ࡱ >
#` ~ bjbj A X X X ( 8 4 3 4 $ ( L t t t t h , $ h E X u t t u u X X t t u X t X t f u : , X X ) t 0|ߟ } N
l
0 4
6 2 6 ) 6 X ) L l 6 , " 4 u u u u 3 3 ; dQ d dQ 3 3 ; d l 4 $ ` T X X X EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
20042009{ENVI}Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
2008/0103(CNS)
{04/09/2008}16.9.2008
OPINION
of the {ENVI}Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
for the {AGRI}Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development
on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers
(COM(2008)0306 C60240/2008 2008/0103(CNS))
Rapporteur: Kathalijne Maria Buitenweg
PA_Legam
SHORT JUSTIFICATION
The European agricultural sector is facing big challenges, such as climate change and water scarcity, and it will continue to do so. It is of big importance that the Common Agricultural Policy is adapted to those challenges. European agriculture still uses a lot of water, pesticides, fertilizers and energy, and without the necessary measures it will keep doing so.
It is difficult to explain to the public that the European Union is giving direct payments to large, intensive farms, on the basis of historic yields or landownership, without asking farmers to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and their use of water, pesticides, fertilizers and energy.
Paying for public services
In November last year the Commission presented its Communication on the CAP Health Check. According to the European Commission, the Common Agricultural Policy would be radically reformed. Direct payments were supposed to be substantially cut in favour of strengthening environmental and employment benefits. Unfortunately, the Commission just marginally cut the direct payments in its legislative proposals, presented in May of this year.
Farmers should not be paid for historic yields or landownership, but for the public services that they deliver, such as enhancing biodiversity, and water management, and for achievements in the fields of environment, animal welfare and food safety, that go further than the legal obligations. The rapporteur therefore proposes to phase out all current direct payments by 2020. The budgetary principle in the Common Agricultural Policy should be 'using public money to pay for public services'.
Cross compliance criteria
Any form of public funding for farming must be conditional on respect for environmental, nature and animal welfare legislation. This is regulated through the cross compliance criteria. The rapporteur proposes to strengthen these criteria and to include additional provisions on water use and greenhouse gas emissions in the cross-compliance criteria.
Experience has shown the necessity of strengthening controls and increasing penalties for not respecting the cross compliance criteria. To ensure that controls will be strengthened, the rapporteur proposes to set a minimum amount of controls. The competent authorities in Member States should annually control at least 5% of all farms.
Abolition of mandatory set aside
The Commission proposes to abolish mandatory set aside. This will cause a further loss of biodiversity, of birdlife in particular, and of other significant environmental benefits. The goal of the European Union is, to stop the loss of biodiversity by 2010.
This is impossible if the agricultural sector does not play its part.
Scientific evidence shows that set aside has brought important environmental benefits. Inter alia, providing habitats for wildlife and mitigating the impacts on soil and water in intensively cropped areas. These benefits will be lost by the abolition of set aside. This loss should be compensated through targeted measures within cross-compliance and within the Rural Development policy.
Furthermore buffer strips, with natural and blooming vegetation and extensively managed crops, in which no pesticides or fertilizers are used, shall be set along field borders. This is not only a good measure to enhance biodiversity, but it also leads to a cleaner soil and especially to cleaner ground- and surface water.
Climate change
The agricultural sector is a big emitter of greenhouse gases. Specific support should be given to measures aiming at reducing the energy consumption in the food chain, and to measures aiming at prevention and re-use of agricultural waste.
Special attention should be paid to intensive livestock farming, which causes about 18% of the global CO2 emissions. In any case CAP money should not be used to promote meat consumption, which is still being done at this moment. What and how much you consume is a free, individual choice, but public money should not be used to promote the consumption of products that have a negative impact on climate change, water scarcity and world hunger.
To reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the whole agricultural sector, the Commission shall propose binding legislative proposals in 2009, aiming at reducing the greenhouse gas emissions by the agricultural sector with at least 30% by 2020, and with at least 80% by 2050.
Animal welfare
Animal welfare should be substantially improved in the agricultural sector. The Commission should propose binding legislative proposals in 2009, aiming at improving animal welfare in the European Union. These proposals will include the phasing out of factory farming.
In 2007 a majority of the Parliament voted in favour of abolishing all subsidies that are given to the breeders of bullfighting bulls. Unfortunately the Commission and the Council ignored this clear call of the Parliament. Bullfighting is a cruel sport and should not be supported by the European Union. The rapporteur therefore repeats the call of the Parliament and asks for the abolishment of payments given to the breeders of bullfighting bulls.
