14 Amendments of George LYON related to 2009/2156(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission, delivered on 17 December 2009,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the proposed eight biophysical criteria might not prove to be sufficient and the proposed threshold value of 66% of the area are not anticipated to bemight not be found suitable in all cases for determining the actual handicap, as this partly depends on the crop grown in a manner respectful of the great diversity of EU rural areas; whereas the crop grown, the level of investment, the combination of soil types and climate are, among others, also factors relevant for the purpose of determining the actual handicap in a given area,
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the importance of an appropriate compensatory payment for less-favoured areas in order toas an indispensable tool to secure the provision of high-value public goods such as maintaining the management of the land and the cultivated landscape in these regions; emphasises that less-favoured areas, in particular, are often of high value in terms of the cultivated landscape, biodiversity preservation and environmental benefits, as well as rural employment and the vitality of rural communities;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that support for areas with natural handicaps is aimed in particular at ensuring that 'extensive farming activity' is maintained, and consequently at countering the risk of abandonment of the land and migrationdepopulation, which would be likely to have negative consequences for the environment, biodiversity and land risk management (prevention of floods, fires);
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that, in contrast to agri- environmental measures, compensatory payments for less-favoured areas must not be subject to additional specific conditions regarding the method of land management which would go beyond cross-compliance requirements; recalls that the LFA scheme must in principle offer compensation to farmers who are also land managers operating with significant natural handicaps which the market does not compensate for as such;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the eight biophysical criteria proposed by the Commission may be suitableight not be sufficient for delimiting areas with natural handicaps; moreover, is of the opinion that additional criteria which address major constraints faced by farmers situated in these areas should also be considered;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. In particular, the inclusion of a geographical criterion referred to as 'isolation' would address the specific natural handicap stemming from distance from the market, remoteness and limited access to services;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. To acknowledge the limitations of wet unworkable soils, the inclusion of a 'field capacity days' criterion would allow the interaction between soil types and climate to be taken into account (for instance to adequately reflect maritime climate difficulties);
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Asks the Commission, therefore, to pursue its research efforts and analysis with a view to including potential additional criteria in the new LFA scheme in order to further adapt its proposals to practical difficulties farmers are facing and build a robust set of criteria which will remain suitable in the long term;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses, in particular, that in order to address the interactions between many influencing factors in a practical manner, the cumulative use of the adopted criteria might prove necessary; it could enable those disadvantaged areas which accumulate two or more small to medium- scale natural handicaps to be classified as LFAs even when individual criteria would not trigger that classification;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Emphasises that a final opinion on the basic territorial unit chosen, the criteria and threshold values proposed by the Commission can only be given when the detailed maps drawn up by the Member States are available; stresses that in the absence of such simulation results, the 66% proposed threshold as well as the thresholds defining the criteria themselves must be viewed with considerable caution and can only be objectively and appropriately adjusted once the national maps are made available; recalls that the national mapping exercise results should be made available to the European Parliament as soon as possible;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers a degree of fine-tuning of the criteria for support for areas with natural handicaps to be necessary in order to be able to respond appropriately to particular geographical situations and crops grown and to exclude areas in which natural handicaps have been offset by human intervenwhere natural handicaps have been offset by human intervention; however emphasises that when land quality has been improved, the burden of high investment costs and the ongoing associated maintenance costs such as drainage and irrigation must be taken into consideration; proposes that farm data (such as farm income and productivity of the land) be used inter alia for this purpose; emphasises, however, that the decision on the criteria to be used for fine-tuning must lie with the Member States;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Urges the Commission, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders, to develop a common framework for farm-level eligibility criteria; points out that Member States and regional authorities should be free to choose, on the basis of that framework, which criteria are best suited to fulfil their priorities and needs;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Taking into account the fact that the new criteria might exclude certain areas that are currently eligible, points out that an adequate phasing-out period should be defined, in order to allow a smooth transition for farmers to adapt to the new support regime;