Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-06-14-Speech-4-212"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010614.13.4-212"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, honourable Members. I should like to start by thanking the rapporteur, Mr Pérez Royo, for his report on the new fisheries protocol with the Comoros. I am delighted, Mr Pérez Royo, that you have given this proposal your full and firm support.
The new protocol refers solely to tuna and makes provision – as already mentioned – for fishing opportunities for a total of 65 ships. The financial contribution paid in return will be EUR 350 000 per annum. What is so gratifying is that 60% of this sum is to be used for targeted measures to develop the local fisheries sector in the Comoros, taking special account of small-scale fishing.
A brief word on the proposed amendments. The Commission has no problem with the content of Amendments Nos 1, 3 and 4 but considers them to be superfluous because it already complies with these requirements within the framework of the Interinstitutional Agreements, especially the Framework Agreement between the European Parliament and the Commission of 5 July last year.
Unfortunately, I cannot agree to Amendment No 5. The principle which applies here is that no new mandate is required for new protocols negotiated because they are annexed to existing agreements.
I can accept Amendment No 2 in full but, here too, we feel that this is not necessary because the principles set out in it coincide with the Community's basic position on sustainable, responsible fisheries as contained, for example, in our communication on fisheries and poverty reduction and the Green Paper presented recently on the future of the common fisheries policy.
As far as Amendment No 6 is concerned, the Commission shares Parliament's concern as regards protecting the habitat of Coelacanth in the Comoros. Rather than refer to this in the text of the Council regulation, I would suggest that we proceed as follows: the Commission is prepared to write to the government of Comoros in order to convince it of the importance of this species and the problems connected with it. We shall then send a copy of this letter to the chairman of the Committee on Fisheries, Mr Varela.
Finally, I cannot accept Amendment No 7. It is an integral part of our agreement policy and all negotiating guidelines state that financial compensation for fishing opportunities must be paid partly from the EU budget and partly by the shipowners. What happens in practice is that the Community pays the financial consideration to the third country in question and the shipowners obviously pay the licence fees themselves."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples