit an appropriate impact assessrules governing the common market organisation; considers that these public rules must give producers more negotiating power vis-à- vis processors, increase market transparency (as regards production and sales volumes, stocks, etc.) and bring about certain changes in competition policy, which should be accepted, given that these professional market management arrangements with the legislative proposalll reduce budget expenditure;
Amendment 1007 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
Amendment 1058 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading before paragraph 48
Subheading before paragraph 48
VI. Rural development
Amendment 1084 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Takes the view that rural development policy must be complementary to, and consistent with, first pillar support, in order to promote strong and sustainable diversified European agriculture across the EU; considers that this rural development policy must contribute to structural developments and innovation in agriculture throughout the EU, in order to respond to the challenges in the fields of food security, the environment, climate change and employment;
Amendment 1102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 b (new)
Paragraph 48 b (new)
Amendment 1109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Advocates therefore introducing targeted measures, to be decidedmutually agreed upon by the Member States inand the second pillar, to attaCommission and forming priority objectives of the EU (2020 Strategy); observes that these measures should be applied in addition to the basic programmes for greening of direct payments in the first pillar and that a reduced national cofinancing rate of 25% should applyart of a predefined EU strategy, in the second pillar, to attain priority objectives of the EU (2020 Strategy);
Amendment 1121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)
Paragraph 49 a (new)
49a. Emphasises that rural development policy must enable all the potentials of rural areas to be harnessed, by means of quality agricultural production focusing on direct sales, product promotion, supplying of local markets, diversification of biomass outlets (energy, green chemistry, bio-based materials, etc.), and able to create very place-specific jobs and multiple-service supply (ecotourism, educational farms, agri-tourism, etc.); considers also that this rural policy must serve to increase competitiveness, particularly in the convergence regions, by means of investment in the fields of the production, processing and marketing of agricultural products; believes, lastly, that this rural development policy must contribute to the management of natural resources (watercourses, soil, etc.) and help in the management and restoration of ecosystems, with this simultaneously providing a response to climate change;
Amendment 1132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 b (new)
Paragraph 49 b (new)
49b. Insists that the measures under axis 1 of the rural development policy must better address the issues connected with the establishment of young farmers following the retirement of older farmers, with this concerning measures in connection with the establishing and modernisation of agricultural holdings; this approach should also consist of facilitating access to the farming profession for young people who are not from a farming background, and include the concept of gradual establishment, necessitating a review of aid eligibility conditions; believes, lastly, that implementation of this establishment support system should be mandatory in all the Member States;
Amendment 1133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 c (new)
Paragraph 49 c (new)
49c. Proposes that agri-environmental measures should include arrangements for a 5 to 7 year ‘conversion’ agreement enabling farmers who themselves decide to move towards more sustainable production models and to innovate, to receive financial support to cover their taking on the financial risk resulting from the agronomic difficulties that could often arise in the years immediately following their change of farming practices; this aim of this incentive mechanism would be to help farmers better comply with the conditions for the granting of level two under the first pillar direct payments system;
Amendment 1137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 d (new)
Paragraph 49 d (new)
49d. Suggests that support for consultancy, orchestration and training be incorporated into Axis 1 of the rural development policy to enable the dissemination of knowledge on innovative changes in farming practices towards more sustainable production systems, and to help innovative farmers pass on their experience;
Amendment 1143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Advocates in this connection that the compensatory allowance for disadvantaged areas be retained in the second pillar; considers that it should be ascertained what cofinancing ralls on the Commission to establish objective criteria for the definition of intermediate apprears to be appropriate; calls on the Commission to reta(currently under review) without those criteria leading the existing criteria for demarcation of disadvantagedo a new demarcation that could see the abrupt exclusion of currently eligible areas;
Amendment 1173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Stresses at the same time, however, that rural structures differ widely in the Member States and therefore require different measures; calls therefore for flexibility to allow the Member States to adopt voluntary measures, the cofinancing rate for which should be based on the rates current at the time; points out that the cofinancing rate should continue to take account of the specific needs and circumstances of convergence regions in the post-2013 period;
Amendment 1178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 a (new)
Paragraph 51 a (new)
51a. Takes the view that the Member States should be able to rely on a national rural development framework that sets the priorities within their territories, without prejudice to the necessary flexibility as regards its application in line with regional and local specificities;
Amendment 1181 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
Amendment 1203 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
Amendment 1252 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57