Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-20-Speech-4-032"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000120.3.4-032"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, may I start by congratulating Mr Cunha on a splendid report which we can, to a very large extent, support. We are looking very seriously at the Commission’s remarks in the annual report on the results of the multiannual guidance programmes for the Community fishing fleet. It should also be pointed out in this regard that the report dates from 1997 and that it is now the year 2000. The annual report is characterised by a series of changes to the reference basis and, as such, by complicated evaluations concerning the measurements, which become still more flimsy because not all Member States keep to the programmes. Some countries fulfil the final objectives for MAGP IV, and other countries hesitate or are very behind. There is also talk of there not being reliable data from other countries. It is important to point out that there may perhaps be major inaccuracies, since there are no uniform criteria for comparison.
Mr Cunha refers in his report to the fact that the goal of the multiannual guidance programmes is to create a balance between the available fishing resources and the common fishing fleet’s activities. It is to be emphasised that a considerable reduction in the fishing fleet is a prerequisite for securing sustainable development within the sector. Here, I am thinking especially of young people just starting out. I am thinking about investment in new vessels. It is also a clear prerequisite that the socio-economic burden should be distributed justly and equally between the Member States.
We are concerned about the fact that a number of the Member States are negligent – in fact, almost indifferent – about submitting reliable data concerning the status of their fishing fleets. It is also very obvious that a number of Member States even show little interest in reducing the capacity of their fishing fleets in accordance with the objective of the programmes and with the resolutions contained therein.
The Committee on Fisheries urges the Commission and the Member States to adopt uniform and comparable criteria for measurements, and this must be an absolute requirement. The Commission is also urged to increase its supervision of developments within the Member States’ fleets. This, too, we fully support. In addition to tighter supervision, the Commission is urged to implement or, in certain cases, to intensify measures to compel the Member States to comply with the stipulations requiring them to reduce the sizes of their fishing fleets. Such measures may include refusing to help them renew and modernise their fishing fleets and bringing legal proceedings before the European Court of Justice.
Mr Cunha proposes that the Member States’ shortcomings in submitting data may lead to fishing quotas being reduced. We do not think that this is the correct way of going about things, for we do not believe that fishermen should be punished because of sloppiness displayed by the Member States. In connection with this amendment, we have asked for split voting. We have also requested split voting in connection with the reference to relative stability, since we think that things have been mixed together here in a way which might perhaps distort the principle established in the Treaty."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples