25 Amendments of James NICHOLSON related to 2008/2100(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. Whereas what constitutes a rural area has yet to be defined with any precision as regards the characteristics of andbeen defined by the OECD, its definition incorporating characteristics such as low population density and lack of access to services, and whereas this definition is used by the Commission in order to identify and outline development objectives for suchthese areas,
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas rural areas differ greatly from Member State to Member State and whereas, while rural areas in many westernsome Member States have even experienced demographic and economic growth, the inhabitants of mostany such areas, particularly in the new Member States, are leaving for the towns or are seeking to retrain,
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the Gothenburg European Council expanded the Lisbon objectives to include the concepts of sustainability and cohesion and that rural development policy is geared towards sustainable farming, preserving non-agricultural rural activities, maximising the potential of local development, environmental protection and, balanced regional planning and the development of SMEs;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the ambitions set out at the Salzburg Conference in 2003, but regrets that the funding granted to the second pillar of the common agricultural policy (CAP) by the latest financial perspectives has been reduced so much, with a risk of fuelling competition between areas and between players inwill be totally ineffective and will increase the risk of division between the farmer and the rural communitydweller;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that it will be necessary to follow closely the implementation and the financial execution of the EAFRD, ERDF and the ESF region by region to check that rural areas doare not suffermarginalised when the funds are allocated;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the establishment of the EAFRD and the separation of non agriculturalrural development funding from the scope of cohesion policy and a broader regional development perspective may result in some objectives (e.g. environmental protection and education) being either duplicated or omitted altogether,
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Recognises that, while funding for non-agricultural activities in rural areas is valuable, the focus should remain on measures which assist the farming community.
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas, in view of budgetary constraints, there is a risk that funding available under the ERDF willmight be used to a large extent to boost economic competitiveness in larger urban centres or the most dynamic regions, while EAFRD financing will be focused on improving agricultural competitiveness, and that spending on support for non-agricultural activities and the development of SMEs in rural areas willcould fall in a “grey area” between both funds and not be covered by either,
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Points out that there is a need to develop a coherent, long-term rural development strategy in order to facilitate the most effective and efficient use of all available funding.
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Requests that the Commission creates a high-level working group by 2011 as part of the Health Check which would bring forward proposals to secure the future of the rural economy and all who live in rural areas after 2013.
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. Whereas rural development policy objectives need not be contrary to the Lisbon goals provided this development is based on the application of the relative competitiveness mechanism (better cost- effectiveness), in particular in local food processing and in relation to the development of Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and of infrastructure and services, such as tourism, education and environmental protection,
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas the natural relationship between and complementarity of agricultural policy and rural development policy should be recognised
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes the view that the criteria traditionally used to distinguish rural areas from urban areas (lower population density, different employment structure, lower level of income and worse access to public goods and services) failmay not always be sufficient to provide a complete picture of the situation; considers, therefore, that from the point of view of territorial cohesion, per-capita income, not lower population density, should be the decisive characteristic and that other criteria could also be considered;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. BelievRecognises that rural development policy haplays a huge influencly important role oin territorial cohesion and that due consideration shoulargeting and addressing specific problems in rural areas and be gilievens to whether it is justifiable to separate rural development measures from cohesion and regional development policyhat the establishment of the EARDF and the second pillar of the CAP represents an attempt to simplify financing procedures and ensure that funds are focused on these areas;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recalls that, with the establishment of the EAFRD in 2005, EU rural development policy has been reformed to have a flexible, strategic, thematic and integrated approach to respond to the diversity of situations and the scale of the challenges facing the EU´s rural areas.
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Considers that this approach of separating rural development from cohesion policy with the creation of EAFRD needs to be monitored very closely in order to evaluate its true impact on the development of rural areas; notes that the new system was put in place in 2007 and that it is, therefore, too early for any conclusions to be reached with regard to the future of this Community policy;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Notes with interest that Axis 3 and Axis 4 (LEADER) of the second pillar of CAP (rural development policy), which represent 15% of total EAFRD expenditure, concern non-agricultural activities that mainly focus on the diversification of rural economies; believes that, given the nature of the interventions financed under these Axes, which resemble some actions financed by the Structural Funds, there is a risk of policy overlap;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that including rural development policy within cohesion and regional development policy is only possible on the condition that rural developmentshould receives adequate funding, that this funding is used in line with the priorities set out for rural areas, and that rural development measures do not drain resources intended for direct payments to farmerfunds raised through modulation should always be distributed back to active farming communities;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Draws attention to the role played by small and medium-sized enterprises in rural development and the contribution they make to convergence at regional and local levels; calls on the Commission, the Member States and regional and local authorities to foster entrepreneurship in rural areas, in particular by removing administrative and legal barriers, legal and planning barriers and providing adequate IT infrastructure
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Takes the view that, prior to rural funding reform, the Commission should conduct a detailed assessment of the CAP's impact on regional developmentall sectoral policies having an impact on rural areas, and notably CAP and regional policy, in the context of territorial cohesion and that a set of best practices should be drawn up for rural development policy as a whole;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission and Member States to apply the open method of coordination to rural development policy at Union leveldhere to the strategic guidelines which have already been established for rural development;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Recognises the potential of the rural community to make a positive contribution to the environment through their engagement in environmentally friendly activities and the development of alternative energy sources such as biofuels, especially considering the four new challenges outlined in the rural development policy of the Health Check, such as biodiversity and renewable energies;