Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-01-Speech-3-156"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000301.9.3-156"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I too would like to start by thanking you warmly for your report Mrs Attwooll. However, I would also like to thank all of you for your great interest in, and support for, the two Commission proposals. One thing is certain: there will be no common fisheries policy if it is not based on a common data support framework. Reliable and complete data are a fundamental prerequisite for credible fisheries management, still more so for creating what we constantly refer to as a level playing field.
Amendments Nos 4 and 5, according to which the Commission is to transmit all financial, and also all situation reports produced by the Member States, appear to me to be superfluous, for after all, we have given a commitment to prepare a report evaluating the measures adopted by the Member States, and this report will contain an assessment of the entire data collection system.
Several other amendments relate to the schedule we have proposed. I wholeheartedly endorse these amendments. The deadlines that we originally put forward in our proposal were on the basis of an earlier adoption of the proposals and are no longer realistic. The Commission, in cooperation with the Council, will see to it that a realistic schedule is established. However, I must make clear reference to the fact that we must meet tight deadlines, and that that there will be absolutely no question, for example, of granting six-month deadlines for the presentation of data collection programmes. Lastly, the remaining amendments help to clarify the wording and the Commission accepts them in their entirety.
Firstly, a few comments on the first report. I completely understand why you have proposed, as expressed in the Amendment, that ecological data should also be included. However, I could only support the collection of data of this kind if a clear data framework was to be put in place first of all and, above all, if the necessary additional budgetary funds were to be made available. As far as Amendment No 2 is concerned, I would point out that we set great store by the collection of economic data. However, if we were to accept your Amendment and not collect data relating to income from catches but only data relating to the volume of catches, then this would actually weaken the proposal, for we need data about income, particularly if we are to be able to assess the economic situation of fishermen.
On the other hand, we support your proposal to the effect that more precise statistics should be collected on the employment situation. I have the following to say to you on the subject of Amendment No 6, namely all recorded data to be automatically transmitted to the Commission: the Commission will automatically receive all the necessary data on request. There is no point in setting up a central database in Brussels when much of this data is needed for international meetings a long way from Brussels. Tried and tested methods for the transmission of scientific and technical data should be retained because they work well.
I can accept parts of your Amendment No 7 in the first report and 6 in the second report. I believe it is an extremely good idea for us to record how we have made use of the data collected, in our report to Parliament and the Council. I also agree with you that we should present our first report in good time after 2002, against the background of the common fisheries policy.
Turning now to the second report by Mrs Attwooll: in Amendment No 1 you recommend placing the funding under heading 1b and not under heading 3 of the Community budget. However, expenditure on supervisory and information activities for fisheries also comes under heading 3. I therefore believe that data collection, which, at the end of the day, is also of use for supervisory purposes, also belongs under this heading. However, this issue has yet to be definitively resolved. It will need to be revisited in further detail in April, within the scope of the draft budget procedure for 2001."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples