BETA


2009/2236(INI) Future of the CAP after 2013

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead AGRI LYON George (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Committee Opinion DEVE
Committee Opinion BUDG LA VIA Giovanni (icon: PPE PPE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54

Events

2010/11/29
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2010/07/08
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2010/07/08
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2010/07/08
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted a resolution on the Future of the Common Agricultural Policy after 2013.

Parliament notes that the CAP reforms initiated in 1992 and 1999 and, in particular, the 2003 reform, which was reviewed during the Health Check and introduced the principle of decoupling, as well as the various sectoral reforms, were all intended to allow EU farmers to better respond and react to market signals and conditions. It wishes for this trend to continue in further reforms, while some market measures are still needed in view of the specific features of agricultural production.

An amendment adopted in plenary recalls that agriculture has always been a producer of public goods, or of what in today's context may be called 'first-generation' public goods , the reference here being to food security and food safety, and to the high nutritional value of agricultural produce, which should continue to constitute the primary raison d'être for the CAP, corresponding to its essence and representing the first concern of Europe's citizens. The more recently identified or 'second-generation' public goods , e.g. the environment, land management or animal welfare, while also objectives of the CAP, are complementary to the first-generation goods and should therefore not replace them.

The resolution also recalls that European agriculture faces new challenges : food security, the rising prices of foodstuffs and volatile market prices, the fight against climate change, water, soil and biodiversity management, consumer demands for high quality products, better animal welfare as well as competitiveness, the rural exodus, ageing of the rural population, pressures on agricultural earnings, achieving equal levels of development and cohesion.

The need for a strong CAP post 2013: given these challenges and in the light of the Europe 2020 Strategy , Parliament considers that the priorities of the European Common Agricultural Policy post-2013 should be part of a common and credible multi-functional agricultural food policy with the necessary funding both to provide effective and targeted support to farmers and respond to the concerns of the rural community, as well as benefiting society as a whole. The CAP should enable agriculture to play its part in the European economy and ensure it has the tools to compete on world markets.

Members consider that the future European agricultural policy must remain a common policy and that it should not be renationalised. It believes that direct support should remain fully financed by the European budget and reject any further cofinancing which could harm fair competition within the EU Single Market. This policy should ensure the coexistence of i) high-added-value farming with high-quality primary and processed products, giving it a strong position on world markets; ii) farming open to regional markets; iii) farming geared to local markets.

Parliament recalls that one of the main reasons why the EU needs a strong CAP is to contribute to the maintenance and development of viable and dynamic rural communities, at the heart of European cultural diversity. It takes the view that this calls for the socio-economic gap between rural and urban communities to be narrowed, in order to avoid the growing land abandonment and rural depopulation which are further isolating rural areas.

The resolution underlines the urgent need to attract younger generations and women to rural areas through long-term policies and to provide new and alternative economic opportunities for them to ensure a sustainable rural population. New ways of attracting young people should be explored, such as the availability of favourable loans and credit for investments and recognition of their professional skills, in order to ensure they are able to enter the rural economy with relative ease.

Noting that the cross-compliance system remains one of the appropriate means of optimising the provision of eco-system services by farmers and meeting new environmental challenges by securing the provision of basic public goods, Parliament notes, however, that the introduction of cross-compliance has raised a whole range of problems relating to administrative issues and acceptance by farmers, who had the impression that they were losing a degree of freedom in their work. They call therefore for the administrative burden on farmers to be reduced through a simplified implementation system for cross-compliance requirements.

CAP priorities for the 21 st century: Parliament agrees on the need to fix certain central key building blocks: security of supply of food products and fair trade, sustainability, agriculture across Europe, the quality of foodstuffs, conservation of biodiversity and environmental protection, and green growth to achieve a fair and more sustainable CAP. They consider that the current two-pillar structure (production supports and rural development) should be maintained.

A fair CAP : the resolution insists that EU agriculture must remain competitive against fierce competition and trade-distorting measures on the part of trading partners and/or countries where producers are not subject to standards as high as in the EU as regards, in particular, product quality, food safety, the environment, social legislation and animal welfare. Members believe that improving competitiveness at different levels (local, regional, internal market and world markets) should still be a fundamental objective of the CAP post-2013. They call on the Commission to uphold the interests of European farmers in the context of multilateral and bilateral trade agreements negotiated on behalf of the EU.

Stressing that farmers require long-term investment prospects and adequate incomes in order to carry out their tasks, Member call for the guarantee of a fair and stable return for the farming community to remain a primary goal for the new CAP, whilst providing good value for money and fair treatment for consumers.

Parliament calls for flexible and efficient market measures to be set in place to ensure an adequate safety net within the future framework of the CAP in order to avoid extreme market price volatility, provide a greater degree of stability, and provide rapid and efficient responses to economic crises arising in the sector. It takes the view that this should be complemented by a risk management system that helps minimise the consequences of natural and health disasters. It also calls for a fair distribution of CAP payments and insists that it should be fair to farmers in both new and old Member States.

Members consider that reducing direct payments under the first pillar would have devastating consequences, not only for farmers but, to an equal extent, for the countryside, for agriculture-linked public services, for consumers and for society, given that the latter is a beneficiary as a whole. They add that direct payments are, therefore, essential and must be maintained.

A sustainable CAP : the agriculture sector has a leading role to play in tackling climate change by reducing GHG emissions, increasing carbon sequestration capacity and developing and using more renewable energy sources and bio-based materials.

Parliament believes that climate considerations should be integrated across CAP measures where appropriate. It believes that an EU-funded top-up direct payment should be made available to farmers through simple multiannual contracts rewarding them for reducing their carbon emissions per unit of production and/or increasing their sequestration of carbon in the soil through sustainable production methods and through the production of biomass that can be used in the production of long-lasting agro-materials.

Parliament takes the view that investment in agricultural innovation should be further encouraged, inter alia through the CAP and EU research and development framework programmes, in order to address new challenges. It recommends, to this end, the active presence of agronomic advisors in the regions to guide farmers in their attempts to deliver environmental public goods.

A green CAP : Parliament notes that the market has failed, to date, to properly reward farmers for protecting the environment and other public goods. It considers that green growth should be at the heart of a new rural development strategy that focuses on creating new green jobs through:

the development of local dynamic tools such as local marketing, local processing, and support for projects involving all stakeholders from the local farming sector; the development of biomass, bio-waste, bio-gas and small-scale renewable energy production, as well as encouraging the production of second-generation biofuels, agro-materials and green-chemistry products, investing in modernisation and innovation, as well as new research and development techniques for adaptation to, and mitigation of, climate change; providing training and advice to farmers in applying new techniques and to assist young farmers entering the industry.

Food quality : the resolution stresses that the development of food quality policy, including in terms of geographical indication (PDO/PGI/TSG), must be a priority aspect of the CAP and be deepened and strengthened so that the EU can maintain its leadership position in this area. It takes the view that, in the case of these high-quality products, the use of original management, protection and promotion instruments should be allowed.

Agriculture across Europe : Parliament calls for the continuation of specific measures to compensate farmers producing in disadvantaged areas such as areas with natural handicaps, including mountainous regions, environmentally sensitive areas and/or regions which are the most affected by climate change, and outermost regions, in order to ensure that agricultural activity takes place so that land continues to be managed and local food is produced across the EU, reducing the threat of land abandonment and ensuring balanced territorial management across the EU and a rational development of agricultural production.

A common and simple policy : Members believe that the new CAP, through a simplified support system, must be easy to administer, transparent, and reduce red tape and administrative burdens on farmers, particularly for smaller producers. They believe that this could be achieved inter alia by moving towards the use of delivery tools that set the goals and empower farmers to choose their own farming systems to meet these objectives, such as outcome agreements, simple contracts and multiannual payments.

The CAP in the multi-annual financial framework: the resolution underlines the need, given the new Common Agricultural Policy objectives, to provide adequate funding in the new multiannual financial framework (MFF), in order to be able to better support the policy in accordance with the major challenges this crucial sector for EU food security will have to face in the coming years.

Documents
2010/07/08
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2010/06/21
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2010/06/21
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Documents
2010/06/15
   EP - Vote in committee
Details

The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development adopted the own-initiative report drafted by George LYON (ALDE, UK) on the Future of the Common Agricultural Policy after 2013.

The committee notes that European agriculture faces new challenges: food security, the rising prices of foodstuffs and volatile market prices, the fight against climate change, water, soil and biodiversity management, consumer demands for high quality products, better animal welfare as well as competitiveness, the rural exodus, ageing of the rural population, pressures on agricultural earnings, achieving equal levels of development and cohesion.

The need for a strong CAP post 2013: given these challenges and in the light of the Europe 2020 Strategy, Members consider that the priorities of the European Common Agricultural Policy post-2013 should be part of a common and credible multi-functional agricultural food policy with the necessary funding both to provide effective and targeted support to farmers and respond to the concerns of the rural community, as well as benefiting society as a whole. The CAP should enable agriculture to play its part in the European economy and ensure it has the tools to compete on world markets.

Members consider that the future European agricultural policy must remain a common policy and that it should not be renationalised. It believes that direct support should remain fully financed by the European budget and reject any further cofinancing which could harm fair competition within the EU Single Market. This policy should ensure the coexistence of i) high-added-value farming with high-quality primary and processed products, giving it a strong position on world markets; ii) farming open to regional markets; iii) farming geared to local markets.

The committee recalls that one of the main reasons why the EU needs a strong CAP is to contribute to the maintenance and development of viable and dynamic rural communities, at the heart of European cultural diversity. It takes the view that this calls for the socio-economic gap between rural and urban communities to be narrowed, in order to avoid the growing land abandonment and rural depopulation which are further isolating rural areas.

The report underlines the urgent need to attract younger generations and women to rural areas through long-term policies and to provide new and alternative economic opportunities for them to ensure a sustainable rural population. New ways of attracting young people should be explored, such as the availability of favourable loans and credit for investments and recognition of their professional skills, in order to ensure they are able to enter the rural economy with relative ease.

CAP priorities for the 21 st century: Members agree on the need to fix certain central key building blocks: security of supply of food products and fair trade, sustainability, agriculture across Europe, the quality of foodstuffs, conservation of biodiversity and environmental protection, and green growth to achieve a fair and more sustainable CAP. They consider that the current two-pillar structure (production supports and rural development) should be maintained.

A fair CAP: the report insists that EU agriculture must remain competitive against fierce competition and trade-distorting measures on the part of trading partners and/or countries where producers are not subject to standards as high as in the EU as regards, in particular, product quality, food safety, the environment, social legislation and animal welfare. Members believe that improving competitiveness at different levels (local, regional, internal market and world markets) should still be a fundamental objective of the CAP post-2013. They call on the Commission to uphold the interests of European farmers in the context of multilateral and bilateral trade agreements negotiated on behalf of the EU.

Stressing that farmers require long-term investment prospects and adequate incomes in order to carry out their tasks, Member call for the guarantee of a fair and stable return for the farming community to remain a primary goal for the new CAP, whilst providing good value for money and fair treatment for consumers.

The committee calls for flexible and efficient market measures to be set in place to ensure an adequate safety net within the future framework of the CAP in order to avoid extreme market price volatility, provide a greater degree of stability, and provide rapid and efficient responses to economic crises arising in the sector. It takes the view that this should be complemented by a risk management system that helps minimise the consequences of natural and health disasters. It also calls for a fair distribution of CAP payments and insists that it should be fair to farmers in both new and old Member States.

Members considers that reducing direct payments under the first pillar would have devastating consequences, not only for farmers but, to an equal extent, for the countryside, for agriculture-linked public services, for consumers and for society, given that the latter is a beneficiary as a whole. They add that direct payments are, therefore, essential and must be maintained, above all for the new Member States.

A sustainable CAP: the agriculture has a leading role to play in tackling climate change by reducing GHG emissions, increasing carbon sequestration capacity and developing and using more renewable energy sources and bio-based materials.

Members believe that climate considerations should be integrated across CAP measures where appropriate. They believe that an EU-funded top-up direct payment should be made available to farmers through simple multiannual contracts rewarding them for reducing their carbon emissions per unit of production and/or increasing their sequestration of carbon in the soil through sustainable production methods and through the production of biomass that can be used in the production of long-lasting agro-materials.

Members take the view that investment in agricultural innovation should be further encouraged, inter alia through the CAP and EU research and development framework programmes, in order to address new challenges. They recommend, to this end, the active presence of agronomic advisors in the regions to guide farmers in their attempts to deliver environmental public goods.

A green CAP: Members note that the market has failed, to date, to properly reward farmers for protecting the environment and other public goods. They consider that green growth should be at the heart of a new rural development strategy that focuses on creating new green jobs through:

the development of local dynamic tools such as local marketing, local processing, and support for projects involving all stakeholders from the local farming sector; the development of biomass, bio-waste, bio-gas and small-scale renewable energy production, as well as encouraging the production of second-generation biofuels, agro-materials and green-chemistry products, investing in modernisation and innovation, as well as new research and development techniques for adaptation to, and mitigation of, climate change, providing training and advice to farmers in applying new techniques and to assist young farmers entering the industry.

Food quality: the report stresses that the development of food quality policy, including in terms of geographical indication (PDO/PGI/TSG), must be a priority aspect of the CAP and be deepened and strengthened so that the EU can maintain its leadership position in this area. It takes the view that, in the case of these high-quality products, the use of original management, protection and promotion instruments should be allowed.

Agriculture across Europe: Members call for the continuation of specific measures to compensate farmers producing in disadvantaged areas such as areas with natural handicaps, including mountainous regions, environmentally sensitive areas and/or regions which are the most affected by climate change, and outermost regions, in order to ensure that agricultural activity takes place so that land continues to be managed and local food is produced across the EU, reducing the threat of land abandonment and ensuring balanced territorial management across the EU and a rational development of agricultural production.

A common and simple policy: Members believe that the new CAP, through a simplified support system, must be easy to administer, transparent, and reduce red tape and administrative burdens on farmers, particularly for smaller producers. They believe that this could be achieved inter alia by moving towards the use of delivery tools that set the goals and empower farmers to choose their own farming systems to meet these objectives, such as outcome agreements, simple contracts and multiannual payments.

The CAP in the multi-annual financial framework: the report underlines the need, given the new Common Agricultural Policy objectives, to provide adequate funding in the new multiannual financial framework (MFF), in order to be able to better support the policy in accordance with the major challenges this crucial sector for EU food security will have to face in the coming years.

2010/06/07
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2010/06/02
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2010/05/19
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2010/04/30
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2010/04/30
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2010/04/29
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2010/04/29
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2010/03/29
   CSL - Debate in Council
Documents
2010/03/29
   CSL - Council Meeting
2010/03/24
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2010/02/22
   CSL - Debate in Council
Details

Ministers held an exchange of views on the future of the CAP and, in particular, on market management measures after 2013, based on a presidency background paper and a questionnaire.

Ministers welcomed the presidency paper as a valuable contribution to the discussion on the future of the CAP, stressing the importance of striking the right balance between market orientation on the one hand and ensuring the viability of agricultural activity in the EU through appropriate market and crisis management instruments on the other.

Many ministers agreed that market orientation of European agriculture achieved as a result of the CAP reforms undertaken since 1992 was sufficient. Many referred to the contribution which existing measures such as direct payments and market management measures make to dampening price and income risks for farmers. At the same time, they highlighted the necessity of keeping an efficient safety net in future, in particular against the background of growing price volatility and market instability, and the EU commitments in the context of the Doha Development Round of the WTO. Many ministers supported the presidency's suggestion of examining the possibility of complementing existing market management measures provided for in the single CMO and made suggestions, such as the creation of income insurance schemes, the strengthening of producer organisations and interbranch cooperation, futures markets and the setting up of a crisis fund. Many delegations also referred to ongoing discussions on the functioning of the food supply chain and asked to take into account the outcome of that work. A substantial number of ministers agreed that the future CAP should provide for a financial mechanism allowing the EU to respond rapidly to serious crises which offers flexibility in responding rapidly to such cases.

A number of ministers considered that market orientation in European agriculture could be further improved and insisted that further efforts to improve competitiveness would offer the best safety net. Some made it clear that any new market measures should not come on top of existing ones and also expressed doubts with regard to the creation of a financial mechanism to deal with crisis situations, as this would involve additional expenditure.

The presidency expressed its intention to table at the Special Committee for Agriculture (SCA) a follow-up paper summarising the Council's debate.

The Council's debate followed previous discussions on the different aspects of the CAP post-2013 held under the French, Czech and Swedish Presidencies. A final general reflection on the CAP post-2013 is scheduled to take place during the informal meeting of the ministers of Agriculture on 30 May - 1 June, to be held in Merida, Spain.

Thereafter the Commission is expected to submit a communication on the post-2013 CAP in late autumn 2010, followed be legislative proposals in mid-2011.

Documents
2010/02/22
   CSL - Council Meeting
2009/12/17
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2009/12/16
   EP - LA VIA Giovanni (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in BUDG
2009/12/14
   CSL - Debate in Council
Details

The Council held a policy debate on the future of the CAP , with a particular focus on rural development policy . The Council debate on the future of rural development policy is the continuation of previous discussions under the Czech and French Presidencies, which focused on the first pillar of the CAP.

Member States were invited to reflect on the future challenges they consider to be most relevant for European agriculture and rural areas and on what changes were needed in the rural development programme in order to tackle these challenges, while respecting the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.

Several Ministers emphasised that although there is already quite a good existing policy, there is still room for improvement because a central banner is needed, which in their view, could be Green Growth . Some urged structural changes; the replacement of the axes-structure with a new clearer one with more focused targets. Some others pointed out the need to redesign some of the individual measures, and establish balance between targeting and simplification.

In its introductory words, the Commission representative highlighted that strengthening competitiveness, protecting the environment and creating new jobs are the three most important challenges we face when we talk about the future of rural development.

After the discussion, she estimated too early to mention any figures and invited Member States to reflect on several issues that most delegates touched upon, such as the criteria to be defined for the distribution of money intending to replace historical grounds.

The Swedish Presidency concluded that there is a need to keep rural development as part of the common policy , in order to face several important challenges such as sustainable development, climatic change, water management, and biodiversity.

Documents
2009/12/14
   CSL - Council Meeting
2009/10/19
   EP - LYON George (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in AGRI

Documents

Activities

Votes

Rapport LYON A7-0204/2010 - AM 1 #

2010/07/08 Outcome: +: 356, -: 219, 0: 18
PL GB IT DE FR BG PT IE FI RO EL LV SI SK EE CY AT NL LT LU DK BE MT HU ES CZ SE
Total
43
63
59
84
57
16
19
11
13
28
9
8
5
8
6
4
13
25
5
5
13
17
5
14
34
17
12
icon: PPE PPE
220

Slovenia PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1

Lithuania PPE

1

Luxembourg PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2

Czechia PPE

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
70

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Lithuania ALDE

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1
3

Belgium ALDE

Against (1)

3

Spain ALDE

1

Sweden ALDE

2
icon: ECR ECR
42

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1
icon: EFD EFD
19

Finland EFD

For (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

For (1)

1

Denmark EFD

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
31

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Latvia GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
22

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

Abstain (1)

5

France NI

For (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

1

Romania NI

2

Belgium NI

2

Hungary NI

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
45

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

For (1)

5

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (2)

2

Greece Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Spain Verts/ALE

2

Sweden Verts/ALE

2
icon: S&D S&D
144

Ireland S&D

3

Finland S&D

2

Greece S&D

Against (1)

1

Latvia S&D

Against (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

Against (1)

1

Slovakia S&D

2

Estonia S&D

Against (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

Against (1)

1

Austria S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

3

Lithuania S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Hungary S&D

Against (2)

Abstain (1)

3

Sweden S&D

2

Rapport LYON A7-0204/2010 - AM 16 #

2010/07/08 Outcome: -: 498, +: 80, 0: 9
CY AT LT EL IE LU SI MT SK LV EE PT CZ FI HU SE BE NL DK BG PL RO ES IT FR GB DE
Total
4
12
5
7
11
5
5
5
8
8
6
18
16
13
14
12
16
25
13
16
43
28
33
59
57
63
85
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
32

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
22

Hungary NI

2

Belgium NI

2

Bulgaria NI

1

Romania NI

2

France NI

For (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

5
icon: EFD EFD
19

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Finland EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1

Denmark EFD

2
icon: ECR ECR
42

Lithuania ECR

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
42

Austria Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (2)

2

Sweden Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Spain Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: ALDE ALDE
70

Lithuania ALDE

Against (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

3

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

2

Belgium ALDE

3

Denmark ALDE

3
3

Spain ALDE

1
icon: S&D S&D
143

Cyprus S&D

Against (1)

1

Austria S&D

2

Lithuania S&D

2

Greece S&D

Against (1)

1

Ireland S&D

3

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

Against (1)

1

Slovakia S&D

2

Latvia S&D

Against (1)

1

Estonia S&D

Against (1)

1

Finland S&D

2

Hungary S&D

3

Sweden S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

3
icon: PPE PPE
217

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

1

Luxembourg PPE

2

Slovenia PPE

Against (2)

2

Malta PPE

Against (2)

2

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Czechia PPE

2

Belgium PPE

For (1)

4

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

Rapport LYON A7-0204/2010 - PAR 27 #

2010/07/08 Outcome: +: 407, -: 144, 0: 37
DE FR IT PL ES RO HU AT PT SK FI LU MT LT BE BG CZ IE EL LV CY SI EE NL SE DK GB
Total
83
59
59
43
34
28
15
13
19
8
13
5
5
6
16
16
17
11
7
8
4
5
6
25
12
13
58
icon: PPE PPE
220

Luxembourg PPE

2

Malta PPE

2

Lithuania PPE

1

Belgium PPE

4

Czechia PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

1

Slovenia PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
144

Austria S&D

2

Finland S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Greece S&D

1

Latvia S&D

1

Cyprus S&D

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Netherlands S&D

3

Sweden S&D

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
43

Spain Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: NI NI
22

France NI

For (1)

1

Hungary NI

2

Belgium NI

2

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
15

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Finland EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1

Denmark EFD

2

United Kingdom EFD

2
icon: ECR ECR
42

Lithuania ECR

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
32

Spain GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

Abstain (2)

4

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

2

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Against (1)

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
70

Spain ALDE

1
3

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

Against (1)

1

Belgium ALDE

3
3

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (2)

2

Sweden ALDE

2

Denmark ALDE

3

Rapport LYON A7-0204/2010 - AM 3 #

2010/07/08 Outcome: -: 444, +: 116, 0: 24
GB SE DK EE NL LV SI LT CY LU MT FI BG BE EL IE SK CZ AT HU PT RO ES PL IT FR DE
Total
61
12
12
6
25
8
5
6
4
5
5
12
16
16
6
11
8
17
13
12
19
28
33
43
59
59
83
icon: ALDE ALDE
67

Sweden ALDE

2

Denmark ALDE

2

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Lithuania ALDE

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Abstain (1)

1

Finland ALDE

Against (1)

3

Belgium ALDE

3

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

3

Spain ALDE

1
icon: ECR ECR
42

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
22
5

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1

Belgium NI

2

Hungary NI

2

Romania NI

2

France NI

Abstain (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
20

Denmark EFD

2

Netherlands EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

1

Finland EFD

Against (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

Abstain (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
31

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Latvia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Greece GUE/NGL

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

4

Spain GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
44

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Sweden Verts/ALE

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (2)

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Spain Verts/ALE

2
icon: S&D S&D
143

Sweden S&D

2

Estonia S&D

Against (1)

1

Netherlands S&D

For (1)

3

Latvia S&D

Against (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

Against (1)

1

Lithuania S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Finland S&D

2

Greece S&D

Against (1)

1

Ireland S&D

3

Slovakia S&D

2

Austria S&D

2

Hungary S&D

3
icon: PPE PPE
215

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Latvia PPE

Against (1)

3

Slovenia PPE

Against (2)

2

Lithuania PPE

1

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

2

Malta PPE

Against (2)

2

Belgium PPE

3

Czechia PPE

2

Rapport LYON A7-0204/2010 - PAR 62/1 #

2010/07/08 Outcome: +: 507, -: 42, 0: 12
DE FR IT PL ES RO GB CZ BG PT BE SE DK IE FI HU NL LV SK LT EE EL AT LU SI MT CY
Total
81
56
57
43
29
27
60
17
15
17
17
12
13
10
12
10
23
8
8
6
6
6
12
5
5
4
2
icon: PPE PPE
207

Czechia PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

2

Slovenia PPE

2

Malta PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
140

Sweden S&D

2

Finland S&D

1

Netherlands S&D

Abstain (1)

3

Latvia S&D

1

Slovakia S&D

2

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Greece S&D

1

Austria S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
69

Spain ALDE

1

Belgium ALDE

3

Sweden ALDE

2
3

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
43

Spain Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Sweden Verts/ALE

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
40

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
23

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

For (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

1
icon: NI NI
20

France NI

For (1)

1
5

Bulgaria NI

Abstain (1)

1

Belgium NI

2

Hungary NI

For (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
19

Denmark EFD

2

Finland EFD

Against (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

For (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

1

Rapport LYON A7-0204/2010 - PAR 62/2 #

2010/07/08 Outcome: +: 450, -: 88, 0: 9
DE IT FR PL ES RO PT BG IE CZ HU FI BE AT LV SK EL LT LU SI EE MT CY NL SE DK GB
Total
82
58
55
39
28
27
17
14
10
15
10
10
15
12
7
8
6
5
5
5
6
4
2
22
12
13
60
icon: PPE PPE
201

Czechia PPE

2

Belgium PPE

2

Lithuania PPE

1

Luxembourg PPE

2

Slovenia PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

1

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
137

Finland S&D

1

Austria S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Slovakia S&D

2

Greece S&D

1

Lithuania S&D

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

1

Netherlands S&D

3

Sweden S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
68

Spain ALDE

1

Belgium ALDE

3

Lithuania ALDE

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Sweden ALDE

2

Denmark ALDE

3
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
42

Spain Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
22

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Greece GUE/NGL

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: ECR ECR
38

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
19

Finland EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

For (1)

1

Denmark EFD

2
icon: NI NI
20

France NI

For (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

1

Hungary NI

For (1)

1

Belgium NI

2

Rapport LYON A7-0204/2010 - AM 2 #

2010/07/08 Outcome: -: 410, +: 116, 0: 20
SE MT CY LT DK CZ AT IE SK SI RO PT EE LU EL HU LV BG FI BE NL ES IT FR PL GB DE
Total
11
5
2
6
12
17
11
8
8
5
28
17
6
4
4
9
8
15
11
16
23
28
56
55
41
58
82
icon: S&D S&D
136

Sweden S&D

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Cyprus S&D

1

Austria S&D

2

Ireland S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Hungary S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Finland S&D

1

Netherlands S&D

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
21

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Latvia GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Spain GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1
icon: NI NI
20

Hungary NI

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

Against (1)

1

Belgium NI

2

France NI

Against (1)

1
5
icon: EFD EFD
19

Lithuania EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark EFD

2

Slovakia EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Finland EFD

Against (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
37

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
43

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (2)

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Spain Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: ALDE ALDE
66

Sweden ALDE

2

Lithuania ALDE

Against (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

2
3

Slovenia ALDE

Against (2)

2
3

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Belgium ALDE

3

Spain ALDE

1
icon: PPE PPE
204

Malta PPE

Against (2)

2

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

1

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

Czechia PPE

2

Austria PPE

3

Ireland PPE

2

Slovenia PPE

Against (2)

2

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

2

Finland PPE

3

Rapport LYON A7-0204/2010 - PAR 81/2 #

2010/07/08 Outcome: +: 461, -: 50, 0: 5
DE IT FR PL RO ES CZ BG BE PT FI AT HU IE LV GB SK NL LT SI LU EE MT CY DK SE
Total
79
55
54
39
25
21
17
14
16
15
12
11
9
8
8
55
7
22
6
5
4
6
4
2
11
11
icon: PPE PPE
196

Czechia PPE

2

Ireland PPE

2

Lithuania PPE

1

Slovenia PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

1

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
121

Finland S&D

1

Austria S&D

2

Hungary S&D

2

Ireland S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Slovakia S&D

1

Netherlands S&D

3

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

2

Cyprus S&D

1

Sweden S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
64

Spain ALDE

1

Belgium ALDE

3

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

2

Sweden ALDE

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
43

Spain Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

2

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

2
icon: ECR ECR
34

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
21

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
18

France NI

For (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

1

Belgium NI

2

Hungary NI

For (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

3
icon: EFD EFD
19

Finland EFD

For (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

Against (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

1

Denmark EFD

2

Rapport LYON A7-0204/2010 - CONSIDÉRANT W #

2010/07/08 Outcome: +: 411, -: 85, 0: 4
DE IT FR PL RO ES PT BG BE FI CZ HU IE LV SK AT LT SI LU EE MT CY NL SE DK GB
Total
74
54
52
41
26
16
17
13
15
10
17
9
8
8
8
9
6
5
4
6
3
2
21
12
13
51
icon: PPE PPE
191

Czechia PPE

2

Ireland PPE

2

Lithuania PPE

1

Slovenia PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

1

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
113

Bulgaria S&D

2

Finland S&D

1

Hungary S&D

2

Ireland S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Slovakia S&D

2

Austria S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

1

Netherlands S&D

2

Sweden S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
65

Spain ALDE

1

Belgium ALDE

3

Latvia ALDE

For (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

2

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

2

Denmark ALDE

3
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
40

Spain Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Austria Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Sweden Verts/ALE

Against (1)

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
22

Spain GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Latvia GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: ECR ECR
33

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Netherlands ECR

For (1)

1
icon: EFD EFD
19

Finland EFD

Abstain (1)

1

Slovakia EFD

For (1)

1

Lithuania EFD

For (1)

1

Netherlands EFD

For (1)

1

Denmark EFD

2
icon: NI NI
17

France NI

For (1)

1

Bulgaria NI

1

Belgium NI

2

Hungary NI

For (1)

1

Austria NI

Against (1)

3

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

3
AmendmentsDossier
858 2009/2236(INI)
2010/04/23 BUDG 26 amendments...
source: PE-440.155
2010/04/29 AGRI 283 amendments...
source: PE-441.049
2010/04/30 AGRI 499 amendments...
source: PE-441.152
2010/06/07 AGRI 50 amendments...
source: PE-442.931