Export subsidies
Export subsidies are still a barrier for fair trade in the agricultural sector. These subsidies often damage local markets of developing countries. The Commission should therefore abolish all export subsidies by 2009.
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety calls on the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following amendments in its report:
Amendment 1
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment(1) Experience drawn from the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No2019/93, (EC) No1452/2001, (EC) No1453/2001, (EC) No1454/2001, (EC) No1868/94, (EC) No1251/1999, (EC) No1254/1999, (EC) No1673/2000, (EEC) No2358/71 and (EC) No2529/2001 shows that certain elements of the support mechanism need to be adjusted. In particular the decoupling of direct support should be extended and the functioning of the Single Payment Scheme should be simplified. It should also be noted that Regulation (EC) No1782/2003 has been substantially amended since its entry into force. In the light of these developments and in the interest of clarity it should be repealed and replaced by a new Regulation.(1) Experience drawn from the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) No 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001 shows that certain elements of the support mechanism need to be adjusted. In particular the decoupling of direct support should be strongly extended with the aim of full decoupling and the functioning of the Single Payment Scheme should be simplified. It should also be noted that Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 has been substantially amended since its entry into force. In the light of these developments and in the interest of clarity it should be repealed and replaced by a new Regulation.Justification
In order to reach the environmental ambitions, including the new challenges, we need a big amount of money to be shifted from the first to the second pillar.
Amendment 2
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment(3) Furthermore, in order to avoid the abandonment of agricultural land and ensure that it is maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition, Regulation (EC) No1782/2003 established a Community framework within which Member States adopt standards taking account of the specific characteristics of the areas concerned, including soil and climatic conditions and existing farming systems (land use, crop rotation, farming practices) and farm structures. The abolition of compulsory set aside within the single payment scheme may in certain cases have adverse effects for the environment, in particular as regards certain landscape features. It is therefore appropriate to reinforce the existing Community provisions aiming at protecting, where appropriate, specified landscape features.(3) Furthermore, in order to avoid the abandonment of agricultural land and ensure that it is maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition, Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 established a Community framework within which Member States adopt standards taking account of the specific characteristics of the areas concerned, including soil and climatic conditions and existing farming systems (land use, crop rotation, farming practices) and farm structures. The abolition of compulsory set aside within the single payment scheme will cause a further loss of biodiversity, of bird life in particular, and of other significant environmental benefits. It is therefore necessary to provide for an appropriate compensation aiming at protecting and enhancing biodiversity, including, protecting and re-establishing specified landscape features. This should be achieved by reinforcing the existing Community provisions, but also by introducing new compensatory measures.Justification
Scientific evidence shows that set aside has brought important environmental benefits. Inter alia, providing habitats for wildlife and mitigating the impacts on soil and water in intensively cropped areas. These benefits will be lost by the abolition of set aside. This loss should be compensated through targeted measures within cross-compliance and the Rural Development policy.
Amendment 3
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment4) Protection and management of water in the context of the agricultural activity has increasingly become a problem in certain areas. It is therefore appropriate to also reinforce the existing Community framework for good agricultural and environmental condition with the aim to protect water against pollution and run-off and to manage the use of water.(4) Protection and management of water in the context of the agricultural activity is becoming a problem in an increasingly large part of the Community. It is therefore appropriate to also reinforce the existing Community framework for good agricultural and environmental condition with the aim to protect water against pollution and run-off and to manage the use of water, including reducing the large annual waste of water through better agronomic and water management systems.Justification
In order to solve and avoid water scarcity, the annual waste of water in the agricultural sector has to be reduced.
Amendment 4
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment(5) Since permanent pasture has a positive environmental effect, it is appropriate to apply measures to encourage the maintenance of existing permanent pasture to avoid its massive conversion into arable land.(5) Since permanent grassland has a positive environmental effect, it is appropriate to apply measures to encourage the maintenance of existing permanent grassland to avoid its massive conversion into arable land.Justification
Not all permanent grasslands are grazed. Permanent grasslands are important carbon stocks and Europe's most important biodiversity habitats. From that point of view, grasslands that are mowed are as important as pastures.
Amendment 5
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment(6) In order to achieve a better balance between policy tools designed to promote sustainable agriculture and those designed to promote rural development, a system of compulsory progressive reduction of direct payments (modulation) was introduced by Regulation (EC) No1782/2003. This system should be maintained including the exemption of payments up to EUR5000 from its application.(6) In order to achieve a better balance between policy tools designed to promote sustainable agriculture and those designed to promote rural development, a system of compulsory progressive reduction of direct payments (modulation) was introduced by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003. This system should be maintained, including the exemption of payments up to EUR 5 000 from its application. The modulation percentages should be strongly enhanced with the aim of phasing out all existing direct payments by 2020. Justification
Farmers should be awarded for the public services that they deliver, such as enhancing biodiversity and storing water, and they should not automatically get supported.
Amendment 6
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Text proposed by the CommissionAmendment(7) The savings made through the modulation mechanism introduced by Regulation (EC) No1782/2003 are used to finance measures under the rural development policy. Since the adoption of that regulation the agricultural sector has been faced with a number of new and demanding challenges such as climate change, the increasing importance of bio-energy, as well as the need for a better water management and a more effective protection of biodiversity. The European Community, as party to the Kyoto Protocol, has been called to adapt its policies in the light of the climate change considerations. Furthermore, following serious problems related to water scarcity and droughts, water management issues should be further addressed. Protecting biodiversity remains a major challenge and while important progress has been made, the achievement of the European Community's biodiversity target for 2010 will require additional efforts. The Community acknowledges the need to tackle these new challenges in the framework of its policies. In the area of agriculture, rural development programs adopted under Council Regulation (EC) No1698/2006 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) are an appropriate tool to deal with them. To enable Member States to revise their rural development programmes accordingly without being required to reduce their current rural development activities in other areas, additional funding needs to be made available. However, the financial perspectives for the period 2007 to 2013 do not provide for the financial means to reinforce the Community's rural development policy as necessary. Under these circumstances it is appropriate to mobilise a large part of the financial resources needed by providing for a gradual increase of the reduction of direct payments through modulation.(7) The funds obtained through the modulation mechanism introduced by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 are used to finance measures under the rural development policy. Since the adoption of that regulation the agricultural sector has been faced with a number of new and demanding challenges such as climate change, the increasing importance of bio-energy, as well as the need for a better water management and a more effective protection of biodiversity. The European Community, as party to the Kyoto Protocol, has been called to adapt its policies in the light of the climate change considerations. Furthermore, following serious problems related to water scarcity and droughts, water management issues within the Community need to be further addressed and firm action needs to be taken. Protecting biodiversity remains, alongside balanced water management, a major challenge, and while important progress has been made, the achievement of the European Union's target for 2010 of halting biodiversity loss within the EU will be impossible unless additional efforts are made in this area. Such action should include major changes to the way in which the European agricultural model is organised, drawing on the experience gained by States whose agricultural systems are based on a traditional, small-scale farming model. The Community accordingly acknowledges the need to tackle these new challenges in the framework of its policies. In the area of agriculture, rural development programs adopted under Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2006 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) are an appropriate tool to deal with them. To enable Member States to revise their rural development programmes accordingly without being required to reduce their current rural development activities in other areas, additional funding needs to be made available. However, the financial perspectives for the period 2007 to 2013 do not provide for the financial means to reinforce the Community's rural development policy as necessary. Under these circumstances it is appropriate to mobilise a large part of the financial resources needed by providing for a gradual increase of the reduction of direct payments through modulation.Justification
Zaburzenia gospodarki wodnej oraz dramatyczny spadek bi o r |n o r o d n o [c i s o b e c n i e g B w n y m i p r o b l e m a m i r o l n o - [r o d o w i s k o w y m i n a t e r e n i e W s p l n o t y . N i e u w z g l d n i e n i e l u b m a r g i n a l i z o w a n i e t y c h p r o b l e m w , p o p r z e z b r a k z a s a d n i c z y c h z m i a n w m o d e l u f u n k c j o n o w a n i a w s p l n o t o w e g o r o l n i c t w a , m o |e d o p r o w a d z i d o t r u d n o o d w r a c a l n y c h z m i a n w s t r u k t u r z e r o l n o - [r o d o w i s k o w e j o b s z a r w w i e j s k i c h .
D a l s z y r o z w j w i e l k o p r z e m y s Bo w e g o m o d e l u r o l n i c t w a n a o b s z a r z e W s p l n o t y o r a z n i e d o s t a t e c z n e w s p a r c i e d l a m a By c h g o s p o d a r s t w r o l n y c h , s t a j w s p r z e c z n o [c i z z a s a d a m i z r w n o w a |o n e g o r o z w o j u i p r a k t y c z n i e u n i e m o |l i w i a j r e a l i z a c j z a Bo |o n y c h c e l w [r o d o w i s k o w y c h , z p o w s t r z y m a n i e m s p a d k u b i o r |n o r o d n o [c i n a c z e l e .
<