Amendments on EP Report A5-0465/2003 (Report on coexistence between genetically modified crops and conventional and organic crops)

December 17, 2003

Brussels, 16 Dec 2003

Full text of Amendments 001 - 002
PIN archive of Amendments 001 - 002

15 December 2003 A5-0465/ 1

AMENDMENT 1
tabled by Jan Mulder, on behalf of the ELDR Group

REPORT by Friedrich-Wilhelm Graefe zu Baringdorf A5-0465/2003
Coexistence of GM crops with conventional and organic crops

Motion for a resolution

Rectial F

F. whereas seed production takes place under particular conditions which must guarantee the highest possible degree of purity, and the limit value for the labelling of GMO-impurities in seed should be set at scientifically, technically and conomically sustainable thresholds that ensure compliance with the current labelling threshold of 0.9% for food,

Or. en AMENDMENT 2
tabled by Jan Mulder, on behalf of the ELDR Group

REPORT by Friedrich-Wilhelm Graefe zu Baringdorf A5-0465/2003
Coexistence of GM crops with conventional and organic crops

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

3. Calls on Member States to develop national strategies and best practices based on Commission guidelines, which are to be part of the Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), to be established without delay (deletion) on the coexistence of genetically modified crops on the one hand and non-genetically modified conventional crops on the other hand; calls on the Commission to keep Parliament well informed about this process;

Or. en Full text of Amendments 003 - 004
PIN archive of Amendments 003 - 004

{16/12/2003}16 December 2003 A5-0465/3
AMENDMENT 3
by Bent Hindrup Andersen, {EDD}on behalf of the EDD Group
Report A5-0465/2003
Friedrich-Wilhelm Graefe zu Baringdorf
Genetically modified crops and conventional and organic crops
Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7a (new)
7a. Calls on the Commission to instruct the Member States to introduce a levy on GMO seed and GMO feed, to be imposed at the marketing stage. The revenue should cover day-to-day administration and the testing of farmers' organically farmed and non-GMO conventional land as well as compensation for damage caused by GMO pollution which occurs despite correct practice on the part of GMO farmers. A Member State should be allowed an exemption if a decision to that effect is taken at a public national parliamentary sitting in the Member State concerned and is presented by the Head of Government to an EU Council meeting;

Justification

A levy is the only reasonable way in which to finance the costs incurred when GMO are correctly used and it reflects the principle that the polluter pays if the revenue is spent on testing and compensation. There is a basis for following this course of action in Article 174(2) of the EC Treaty (polluter-pays- principle). The amount of the levy should merely reflect the actual expenditure on administration, testing and estimated expenditure on compensation. Allowing a Member State the possibility of an exemption leaves Member States' sovereignty intact and, at the same time, means that a grassroots-based environmental campaign can achieve results across borders.

Or.  {DA}da
{16/12/2003}16 December 2003 A5-0465/4
AMENDMENT 4
by Bent Hindrup Andersen, {EDD}on behalf of the EDD Group
Report A5-0465/2003 Genetically modified crops and conventional and organic crops
Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7b (new)
7b. Calls on the Commission to recommend that the Member States introduce a levy on GMO seed and GMO feed, to be imposed at the marketing stage. The revenue should cover day-to-day administration and the testing of farmers' organically farmed and non-GMO conventional land as well as compensation for damage caused by GMO pollution which occurs despite correct practice on the part of GMO farmers. A Member State should be allowed an exemption if a decision to that effect is taken at a public national parliamentary sitting in the Member State concerned and is presented by the Head of Government to an EU Council meeting;

Justification

A levy is the only reasonable way in which to finance the costs incurred when GMO are correctly used and it reflects the principle that the polluter pays if the revenue is spent on testing and compensation. There is a basis for following this course of action in Article 174(2) of the EC Treaty (polluter-pays- principle). The amount of the levy should merely reflect the actual expenditure on administration, testing and estimated expenditure on compensation. Allowing a Member State the possibility of an exemption leaves Member States' sovereignty intact and, at the same time, means that a grassroots-based environmental campaign can achieve results across borders

Or.  {DA}da

Report A5-0465/2003

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments