13 Amendments of Stanisław OŻÓG related to 2017/2052(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the common agricultural policy (CAP) is fundamental for food security, the preservation of rural populations and sustainable developmena comprehensive and fully-fledged EU policy that is one of the cornerstones of the European Union; this policy achieves more and more public objectives and is responding to evolving challenges through reforms; is fundamental for food security, the preservation of rural populations and sustainable development; is responsible for the conditions of competition in the single market, thus determining the predictability and stability of the conditions under which agricultural activities are carried out; regrets that the CAP, which once accounted for 75 % of the EU budget is now only 38 % as laid down in the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), while food requirements have increased, as has the need to develop environmentally friendly farming practices and to mitigate the effects of climate change; urges the Commission to increase, or at least to maintain at its current level, the CAP budget post-2020;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that the CAP budget should reflect the high European added value of this policy, consisting of both a single market for agri-food products and social, environmental and cohesion benefits at EU level; considers that a reduction in the CAP budget as a share of EU-27 GDP would reduce the effectiveness of the CAP in meeting Community objectives; feels that the budget level of this policy should guarantee its full Community-status in financial terms; points out that the CAP is no longer merely a sectoral policy, and that the integration of further tasks and objectives into the CAP was carried out without increasing its budget, and while the EU was enlarged to include more Member States;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that the CAP and its budget form a common operating framework for the agricultural sector in the European Union, and that the absence of these elements of the European project would prevent the functioning of an efficient common market for agri-food products in the EU, as Member States would compete with each other concerning the level of support for agriculture, thereby distorting competition;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Draws attention to the Commission's high level of ambition in terms of further negotiations on trade negotiations and liberalisation of access to the European agricultural market for some of the world's most competitive agricultural producers; stresses, on the other hand, that European society has the expectation that agricultural production in the EU will be carried out in accordance with some of the highest norms and standards in terms of quality and food safety, animal welfare, environmental protection and climate protection; stresses, in this context, the important compensatory role of the CAP and the related financial support for maintaining the competitiveness of European agriculture;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Notes that many new challenges, as well as the EU's international commitments to implement the Paris climate change agreement (COP21) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, will not be met without commitment and the use of the potential of agriculture and rural areas; calls, therefore, for related needs to be taken into account in the discussions on the MFF beyond 2020 and the financial needs of the EU's agricultural policy;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to keep direct payments intact as they help to avoid distortions of competition between Member States, and to maintain them without any national co-financing; uUrges the Commission to continueclude, with positive results, the process of convergence ofequalising direct payments betweenin the Member States in the future MFF;
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasises that the future CAP should ensure a level playing field in the EU's single market and recognises that it is essential to achieve this objective tin order to equalise the level of direct payments among the Member States; achieving this objective will also contribute to the sustainable use of agricultural resources throughout the EU and to achieving the Treaty objectives of economic and social cohesion and compliance with the principle of equality between EU citizens;
Amendment 95 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Recalls that most rural areas are among the least-favoured regions of the EU, whose GDP per capita is significantly lower than the European average; feels, therefore, that rural development remains an important challenge for balanced territorial development and that these areas need support in terms of raising employment levels and living standards, as well as in terms of developing non- agricultural roles; stresses that the promotion of economic and social cohesion in the EU is still an ongoing task for the EU budget; considers, therefore, that EU budget funding for rural development under the CAP should be strengthened, while the criteria for distributing this support among the Member States should continue to take into account the differences in a rural population's wealth, size and area given over to agriculture;
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64 a (new)
Paragraph 64 a (new)
64a. Takes the view, therefore, that the current presentation of the headings does require some improvement, but is against any unjustified radical changes, and with that in mind calls for expenditure on the common agricultural policy to be maintained as a separate budget heading;
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
Paragraph 65
Amendment 360 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 a (new)
Paragraph 70 a (new)
70a. Draws attention to the need to ensure geographical balance in the use of EU research and innovation funding by introducing national envelopes or additional project selection criteria that ensure a fair distribution of support among Member States;
Amendment 444 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
Paragraph 78
78. Expects the global amount of direct payments to be kept intact under the next MFF, as they generate clear EU added value and strengthen the single market by avoiding distortions of competition between Member States; opposes any renationalisation and any national co- financing in that respect; points out, furthermore, that equalising the level of direct payments among the Member States is essential in order to ensure a level playing field in the EU’s single market; stresses the need to increase funding in line with responses to the various cyclical crises in sensitive sectors, to create new instruments that can mitigate price volatility and to increase funding for Programmes of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity (POSEI); concludes, therefore, that the CAP budget in the next MFF should be at least maintained at its current level for the EU-27;
Amendment 483 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
Paragraph 81
81. Stresses that cohesion policy post- 2020 should remain the main investment policy of the European Union covering all EU regions while concentrating the majority of the resources on the most vulnerable ones; believes that, beyond the goal of reducing the disparities between levels of development and enhancing convergence as enshrined in the Treaty, it should focus on the achievement of the broad EU political objectives and proposes, therefore, that under the next MFF, the three cohesion policy funds – the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Cohesion Fund – should concentrate mainly on providing support for innovation, digitalisation, reindustrialisation, SMEs, transport, climate change adaptation, employment and social inclusion; calls, moreover, for a reinforced territorial cooperation component and an urban dimension for the policy; at the same time, calls for greater use to be made of cohesion policy instruments and funding for sustainable development in rural areas in order to counteract development delays and depopulation in those areas;