22 Amendments of Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK related to 2017/2116(INI)
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas because of the outbreak of the BSE crisis a European ban was rightly imposed on the use of animal meal in feed (Regulation (EC) No 999/2001) but this has had the effect of sharply increasing imports of soya from Latin America;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the nitrogen needed to feed plants and manufacture vegetable proteins is today mainly, with the exception of leguminous crops, which fix nitrogen from the air, can be provided, up to a statutory limit, by animal manure, and above that limit must be provided by synthetic nitrogenous fertilisers, which are costly to produce and generate pollution of both water and air;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that the CAP has a decisive impact on farmers’ decisions to grow protein crops and should therefore be used to its full potential in the context of European environmental standards and European sustainability goals;
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that once it has been in force for a few years, useful lessons should be learnt from the recent ban on the use of pesticides in ecological focus areas, and also notes the unattractive conditions created for the cultivation of protein crops in Europe as a result of the introduction of the ban;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas the interest of farmers in nitrogen-fixing and protein-rich crops has increased significantly because in that way they can meet requirements under the greening policy, and whereas this interest will encourage plant breeders to resume or increase their activities related to these crops;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that legislation on animal sources of protein is out of date and should be optimised in accordance with the circular economy and Parliament’s resolution on an initiative to reduce food waste effectively1 a and that, in addition to promoting production of traditional protein crops, more scope should be allowed for alternative protein sources, such as insects and algae; _________________ 1a European Parliament resolution of 16 May 2017 on initiative on resource efficiency: reducing food waste, improving food safety (2016/2223(INI)), in particular par. 33, 34, 38, 39.
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recommends focusing on all protein resources and thus on, such as insects, animal meal and algae and also crops used both in human food and in farm animal feed;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points out that the EU’s earlier protein strategy, under the second CAP pillar, was not taken up by farmers, as protein crops were financially unattractive compared with other crops;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Points out that protein crops, as well as being a source of protein, also benefit soil and biodiversity;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers it necessary to look in particular at the potential of leguminous crops, whether grain or forage legumes, as this family of plants presents many agricultural, economic and environmental benefits (being the only one to fix nitrogen from the air); stresses that leguminous crops leave behind a good soil structure for the next crop thanks to their legacy of nitrogen, which can increase yields by between 10 and 20 %;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recommends supporting the cultivation of soya, in Europe by making it profitable and competitive, as new varieties of whichsoya are currently opening up fresh possibilities, but notes that this should not overshadow interest in other grain protein crops (lupins, faba beans, peas, chickpeas, etc.);
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Encourages promoting the production of high-quality, GMO-free proteins by improving their traceability and labelling and making the cultivation of protein crops financially more attractive;
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers it desirable to minimise harvest losses and increase nutritional value by improving harvesting and storage conditions (drying, wrapping, etc.) and by promoting efficient use of underused farmland so as to encourage plant protein production and research into synergies between biofuels, feed and increased European protein production;
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers it desirable to minimise harvest losses and residual streams and increase nutritional value by improving harvesting and storage conditions (drying, wrapping, etc.) and exploiting them better;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Takes the view that in order to enhance protein production it is necessary tocan be enhanced by rotateing crops (over a minimum of three years) and increaseing mixing of varieties and crops in the pulse (clover/rape, triticale/peas etc.) and forage (leguminous grasses, meslins, etc.) production sectors;
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls for research work to begin on: selection of new varieties and species; crop mixing; improvement of the yields, protein contentincreasing tolerance of plant diseases, protein content, ensiling of crops, the germination biology of weeds as a function of weed control, feed conversion and digestibility of animal feed (sprouted seeds, etc.); and biostimulants;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recommends greater use of precision agriculture in order to adjust plant nitrogen supplements and animal feed rations as accurately as possible so as to limit wastage and some types of pollution, and also recommends making more use of mechanical weed control systems;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Takes the view that this plan calls for the mobilisation and coordination of several EU policies: the CAP, climate policy, research policy, the neighbourhood policy and trade policy;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Considers it important for the CAP to support protein crop cultivation by means of the voluntary coupled payment (which, if not restricted to crops and regions in difficulty, would give scope for more action) and the greening payment, and by means of the second pillar, particularly through agro-environmental measures on organic farming, investment quality, advice, training and of course innovation via the EIPNotes that the voluntary coupled payment for protein crops is part of the European protein strategy; believes, however, that transferring financial support schemes to the second pillar is an option that should be considered;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Considers it important for the CAP to support protein crop cultivation by means of the voluntary coupled payment (which, if not restricted to crops and regions in difficulty, would give scope for more action) and the greening payment, and by means of the second pillar, particularly through agro-environmental measures on organic farming, investment quality, advice, training and of course innovation via the EIP;
Amendment 319 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Takes the view that it is necessary to secure our soya supplies by cooperating more closely with our neighbourhood, in particular with Ukraine, which has opted for Europe and which produces soya that could be brought into the EU via the Danube – breeding being among the areas to explore further – instead of importing supplies from overseas;
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Takes the view that it is necessary to secure our soya supplies by cooperating more closely with our neighbourhood, in particular with Ukraine, which has opted for Europe and which produces soya that could be brought into the EU via the Danube; observes that farmers in Ukraine are permitted to grow GMO soya;