9 Amendments of Michèle RIVASI related to 2020/2140(DEC)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is satisfied with the work carried out by the five decentralised agencies which are under its remit, which carry out technical, scientific or managerial tasks that help the Union institutions elaborate and implement policies in the area of environment, climate, public health and food safety, as well as with the way in which those agencies' budgets are implemented; stresses that given the scale of current and upcoming challenges, sufficient funding must be guaranteed for the agencies and the Commission DGs working in the areas of environment, climate, public health and food safety and that further cuts or a failure to increase the budgets will have knock-on effects for the quality of life of Union citizens;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Calls on the Commission urgently to start working on an effective methodology, where relevant, and in accordance with sectoral legislation, for monitoring climate spending and its performance in view of achieving an overall target of at least 30 % of the total amount of the 2021-2027 Union budget and Next Generation EU (NGEU) expenditures supporting climate objectives, taking into consideration the effects of the phasing out of NGEU funding and differentiating between climate mitigation and adaptation, where feasible and including relevant measures for insufficient progress; expects this work to take into account the highest standards already applied for such tracking, amongst others, the harmonised multilateral development bank methodology on identifying climate action, and to include safeguards against overestimation, in line with sound performance budgeting and to be developed in close cooperation with Parliament;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11 b. Recalls that expenditure contributing to halting and reversing the decline of biodiversity should be calculated on the basis of an effective, transparent and comprehensive methodology set out by the Commission, in cooperation with Parliament and the Council; calls on the Commission to provide Parliament with an annual report setting out in detail the contribution of each budget item to the biodiversity mainstreaming target of providing 7,5 % of annual spending under the 2021-2027 MFF to biodiversity objectives from 2024 and 10 % of annual spending under the MFF to biodiversity objectives from 2026, in order to facilitate its monitoring;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Welcomes the commitment made in 2019 by the Commission to take measures, including legislative measures, to significantly reduce the use and risk of chemical pesticides;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Notes the conclusions of the Court of Auditors in its Special Report No 5/20201a, according to which the Commission has taken increased action to reduce the risk related to plant protection products (PPP); regrets, however, that according to the same report, the Commission has failed to propose clear practical criteria to apply general principles of integrated pest management or to improve or develop harmonised risk indicators taking into account the use of PPP, which is important given that Union rules stipulate that biological, physical and other non-chemical methods must be preferred to chemical ones; _________________ 1aSpecial Report No 5/2020 'Sustainable use of plant protection products: limited progress in measuring and reducing risks' (OJ C 46, 11.2.2020, p. 6).
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Stresses that, according to the Court of Auditors' Special Report No 5/2020, while the integrated pest management principles are mandatory for farmers, they are not included as a condition for Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) payments and that the Commission should incorporate these measurable integrated pest management criteria into ‘conditionality’ in the post- 2020 CAP and ensure that they are enforced;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17 d (new)
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17 d. Observes that, according to the Court of Auditors' Special Report No 5/2020, data collected and made available on plant protection products (PPP) sales and uses were not sufficient to allow effective monitoring and that the Commission should improve statistics on PPP when revising the legislation to make them more accessible, useful and comparable;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17 e (new)
Paragraph 17 e (new)
17 e. Notes that Special Report No 15/20201a of the Court of Auditors on protection of wild pollinators in the EU recommends to the Commission to improve the protection of wild pollinators in the pesticides risk assessment process and to better integrate actions to protect wild pollinators in EU policy instruments addressing biodiversity conservation and agriculture; regrets that, according to the same report, the Commission did not succeed in including in the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020 any specific actions to address the decline of wild pollinators, to address safeguards and to update guidance for the development of test methods focusing on wild pollinators, and for the definition of specific protection goals for wild pollinators; calls for follow-up actions and measures in 2021 in the new EU biodiversity strategy to 2030, and specific measures, appropriate governance and monitoring mechanisms for these actions, including assigning clear responsibilities between Commission departments involved in policy areas relevant for wild pollinators, especially in the areas of the environment, pesticides, agriculture, cohesion, and research and innovation; _________________ 1aSpecial Report 15/2020 'Protection of wild pollinators in the EU — Commission initiatives have not borne fruit' (OJ C 227, 10.7.2020, p. 8.)
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 17 f (new)
Paragraph 17 f (new)
17 f. Notes that, on 2 December 2020, the Ombudsman has made three suggestions to the European Commission1a to improve approval process for substances in pesticides: to approve active substances only for uses that have been confirmed as safe by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA); to publish an explanation of its approvals of active substances in language easily understandable to the public; and to use the confirmatory data procedure with particular restraint; calls on the Commission to follow-up the Ombudsman’s suggestions satisfactorily; _________________ 1aDecision in joint cases 1570/2018/JF- JN and 1973/2018/JF-JN on how the European Commission approves substances used in plant protection products (pesticides)