23 Amendments of Romana TOMC related to 2020/2260(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fact that the aim of the Farm to Fork Strategy is to establish a sustainable, healthy and resilient food system which benefits consumers in the EU and includes the production, transport, distribution, marketing and consumption of food;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that promoting healthy and sustainable food consumption calls for changes to diets, and production systems and internal trade, which should be supported by harmonised front-of-pack nutritional labelling framework in order to avoid market fragmentation and better enforcement of internal market rules; considers, however, that the 'Farm to Fork' Strategy should be based primarily on a scientific approach, and therefore calls on the European Commission to make a further impact assessment of the effects of the objectives set out in the Strategy;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that the 'Farm to Fork' Strategy is specific in relation to the objectives it seeks to achieve but lacks in relation to the thorough scientific data that should complement the objectives set;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Considers, in particular, that the ambitious targets set by the Strategy must not result in a reduction or shortage of food production in the European Union; stresses the importance of European self- sufficiency in the production of healthy and affordable food;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Stresses that many Member States have a long tradition in the meat industry; notes that the goal of moving towards a more plant-based diet with less red and processed meat must not negatively affect supply and consumer’s choice; considers that informed consumer choice is key for transition to a sustainable food system;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. CStresses that food industry has to be supported in order to increase the availability and affordability of healthy and sustainable food options; calls on the Commission also to step up its support for regional food systems and short supply chains, which act as a source of fresh, and sustainable and better quality products for consumers; takes the view that legislation on European public food procurement should be revised in order to fostersupport healthy and sustainable diets, including organic products, as well as local, high- quality food supply systems;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Urges the Commission to promote alternativesustainable production methods and circular business models, such as consumer-friendly cooperative schemes, in food processing and retail, including specifically for small and medium-sized enterprises;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. SupportsConsiders that the concept of the establishment of a governance framework and a code of conduct for food and retail businesses, in order to make them accountable and aware of the importance of sustainability and health needs to be further clarified by the European Commission so that food producers and food retail businesses can be aware of the importance of sustainability and health; calls on the Commission to clarify also if the codes of conduct will focus and to which extent on marketing campaigns undertaken by businesses on advertising food products;
Amendment 111 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Emphasizes that the primary purpose of food labelling is to provide clear and accurate information to consumers so that they can make informed purchasing decisions;
Amendment 114 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Notes consumers' views that the existing regulatory framework does not fully allow for clear and easily understandable information on the nutritional value and therefore welcomes the European Commission's intention to explore and propose new ways to improve food nutritional labelling;
Amendment 115 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Stresses that the ‘Farm to Fork’ Strategy, including mandatory front of pack nutrition labelling, provides for other labels that include animal welfare, sustainability and places of origin for certain products categories; considers that in no case should over-labelling confuse customers and therefore stresses the importance of customers education;
Amendment 116 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. Underlines that using different labels in different Member States might lead to market fragmentation and confuse consumers;
Amendment 128 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Regards it as essentialimportant, further, to keep consumers better informed by considering the introducingtion of mandatory origin labelling of foodcertain food products, which wcould be broadened to cover animal welfare, sustainability and pesticide residue levels;
Amendment 136 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the need for clearer rules on information on the origin of honey and in the case of honey originating from more than one EU Member State or third country, which, together with better consumer information, would contribute to an even better position for European beekeepers and honey producers;
Amendment 147 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 157 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Takes note of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 25 July 2018 in Case C-528/16;
Amendment 163 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to clarify the current legislation on launch a systematic campaign to explain to European consumers the use-by dates concept, and in particular the difference between the dates printed on product packaging: 'use- by dates,' and 'best before' in order to reduce food waste and increase consumption safety of food products;
Amendment 174 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Notes that a study carried out by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre did not identify a precise geographical pattern of dual quality of products; points out, however, that the above-mentioned research has shown the presence of dual quality of certain products in the European single market and therefore considers that the implementation of the ‘Farm to Fork’ Strategy must ensure that products which are not identical should be presented in a different way;
Amendment 181 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. In order to protect the competitiveness of European businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, and to protect the integrity of the single market, calls on the European Commission to ensure, through a proactive trade and customs policy, that food products imported into the single market comply with strict European food safety regulations;
Amendment 184 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Stresses that the ‘Farm to Fork’ Strategy must take a stronger regional approach, taking into account the specificities of production in those Member States where there is a risk of food production moving to third countries due to the their proximity; calls on the Commission, therefore, to monitor situation closely in this regard in order to avoid relocating of production to third countries;
Amendment 191 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Stresses that water is source of strategic importance for the European consumers, and that delivering a Green deal, which includes ‘Farm to Fork’ Strategy, is impossible without prudent water management; further emphasizes that water suppliers are key to achieving sustainability, but notes the insufficiently ambitious approach to water resources in the Strategy;
Amendment 193 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Stresses that a resistant, secure and reliable food supply chain is the core for ensuring sufficient amount of food products in the cases of pandemics, earthquakes, droughts, flood sand other crisis situations; welcomes, in particular, the European Commission's plan to develop a contingency plan for ensuring food supply and food security in times of crisis; further calls on the European Commission to examine the level of self- sufficiency of the Member States and the European Union as a whole in food production and to report to the European Parliament without delay;
Amendment 196 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 d (new)
Paragraph 11 d (new)
11d. Points out that over-packaging of food is an important issue that needs EU attention and action as it has consequences for consumers, affects shipping costs, and also has an adverse impact on the environment; reiterates its call on the European Commission to clarify the concept of unnecessary packaging and over-packaging.