Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-05-Speech-4-198"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010705.11.4-198"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, I should like to thank my colleagues in the Committee on Fisheries for the considerable interest and support elicited by my report on the multiannual guidance programmes for fishing fleets. It shows that this is a very important report. The multiannual guidance programmes proposed by the Commission make a lot of sense. The overriding problem is that they are not being implemented in the Member States. Therefore, we never find out whether or not they would be a success. It is quite simply unacceptable that they are not being implemented in their entirety. According to the Commission, there are 7 or 8 Member States which do not comply with MAGPs. If one adds to these the countries which do not have a fishing fleet at all, not many countries are left which comply with the common decisions.
We simply have too large a fleet fishing for too few fish in the EU. There has only just recently been a ban on cod fishing in the North Sea, and this clearly shows that there are some very weak links in the chain when it comes to the ability of the common fisheries policy to secure sustainable fisheries. European fishermen are entitled to a more stable fisheries and quota policy as a basis on which to organise their industry. One of the most important tools for securing sustainable fisheries is simply to ensure that the size of the fishing fleet corresponds to the quantity of the fish that can be caught. Technological progress entails a still greater need to reduce fishing fleets. We are now, of course, in the unfortunate and regrettable position arising from the failure to renegotiate a fisheries agreement with Morocco. The EU’s over-capacity when it comes to the fishing fleet is therefore a great weakness.
I look forward to the Commission’s using the new tools in the form of Articles 6 and 10 of the Council Regulation which of course enable the Commission to withhold aid for, respectively, fleet renewal and the modernisation of vessels. It is naturally sad that the Member States do not have a greater incentive to implement those decisions which they themselves have been involved in taking on a joint basis and that some countries feel superior about the fact that they are to implement the guidance programmes, given that they are not exceeding the quotas. I find that deeply regrettable. One is almost tempted to propose introducing a system of rewards for those countries which comply with the common decisions and reduce their fishing fleets.
I am obliged to criticise the form taken by the Commission’s annual report, which is impossible to read unless one is an expert in the area. The various figures are set out without any comments as to their reliability. For that matter, they are included in the report in such a way that it is largely up to the reader to interpret the figures and make what he considers to be the correct interpretations. In other words, the annual report is not easy to read and it provides absolutely no overview of the situation. For example, there is no clearly set-out table to permit comparison of the individual Member States. It is, unfortunately, a very poor point of departure for the reform of the common fisheries policy in 2002. The Commission therefore has a very great deal of work ahead of it, Commissioner, if a new and better guidance programme for the reduction of the fishing fleet is to be carried out and if this is to be implemented in all the Member States."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples