Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-12-14-Speech-3-324"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051214.22.3-324"6
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@en4
|
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@cs1
"Hr. formand, lad mig, før jeg skitserer Kommissionens holdning til denne sag, først give udtryk for min taknemmelighed over for Fiskeriudvalget, og i særdeleshed dets formand og ordfører, hr. Morillon, for det udmærkede arbejde, der er udført inden for en meget stram tidsfrist.
Vedrørende ændringsforslag 2 er det, som anført i artikel 7 i protokollen, op til kyststaten sammen med Fællesskabet at beslutte, hvordan det finansielle bidrag skal anvendes til støtte for dens fiskeripolitik. Det er derfor Seychellernes myndigheders ansvar at udpege de vigtigste punkter, de prioriterer i deres fiskeripolitik, som skal gennemføres med bistand fra fiskeriprotokollen. Derfor kan jeg ikke acceptere dette ændringsforslag.
Hvad angår ændringsforslag 3 og 5, er Kommissionen helt enige i ånden i dem. Men Kommissionen retter sig allerede efter viderebringelse af den slags oplysninger, på linje både med de nuværende interinstitutionelle ordninger og i særdeleshed med rammeaftalen mellem Kommissionen og Parlamentet. Kommissionen mener derfor, at disse ændringsforslag ikke rigtig er nødvendige, hvis mine oplysninger er korrekte.
Ændringsforslag 4 kan Kommissionen ikke acceptere. Må jeg erindre om de grundlæggende fællesskabsbestemmelser om Kommissionens mandat til at forhandle på Fællesskabets vegne. Rådet har bemyndiget Kommissionen til at forhandle fiskeriordninger mellem Fællesskabet og Seychellerne. På denne baggrund kræver den periodiske fornyelse ikke et nyt mandat hver gang. Der er intet behov for et nyt mandat, i betragtning af at det eksisterende mandat dækker forhandlingernes mål.
Med hensyn til ændringsforslag 6 indeholder den nye protokol ikke nogen specifikke foranstaltninger, men en støtte til Seychellernes fiskeripolitik - artikel 7 i protokollen - som skal fremme ansvarligt og bæredygtigt fiskeri i Seychellernes farvande. Vi deler fuldt ud ønsket om at holde Parlamentet informeret om de forskellige aspekter af gennemførelsen af protokollen. Men Kommissionen retter sig allerede efter bestemmelserne om viderebringelse af sådanne oplysninger, i overensstemmelse med de nuværende interinstitutionelle ordninger. Derfor mener Kommissionen ikke, at dette ændringsforslag er nødvendigt.
Som De alle er opmærksomme på, har Kommissionens procedurer forsinket færdiggørelsen af dette forslag. Kommissionen stræber efter at forhindre lignende udsættelser i fremtiden. Vi er i øjeblikket i gang med interne høringer for at se, hvordan vi bedst kan overvinde de forsinkelser, der fører til, at Parlamentet får meget korte tidsfrister til at behandle betænkningerne. Jeg håber, at jeg kan rapportere til Fiskeriudvalget om mulige løsninger i nærmeste fremtid. I mellemtiden vil jeg gerne over for ordføreren undskylde den meget stramme tidsfrist, han har måttet arbejde inden for, og jeg lover personligt, at jeg vil drøfte dette med ham og søge efter og finde løsninger med hensyn til den fremtidige arbejdsgang.
Om denne sag vil jeg gerne sige, at vi har informeret Seychellernes myndigheder om udsættelsen af vedtagelsesproceduren på et tidligt tidspunkt. De seychelliske myndigheder har vist stor forståelse.
Som de ærede medlemmer er klar over, har Fællesskabet i meget lang tid haft forbindelse med Seychellerne på fiskeriområdet. De første fiskeriaftaler med dette land går tilbage til 1985, og det er en af de vigtigste tunaftaler fra et økonomisk synspunkt. Det er også en hjørnesten for netværket af tunaftaler i Det Indiske Ocean.
Denne nye protokol er den første, som fuldt ud afspejler den nye partnerskabstilgang. Begge parter går ind for en politisk dialog om fiskerispørgsmål og i særdeleshed den politik for fiskerisektoren, der defineres af regeringen på Seychellerne. Mere end en tredjedel af det finansielle bidrag er blevet øremærket til støtte til Seychellernes fiskeripolitik.
På linje med dette ønske har Kommissionen haft et møde i den blandede komité i april og to tekniske møder i juli og september 2005 med myndighederne på Seychellerne for at indlede den politiske dialog om etablering af et flerårigt sektorprogram for at støtte udviklingen af ansvarligt fiskeri på Seychellerne. Dette arbejde inkluderer etableringen af årlige og flerårlige mål, fordeling af en del af den økonomiske kompensation, de mål, der skal nås, og de kriterier og procedurer, der skal følges, for at tillade en evaluering af de årlige resultater i overensstemmelse med artikel 7 i protokollen. På denne måde er begge parter fast forpligtede til ansvarligt og bæredygtigt fiskeri i Seychellernes farvande.
Den nye protokol dækker en seksårig periode fra den 18. januar 2005 til den 17. januar 2011. Den giver fiskemuligheder for 40 notfartøjer til tunfiskeri og 12 langlinefartøjer med flydeline og lægger op til et finansielt bidrag på 4.125.000 euro om året. Protokollen er til gavn for begge parter.
Jeg vil nu gå over til ændringsforslagene. Hvad angår ændringsforslag 1, deler vi helt Parlamentets bekymring og anerkender den hurtige procedure, der er gennemført til trods for den korte tidsfrist, der har været. Som jeg allerede har sagt, har Kommissionen på et tidligt tidspunkt informeret Seychellernes myndigheder om denne udsættelse. Seychellernes myndigheder har udvist stor forståelse og har accepteret at modtage betalingen af den økonomiske kompensation for det første år af aftalen på et senere tidspunkt.
Som jeg har anført ovenfor, skyldes forsinkelserne af overførslen især forhandlingernes karakter, men også den lange tid, der er gået med interne procedurer. I betragtning heraf og af mit engagement i at finde en løsning, søger jeg ordførerens forståelse for, at vi ikke kan acceptere dette ændringsforslag."@da2
".
Herr Präsident! Bevor ich den Standpunkt der Kommission zu diesem Themenkomplex darlege, möchte ich mich zunächst beim Fischereiausschuss und insbesondere seinem Vorsitzenden und Berichterstatter, Herrn Morillon, dafür bedanken, dass er trotz des Zeitdrucks so ausgezeichnete Arbeit geleistet hat.
Bei Änderungsantrag 2 ist es gemäß Artikel 7 des Protokolls Sache des Küstenstaats, nach Vereinbarung mit der Gemeinschaft über die Art und Weise zu entscheiden, wie der Finanzbeitrag zur Unterstützung der Fischereipolitik genutzt werden soll. Die Behörden der Seychellen müssen daher die wichtigsten Schwerpunkte ihrer Fischereipolitik benennen, die mithilfe des Fischereiprotokolls umgesetzt werden sollen. Aus diesem Grunde kann ich diesen Änderungsantrag nicht annehmen.
Den Änderungsanträgen 3 und 5 kann die Kommission inhaltlich voll und ganz zustimmen. Allerdings erfüllt die Kommission die Anforderungen für die Übermittlung solcherart Informationen bereits, nämlich entsprechend den aktuellen interinstitutionellen Übereinkommen, insbesondere der Rahmenvereinbarung zwischen der Kommission und dem Europäischen Parlament. Daher ist die Kommission der Auffassung, dass diese Änderungsanträge nicht unbedingt notwendig sind, wenn ich recht informiert bin.
Änderungsantrag 4 kann die Kommission nicht annehmen. Wenn ich auf die grundlegenden Gemeinschaftsbestimmungen verweisen darf, die das Mandat der Kommission für Verhandlungen im Namen der Gemeinschaft betreffen, so hat der Rat die Kommission ermächtigt, über Fischereiabkommen zwischen der Gemeinschaft und den Seychellen Verhandlungen zu führen. Vor diesem Hintergrund ist für die Verhandlungen nicht jeweils ein neues Mandat erforderlich. Es besteht dafür keine Notwendigkeit, da die Verhandlungsziele vom bestehenden Mandat abgedeckt sind.
In Bezug auf Änderungsantrag 6 enthält das neue Protokoll außer der Unterstützung der Fischereipolitik der Seychellen – Artikel 7 des Protokolls –, wonach verantwortungsvoller Fischfang und nachhaltige Fischereipolitik in den Gewässern der Seychellen gefördert werden, keine zielgerichteten Maßnahmen. Wir unterstützen das Anliegen des Europäischen Parlaments voll und ganz, es über die einzelnen Aspekte der Umsetzung des Protokolls zu unterrichten. Jedoch erfolgt die Übermittlung diesbezüglicher Informationen durch die Kommission bereits im Einklang mit den aktuellen interinstitutionellen Vereinbarungen. Aus diesem Grunde hält die Kommission diesen Änderungsantrag für entbehrlich.
