7 Amendments of Angelo CIOCCA related to 2017/2128(INI)
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the factNotes that an implementation report for Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 is being undertaken with the aim of ensuring a high level of protection of both human and animal health as well as the environment, while safeguarding; calls for the competitiveness of the EU’s agriculture sector to be safeguarded by providing access to a broad range of active substances and Plant Protection Products (PPP) for all farmers and producers, irrespective of the Members States they are operating in;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the importance of a science-based approach in authorising any active substance, in line with the Member States' and the EU’s risk analysis principles and the precautionary principle as established in the General Food Law (Regulation (EC) No 178/2002);
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses its concern aboutHighlights the existence of systematic delays in the authorisation processes and thean increasing use of derogations as laid down in Article 53 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, while underlining the necessity for Member States to comply with the legal deadlines to ensure predictability for applicants and facilitate the market introduction of innovative PPPs that are in line with more stringent requirements;
Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that the zonal evaluation of PPP applications, which allows applicants to propose one zonal Rapporteur Member State (zRMS) to carry out the assessment, should lead to the concerned Member States (cMS) taking a decision withviolates the subsidiarity principle and increases the lack of transparency surrounding the maximum time limit of 120 days after the zRMS has issued the registration reportdecisions taken by Member States' health agencies;
Amendment 104 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need to encourage workdata sharing between Member States by fostering the availability and use of harmonised methodology and models to conduct evaluations, while reducing the existence of additional national requirementswhere feasible;
Amendment 118 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Regards the application of the mutual recognition procedure as an important tool to increase work sharing and ensure compliance with deadlines, as it allows applicants to apply for authorisation in another Member State which makes the same use of the product in question for the same agricultural practices, based on the assessment carried out for the authorisation in the original Member Statconflicting with the subsidiarity principle;
Amendment 137 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the contribution that the authorisation of low-risk PPPs makes to a sustainable EU farming sector, and draws attention to the importance of contributing to a better functioning agricultural ecosystem and a sustainable farming sector, while pointing out that the lack of availability of PPPs or the lack of research and development in new PPPs could jeopardise the diversification of agriculture and cause harmful organisms to become resistant to PPPs.