BETA

14 Amendments of Albert DESS related to 2009/2155(INI)

Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the objective should be to reduce the administrative costs of the CAP, both direct and indirect,
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Considers that the Member States should have the option, in rural development plans, to introduce a flat-rate land parcels scheme, particularly for small farms, on condition that compliance with the obligations entered into is guaranteed;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that the principle of cross- compliance should be maintained as one of the key concepts of CAP direct payments, but that strong simplification is recommended, without reducing their effectiveness;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need for the CAP to be simpler, more transparent and more equitable; in this respect a single flat rate payment would be preferable;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls for the possibility of autonomous error correction which would allow recipients of payments who unintentionally broke the rules to inform the authorities without becoming liable to fines as a result;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that the fundamental objective of checks is to encourage farmers to comply more fully with the law and that yearly CC controls for statutory management requirements (SMR) shcould be reduced, or even abolished, if there have only been a few infringements in recent years;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Emphasises that the requirement for follow-up checks in relation to small infringements (triviality limit) should be abolishedreduced to random samples;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Heading 3
Single dDirect payments
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that in the first year of application the farmer needs to state the codes for the land used; that if the application is for the whole area, no further information regarding area is required; if the application is for part of the area, the farmer needs to specify the area; and for the second and subsequent years the farmer need only specify changes in the use of his land;deleted
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that the future single payment should be based on a simplified flat rate basic support system based on uniform payments in order to make the CAP simpler, fairer and more transparent;deleted
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Believes that only one holding number should be issued per producer;deleted
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Stresses that the number of registers should be limited, with batch registration combined with holding number being sufficient, and that there is no benefit in adding an individual register for each holding;deleted
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Considers that the use of handwritten ear tags should be allowed for sheep in the same way as for bovines;deleted
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Considers that for sheep and goats, as for pigs, herd identification is sufficient;
2010/02/26
Committee: AGRI