Wie Sie alle wissen, verzögerte sich die Fertigstellung dieses Vorschlags aufgrund kommissionsinterner Verfahren. Die Kommission ist bestrebt, ähnliche Verzögerungen zukünftig zu vermeiden. Wir beraten derzeit intern darüber, wie man die Verzögerungen am besten bewältigen könnte, um dem Europäischen Parlament zu kurze Fristen für die Erörterung der Berichte möglichst zu ersparen. Ich hoffe, dass ich dem Fischereiausschuss schon bald Lösungsvorschläge präsentieren kann. Bis dahin möchte ich mich beim Berichterstatter für den sehr engen Zeitrahmen entschuldigen, der ihm für seine Arbeit verblieb, und ich würde mich gern mit ihm zusammensetzen und gemeinsam nach einer Lösung suchen, wie wir zukünftig vorgehen wollen.
Zu unserem Thema möchte ich sagen, dass wir die Behörden der Seychellen bereits frühzeitig über die Verzögerung des Annahmeverfahrens informiert haben. Die Behörden zeigten großes Verständnis.
Wie Ihnen bekannt sein wird, unterhält die Gemeinschaft schon seit langem Beziehungen im Fischereibereich zu den Seychellen. Das erste Fischereiabkommen mit diesem Land wurde 1985 geschlossen, wobei es sich aus finanzieller Sicht um das wichtigste Thunfischabkommen handelt. Es bildet ferner den Eckpfeiler unseres Netzes von Thunfischabkommen im Indischen Ozean.
In diesem neuen Protokoll findet der neue Partnerschaftsansatz umfassende Berücksichtigung. Beide Partner haben sich einem politischen Dialog zu Fischereifragen verschrieben, insbesondere zu der von der Regierung der Seychellen festgelegten Fischereipolitik. Über ein Drittel der Finanzbeiträge ist für die Unterstützung der Fischereipolitik der Seychellen vorgesehen.
Im Rahmen dieses Vorhabens trafen die Kommission und die Behörden der Seychellen im Rahmen eines gemeinsamen Ausschusses im April sowie zweier Fachtagungen im Juli und September 2005 zusammen, um den politischen Dialog über die Gründung eines mehrjährigen sektoralen Programms zur Unterstützung der Entwicklung der zuständigen Fischereibetriebe auf den Seychellen aufzunehmen. Dazu zählt die Aufstellung jährlicher und mehrjähriger Ziele, die Verteilung eines Teils der Finanzbeiträge, die zu erreichenden Ziele und die dafür notwendigen Kriterien und Verfahren, um eine Bewertung der jährlichen Ergebnisse gemäß Artikel 7 des Protokolls zu ermöglichen. In dieser Hinsicht verpflichten sich beide Parteien zu verantwortungsvollem Fischfang und nachhaltiger Fischereipolitik in den Gewässern der Seychellen.
Das neue Protokoll umfasst einen Sechsjahreszeitraum vom 18. Januar 2005 bis zum 17. Januar 2011. Es garantiert Fangmöglichkeiten für 40 Thunfischwadenfänger und 12 Oberflächen-Langleinenfischer und sieht finanzielle Gegenleistungen in Höhe von 4.125.000 Euro pro Jahr vor. Beide Parteien sind gegenseitige Nutznießer dieses Protokolls.
Ich komme nun zu den Änderungsanträgen. Beim Änderungsantrag 1 teilen wir die Vorbehalte des Parlaments ausnahmslos und wissen die – trotz der knappen Fristen – schnelle Bearbeitung sehr zu schätzen. Wie ich bereits sagte, hat die Kommission die Seychellen über diese Verzögerung schon frühzeitig informiert. Die Behörden der Seychellen haben großes Verständnis gezeigt und der Zahlung des Finanzbeitrags für das erste Vertragsjahr zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt zugestimmt.
Wie schon erwähnt, resultieren die Verzögerungen bei der Übermittlung vor allem aus der Art der Verhandlungen, jedoch auch aus dem Zeitaufwand für die internen Verfahren. Angesichts dieser Umstände sowie der von mir gegebenen Zusage, eine Lösung zu finden, ersuche ich den Berichterstatter um Verständnis dafür, dass wir diesen Änderungsantrag nicht annehmen können."@de9
".
Κύριε Πρόεδρε, πριν αναφερθώ στα κύρια σημεία της θέσης της Επιτροπής σχετικά με αυτόν τον φάκελο, επιτρέψτε μου καταρχάς να απευθύνω τις ευχαριστίες μου στην Επιτροπή Αλιείας και ιδιαίτερα στον πρόεδρό της και εισηγητή κ. Morillon για το εξαίρετο έργο που επιτέλεσε σε πολύ στενά χρονικά περιθώρια.
Όπως ανέφερα προηγουμένως, οι καθυστερήσεις στη διαβίβαση πληροφοριών είναι αποτέλεσμα κυρίως της φύσης των διαπραγματεύσεων, αλλά και του χρόνου που απαιτείται για την ολοκλήρωση των εσωτερικών διαδικασιών. Ως εκ τούτου, και με δεδομένη τη δέσμευσή μου να επιδιώξω την επίλυση του προβλήματος, ζητώ την κατανόηση του εισηγητή για την αδυναμία μας να δεχτούμε αυτή την τροπολογία.
Σχετικά με την τροπολογία 2, όπως αναφέρεται στο άρθρο 7 του Πρωτοκόλλου, εναπόκειται στο παραθαλάσσιο κράτος, με τη σύμφωνη γνώμη της Κοινότητας, να αποφασίσει σχετικά με τον τρόπο χρησιμοποίησης της χρηματικής συνεισφοράς για τη στήριξη της αλιευτικής του πολιτικής. Είναι, ως εκ τούτου, ευθύνη των αρχών των Σεϋχελλών να προσδιορίσουν τις βασικές προτεραιότητες της αλιευτικής τους πολιτικής τις οποίες θα εφαρμόσουν με τη βοήθεια του αλιευτικού πρωτοκόλλου. Συνεπώς, δεν είμαι σε θέση να δεχτώ αυτή την τροπολογία.
Όσον αφορά τις τροπολογίες 3 και 5, η Επιτροπή συμφωνεί απολύτως με το πνεύμα τους. Ωστόσο, η Επιτροπή συμμορφώνεται ήδη με τη διαβίβαση πληροφοριών τέτοιου είδους, σύμφωνα με τις τρέχουσες διοργανικές συμφωνίες και ιδίως με τη συμφωνία πλαίσιο μεταξύ της Επιτροπής και του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου. Η Επιτροπή θεωρεί, ως εκ τούτου, ότι οι εν λόγω τροπολογίες δεν είναι πράγματι απαραίτητες, εάν αληθεύουν οι πληροφορίες μου.
Η τροπολογία 4 δεν μπορεί να γίνει δεκτή από την Επιτροπή. Επιτρέψτε μου να υπενθυμίσω τις βασικές κοινοτικές διατάξεις που αφορούν την εντολή της Επιτροπής για διαπραγμάτευση εξ ονόματος της Κοινότητας. Το Συμβούλιο έχει εξουσιοδοτήσει την Επιτροπή να διαπραγματεύεται τους διακανονισμούς σχετικά με την αλιεία μεταξύ της Κοινότητας και των Σεϋχελλών. Σε αυτό το πλαίσιο, η περιοδική ανανέωση δεν απαιτεί νέα εντολή κάθε φορά. Δεν υπάρχει ανάγκη για νέα εντολή, δεδομένου ότι η υφιστάμενη εντολή καλύπτει τους στόχους αυτών των διαπραγματεύσεων.
Αναφορικά με την τροπολογία 6, το νέο Πρωτόκολλο δεν περιλαμβάνει μέτρα ειδικής στόχευσης, αλλά τη στήριξη της αλιευτικής πολιτικής των Σεϋχελλών –άρθρο 7 του Πρωτοκόλλου– για την προαγωγή της υπεύθυνης και βιώσιμης αλιείας στα ύδατα των Σεϋχελλών. Συμμεριζόμαστε απόλυτα την επιθυμία να τηρείται ενήμερο το ΕΚ για τις διαφορετικές πτυχές της εφαρμογής του Πρωτοκόλλου. Ωστόσο, η Επιτροπή συμμορφώνεται ήδη με τη διαβίβαση τέτοιων πληροφοριών σύμφωνα με τις ισχύουσες διοργανικές συμφωνίες. Ως εκ τούτου, η Επιτροπή θεωρεί ότι η εν λόγω τροπολογία δεν είναι πράγματι απαραίτητη.
Όπως όλοι γνωρίζετε, οι διαδικασίες της Επιτροπής έχουν καθυστερήσει την οριστικοποίηση αυτής της πρότασης. Η Επιτροπή επιδιώκει να αποτρέψει την επανάληψη παρόμοιων καθυστερήσεων στο μέλλον. Διεξάγουμε επί του παρόντος εσωτερικές διαβουλεύσεις για να δούμε ποιος είναι ο καλύτερος τρόπος για να ξεπεράσουμε τις καθυστερήσεις που προκύπτουν από τα πολύ στενά χρονικά περιθώρια που έχει στη διάθεσή του το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο για την εξέταση των εκθέσεων. Ευελπιστώ ότι θα είμαι σε θέση να παρουσιάσω έκθεση στην Επιτροπή Αλιείας σχετικά με τις πιθανές λύσεις στο εγγύς μέλλον. Εν τω μεταξύ, θέλω να ζητήσω συγγνώμη από τον εισηγητή για τα στενά χρονικά περιθώρια εντός των οποίων έπρεπε να εργαστεί και δεσμεύομαι προσωπικά να συζητήσω μαζί του προκειμένου να αναζητηθεί και να εξευρεθεί μια λύση αναφορικά με τον μελλοντικό τρόπο λειτουργίας.
Επί του προκειμένου, επισημαίνω ότι ενημερώσαμε εγκαίρως τις αρχές των Σεϋχελλών για την καθυστέρηση στη διαδικασία έγκρισης. Οι αρχές των Σεϋχελλών έχουν επιδείξει μεγάλη κατανόηση.
Όπως θα γνωρίζουν οι αξιότιμοι βουλευτές, η Κοινότητα έχει μακρά σχέση με τις Σεϋχέλλες στον τομέα της αλιείας. Η πρώτη αλιευτική συμφωνία με τη χώρα χρονολογείται από το 1985 και πρόκειται για μια από τις σημαντικότερες από οικονομική άποψη συμφωνίες σχετικά με την αλιεία τόνου. Αποτελεί μάλιστα τον ακρογωνιαίο λίθο του δικτύου συμφωνιών μας σχετικά με τον τόνο στον Ινδικό Ωκεανό.
Αυτό το νέο Πρωτόκολλο είναι το πρώτο που αντικατοπτρίζει πλήρως τη νέα προσέγγιση συνεργασίας. Και τα δύο μέρη έχουν συμφωνήσει σε έναν πολιτικό διάλογο για θέματα αλιείας, ειδικότερα όσον αφορά την πολιτική που ασκεί στον τομέα της αλιείας η κυβέρνηση των Σεϋχελλών. Περισσότερο από το ένα τρίτο της χρηματικής συνεισφοράς προορίζεται για τη στήριξη της αλιευτικής πολιτικής των Σεϋχελλών.
Στο πλαίσιο αυτής της επιδίωξης, η Επιτροπή πραγματοποίησε μια
συνεδρίαση της κοινής επιτροπής τον Απρίλιο και δύο τεχνικές συνεδριάσεις τον Ιούλιο και τον Σεπτέμβριο του 2005 με τις αρχές των Σεϋχελλών, προκειμένου να ξεκινήσει ο πολιτικός διάλογος για τη θέσπιση ενός πολυετούς τομεακού προγράμματος με σκοπό τη στήριξη της ανάπτυξης υπεύθυνης αλιευτικής δραστηριότητας στις Σεϋχέλλες. Το εν λόγω έργο περιλαμβάνει τη θέσπιση ετήσιων και πολυετών στόχων, τη διανομή τμήματος της χρηματικής αντιπαροχής, τους στόχους που πρέπει να επιτευχθούν και τα κριτήρια και τις διαδικασίες που πρέπει να ακολουθηθούν, προκειμένου να καταστεί δυνατή η αξιολόγηση των ετήσιων αποτελεσμάτων σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 7 του Πρωτοκόλλου. Κατά τον τρόπο αυτόν, τα δύο μέρη παραμένουν απολύτως προσηλωμένα στην προώθηση της υπεύθυνης και βιώσιμης αλιείας στα ύδατα των Σεϋχελλών.
Το νέο Πρωτόκολλο καλύπτει την εξαετή περίοδο μεταξύ 18 Ιανουαρίου 2005 και 17 Ιανουαρίου 2011. Προσφέρει αλιευτικές δυνατότητες για 40 θυνναλιευτικά γρι-γρι και 12 παραγαδιάρικα επιφανείας και προβλέπει χρηματική συνεισφορά ύψους 4 125 000 ευρώ ετησίως. Το Πρωτόκολλο έχει αμοιβαία οφέλη και για τα δύο μέρη.
Στρέφομαι τώρα στις τροπολογίες. Όσον αφορά την τροπολογία 1, συμμεριζόμαστε πλήρως την ανησυχία του Κοινοβουλίου και εκτιμούμε την ταχεία διαδικασία που ξεκίνησε παρά τα μικρά χρονικά περιθώρια που του δόθηκαν. Όπως είπα προηγουμένως, η Επιτροπή ενημέρωσε εγκαίρως τις αρχές των Σεϋχελλών σχετικά με την εν λόγω καθυστέρηση. Οι αρχές των Σεϋχελλών έχουν επιδείξει μεγάλη κατανόηση και έχουν δεχτεί την καταβολή της οικονομικής αντιπαροχής για το πρώτο έτος της συμφωνίας σε μεταγενέστερη ημερομηνία."@el10
".
Señor Presidente, antes de presentar la posición de la Comisión sobre este asunto permítame extender mi gratitud a la Comisión de Pesca, y especialmente a su Presidente y ponente, el señor Morillon, por su excelente trabajo realizado en unos plazos muy ajustados.
En cuanto a la enmienda 2, tal como se afirma en el artículo 7 del Protocolo, el Estado costero, de común acuerdo con la Comunidad, podrá decidir la forma de utilizar la contribución económica para apoyar su política pesquera. Por ello, es responsabilidad de las autoridades de las Seychelles establecer las principales prioridades de su política pesquera que deben aplicarse con ayuda del Protocolo de pesca. Por tanto, me resulta imposible aceptar esta enmienda.
Por lo que respecta a las enmiendas 3 y 5, la Comisión está totalmente de acuerdo con su espíritu. Sin embargo, la Comisión ya respeta su obligación de transmisión de este tipo de información, en línea con el actual acuerdo interinstitucional y particularmente con el acuerdo marco entre la Comisión y el Parlamento Europeo. La Comisión, por tanto, considera que estas enmiendas no son realmente necesarias si mi información es correcta.
La Comisión no puede aceptar la enmienda 4. Permítanme recordarles las disposiciones básicas de la Comunidad relativas al mandato de la Comisión para negociar en nombre de la Comunidad. El Consejo ha autorizado a la Comisión a negociar acuerdos pesqueros entre la Comunidad y las Seychelles. En este sentido, la renovación periódica no requiere un nuevo mandato cada vez. No es necesario un nuevo mandato, dado que el mandato presente cubre estos objetivos de negociación.
En lo relativo a la enmienda 6, el nuevo Protocolo no contempla ninguna medida selectiva, sino un apoyo a la política pesquera de las Seychelles –artículo 7 del Protocolo– para promover una pesca responsable y una actividad pesquera sostenible en las aguas de las Seychelles. Compartimos plenamente la preocupación de mantener informado al Parlamento Europeo sobre los diversos aspectos de la aplicación del Protocolo. Sin embargo, la Comisión ya respeta su obligación de transmisión de dicha información de conformidad con los actuales acuerdos interinstitucionales. Por tanto la Comisión considera que esta enmienda no es realmente necesaria.
Como ya saben, los procedimientos de la Comisión han retrasado la ultimación de esta propuesta. La Comisión quiere impedir que en el futuro vuelvan a ocurrir retrasos semejantes. Estamos llevando a cabo actualmente consultas internas para ver la mejor manera de superar los retrasos cuya consecuencia es que se dan plazos de tiempo muy breves al Parlamento Europeo para examinar los informes. Espero poder informar a la Comisión de Pesca sobre posibles soluciones en un futuro próximo. Entretanto quiero pedir disculpas al ponente por los plazos tan breves con los que tiene que trabajar y personalmente me comprometo a conversar con él y buscar y encontrar una solución con respecto al futuro
.
En este asunto, quisiera decir que informamos con mucha antelación a las autoridades de las Seychelles sobre el retraso del procedimiento de aprobación. Las autoridades de las Seychelles han mostrado una gran comprensión.
Como ya saben sus Señorías, la Comunidad mantiene una relación muy antigua con las Seychelles en el ámbito pesquero. El primer acuerdo pesquero con este país se remonta a 1985 y se trata de uno de los acuerdos relativos al atún más importantes en términos económicos. También es la piedra angular de nuestra red de acuerdos de atún en el Océano Índico.
Este nuevo Protocolo es el primero que refleja plenamente el nuevo enfoque asociativo. Ambas partes suscriben un diálogo político sobre asuntos pesqueros y en particular la política del sector pesquero definida por el Gobierno de las Seychelles. Más de un tercio de la contribución financiera se ha destinado a apoyar la política pesquera de las Seychelles.
En línea con este deseo, la Comisión ha celebrado una reunión del comité conjunto en abril y dos reuniones técnicas en julio y septiembre de 2005 con las autoridades de las Seychelles, con el fin de iniciar el diálogo político sobre la creación de un programa sectorial plurianual para apoyar el desarrollo de una pesca responsable en las Seychelles. Este trabajo incluye la creación de objetivos anuales y plurianuales, la distribución de una parte de la compensación financiera, los objetivos que deben lograrse y los criterios y procedimientos que deben seguirse con el fin de permitir una evaluación de los resultados anuales obtenidos de conformidad con el artículo 7 del Protocolo. De esta manera, ambas partes defienden firmemente la pesca responsable y una actividad pesquera sostenible en las aguas de las Seychelles.
El nuevo Protocolo abarca un período de seis años, desde el 18 de enero de 2005 hasta el 17 de enero de 2011. Ofrece oportunidades de pesca para 40 cerqueros atuneros y 12 palangreros de superficie y prevé una aportación económica de 4 125 000 euros al año. El Protocolo ofrece ventajas mutuas a ambas partes.
Voy a centrarme ahora en las enmiendas. En la enmienda 1 compartimos plenamente la preocupación del Parlamento y apreciamos el rápido procedimiento utilizado a pesar de los cortos plazos otorgados. Como ya he dicho antes, la Comisión informó a las autoridades de las Seychelles de este retraso con mucha antelación. Las autoridades de las Seychelles han mostrado una gran comprensión y han aceptado recibir el pago de la compensación económica por el primer año del acuerdo en una fecha posterior.
Tal como he afirmado anteriormente, los retrasos de la transmisión se derivan sobre todo de la naturaleza de las negociaciones, pero también por el largo tiempo que conllevan los procedimientos internos. A la luz de esto y de mi compromiso para encontrar una solución solicito la comprensión del ponente por no poder aceptar esta enmienda."@es20
"Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@et5
".
Arvoisa puhemies, ennen kuin esitän pääpiirteittäin komission kannan tähän asiakirjaan haluan kiittää kalatalousvaliokuntaa ja erityisesti sen puheenjohtajaa ja esittelijää Morillonia siitä, että hän on tehnyt erinomaista työtä erittäin tiukassa määräajassa.
Kuten pöytäkirjan 7 artiklassa todetaan, tarkistuksessa 2 on kyse siitä, että rannikkovaltion velvollisuutena on yhteisymmärryksessä EY:n kanssa tehdä päätös siitä, miten taloudellinen korvaus käytetään kyseisen valtion kalastuspolitiikan tukemiseen. Seychellien viranomaisten vastuulla on näin ollen määrittää kalastuspolitiikkansa tärkeimmät tavoitteet, jotka pannaan täytäntöön kalastuspöytäkirjan avustuksella. Näin ollen en voi hyväksyä tätä tarkistusta.
Komissio kannattaa täysin tarkistusten 3 ja 5 tarkoitusta. Komissio kuitenkin jo toimittaa tällaisia tietoja nykyisten toimielintenvälisten järjestelyjen ja varsinkin komission ja Euroopan parlamentin välisen puitesopimuksen mukaisesti. Komissio katsookin, että kyseiset tarkistukset eivät ole todella tarpeellisia, mikäli saamani tiedot pitävät paikkansa.
Komissio ei voi hyväksyä tarkistusta 4. Saanen muistuttaa EY:n perussäännöksistä, jotka koskevat komission valtuuksia neuvotella EY:n puolesta. Neuvosto on valtuuttanut komission neuvottelemaan EY:n ja Seychellien välisistä kalastusjärjestelyistä. Tätä taustaa vasten pöytäkirjan uusiminen säännöllisin väliajoin ei edellytä joka kerran uutta valtuutusta. Uuteen valtuutukseen ei ole tarvetta siksi, että nykyinen valtuutus kattaa tällaisten neuvottelujen tavoitteet.
Tarkistuksesta 6 haluan todeta, että uuteen pöytäkirjaan ei sisälly mitään kohdennettuja toimenpiteitä vaan pöytäkirjan 7 artiklan mukaisesti ainoastaan tukea Seychellien kalastuspolitiikalle, jolla edistetään vastuullista ja kestävää kalastusta Seychellien vesillä. Meille on aivan yhtä tärkeää, että parlamentti saa tiedon pöytäkirjan täytäntöönpanoon liittyvistä eri näkökohdista. Komissio kuitenkin jo toimittaa tällaisia tietoja nykyisten toimielintenvälisten järjestelyjen mukaisesti. Komissio katsookin, että tämä tarkistus ei ole todella tarpeellinen.
Kuten kaikki tiedätte, komission menettelyt ovat viivästyttäneet tämän ehdotuksen viimeistelyä. Komissio yrittää estää vastaavanlaiset viivästykset tulevaisuudessa. Käymme parhaillaan sisäisiä neuvotteluja selvittääksemme, miten voimme parhaiten välttää viivästykset, jotka johtavat siihen, että Euroopan parlamentille jää aivan liian vähän aikaa tarkastella mietintöjä. Toivon voivani kertoa piakkoin mahdollisista ratkaisuista kalatalousvaliokunnalle. Sillä välin haluan pyytää esittelijältä anteeksi, että hän on joutunut työskentelemään erittäin tiukassa aikataulussa, ja sitoudun käymään hänen kanssaan henkilökohtaisia keskusteluja sekä etsimään ja löytämään ratkaisun tulevaan työskentelytapaan.
Haluan todeta tästä asiakirjasta, että ilmoitimme Seychellien viranomaisille jo varhain asetuksen hyväksymismenettelyn viivästymisestä. Seychellien viranomaiset ovat osoittaneet suurta ymmärrystä.
Kuten parlamentin jäsenet tietävät, EY on luonut kalatalouden osalta jo pitkän aikaa sitten suhteet Seychelleihin. Maan kanssa tehtiin ensimmäinen kalastussopimus jo vuonna 1985, ja tämä on taloudelliselta kannalta katsottuna yksi tärkeimmistä tonnikalasopimuksista. Se on myös perusta Intian valtameren alueen tonnikalasopimusten muodostamalle verkostollemme.
Tämä uusi pöytäkirja on ensimmäinen, joka on täysin uuden kumppanuuteen perustuvan lähtökohdan mukainen. Molemmat osapuolet antavat siunauksensa kalataloutta koskevalle poliittiselle vuoropuhelulle ja varsinkin Seychellien hallituksen määrittelemälle kalatalouden sektoripolitiikkaa koskevalle vuoropuhelulle. Yli kolmannes taloudellisesta korvauksesta on varattu Seychellien kalastuspolitiikan tukemiseen.
Tämän toiveen mukaisesti komissio järjesti Seychellien viranomaisten kanssa sekakomitean kokouksen huhtikuussa ja kaksi teknistä kokousta heinä- ja syyskuussa 2005 aloittaakseen poliittisen vuoropuhelun monivuotisen sektoriohjelman luomisesta tukemaan vastuullisen kalastuksen kehittymistä Seychelleillä. Tämän työn yhteydessä asetetaan muun muassa vuosittain ja useamman vuoden aikana saavutettavat tavoitteet, jaetaan osa taloudellisesta korvauksesta ja määritellään päämääriä. Lisäksi määritellään noudatettavat kriteerit ja menettelyt, jotka mahdollistavat pöytäkirjan 7 artiklan mukaisesti saavutettujen tulosten vuosittaisen arvioinnin. Tällä tavoin molemmat osapuolet ovat vakaasti sitoutuneet vastuulliseen ja kestävään kalastukseen Seychellien vesillä.
Uusi pöytäkirja kattaa kuuden vuoden ajanjakson, joka alkaa 18. tammikuuta 2005 ja päättyy 17. tammikuuta 2011. Siinä myönnetään kalastusmahdollisuudet 40:lle nuottaa käyttävälle tonnikala-alukselle ja 12:lle pintasiima-alukselle sekä varataan 4 125 000 euron vuosittainen taloudellinen korvaus. Pöytäkirjasta on hyötyä molemmille osapuolille.
Ryhdyn nyt käsittelemään tarkistuksia. Tarkistuksen 1 osalta olemme aivan yhtä huolestuneita kuin parlamenttikin ja arvostamme sen sitoutumista nopeaan menettelyyn sille annetusta lyhyestä määräajasta huolimatta. Kuten aiemmin kerroin, komissio ilmoitti Seychellien viranomaisille viivästyksestä jo varhain. Seychellien viranomaiset ovat osoittaneet suurta ymmärrystä ja hyväksyneet sen, että sopimuksen ensimmäisen vuoden taloudellinen korvaus maksetaan niille myöhäisempänä ajankohtana.
Kuten edellä totesin, viivästykset maksunvälityksessä johtuvat lähinnä neuvottelujen luonteesta mutta myös siitä, että sisäiset menettelyt veivät niin paljon aikaa. Kun otetaan huomioon tämä seikka ja oma sitoutumiseni ratkaisun löytämiseen, pyydän esittelijää ymmärtämään, ettemme voi hyväksyä kyseistä tarkistusta."@fi7
".
Monsieur le Président, avant de détailler la position de la Commission dans ce dossier, je voudrais, si vous le permettez, remercier la commission de la pêche, et en particulier son président et rapporteur, M. Morillon, pour l’excellent travail qu’il a effectué dans des délais extrêmement serrés.
Concernant l’amendement 2, comme indiqué à l’article 7 du protocole, il revient à l’État côtier, en accord avec la Communauté, de décider de la manière dont sera utilisée la contribution financière visant à soutenir sa politique de la pêche. Il revient donc aux autorités seychelloises d’identifier les principales priorités de leur politique de la pêche à mettre en œuvre avec l’aide du protocole sur la pêche. Je ne suis donc pas en mesure d’accepter cet amendement.
La Commission est tout à fait d’accord avec l’esprit des amendements 3 et 5. Cela étant, elle transmet déjà ce genre d’informations, conformément aux accords interinstitutionnels actuels, et notamment à l’accord-cadre entre la Commission et le Parlement européen. Elle considère donc que ces amendements ne sont pas réellement nécessaires, si les informations dont je dispose sont exactes.
La Commission ne peut accepter l’amendement 4. Je me permettrai de rappeler les dispositions communautaires fondamentales concernant le droit pour la Commission de négocier au nom de la Communauté. Le Conseil autorise la Commission à négocier des accords de pêche entre la Communauté et les Seychelles. Dans ce contexte, le renouvellement périodique ne nécessite pas un nouveau mandat à chaque fois. Un nouveau mandat est inutile, étant donné que le mandat existant couvre ces objectifs de négociations.
Concernant l’amendement 6, le nouveau protocole ne contient aucune mesure ciblée, mais un soutien à la politique de la pêche des Seychelles - l’article 7 du protocole - pour que le pays promeuve la pêche responsable et durable dans ses eaux territoriales. Nous partageons pleinement la préoccupation de tenir le Parlement informé des différents aspects de la mise en œuvre du protocole. Cependant, la Commission s’applique déjà à transmettre de telles informations, dans le respect des accords interinstitutionnels actuels. Elle estime donc que cet amendement n’est pas vraiment nécessaire.
Comme vous le savez tous, les procédures de la Commission ont retardé la finalisation de cette proposition. La Commission s’engage à éviter que de tels retards ne se reproduisent à l’avenir. Nous menons actuellement des consultations internes pour déterminer comment gérer au mieux le calendrier, qui induit des délais extrêmement serrés pour l’examen des rapports par le Parlement. J’espère pouvoir faire état de possibles solutions à la commission de la pêche dans un futur proche. Dans l’intervalle, je tiens à m’excuser auprès du rapporteur pour les délais extrêmement réduits dans lesquels il a dû travailler, et je m’engage personnellement à débattre avec lui et à trouver une solution quant à la marche à suivre ultérieurement.
Concernant ce dossier, je tiens à indiquer que nous avons informé à un stade précoce les autorités seychelloises du retard pris au niveau de la procédure d’adoption. Ces dernières ont fait preuve d’une grande compréhension.
Les honorables parlementaires ne sont pas sans savoir que la Communauté entretient depuis longtemps des relations avec les Seychelles dans le domaine de la pêche. Le premier accord de pêche avec le pays, qui remonte à 1985, est l’un des principaux accords concernant le thon en termes financiers. Il constitue également la pierre angulaire de notre réseau d’accords de pêche concernant le thon dans l’océan Indien.
Ce nouveau protocole est le premier à refléter pleinement la nouvelle approche de partenariat. Les deux parties prennent part à un dialogue politique sur les questions halieutiques, et notamment la politique de la pêche définie par le gouvernement des Seychelles. Plus du tiers de la contribution financière a été alloué au soutien à la politique seychelloise de la pêche.
Conformément à cette volonté, la Commission a assisté à une réunion du comité conjoint en avril et à deux réunions techniques en juillet et septembre 2005 avec les autorités seychelloises, en vue d’entamer le dialogue politique sur l’établissement d’un programme sectoriel pluriannuel de soutien au développement d’une pêche responsable dans l’archipel. Ce travail inclut l’établissement d’objectifs annuels et pluriannuels, l’allocation d’une partie des compensations financières et la définition des objectifs à atteindre ainsi que des critères et des procédures à respecter, de manière à permettre une évaluation des résultats obtenus, conformément à l’article 7 du protocole. De la sorte, les deux parties sont pleinement engagées en faveur de la pêche responsable et durable dans les eaux seychelloises.
Le nouveau protocole couvre une période de six ans entre le 18 janvier 2005 et le 17 janvier 2011. Il offre des perspectives de pêche pour 40 thoniers senneurs et 12 palangriers de surface et prévoit une contribution financière de 4 125 000 euros par an. Il bénéficie mutuellement aux deux parties.
J’en viens à présent aux amendements. Concernant l’amendement 1, nous partageons pleinement les préoccupations du Parlement et apprécions la procédure rapide adoptée en dépit des brefs délais qui lui ont été accordés. Comme je l’ai indiqué précédemment, la Commission a informé les autorités seychelloises de ce retard à un stade précoce. Celles-ci ont fait preuve d’une grande compréhension et ont accepté de recevoir le paiement des compensations financières pour la première année de l’accord à une date ultérieure.
Comme indiqué ci-dessus, les retards pris dans la transmission sont dus essentiellement à la nature des négociations, mais aussi à la lenteur des procédures internes. Au vu de ce constat et de mon engagement à trouver une solution, j’espère que le rapporteur comprendra que nous ne sommes pas en mesure d’accepter cet amendement."@fr8
"Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@hu11
"Signor Presidente, prima di illustrare la posizione della Commissione sull’argomento in esame mi permetta di esprimere la mia gratitudine alla commissione per la pesca e, in particolare, al suo presidente e relatore, onorevole Morillon, per l’eccellente lavoro svolto in tempi così brevi.
Per quanto riguarda l’emendamento n. 2, come sancito dall’articolo 7 del protocollo, spetta allo Stato costiero, di comune accordo con la Comunità, decidere come utilizzare la contropartita finanziaria a sostegno della propria politica in materia di pesca. Spetta pertanto alle autorità delle Seicelle individuare quali priorità della politica di pesca attuare con l’aiuto del protocollo. Per tale motivo non sono in grado di accogliere questo emendamento.
Con riferimento agli emendamenti nn. 3 e 5, la Commissione concorda pienamente sullo spirito di fondo. Tuttavia, la Commissione già trasmette questo tipo di informazioni, in conformità agli attuali accordi interistituzionali e, in particolare, all’accordo quadro tra Commissione e Parlamento europeo. La Commissione ritiene quindi che questi emendamenti non siano davvero necessari, se le mie informazioni sono giuste.
L’emendamento n. 4 non può essere accettato dalla Commissione. Vorrei ricordare le disposizioni di base della Comunità riguardanti il mandato conferito alla Commissione per negoziare a nome della Comunità. Il Consiglio ha autorizzato la Commissione a negoziare accordi di pesca tra la Comunità e le Seicelle. In questo contesto il rinnovo periodico non richiede, ogni volta, un nuovo mandato. Non è necessario, poiché quello esistente comprende gli obiettivi di questi negoziati.
In merito all’emendamento n. 6, il nuovo protocollo non contiene provvedimenti mirati bensì un sostegno alla politica in materia di pesca delle Seicelle – articolo 7 del protocollo – per la promozione di una pesca responsabile e sostenibile nelle acque delle Seicelle. Condividiamo pienamente la necessità di tenere informato il Parlamento europeo sui vari aspetti dell’attuazione del protocollo. Tuttavia, la Commissione provvede già a trasmettere tali informazioni in linea con gli attuali accordi interistituzionali. Pertanto, la Commissione ritiene che tale emendamento non sia davvero indispensabile.