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.972
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE439.972
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.964&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/BUDG-AD-439964_EN.html
docs/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE441.049
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE441.049
docs/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE441.147
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE441.147
docs/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE441.152
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE441.152
docs/5/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE442.808
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE442.808
docs/6/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE442.868
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE442.868
docs/7/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE442.931
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE442.931
docs/8/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0204_EN.html
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0204_EN.html
events/1/type
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
New
Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/4/type
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee
events/5
date
2010-06-21T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0204_EN.html title: A7-0204/2010
events/5
date
2010-06-21T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0204_EN.html title: A7-0204/2010
events/7/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100708&type=CRE
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=20100708&type=CRE
events/8
date
2010-07-08T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0286_EN.html title: T7-0286/2010
summary
events/8
date
2010-07-08T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0286_EN.html title: T7-0286/2010
summary
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 150
procedure/Other legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 54
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 52
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Agriculture and Rural Development
committee
AGRI
rapporteur
name: LYON George date: 2009-10-19T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Agriculture and Rural Development
committee
AGRI
date
2009-10-19T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: LYON George group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
rapporteur
name: LA VIA Giovanni date: 2009-12-16T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2009-12-16T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: LA VIA Giovanni group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
docs/8/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-204&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0204_EN.html
docs/9/body
EC
events/5/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-204&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0204_EN.html
events/8/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-286
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0286_EN.html
activities
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 2986 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=2986*&MEET_DATE=14/12/2009 type: Debate in Council title: 2986 council: Agriculture and Fisheries date: 2009-12-14T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • date: 2009-12-17T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2009-10-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development rapporteur: group: ALDE name: LYON George body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2009-12-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: PPE name: LA VIA Giovanni body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Development committee: DEVE
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 2995 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=2995*&MEET_DATE=22/02/2010 type: Debate in Council title: 2995 council: Agriculture and Fisheries date: 2010-02-22T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 3006 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3006*&MEET_DATE=29/03/2010 type: Debate in Council title: 3006 council: Agriculture and Fisheries date: 2010-03-29T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • date: 2010-06-15T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2009-10-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development rapporteur: group: ALDE name: LYON George body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2009-12-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: PPE name: LA VIA Giovanni body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Development committee: DEVE type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2010-06-21T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-204&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0204/2010 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2010-07-08T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18589&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100708&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-286 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0286/2010 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
commission
  • body: EC dg: Agriculture and Rural Development commissioner: CIOLOŞ Dacian
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Agriculture and Rural Development
committee
AGRI
date
2009-10-19T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: LYON George group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
True
committee
AGRI
date
2009-10-19T00:00:00
committee_full
Agriculture and Rural Development
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: LYON George
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
opinion
False
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
BUDG
date
2009-12-16T00:00:00
committee_full
Budgets
rapporteur
group: PPE name: LA VIA Giovanni
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2009-12-16T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: LA VIA Giovanni group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/2
body
EP
responsible
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
council
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Agriculture and Fisheries meeting_id: 3006 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3006*&MEET_DATE=29/03/2010 date: 2010-03-29T00:00:00
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Agriculture and Fisheries meeting_id: 2995 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=2995*&MEET_DATE=22/02/2010 date: 2010-02-22T00:00:00
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Agriculture and Fisheries meeting_id: 2986 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=2986*&MEET_DATE=14/12/2009 date: 2009-12-14T00:00:00
docs
  • date: 2010-03-24T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.972 title: PE439.972 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2010-04-29T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.964&secondRef=02 title: PE439.964 committee: BUDG type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2010-04-29T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE441.049 title: PE441.049 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2010-04-30T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE441.147 title: PE441.147 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2010-04-30T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE441.152 title: PE441.152 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2010-05-19T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE442.808 title: PE442.808 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2010-06-02T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE442.868 title: PE442.868 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2010-06-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE442.931 title: PE442.931 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2010-06-21T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-204&language=EN title: A7-0204/2010 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP
  • date: 2010-11-29T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=18589&j=0&l=en title: SP(2010)6850 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events
  • date: 2009-12-14T00:00:00 type: Debate in Council body: CSL docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=2986*&MEET_DATE=14/12/2009 title: 2986 summary: The Council held a policy debate on the future of the CAP , with a particular focus on rural development policy . The Council debate on the future of rural development policy is the continuation of previous discussions under the Czech and French Presidencies, which focused on the first pillar of the CAP. Member States were invited to reflect on the future challenges they consider to be most relevant for European agriculture and rural areas and on what changes were needed in the rural development programme in order to tackle these challenges, while respecting the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. Several Ministers emphasised that although there is already quite a good existing policy, there is still room for improvement because a central banner is needed, which in their view, could be Green Growth . Some urged structural changes; the replacement of the axes-structure with a new clearer one with more focused targets. Some others pointed out the need to redesign some of the individual measures, and establish balance between targeting and simplification. In its introductory words, the Commission representative highlighted that strengthening competitiveness, protecting the environment and creating new jobs are the three most important challenges we face when we talk about the future of rural development. After the discussion, she estimated too early to mention any figures and invited Member States to reflect on several issues that most delegates touched upon, such as the criteria to be defined for the distribution of money intending to replace historical grounds. The Swedish Presidency concluded that there is a need to keep rural development as part of the common policy , in order to face several important challenges such as sustainable development, climatic change, water management, and biodiversity.
  • date: 2009-12-17T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2010-02-22T00:00:00 type: Debate in Council body: CSL docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=2995*&MEET_DATE=22/02/2010 title: 2995 summary: Ministers held an exchange of views on the future of the CAP and, in particular, on market management measures after 2013, based on a presidency background paper and a questionnaire. Ministers welcomed the presidency paper as a valuable contribution to the discussion on the future of the CAP, stressing the importance of striking the right balance between market orientation on the one hand and ensuring the viability of agricultural activity in the EU through appropriate market and crisis management instruments on the other. Many ministers agreed that market orientation of European agriculture achieved as a result of the CAP reforms undertaken since 1992 was sufficient. Many referred to the contribution which existing measures such as direct payments and market management measures make to dampening price and income risks for farmers. At the same time, they highlighted the necessity of keeping an efficient safety net in future, in particular against the background of growing price volatility and market instability, and the EU commitments in the context of the Doha Development Round of the WTO. Many ministers supported the presidency's suggestion of examining the possibility of complementing existing market management measures provided for in the single CMO and made suggestions, such as the creation of income insurance schemes, the strengthening of producer organisations and interbranch cooperation, futures markets and the setting up of a crisis fund. Many delegations also referred to ongoing discussions on the functioning of the food supply chain and asked to take into account the outcome of that work. A substantial number of ministers agreed that the future CAP should provide for a financial mechanism allowing the EU to respond rapidly to serious crises which offers flexibility in responding rapidly to such cases. A number of ministers considered that market orientation in European agriculture could be further improved and insisted that further efforts to improve competitiveness would offer the best safety net. Some made it clear that any new market measures should not come on top of existing ones and also expressed doubts with regard to the creation of a financial mechanism to deal with crisis situations, as this would involve additional expenditure. The presidency expressed its intention to table at the Special Committee for Agriculture (SCA) a follow-up paper summarising the Council's debate. The Council's debate followed previous discussions on the different aspects of the CAP post-2013 held under the French, Czech and Swedish Presidencies. A final general reflection on the CAP post-2013 is scheduled to take place during the informal meeting of the ministers of Agriculture on 30 May - 1 June, to be held in Merida, Spain. Thereafter the Commission is expected to submit a communication on the post-2013 CAP in late autumn 2010, followed be legislative proposals in mid-2011.
  • date: 2010-03-29T00:00:00 type: Debate in Council body: CSL docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3006*&MEET_DATE=29/03/2010 title: 3006
  • date: 2010-06-15T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP summary: The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development adopted the own-initiative report drafted by George LYON (ALDE, UK) on the Future of the Common Agricultural Policy after 2013. The committee notes that European agriculture faces new challenges: food security, the rising prices of foodstuffs and volatile market prices, the fight against climate change, water, soil and biodiversity management, consumer demands for high quality products, better animal welfare as well as competitiveness, the rural exodus, ageing of the rural population, pressures on agricultural earnings, achieving equal levels of development and cohesion. The need for a strong CAP post 2013: given these challenges and in the light of the Europe 2020 Strategy, Members consider that the priorities of the European Common Agricultural Policy post-2013 should be part of a common and credible multi-functional agricultural food policy with the necessary funding both to provide effective and targeted support to farmers and respond to the concerns of the rural community, as well as benefiting society as a whole. The CAP should enable agriculture to play its part in the European economy and ensure it has the tools to compete on world markets. Members consider that the future European agricultural policy must remain a common policy and that it should not be renationalised. It believes that direct support should remain fully financed by the European budget and reject any further cofinancing which could harm fair competition within the EU Single Market. This policy should ensure the coexistence of i) high-added-value farming with high-quality primary and processed products, giving it a strong position on world markets; ii) farming open to regional markets; iii) farming geared to local markets. The committee recalls that one of the main reasons why the EU needs a strong CAP is to contribute to the maintenance and development of viable and dynamic rural communities, at the heart of European cultural diversity. It takes the view that this calls for the socio-economic gap between rural and urban communities to be narrowed, in order to avoid the growing land abandonment and rural depopulation which are further isolating rural areas. The report underlines the urgent need to attract younger generations and women to rural areas through long-term policies and to provide new and alternative economic opportunities for them to ensure a sustainable rural population. New ways of attracting young people should be explored, such as the availability of favourable loans and credit for investments and recognition of their professional skills, in order to ensure they are able to enter the rural economy with relative ease. CAP priorities for the 21 st century: Members agree on the need to fix certain central key building blocks: security of supply of food products and fair trade, sustainability, agriculture across Europe, the quality of foodstuffs, conservation of biodiversity and environmental protection, and green growth to achieve a fair and more sustainable CAP. They consider that the current two-pillar structure (production supports and rural development) should be maintained. A fair CAP: the report insists that EU agriculture must remain competitive against fierce competition and trade-distorting measures on the part of trading partners and/or countries where producers are not subject to standards as high as in the EU as regards, in particular, product quality, food safety, the environment, social legislation and animal welfare. Members believe that improving competitiveness at different levels (local, regional, internal market and world markets) should still be a fundamental objective of the CAP post-2013. They call on the Commission to uphold the interests of European farmers in the context of multilateral and bilateral trade agreements negotiated on behalf of the EU. Stressing that farmers require long-term investment prospects and adequate incomes in order to carry out their tasks, Member call for the guarantee of a fair and stable return for the farming community to remain a primary goal for the new CAP, whilst providing good value for money and fair treatment for consumers. The committee calls for flexible and efficient market measures to be set in place to ensure an adequate safety net within the future framework of the CAP in order to avoid extreme market price volatility, provide a greater degree of stability, and provide rapid and efficient responses to economic crises arising in the sector. It takes the view that this should be complemented by a risk management system that helps minimise the consequences of natural and health disasters. It also calls for a fair distribution of CAP payments and insists that it should be fair to farmers in both new and old Member States. Members considers that reducing direct payments under the first pillar would have devastating consequences, not only for farmers but, to an equal extent, for the countryside, for agriculture-linked public services, for consumers and for society, given that the latter is a beneficiary as a whole. They add that direct payments are, therefore, essential and must be maintained, above all for the new Member States. A sustainable CAP: the agriculture has a leading role to play in tackling climate change by reducing GHG emissions, increasing carbon sequestration capacity and developing and using more renewable energy sources and bio-based materials. Members believe that climate considerations should be integrated across CAP measures where appropriate. They believe that an EU-funded top-up direct payment should be made available to farmers through simple multiannual contracts rewarding them for reducing their carbon emissions per unit of production and/or increasing their sequestration of carbon in the soil through sustainable production methods and through the production of biomass that can be used in the production of long-lasting agro-materials. Members take the view that investment in agricultural innovation should be further encouraged, inter alia through the CAP and EU research and development framework programmes, in order to address new challenges. They recommend, to this end, the active presence of agronomic advisors in the regions to guide farmers in their attempts to deliver environmental public goods. A green CAP: Members note that the market has failed, to date, to properly reward farmers for protecting the environment and other public goods. They consider that green growth should be at the heart of a new rural development strategy that focuses on creating new green jobs through: the development of local dynamic tools such as local marketing, local processing, and support for projects involving all stakeholders from the local farming sector; the development of biomass, bio-waste, bio-gas and small-scale renewable energy production, as well as encouraging the production of second-generation biofuels, agro-materials and green-chemistry products, investing in modernisation and innovation, as well as new research and development techniques for adaptation to, and mitigation of, climate change, providing training and advice to farmers in applying new techniques and to assist young farmers entering the industry. Food quality: the report stresses that the development of food quality policy, including in terms of geographical indication (PDO/PGI/TSG), must be a priority aspect of the CAP and be deepened and strengthened so that the EU can maintain its leadership position in this area. It takes the view that, in the case of these high-quality products, the use of original management, protection and promotion instruments should be allowed. Agriculture across Europe: Members call for the continuation of specific measures to compensate farmers producing in disadvantaged areas such as areas with natural handicaps, including mountainous regions, environmentally sensitive areas and/or regions which are the most affected by climate change, and outermost regions, in order to ensure that agricultural activity takes place so that land continues to be managed and local food is produced across the EU, reducing the threat of land abandonment and ensuring balanced territorial management across the EU and a rational development of agricultural production. A common and simple policy: Members believe that the new CAP, through a simplified support system, must be easy to administer, transparent, and reduce red tape and administrative burdens on farmers, particularly for smaller producers. They believe that this could be achieved inter alia by moving towards the use of delivery tools that set the goals and empower farmers to choose their own farming systems to meet these objectives, such as outcome agreements, simple contracts and multiannual payments. The CAP in the multi-annual financial framework: the report underlines the need, given the new Common Agricultural Policy objectives, to provide adequate funding in the new multiannual financial framework (MFF), in order to be able to better support the policy in accordance with the major challenges this crucial sector for EU food security will have to face in the coming years.
  • date: 2010-06-21T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-204&language=EN title: A7-0204/2010
  • date: 2010-07-08T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18589&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2010-07-08T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100708&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-07-08T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-286 title: T7-0286/2010 summary: The European Parliament adopted a resolution on the Future of the Common Agricultural Policy after 2013. Parliament notes that the CAP reforms initiated in 1992 and 1999 and, in particular, the 2003 reform, which was reviewed during the Health Check and introduced the principle of decoupling, as well as the various sectoral reforms, were all intended to allow EU farmers to better respond and react to market signals and conditions. It wishes for this trend to continue in further reforms, while some market measures are still needed in view of the specific features of agricultural production. An amendment adopted in plenary recalls that agriculture has always been a producer of public goods, or of what in today's context may be called 'first-generation' public goods , the reference here being to food security and food safety, and to the high nutritional value of agricultural produce, which should continue to constitute the primary raison d'être for the CAP, corresponding to its essence and representing the first concern of Europe's citizens. The more recently identified or 'second-generation' public goods , e.g. the environment, land management or animal welfare, while also objectives of the CAP, are complementary to the first-generation goods and should therefore not replace them. The resolution also recalls that European agriculture faces new challenges : food security, the rising prices of foodstuffs and volatile market prices, the fight against climate change, water, soil and biodiversity management, consumer demands for high quality products, better animal welfare as well as competitiveness, the rural exodus, ageing of the rural population, pressures on agricultural earnings, achieving equal levels of development and cohesion. The need for a strong CAP post 2013: given these challenges and in the light of the Europe 2020 Strategy , Parliament considers that the priorities of the European Common Agricultural Policy post-2013 should be part of a common and credible multi-functional agricultural food policy with the necessary funding both to provide effective and targeted support to farmers and respond to the concerns of the rural community, as well as benefiting society as a whole. The CAP should enable agriculture to play its part in the European economy and ensure it has the tools to compete on world markets. Members consider that the future European agricultural policy must remain a common policy and that it should not be renationalised. It believes that direct support should remain fully financed by the European budget and reject any further cofinancing which could harm fair competition within the EU Single Market. This policy should ensure the coexistence of i) high-added-value farming with high-quality primary and processed products, giving it a strong position on world markets; ii) farming open to regional markets; iii) farming geared to local markets. Parliament recalls that one of the main reasons why the EU needs a strong CAP is to contribute to the maintenance and development of viable and dynamic rural communities, at the heart of European cultural diversity. It takes the view that this calls for the socio-economic gap between rural and urban communities to be narrowed, in order to avoid the growing land abandonment and rural depopulation which are further isolating rural areas. The resolution underlines the urgent need to attract younger generations and women to rural areas through long-term policies and to provide new and alternative economic opportunities for them to ensure a sustainable rural population. New ways of attracting young people should be explored, such as the availability of favourable loans and credit for investments and recognition of their professional skills, in order to ensure they are able to enter the rural economy with relative ease. Noting that the cross-compliance system remains one of the appropriate means of optimising the provision of eco-system services by farmers and meeting new environmental challenges by securing the provision of basic public goods, Parliament notes, however, that the introduction of cross-compliance has raised a whole range of problems relating to administrative issues and acceptance by farmers, who had the impression that they were losing a degree of freedom in their work. They call therefore for the administrative burden on farmers to be reduced through a simplified implementation system for cross-compliance requirements. CAP priorities for the 21 st century: Parliament agrees on the need to fix certain central key building blocks: security of supply of food products and fair trade, sustainability, agriculture across Europe, the quality of foodstuffs, conservation of biodiversity and environmental protection, and green growth to achieve a fair and more sustainable CAP. They consider that the current two-pillar structure (production supports and rural development) should be maintained. A fair CAP : the resolution insists that EU agriculture must remain competitive against fierce competition and trade-distorting measures on the part of trading partners and/or countries where producers are not subject to standards as high as in the EU as regards, in particular, product quality, food safety, the environment, social legislation and animal welfare. Members believe that improving competitiveness at different levels (local, regional, internal market and world markets) should still be a fundamental objective of the CAP post-2013. They call on the Commission to uphold the interests of European farmers in the context of multilateral and bilateral trade agreements negotiated on behalf of the EU. Stressing that farmers require long-term investment prospects and adequate incomes in order to carry out their tasks, Member call for the guarantee of a fair and stable return for the farming community to remain a primary goal for the new CAP, whilst providing good value for money and fair treatment for consumers. Parliament calls for flexible and efficient market measures to be set in place to ensure an adequate safety net within the future framework of the CAP in order to avoid extreme market price volatility, provide a greater degree of stability, and provide rapid and efficient responses to economic crises arising in the sector. It takes the view that this should be complemented by a risk management system that helps minimise the consequences of natural and health disasters. It also calls for a fair distribution of CAP payments and insists that it should be fair to farmers in both new and old Member States. Members consider that reducing direct payments under the first pillar would have devastating consequences, not only for farmers but, to an equal extent, for the countryside, for agriculture-linked public services, for consumers and for society, given that the latter is a beneficiary as a whole. They add that direct payments are, therefore, essential and must be maintained. A sustainable CAP : the agriculture sector has a leading role to play in tackling climate change by reducing GHG emissions, increasing carbon sequestration capacity and developing and using more renewable energy sources and bio-based materials. Parliament believes that climate considerations should be integrated across CAP measures where appropriate. It believes that an EU-funded top-up direct payment should be made available to farmers through simple multiannual contracts rewarding them for reducing their carbon emissions per unit of production and/or increasing their sequestration of carbon in the soil through sustainable production methods and through the production of biomass that can be used in the production of long-lasting agro-materials. Parliament takes the view that investment in agricultural innovation should be further encouraged, inter alia through the CAP and EU research and development framework programmes, in order to address new challenges. It recommends, to this end, the active presence of agronomic advisors in the regions to guide farmers in their attempts to deliver environmental public goods. A green CAP : Parliament notes that the market has failed, to date, to properly reward farmers for protecting the environment and other public goods. It considers that green growth should be at the heart of a new rural development strategy that focuses on creating new green jobs through: the development of local dynamic tools such as local marketing, local processing, and support for projects involving all stakeholders from the local farming sector; the development of biomass, bio-waste, bio-gas and small-scale renewable energy production, as well as encouraging the production of second-generation biofuels, agro-materials and green-chemistry products, investing in modernisation and innovation, as well as new research and development techniques for adaptation to, and mitigation of, climate change; providing training and advice to farmers in applying new techniques and to assist young farmers entering the industry. Food quality : the resolution stresses that the development of food quality policy, including in terms of geographical indication (PDO/PGI/TSG), must be a priority aspect of the CAP and be deepened and strengthened so that the EU can maintain its leadership position in this area. It takes the view that, in the case of these high-quality products, the use of original management, protection and promotion instruments should be allowed. Agriculture across Europe : Parliament calls for the continuation of specific measures to compensate farmers producing in disadvantaged areas such as areas with natural handicaps, including mountainous regions, environmentally sensitive areas and/or regions which are the most affected by climate change, and outermost regions, in order to ensure that agricultural activity takes place so that land continues to be managed and local food is produced across the EU, reducing the threat of land abandonment and ensuring balanced territorial management across the EU and a rational development of agricultural production. A common and simple policy : Members believe that the new CAP, through a simplified support system, must be easy to administer, transparent, and reduce red tape and administrative burdens on farmers, particularly for smaller producers. They believe that this could be achieved inter alia by moving towards the use of delivery tools that set the goals and empower farmers to choose their own farming systems to meet these objectives, such as outcome agreements, simple contracts and multiannual payments. The CAP in the multi-annual financial framework: the resolution underlines the need, given the new Common Agricultural Policy objectives, to provide adequate funding in the new multiannual financial framework (MFF), in order to be able to better support the policy in accordance with the major challenges this crucial sector for EU food security will have to face in the coming years.
  • date: 2010-07-08T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Former Council configuration
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/agriculture/ title: Agriculture and Rural Development commissioner: CIOLOŞ Dacian
procedure/Modified legal basis
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
New
Rules of Procedure EP 150
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
AGRI/7/01458
New
  • AGRI/7/01458
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 52
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
procedure/subject
Old
  • 3.10 Agricultural policy and economies
New
3.10
Agricultural policy and economies
activities
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 2986 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=2986*&MEET_DATE=14/12/2009 type: Debate in Council title: 2986 council: Agriculture and Fisheries date: 2009-12-14T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • date: 2009-12-17T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2009-10-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development rapporteur: group: ALDE name: LYON George body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2009-12-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: PPE name: LA VIA Giovanni body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Development committee: DEVE
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 2995 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=2995*&MEET_DATE=22/02/2010 type: Debate in Council title: 2995 council: Agriculture and Fisheries date: 2010-02-22T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • body: CSL meeting_id: 3006 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=3006*&MEET_DATE=29/03/2010 type: Debate in Council title: 3006 council: Agriculture and Fisheries date: 2010-03-29T00:00:00 type: Council Meeting
  • date: 2010-06-15T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2009-10-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development rapporteur: group: ALDE name: LYON George body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2009-12-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: PPE name: LA VIA Giovanni body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Development committee: DEVE type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2010-06-21T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-204&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0204/2010 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2010-07-08T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18589&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100708&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-286 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0286/2010 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
committees
  • body: EP responsible: True committee: AGRI date: 2009-10-19T00:00:00 committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development rapporteur: group: ALDE name: LYON George
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2009-12-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: PPE name: LA VIA Giovanni
  • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Development committee: DEVE
links
other
  • body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Former Council configuration
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/agriculture/ title: Agriculture and Rural Development commissioner: CIOLOŞ Dacian
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
AGRI/7/01458
reference
2009/2236(INI)
title
Future of the CAP after 2013
legal_basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
stage_reached
Procedure completed
subtype
Initiative
Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subject
3.10 Agricultural policy and economies