3 Amendments of John Stuart AGNEW related to 2016/2148(INI)
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the more flexible structure of the EAFRD whas not fully taken advantage of by someactually created significant additional complexity for Members States and regions, which perceived a risk oflimits uptake by potential beneficiaries due to the increased complexity and punitive control requirements; notes that programmes designed and led by local partnerships to meet local needs, and a focus on results and rather than processes, produce a better return on investment and simpler administration;
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. UrgesRegrets that the Member States cannoto avoid gold-plathaving tor adding unnecessary guidelines and procedures which could interfere with efficientin the local application and implementation of the EAFRD; asks the Commission to continuend suggests that a bottom-up approach would produce more appropriate programmes; suggests that the Commission could achieve greater gains in simplifying the RDPs than it would in the simplification of the CAP and should, where feasible and necessary, to adapt the basic legislation to this effect; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that sufficient resources are dedicated to successful fulfilment of remaining ex-ante conditionalities;
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the Directorate- General for Agriculture and Rural Development has the necessary technical knowledge and overview of rural and agricultural issues and is therefore the natural manager of the RDPs, and urges the Commission to ensure that staffing levels are in place to ensure proper implementation and auditing of the CAP; however notes the principle of subsidiarity and that the existing RDP structure designed and managed by DG-AGRI is failing to meet the needs of rural businesses; notes also that such poorly designed schemes have contributed to voter antipathy towards the EU;