Come tutti sapete, le procedure della Commissione hanno ritardato il perfezionamento della proposta. La Commissione sta facendo il possibile per evitare che, in futuro, si ripetano simili ritardi. Attualmente sono in fase di avvio consultazioni interne per decidere come meglio ovviare ai ritardi che lasciano al Parlamento europeo poco tempo a disposizione per esaminare le relazioni. Spero, nel prossimo futuro, di poter offrire possibili soluzioni alla commissione per la pesca. Nel frattempo voglio scusarmi con il relatore per le scadenze incalzanti con cui ha dovuto lavorare, e mi impegno personalmente a discutere, cercare e trovare insieme a lui una soluzione sul futuro
.
Con riferimento a questo
vorrei dire che abbiamo immediatamente informato le autorità delle Seicelle del ritardo accumulato nella procedura di adozione, e che esse hanno dato prova di grande comprensione.
Come gli onorevoli deputati sapranno, la Comunità ha rapporti di lunga data con le Seicelle nel settore della pesca. Il primo accordo di pesca con il paese risale al 1985: esso rappresenta, in termini finanziari, uno dei più importanti accordi sulla pesca del tonno e il fondamento su cui poggiano i nostri accordi in materia nell’Oceano Indiano.
Questo nuovo protocollo è il primo a riflettere pienamente il nuovo approccio di partenariato. Entrambe le parti aderiscono al dialogo politico sul tema della pesca e, in particolare, alla politica nel settore della pesca definita dal governo delle Seicelle. Oltre un terzo della contropartita finanziaria è stata stanziata a sostegno della politica in materia di pesca delle Seicelle.
Per rispondere a questa ambizione, ad aprile la Commissione ha tenuto una riunione congiunta con la commissione competente e, a luglio e settembre 2005, due riunioni tecniche con le autorità delle Seicelle per avviare il dialogo politico sulla messa a punto di un programma settoriale pluriennale per promuovere una pesca responsabile nelle Seicelle. Questa attività comprende la definizione di obiettivi annuali e pluriennali, la distribuzione di parte della contropartita finanziaria, la fissazione degli scopi da raggiungere nonché dei criteri e delle procedure da seguire per consentire una valutazione dei risultati annuali ottenuti in conformità dell’articolo 7 del Protocollo. In tale maniera, entrambe le parti si impegnano fermamente ad attuare una pesca responsabile e sostenibile nelle acque delle Seicelle.
Il nuovo protocollo è valido per un periodo di sei anni, dal 18 gennaio 2005 al 17 gennaio 2011, accorda possibilità di pesca a 40 tonniere con reti a circuizione e a 12 pescherecci con palangari di superficie e prevede una contropartita finanziaria di 4 125 000 euro all’anno. Il protocollo è reciprocamente vantaggioso per entrambe le parti.
Passerò ora agli emendamenti. Per quanto attiene all’emendamento n. 1, condividiamo pienamente i timori del Parlamento e apprezziamo la rapida procedura attuata nonostante il poco tempo concesso. Come ho affermato in precedenza, la Commissione ha immediatamente informato le autorità delle Seicelle di questo ritardo. Esse si sono mostrate molto comprensive e hanno accettato, per il primo anno dell’accordo, di ricevere il pagamento della contropartita finanziaria in un secondo momento.
Come ho detto in precedenza, i ritardi di trasmissione sono principalmente dovuti alla natura dei negoziati, così come ai tempi richiesti dalle procedure interne. Per questo motivo, e considerato l’impegno da me profuso nel trovare una soluzione, spero che il relatore capisca il motivo per cui non possiamo approvare questo emendamento."@it12
"Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@lt14
"Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@lv13
"Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@mt15
".
Mijnheer de Voorzitter, alvorens het standpunt van de Commissie toe te lichten inzake dit dossier, wil ik mijn dank betuigen aan de Commissie visserij en met name aan haar voorzitter en rapporteur, de heer Morillon, voor zijn werk, dat hij binnen krappe deadlines tot een uitstekend einde heeft weten te brengen.
Zoals geschetst in artikel 7 van het protocol is het aan de kuststaat om in overleg met de Gemeenschap te besluiten op welke wijze de financiële bijdrage wordt aangewend ter ondersteuning van zijn visserijbeleid. Het valt dientengevolge onder de verantwoordelijkheid van de autoriteiten van de Seychellen om de hoofdprioriteiten vast te stellen van hun visserijbeleid, dat ten uitvoer gelegd moet worden met behulp van het protocol inzake de visserij. Ik kan dit amendement daarom niet aanvaarden.
De Commissie is het geheel eens met de strekking van amendement 3 en 5. De Commissie heeft evenwel reeds ingestemd met de indiening van dergelijk informatie overeenkomstig de heersende interinstitutionele regelingen en in het bijzonder het kaderakkoord tussen de Commissie en het Europees Parlement. De Commissie vindt derhalve dat deze amendementen niet echt nodig zijn, als mijn informatie juist is.
De Commissie kan amendement 4 niet aanvaarden. Ik roep de communautaire basisbepalingen in herinnering over het mandaat van de Commissie om namens de Gemeenschap onderhandelingen te voeren. De Raad heeft de Commissie toestemming gegeven onderhandelingen te voeren uitmondend in visserijregelingen tussen de Gemeenschap en de Seychellen. Tegen deze achtergrond is het niet nodig om voor de periodieke vernieuwing telkens te voorzien in een nieuw mandaat. Daar is geen behoefte aan, omdat het huidige mandaat van toepassing is op de doelstellingen van deze onderhandelingen.
Wat amendement 6 betreft, kan ik u onder verwijzing naar artikel 7 van het protocol mededelen dat het nieuwe protocol geen gerichte maatregelen bevat maar steun voor het visserijbeleid van de Seychellen die een duurzame en verantwoordelijke visserij in de wateren van de Seychellen bevordert. Wij zijn het er volkomen mee eens dat wij het Europees Parlement op de hoogte dienen te houden van de verschillende aspecten in verband met de tenuitvoerlegging van het protocol. De Commissie heeft evenwel reeds ingestemd met de indiening van dergelijke informatie in overeenstemming met de heersende interinstitutionele regelingen. Op grond daarvan oordeelt de Commissie dat dit amendement niet echt nodig is.
Zoals u allen weet, heeft de afwikkeling van dit voorstel vertraging opgelopen door de procedures van de Commissie. De Commissie onderneemt stappen om dergelijke vertragingen in de toekomst te voorkomen. Er wordt intern besproken hoe we het best kunnen voorkomen dat er vertragingen optreden die uitmonden in zeer krappe termijnen waarin het Europees Parlement zijn werk moet doen. Ik hoop dat ik de Commissie visserij weldra op de hoogte kan stellen van mogelijke oplossingen die dit probleem in de toekomst moeten voorkomen. Hoe dan ook wil ik mijn excuses aanbieden aan de rapporteur voor de zeer krappe termijnen waarin hij moest werken en ik ben vastbesloten om met hem persoonlijk te bespreken hoe we oplossingen kunnen vinden voor de modus operandi in de toekomst.
Ten aanzien van dit dossier wil ik vermelden dat wij de autoriteiten van de Seychellen in een vroeg stadium op de hoogte hebben gesteld van de vertraging in de goedkeuringsprocedure. Zij hebben hiervoor veel begrip getoond.
Zoals de geachte afgevaardigden weten, onderhoudt de Gemeenschap langdurige betrekkingen op vissergebied met de Seychellen. De eerste visserijovereenkomst met dit land, die dateert van 1985, is in financieel opzicht een van de belangrijkste tonijnovereenkomsten en vormt tevens de basis voor het netwerk van tonijnovereenkomsten in de Indische Oceaan.
Dit nieuwe protocol is de eerste visserijovereenkomst waarin de nieuwe partnerschapsbenadering volledig tot uiting komt. Beide partijen hebben zich verbonden tot een politieke dialoog inzake visserijvraagstukken en in het bijzonder het sectoraal visserijbeleid van de regering van de Seychellen. Meer dan eenderde van de financiële bijdrage is uitgetrokken voor de ondersteuning van het visserijbeleid van dit land.
Met het oog hierop heeft de Commissie in het gemengd comité met de autoriteiten van de Seychellen twee bijeenkomsten gehouden, in juli en september 2005, met als doel de politieke dialoog in gang te zetten inzake de vaststelling van een meerjarig sectoraal programma ter bevordering van de ontwikkeling van een verantwoorde visserij voor de kust van de Seychellen. De werkzaamheden in dit verband hebben betrekking op de vaststelling van jaarlijkse en meerjarendoelstellingen, de verlening van een deel van de financiële tegenprestatie alsmede doelstellingen die verwezenlijkt en criteria en procedures die nageleefd moeten worden teneinde de voorwaarden te scheppen voor een evaluatie van de jaarlijkse resultaten die zijn verkregen overeenkomstig artikel 7 van het protocol. Hierin komt het vaste voornemen van beide partijen tot uiting om te komen tot een verantwoorde visserij in de wateren van de Seychellen.
Het nieuwe protocol bestrijkt een periode van zes jaar: de periode van 18 januari 2005 tot en met 17 januari 2011. Het biedt visserijmogelijkheden aan veertig vaartuigen voor de tonijnvisserij met de zegen en 12 vaartuigen voor de tonijnvisserij met de drijvende beug en voorziet in een financiële tegenprestatie van 4 125 000 euro per jaar. Het protocol is voor de partijen van wederzijds belang.
Dan nu naar de amendementen. Wat amendement 1 betreft, delen wij de zorgen van het Parlement volledig en spreken wij onze waardering uit voor de snelle afwikkeling van de procedure binnen de krappe termijnen die er voor stonden. Zoals ik al zei, heeft de Commissie in een vroeg stadium de autoriteiten van de Seychellen op de hoogte gesteld van de vertraging. Zij hebben veel begrip getoond voor de situatie en gingen ermee akkoord dat de financiële tegenprestatie voor het eerste jaar van de overeenkomst op een later tijdstip wordt uitbetaald.
Zoals ik eerder al zei, is de vertraagde indiening hoofdzakelijk te wijten aan de aard van de onderhandelingen en aan de duur van de interne procedures. Met het oog hierop en gezien mijn vaste voornemen een oplossing hiervoor te vinden, vraag ik de rapporteur om begrip voor de verwerping van dit amendement."@nl3
"Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@pl16
"Senhor Presidente, antes de traçar em linhas gerais a posição da Comissão sobre este dossiê permita-me primeiro exprimir a minha gratidão à Comissão das Pescas, e especialmente ao seu Presidente e relator, o Deputado Morillon, pelo excelente trabalho efectuado com prazos muito apertados.
No que respeita à alteração 2, e tal como consta do artigo 7º do Protocolo, compete ao país costeiro, de acordo com a Comunidade, decidir qual a forma como a contribuição financeira deverá ser usada para apoiar a sua política de pescas. Por conseguinte, compete às autoridades das Seychelles identificar as principais prioridades da sua política de pescas que devem ser implementadas com a ajuda do Protocolo sobre as pescas. Não posso, por isso, aceitar esta alteração.
No que se refere às alterações 3 e 5, a Comissão está plenamente de acordo com o seu espírito. No entanto, a Comissão já cumpre a sua parte, procedendo ao envio deste tipo de informação em consonância com os dois actuais acordos interinstitucionais, e em especial com o acordo-quadro entre a Comissão e o Parlamento Europeu. A Comissão entende, por conseguinte, que estas alterações não são realmente necessárias se estiver correcta a informação de que disponho.
A alteração 4 não pode ser aceite pela Comissão. Permitam-me recordar as disposições comunitárias fundamentais relativas ao mandato conferido à Comissão para negociar em nome da Comunidade. O Conselho autorizou a Comissão a negociar acordos de pescas entre a Comunidade e as Seychelles. Assim sendo, a sua renovação periódica não requer que lhe seja conferido um novo mandato cada vez que isso se verifica. Não há necessidade de um novo mandato porque o mandato existente abrange os objectivos destas negociações.
Relativamente à alteração 6, o novo protocolo não inclui quaisquer medidas específicas para além de um apoio à política de pescas das Seychelles – visado no artigo 7º do Protocolo – para promover uma pesca responsável e sustentável nas águas deste país. Partilhamos inteiramente a preocupação de manter o Parlamento Europeu informado sobre os vários aspectos da implementação do Protocolo. Contudo, a Comissão está já a respeitar a obrigatoriedade de transmitir essa informação, de acordo com as actuais disposições interinstitucionais. A Comissão considera, por isso, que a alteração em apreço não é verdadeiramente necessária.
Como todos sabem, a tramitação na Comissão atrasou a conclusão da proposta em apreço. A Comissão está a diligenciar para evitar atrasos semelhantes no futuro. Estamos actualmente a efectuar consultas internas para decidir a melhor forma de ultrapassar os atrasos que levam o Parlamento Europeu a dispor de calendários muito apertados para analisar os relatórios. Espero poder comunicar à Comissão das Pescas soluções possíveis num futuro próximo. Entretanto, queria pedir desculpa ao relator pelo facto de ter tido de trabalhar com prazos muito apertados, e pelo meu lado comprometo-me a falar com ele para procurarmos uma solução no que respeita ao futuro
.
A propósito deste dossiê gostaria de dizer que informámos numa fase inicial as autoridades das Seychelles sobre o atraso no processo de aprovação. As autoridades das Seychelles demonstraram uma grande compreensão.
Como os Senhores Deputados sabem, a Comunidade tem relações antigas com as Seychelles no sector das pescas. O primeiro acordo de pescas com o país remonta a 1985 e é um dos acordos sobre atum mais importantes do ponto de vista financeiro. É também a pedra angular da nossa rede de acordos sobre a pesca de atum no Oceano Índico.
Este novo Protocolo é o primeiro a reflectir plenamente a nova abordagem adoptada nesta parceria. Ambas as partes defendem um diálogo político sobre as questões da pesca, e em especial sobre a política do sector das pescas definida pelo Governo das Seychelles. Mais de um terço da contribuição financeira foi reservada para apoiar a política das pescas nas Seychelles.
Em consonância com este desejo, a Comissão participou numa reunião da comissão conjunta, em Abril, e em duas reuniões técnicas, em Julho e Setembro de 2005, com as autoridades das Seychelles para se iniciar o diálogo político sobre a criação de um programa sectorial plurianual destinado a apoiar o desenvolvimento da pesca responsável nas Seychelles. Este trabalho inclui o estabelecimento de objectivos anuais e plurianuais, a distribuição de uma parte da contrapartida financeira, os objectivos a atingir e os critérios e procedimentos a seguir, de forma a permitir uma avaliação dos resultados anuais obtidos nos termos do artigo 7º do Protocolo. Assim sendo, ambas as partes estão fortemente empenhadas na pesca responsável e em pescarias sustentáveis nas águas das Seychelles.
O novo Protocolo abarca um período de seis anos que vai de 18 de Janeiro de 2005 a 17 de Janeiro de 2011. Concede possibilidades de pesca a 40 atuneiros cercadores e 12 palangreiros de superfície, prevendo uma contribuição financeira anual de 4 125 000 euros. O Protocolo traz ainda benefícios mútuos a ambas as partes.
Gostaria agora de voltar às alterações. No que se refere à alteração 1, partilhamos plenamente da preocupação do Parlamento e congratulamo-nos com a rapidez do processo, não obstante os apertados calendários que lhe foram dados. Como referi anteriormente, a Comissão informou as autoridades das Seychelles deste atraso numa fase inicial. As autoridades das Seychelles demonstraram uma grande compreensão e aceitaram receber o pagamento da contrapartida financeira relativa ao primeiro ano do acordo em data ulterior.
Como referi supra, os atrasos no envio devem-se sobretudo à natureza das negociações mas também à demora na tramitação interna. Tendo em conta este facto, e o meu empenho em encontrar uma solução, peço a compreensão do relator para a impossibilidade de aceitarmos esta alteração."@pt17
"Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@sk18
"Mr President, before I outline the Commission’s position on this dossier let me first extend my gratitude to the Committee on Fisheries, and especially to its Chairman and rapporteur Mr Morillon for his excellent work carried out within the very tight deadlines.
On Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal state, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is therefore the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Protocol. Therefore I am unable to accept this amendment.
As regards Amendments 3 and 5, the Commission is entirely in agreement with their spirit. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of this kind of information, in line with both the current interinstitutional arrangements and in particular with the framework agreement between the Commission and the European Parliament. The Commission therefore considers that these amendments are not really necessary, if my information is right.
Amendment 4 cannot be accepted by the Commission. May I recall the basic Community provisions concerning the mandate of the Commission to negotiate on behalf of the Community. The Council has authorised the Commission to negotiate fisheries arrangements between the Community and the Seychelles. Against this background, the periodic renewal does not require a new mandate each time. There is no need for a new mandate, given that the existing mandate covers these negotiations’ objectives.
On Amendment 6, the new Protocol does not contain any targeted measures but a support to the Seychelles fisheries policy – Article 7 of the Protocol –promoting responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in Seychelles waters. We fully share the concern to keep the EP informed on the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. However, the Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. Therefore the Commission considers that this amendment is not really necessary.
As you are all aware, the Commission procedures have delayed the finalisation of this proposal. The Commission is endeavouring to prevent similar delays occurring in the future. We are currently undertaking internal consultations to see how best to overcome the delays which result in very short timeframes being given to the European Parliament to consider the reports. I hope to be able to report to the Committee on Fisheries on possible solutions in the near future. In the meantime I want to apologise to the rapporteur for the very tight deadlines he had to work within, and I personally commit myself to discuss with him and to search for and find a solution with regard to the future modus operandi.
On this dossier I would like to say that we informed the Seychelles authorities of the delay in the adoption procedure at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding.
As the honourable Members are aware, the Community has a long-standing relation with the Seychelles in the fisheries area. The first fisheries agreement with the country dates back to 1985 and this is one of the most important tuna agreements in financial terms. It is also the cornerstone of the network of our tuna agreements in the Indian Ocean.
This new Protocol is the first one that fully reflects the new partnership approach. Both parties subscribe to a political dialogue on fisheries issues and in particular the fisheries sector policy defined by the Government of the Seychelles. More than one third of the financial contribution has been earmarked in support of the Seychelles fisheries policy.
In line with this desire, the Commission has had a joint committee meeting in April and two technical meetings in July and September 2005 with the Seychelles authorities in order to start the political dialogue on the establishment of a multiannual sector programme to support the development of responsible fisheries in the Seychelles. This work includes the establishment of annual and multiannual objectives, the distribution of a part of the financial compensation, the aims to be attained and criteria and procedures to be followed, in order to allow for an evaluation of the yearly results obtained in accordance with Article 7 of the Protocol. In this manner, both parties are firmly committed to responsible fishing and sustainable fisheries in the Seychelles waters.
The new Protocol covers a six-year period from 18 January 2005 to 17 January 2011. It grants fishing opportunities for 40 tuna seiners and 12 surface longliners and foresees a financial contribution of EUR 4 125 000 per year. The Protocol is of mutual benefit to both parties.
I shall now turn to the amendments. On Amendment 1 we fully share Parliament’s concern and appreciate the speedy procedure undertaken notwithstanding the short time-frames given to them. As I said before, the Commission informed the Seychelles authorities of this delay at an early stage. The Seychelles authorities have shown great understanding and have accepted to receive the payment of the financial compensation for the first year of the agreement at a later date.
As I have stated above, the delays in the transmission result mainly from the nature of negotiations, but also because of the length of time involved in internal procedures. In view of this and of my commitment to find a solution, I seek the rapporteur’s understanding of our inability to accept this amendment."@sl19
".
Herr talman! Innan jag beskriver kommissionens inställning till detta ärende vill jag först uttrycka min tacksamhet till fiskeriutskottet, och särskilt till dess ordförande och föredragande Philippe Morillon för hans utmärkta arbete som har utförts inom de mycket snäva tidsfristerna.
När det gäller ändringsförslag 2 är det, såsom sägs i artikel 7 i protokollet, upp till kuststaten, i överenskommelse med gemenskapen, att besluta om hur det ekonomiska bidraget ska användas till stöd för dess fiskeripolitik. Det åligger därför myndigheterna i Seychellerna att identifiera de huvudprioriteringar i dess fiskeripolitik som ska genomföras med hjälp av fiskeriprotokollet. Jag kan därför inte godta detta ändringsförslag.
När det gäller ändringsförslagen 3 och 5 håller kommissionen helt med om deras andemening. Kommissionen uppfyller emellertid redan överföringen av denna typ av information, i linje med både de nuvarande arrangemangen mellan institutionerna och särskilt ramavtalet mellan kommissionen och Europaparlamentet. Kommissionen anser därför att dessa ändringsförslag egentligen inte är nödvändiga, om jag har fått rätt information.
Ändringsförslag 4 kan inte godtas av kommissionen. Får jag påminna om de grundläggande gemenskapsbestämmelserna om kommissionens fullmakt att förhandla på gemenskapens vägnar. Rådet har gett kommissionen tillstånd att förhandla fram fiskeriarrangemang mellan gemenskapen och Seychellerna. Mot denna bakgrund kräver den regelbundna förnyelsen inte en ny fullmakt varje gång. Det behövs ingen ny fullmakt, med tanke på att den befintliga fullmakten omfattar dessa förhandlingars målsättningar.
När det gäller ändringsförslag 6 innehåller det nya protokollet inga målinriktade åtgärder utan ett stöd till Seychellernas fiskeripolitik – artikel 7 i protokollet – som främjar ansvarsfullt och hållbart fiske i Seychellernas vatten. Vi delar helt åsikten att det är viktigt att hålla Europaparlamentet informerat om de olika aspekterna på protokollets genomförande. Kommissionen uppfyller emellertid redan överföringen av sådan information i linje med de nuvarande arrangemangen mellan institutionerna. Kommissionen anser därför att detta ändringsförslag egentligen inte är nödvändigt.
Som ni alla känner till har kommissionens förfaranden försenat slutförandet av detta förslag. Kommissionen strävar efter att förhindra att liknande förseningar uppstår i framtiden. Vi genomför för närvarande interna samråd för att se hur vi på bästa sätt ska kunna komma förbi de förseningar som leder till att mycket korta tidsfrister har getts till Europaparlamentet för att diskutera betänkandena. Jag hoppas kunna rapportera till fiskeriutskottet om möjliga lösningar inom en nära framtid. Fram till dess vill jag be föredraganden om ursäkt för de mycket snäva tidsfrister som han har tvingats arbeta under, och jag lovar personligen att diskutera med honom och söka och hitta en lösning när det gäller framtidens arbetsmetoder.
När det gäller detta ärende vill jag säga att vi tidigt informerade myndigheterna i Seychellerna om förseningen i antagningsförfarandet. Myndigheterna i Seychellerna har visat stor förståelse.
Som ledamöterna känner till har gemenskapen en långvarig förbindelse med Seychellerna på fiskeriområdet. Det första fiskeriavtalet med landet slöts redan 1985, och det här är ett av de viktigaste tonfiskavtalen i ekonomiska termer. Det är också hörnstenen för vårt nätverk av tonfiskavtal i Indiska oceanen.
Detta nya protokoll är det första som helt avspeglar den nya partnerskapsstrategin. Båda parterna skriver under på en politisk dialog om fiskefrågor och särskilt den politik om fiskerisektorn som har definierats av Seychellernas regering. Mer än en tredjedel av det ekonomiska bidraget har öronmärkts till stöd för Seychellernas fiskeripolitik.
I linje med denna önskan har kommissionen haft ett sammanträde med gemensamma kommittén i april och två tekniska sammanträden i juli och september 2005 med myndigheterna i Seychellerna för att inleda den politiska dialogen om upprättandet av ett flerårigt sektorsprogram för att stödja utvecklingen av ansvarsfullt fiske i Seychellerna. Detta arbete innefattar upprättandet av årliga och fleråriga målsättningar, fördelning av en del av den ekonomiska ersättningen, de mål som ska uppnås och de kriterier och förfaranden som ska följas, för att möjliggöra en utvärdering av de årliga resultat som uppnås i enlighet med artikel 7 i protokollet. På detta sätt har båda parterna ett fast engagemang för ansvarsfullt fiske i Seychellernas vatten.
Det nya protokollet omfattar en sexårsperiod från den 18 januari 2005 till den 17 januari 2011. Det ger fiskemöjligheter för 40 notfartyg för tonfisk och 12 ytlångrevsfartyg och föreskriver ett ekonomiskt bidrag om 4 125 000 euro per år. Protokollet är gynnsamt för båda parterna.
Jag ska nu gå över till ändringsförslagen. När det gäller ändringsförslag 1 delar vi helt parlamentets oro och uppskattar det snabba förfarande som har ägt rum trots de korta tidsfrister som har getts till dem. Som jag sa förut informerade kommissionen myndigheterna i Seychellerna om denna försening i ett tidigt skede. Myndigheterna i Seychellerna har visat stor förståelse och accepterat att ta emot betalningen av den ekonomiska ersättningen för avtalets första år vid en senare tidpunkt.
Som jag har sagt ovan är förseningarna i överföringen främst en följd av förhandlingarnas natur, men beror också på den tidslängd som ingår i de interna förfarandena. Mot bakgrund av detta och mitt engagemang för att hitta en lösning söker jag föredragandens förståelse för vår oförmåga att acceptera detta ändringsförslag."@sv21
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Joe Borg,"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
"Member of the Commission"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,11,13,4
"modus operandi"20,17,12
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples