Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-19-Speech-5-056"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991119.4.5-056"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, the question of shipbuilding must, quite obviously, be tackled comprehensively, taking one area of production at a time.
I would therefore be grateful to you, Commissioner Liikanen, if you would point out to your colleague, Mr Fischler, that shipowners are having trouble understanding this logic, or rather this absence of logic. The Commission shall obviously have to make the necessary arrangements to enable the construction of ships required by the changes in regulations which it has decided on.
In conclusion, Mr President, Commissioner, if the European Commission really wishes to make a contribution to the expansion of the shipbuilding sector in Europe, it is enough for it to clearly defend the principle of fair trade at the WTO talks, to leave Member States the freedom to intervene directly in this strategic sector in order to convert shipyards, by means of technological modifications, for activity in profitable market sectors, to promote cooperation between businesses in order to contribute towards improving the overall efficiency of each type of shipyard and, finally, in the context of the common fisheries policy, to take the necessary decisions to enable the controlled renewal of our fishing fleet, the continuation of the expertise of our shipyards and the vitality, Mr President, of our coastal regions which are dependent on fishing.
The Member States have acknowledged expertise in the field of military shipbuilding. This is a field in which the Commission obviously does not have to intervene, but in which intergovernmental cooperation should be stepped up, so that Member States can safeguard and increase their expertise and independence, at acceptable cost. It would be very dangerous to allow disinvestment in this field and one can only regret the recent problems afflicting in particular the Horizon frigate programme and the abrupt withdrawal of some partners, which upset the overall balance of the programme.
As regards the construction of passenger and merchant vessels, both highly competitive, labour-intensive sectors, here too the Member States’ remarkable expertise and outstanding capabilities must be protected and developed and not allowed to go outside Europe. As regards heavy manufacturing units affected by significant technological developments, Member States must be able to implement a policy fostering the technological conversion of their shipyards, so that the latter can become active in market sectors which allow them to exploit their know-how. The closure of any shipyard represents an irreparable loss of expertise for the Member States and for the European Union. The Union must not, therefore, on the basis of ill-advised notions of free competition, prevent states from promoting the conversion of manufacturing units with a view to preserving both know-how and jobs. In this respect, the example of the shipyards on France’s Atlantic coast, whose brilliant recovery following a period of crisis has been particularly spectacular, and the role the French State played in this process, should be pondered.
We must be very careful to ensure that the forthcoming WTO negotiations make it possible to put an end to the unacceptable dumping practised by a number of countries and do not endanger a sector in which world competition is intense, since it is highly labour-intensive, difficult to automate, and therefore prey to strong pressure in favour of relocation to countries where labour costs are far lower than those we have in the European Union.
Finally, Mr President, I wish to mention the subject of the construction of fishing boats. This sector, which may, in the overall scheme of things, seem a rather marginal one, does however play a crucial role in the balance of the economic and social fabric of our coastal regions. The European Community plays an essential role in this field. This sector is, in fact, almost totally dependent on the common fisheries policy. But for two years now the European Commission has frozen Community aid for the construction of new vessels and, by the same token, that of Member States, until the objectives for the destruction of boats outlined in the multiannual guidance programmes have been reached.
This deadlock, which has serious consequences, was compounded by a refusal to take the sale of boats to third countries into consideration in calculating the reduction in capacity of the European fleet. In considering only the boats destroyed, the Commission is thus behind a considerable loss of earnings to the detriment of fishermen and ship-owners. What is more, the Commission is today proposing to prohibit any renewal in the sectors which are not advancing as quickly as others and is making it compulsory to find and destroy any capacity which exceeds by more than 30% the renewed boat capacity in the sectors which are up to date with the MAGP objectives.
This situation and these proposals entail a worrying ageing of the European fishing fleet, discourage young people from investing their energies in it, cause a significant loss of sales for the specialist shipyard sector, making some of them dangerously vulnerable, and entail a clear risk for our seafarers as far as safety is concerned.
We hope that the Council will be able to make the Commission see reason and carry through the proposals which the European Parliament made at the time after close consultation with Member States, in the report by our fellow Member, Mr Arias Cañete. Whenever a shipyard disappears, particularly valuable know-how built up over time, linked with the seafaring history of a region, disappears along with it. Everything must be done to prevent this.
The Commission must also show consistency. After urging the construction of netters, on the grounds of the selectivity of the drift net, the Commission then, under pressure from some lobbies and some Member States, without scientific basis and in a discriminatory fashion, prohibited the use of this same drift net in some seas only. It recommended experimenting with alternative gear, but did not envisage a specific financial chapter or a specific kilowatt package enabling boats to be built in line with the new regulations which it had issued. Now, it has been confirmed, after analysing the results of the first experiments, that existing netters cannot be adapted to comply with the new conditions, and new boats will have to be built."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples