59 Amendments of Michel DANTIN related to 2011/2051(INI)
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas a sustainable, productive and competitive European agriculture makes a significantvital contribution to the EU 2020 Strategy andmeeting the objectives set by the Treaties for the CAP and the objectives of the EU 2020 Strategy; whereas it can also help to meeting new political challenges such as security of supply of food, and energy, including for the poorest members of society, and industrial raw materials, climate change, the environment and biodiversity, health and demographic change in the EU and whereas in this context the situation brought about by the Lisbon Treaty must be taken into account,
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas, on the one hand, only 6% of European farmers are aged under 35, and, on the other, 4.5 million farmers will retire in the next 10 years; whereas generational renewal should therefore be seen as one of the priority challenges for the future CAP,
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas Europe’s history has left it with a dense population spread across the whole of its territory; whereas this legacy represents an opportunity for Europe, in particular in terms of tourism, but also creates a need to maintain good environmental, economic and social conditions throughout Europe; whereas the agricultural sector is by far the best placed to take steps to achieve these objectives in rural areas,
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the agricultural sector has a crucial role to play in the fight against climate change, in particular by reducing its own greenhouse gas emissions and by developing carbon storage in the form of the production of biomass from, for example, agri-materials,
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the European Union must still have sufficient instruments to be prepared for market and supply crises and market and price fluctuations in the agricultural sector in the future; whereas steps should be taken to ensure that these instruments are not only up to date and effective, but also flexible, so that they can be implemented quickly if necessary,
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas although direct payments have made a vital contribution to meeting the objectives of the CAP, the arrangements for effecting them have shown themselves to be too rigid and abstract; whereas, against a background of increasing volatility, the European Union has no choice but to introduce more flexible arrangements to govern direct payments so that public spending can be brought more closely into line with economic realities,
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the incorporation of general objectives into the CAP, particularly relating to consumer protection, environmental protection, climate protection, animal welfare and regional cohesion, is in principle to be welcomed but this must not jeopardise the competitiveness of European farmers and the continued viability of farming throughout Europe,
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas according to the latest Eurobarometer poll, 90% of EU citizens surveyed consider agriculture and rural areas to be important for Europe's future, 83% of EU citizens surveyed are in favour of financial support to farmers and, on average, they believe that agricultural policy should continue to be decided upon at European level,
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas there should not be any differentiation in the treatment of farmers according to size of holding and legal form for the purpose of direct payments reserved for active farmers, although the possibility of introducing a basic allowanceincome support specifically for small farmers should not be excluded,
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas effective measures should be taken to ensure a fair and equitable distribution of profits in the food chain, for example by means of the more widespread use of the contractual system, the development of inter-branch organisations, greater transparency in the way sectors operate and a strengthening of producer organisations and their negotiating powers; whereas, in order to achieve these objectives, European competition rules should be adjusted where necessary,
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas, because the world economy is becoming integrated more rapidly, trade systems are as rule being liberalised more by mult the liberalisation of trade systems is the result of political choices made at EU level and of the EU’s determination to open up trade by means of multilateral and bilateral negotiations (the Doha Round), and whereas in relation to imports from third countries environmental, animal welfare, plant protection and consumer protection standards need to be raised to EU level and minimum employment standards should be complied with,
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas rural development is an important instrument of the CAP and whereas the new programmes should be geared even more strongly to the priority objectives of rural development and of farmers (employment, investment, competitiveness, the agricultural environment, water, climate change, innovationsupport for less favoured areas, water, climate change, biodiversity, innovation, farm start-ups and education),
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
Pa. whereas the high food standards achieved in the European Union and EU citizens’ legitimate expectations, in particular as regards the environment and animal welfare, are public goods which generate additional costs for farmers which are not offset, or offset only in part, by market prices,
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Insists that the costs of supporting a strong CAP are more than justified if compared to the costs to society of not supporting European agriculture;
Amendment 437 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. In the case of direct farm payments, advocates moving away from historical and individual reference values and calls for a transition to a uniform area-based regional or national premium for decoupled payments in the next financing period; recognises, however, that the situations in the individual Member States are very disparate, requiring special measures per regiona certain flexibility to be granted to Member States in this context;
Amendment 459 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for an adequate basic allowance for small farmers, which Member States can optionally determine in those Member States where these farms help to stabilise rural developmentbasic income support specific to small farmers, particularly in Member States where these farmers particularly help to stabilise rural areas; calls on the Commission to establish flexible and objective criteria for the status of small farmers to be defined by each Member State; calls for these Member States to decide, in accordance with subsidiarity but within a range decided at Community level, what percentage of the direct payments to be incorporated in the new subsidy system should be made available to their smallse farmers; stresses, however, that this must not hamper the necessary structural change;
Amendment 494 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Recognises that young farmers encounter start-up problems, such as high investment costs or difficulty in gaining access to land and credit; stresses the need to devise targeted measures for young farmers, including under the first pillar;
Amendment 510 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that decoupling has essentially proved its worth, given the increased effeproved that it has a certain worth, particularly for crop product ion income and, as it permits greater autonomy in decision-making on the part of farmers and the associated simplification of the CAP, and calls for this also, in general, to apply to suckler cow and sheep premiums; recognises, however, that in certain sectors and regions such as mountain, island or very remote regions, where there are no alternatives to relatively labour-intensive livestock farming, there may be considerable economic and, environmental and social drawbacks which cannot be reconciled with the aims of the Treaty; acknowledges, therefore, that production-based premiums might be defensible within a narrowly defined framework for a limited period even after 2013emiums linked to the desirability of maintaining types of production which are considered to be strategic may be retained after 2013, particularly suckler cow and sheep premiums;
Amendment 528 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls – without casting any doubt on the results of the 2008 Health Check of the CAP – for appropriations under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 primarily to be allocated fortherefore for part of payments to remain wholly or partially coupled in order to finance measures to promote territorial coherencesion, promote support and boost key sectors (e.g. the dairy and sheep sectors and suckler cows), for area-based environmental measures (e.g. organic farming) which to date have not been included in the, including production of bio-based materials, certain specond pillar; considers that the budget for Article 68 could – subject to contrary results of an impact assessment – cover up to 10% of direct paymentsific types of production or certain types of farming;
Amendment 557 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Observes that, for historical reasons, farms in the European Union have a very diverse structure as regards size, employment arrangements and legal form; is aware that direct payments are moving away from a historical basis to area-based payments and that the provision of public goods is independent of farm size; rejects, therefore, measures which discriminate against particular types ofwelcomes, however, the Commission’s proposal to impose a ceiling on direct aid, taking account, in particular, of the intensity of family or waged employment, thus reinforcing the social legitimacy of the CAP; considers that these measures to impose ceilings should be provided with a Community framework but implemented by virtue of the subsidiarity principle; calls for the use of other instruments appropriate as a backup to the operations of large farmers;
Amendment 568 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Is aware, however, of the potential evasion strategies to which this measure could give rise on the part of certain farmers; calls on the Commission, therefore, also to study the feasibility of a system of degressivity of direct payments in relation to the size of holdings;
Amendment 577 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to provide support for grassland under the first pillar and to submit by 31 December 2016 a report setting out comprehensively how livestock farming in Europe can be safeguarded in the long term with regard to multifunctionality and regional aspects (such as mountain areas, Nordic regions and extremely remote areas) and also dealing with the question of how far the aims of the CAP can be realised in a moren efficient, targeted way by means of decoupled, indirect support, e.g. premiums for extensive grassland or pasture land;
Amendment 591 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Is aware that direct payments are moving away from a historical basis to area-based payments and that the provision of public goods is independent of farm size; calls therefore for fair rewards for greening measures, particularly if their assignment to the first pillar is confirmed;
Amendment 607 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers that direct payments should be made only to active farmers, i.e. to professionals whose activities entail the mastery and pursuit of one or more of the steps required in a plant or animal biological cycle, and those whose activities are performed further to the act of production, who use an agricultural holding for this purpose or whose production emanates from a minimum of 50% of materials from an agricultural holding; realises that, under the system of decoupled direct payments, each farmer who uses farmland for production or who tends it in order to maintain GAEC should receive direct payments; calls on the Commission therefore to devise a definition of ‘active farmer’ which the Member States can administer without additional administrative effort, while it should be ensured that traditional farming activities (full-time and various degrees of part-time) are classified as active farming;
Amendment 612 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls on the European Commission to study the feasibility of flexibility mechanisms for granting direct payments, which could come in three forms: at Community budget level, the carryover of CAP funds not used in a given year and their transfer to a new financial tool (crisis management rapid-response reserve fund); at sectoral level, the transfer of some direct aid between the plant and animal sectors at times of major crisis (mutual solidarity mechanism); at farmer level, the placing in reserve of some of the direct aid not used in a given year (precautionary savings, multiannual investment plan, etc);
Amendment 632 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that better resource protection is an central element in sustainable farming, which should involve separate support for environmental measures going beyond the requirements of Cross Compliance (CC), which already entail many environmental measures, and being geared to multiannual applications, as a result of which greater environmental benefits can be attainedjustifies, within the framework of the new challenges and objectives of the EU 2020 strategy, special support for environmental measures going beyond the requirements of Cross Compliance (CC) and beyond the already existing agri-environmental programs; welcomes in this regard the proposed greening of the CAP, which meets this goal by effectively recognizing the environmental services delivered by farmers; considers that this greening should be applied through simple measures, widespread and accessible to as many farmers as possible, as a result of which greater environmental benefits can be attained; demands that the implementation of such measures is accompanied by a simplification of the cross-compliance rules; considers that farmers already participating to a great extent in agri-environmental programs should not be discriminated under the new system;
Amendment 652 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers therefore that resource protection should be directly linked to the granting of direct payments in order to attain these environmental objectives to the maximum without the need to introduce new, bureaucratic environmental conditions into the first pillar; considers thatas far as possible, should simplify the SPS scheme, avoid duplication of controls and the introduction of additional administrative procedures; also considers that the possibility of a flat- rate income payment, as envisaged in a top-up model in the first pillar, must cover costs and income losseunder the greening component, should be studied; stresses that these measures will have to balance environmental and economic performance, be relevant from an agronomic point of view and provide appropriate incentives for farmers;
Amendment 672 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Consideralls therefore that any environmental advantages can be attained more effectively and directly by means of second-pillar measures adopted by the Member States, which should ideally build on existing agrienvironmental measures or should supplement measures which take into account climatic and geographical differences in the Member States; observes that resource protection programmes should be pursued everywhereon the Commission to submit, as soon as possible, both the details of its proposed new scheme of direct payments as well as an impact assessment of the administrative and bureaucratic conditions related to the implementation of the greening component; observes that the greening should be pursued across Member States by means of a priority catalogue of area- based measures in the second pillar which are subject to basic requirements, particularly in the fields of climate, environment and innovation (Annex I), and are 100% EU-financed; regards the greening of direct payments in the first pillar as lying in the fact that any recipient of direct payments in the EU must implement at least two priority area- based resource protection programmes in order to be eligible for the complete farm payment; believes that the administration involved in these measures can be minimised by managing them in accordance with the system of the existing agrienvironmental programmes, thus avoiding duplication of monitoring and additional application and administration proceduresthat are 100% EU- financed; considers that any recipient of these particular payments must implement a certain number of greening measures, chosen from a national or a regional list established by the Member State on the basis of a broader EU list; demands, in order to streamline the administrative procedures associated with these measures that all agricultural controls are, as far as possible, operated concomitantly;
Amendment 707 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls foronsiders that the resources allocated to greening to be reserved for recipients of direct payments and only disbursed in connection with greeningwill be inextricably linked to the level of budgetary resources allocated to the CAP as a whole;
Amendment 719 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 739 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 769 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that direct payments are no longer justified without cross compliance (CC) and therefore that thea slimmer CC system which has been simplified in response to the greening of the CAP should apply to all recipients of direct payments;
Amendment 776 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that direct payments are no longer justified without cross compliance (CC) and therefore that the CC system should apply to all recipients of direct payments19;
Amendment 802 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Considers that CC should be restricted to monitoring for compliance with fundamental and recognised standards and standards closely related to farming, which lend themselves to systematictraightforward and perhaps recurrent monitoring;
Amendment 807 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls for an end to disproportionate burdens imposed on livestock farming by CC, and particularlywithout prejudice to the basic principles of food safety and traceability, and for a critical review of certain hygiene and animal marking standards;
Amendment 831 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Considers that a pragmatic approach should be taken to the general market orientation of the CAP should be maintained and that the general structure of market management instruments should likewise be retainvamped;
Amendment 846 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Considers that the health check approach should be pursued further, as these existing market instruments have also demonstrated their value as anow play a role as a minimum safety net; takes the view, however, that these market measures, and in particular intervention, should only be used as a safety net in case of price crises and potential market disruption, cannot be termed market management tools, given the very low price levels at which they are now triggered;
Amendment 865 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Considers that, in view of the anticipated environmental and climate dangers and the risk of epidemics and considerable price fluctuations on agricultural markets, additional risk prevention is of vital importance, particularly at at Union, Member State and individual farm level;
Amendment 874 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Recalls that market-orientated production and direct payments are at the heart of anyone element of insurance against risk, and that it is farmers who are responsible for risk preventionalso incumbent on farmers to take account of and anticipate risk; supports the Member States, in this context, in making national risk insurance instruments available to farmers;
Amendment 885 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Considers that a multi-stage safety net comprising privateextended to cover all sectors, comprising a combination of tools such as private storage as part of a public-private policy mix, the expansion of public storage, public intervention, market disruption instruments and an emergency clause, would confer the greatest possible benefit; calls for private storage and public intervention to be permitted for specific sectorseven for an extended period where market disruptions are of limited duration; calls furthermore for a market disruption instrument and an emergency clause to be established for all sectors in common, making it possible for the Commission, under certain circumstances, in the event of crises to take action over a limited period which goes beyond the existing instruments;
Amendment 909 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Considers that the use of these instruments which have been described should be triggered only by a political assessment by the EU legislaturefalls within the scope of the Commission’s executive powers, but that the latter must inform the European legislator without delay, by means of an urgent procedure to be established;
Amendment 917 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Considers that, in view of the completely different conditions which exist in the individual sectors, differentiated sectoral solutions are preferable toshould be combined with across- the-board approaches;
Amendment 928 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Continues to support the Commission’s proposal to lower the intervention thresholds for market crops to zero, maintaining a – possibly reduced – intervention threshold only in the case ofalls on the Commission to assess each year, in a pragmatic manner and in the light of the situation on the markets, the quotas eligible for intervention for all types of cereals, including wheat;
Amendment 944 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Considers that private-sector insurance schemes, such as multi-hazard insurance (climate insurance, insurance against loss of income, etc.), futures contracts or even mutualisation funds, must be developed in view of increasing risks; is aware of the fact that, without public contributions to the financing (from the EU and Member States), this would be difficult; supports the adoption of an EU- wide and WTO- compliant environment to ensure that no distortions of competition occur among Member States; rejects, however, the introduction of EU-wide insurance systems;
Amendment 958 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Considers rather that these measures should be promoted optionally, by decision of the Member State, in the first pillar (now Article 69) within the existing financing ceiling of the Member State concerned and that Member States should be allowed, initially, on the basis of national and regional needs, to use up to 2% of direct payments for risk management, stabilEndorses the Commission proposal to develop these risk management tools, as an adjunct to the existing instruments, and takes the view that incorporating them in the second pillar will make for flexibility in their implementation, in particular by virtue of the multiannual nature of the budget and the scope for tailoring the tools to the specific situation in each Member State; considers that these measures should be promoted optionally, by decision of the Member State, within the exisation and prevention measuresng financing ceiling of the Member State concerned; considers that, in justified cases, Member States should be allowed to make additional resources available from national funds;
Amendment 977 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Calls on the Commission to examine the extent to which producer groups or sectoral associations can be extended to all production sectors and incorporated into the risk prevention and management schemes;
Amendment 994 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Acknowledges that in the WTO negotiations the EU has offered to abolish export refunds, albeit with the proviso that other trading partners (particularly the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) also bring their export support into line with WTO rules; calls for the EU likewise to formulate a system foremphasises that this offer by the EU should be made contingent on the entry into force of the Doha agreement and reciprocity on the part of the EU’s trading partners; should the offer lapse, calls for the EU to retain the legal instrument of export credits which complies with WTO rulefunds, although these should be activated only for a limited period and used only in the event of a serious, short-term crisis, as an adjunct to the intervention instruments;
Amendment 1019 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Advocates that the 2006 sugar market reform be extended to 2020 in its existing form in order to develop a system for the subsequent period which can operate without quotas;
Amendment 1031 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Calls on the Commission to investigate whether the current arrangement whereby the wine market organisation ban on planting is to expire should be maintained, in view of anticipated market trendsmaintain the planting rights currently granted under the single wine market organisation, in view of the specific nature of this sector;
Amendment 1038 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Observes that speculation in agricultural commodities should be combated; takes the view that coordinated international action is the only effective means of curbing such speculation; supports, in that connection, the proposal by the French Presidency of the G20 that the group should consider measures to combat the increasing volatility in the prices of agricultural raw materials; advocates a worldwide notification and coordinated action system for agricultural stocks; observes intended to provide food security; observes, therefore, that consideration should be given to maintaining stocks of vital agricultural commodities; emphasises that, if these objectives are to be achieved, storage capacities must be increased and market monitoring and surveillance instruments developed;
Amendment 1065 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Is aware of the importance of the second pillar, in view of its environmental, modernisation and, innovation, structural improvement and competitiveness achievements, but also for attaining political objectives, which should also benefit farmers; supports greater orientation of the second pillar towards competitiveness and innovation; considers that aid measures under the second pillar which are not directly linked to agricultural or agri-food activities should be discontinued; calls therefore for second- pillar measures to be better suited to their objectives of the EU 2020 Strategy, so that the effectiveness of growth, employment and climate measures and measures for the benefit of rural areas can be increased; considers that, in this context, particular attention should be devoted to assisting young farmers, particularly in the fields of innovation, modernisation and the development of investment; calls, therefore, for reinforcement of the mechanisms for facilitating the establishment and training of young farmers and hopes that implementation of those mechanisms will be made compulsory for all the Member States;
Amendment 1113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Advocates therefore maintroducaining targeted measures, to be decidcofinanced by the Member States in the second pillar, to help attain priority objectives of the EU (2020 Strategy); observes that these measures should be applied in addition to the basic programmes for greening of direct payments in the first pillar and that a reduced national cofinancing rate of 25% should apply; considers that the cofinancing rate applicable to each of those measures should be determined on the basis of impact assessments and detailed simulations;
Amendment 1159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Advocates in this connection that the compensatory allowance for disadvantaged areas be retained in the second pillar; considers that it should be ascertained what cofinancing rate appears to be appropriate; calls on the Commission to retainview the existing criteria for demarcation of disadvantaged areas, bar mountain areas, in a manner combining, inter alia, bio-physical and socio-economic criteria;
Amendment 1191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Advocates that, in the case of measures which are of particular importance to Member States, an optional increase of 25% in national cofinancing in the second pillar (top-up) should be possible; emphasises, however, that this possibility must not lead to a renationalisation of the CAP;
Amendment 1198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Calls for abrupt changes in the allocation between Member States of appropriations in the second pillar to be avoided, as Member States and farmers require certainty to enable them to plan and continuity of financing; emphasises that the discussions on the allocation of this funding should be indisociable from the discussions on the allocation funding under the first pillar; calls therefore on the Commission to establish, for the second pillar also, clear, objective and equitable criteria for the new allocation;
Amendment 1213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Advocates that it should not be compulsory for national cofinancing to come from public funds; considers that at least 10 percentage points proportion (to be established) of any national cofinancing should nevertheless come from public funds;
Amendment 1238 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56 a (new)
Paragraph 56 a (new)
56a. Stresses that development of the food quality policy, not least as regards geographical indications (AOP/IGP/STG), must be a priority axis of the CAP and that it must be deepened and strengthened to enable the EU to maintain its leading position in this field; considers that approval should be granted for the implementation of innovative instruments for the management, protection and promotion of quality products, enabling their harmonious development and ensuring they continue to make a major contribution to the sustainable growth and competitiveness of the European market;
Amendment 1242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56 b (new)
Paragraph 56 b (new)
56b. Considers it vital to maintain and develop the added value generated in rural areas in order to ensure their dynamism and viability; recommends, therefore, the creation of territorial supply-chain projects based on joint approaches, for any creative forms of production with added value, developing a link between the product and the area, and centring on economic and social development while taking into account the environmental or landscape value of the area in question;
Amendment 1245 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading before paragraph 57
Subheading before paragraph 57