Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-01-17-Speech-4-020"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020117.2.4-020"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, when it is normal practice to congratulate rapporteurs on their work, it is difficult to find appropriate words to use when something exceptional has been achieved. So I shall say simply that it is a tribute to the work of Mrs Miguélez Ramos that a report that attracted over 400 amendments at the committee stage has come to plenary with only 25 to be considered.
Before dealing with the nature of the substantive motion for a resolution, I want to touch briefly on the amendments by my own group. Amendments Nos 3, 4 and 5 look to the international level. Amendment No 3 seeks common definitions and methodology in respect of fisheries subsidies and fishing capacity and effort and the interrelationship between them. Amendments Nos 4 and 5 are designed to improve the monitoring both of the cost-effectiveness of fisheries agreements with third countries and of fishing activities conducted in the context thereof.
Amendment No 6 seeks only to soften the wording of recital H because of doubts that the CFP can actually guarantee those working in the sector living conditions comparable to those in other production sectors, although it should certainly assist in this respect.
Finally, Amendment No 7 wishes merely to add recreational sea angling to the areas to which, along with deep-sea and coastal fishing and aquaculture, separate attention needs to be given. We hope that these amendments will meet with the approval of the House.
More generally, we believe that the motion for a resolution has achieved a commendable balance between the demands of fishing as an economic activity and the need for conservation. In sustaining the principle of relative stability, and the six- to twelve-mile limit, it recognises the fragility of fisheries-dependent communities. In endorsing a move to multiannual and multi-species quotas, it promotes an approach to fisheries management that is better for the industry and the environment alike. It also addresses other issues of environmental concern, such as shark finning and the bycatch of citations. Further, it takes serious note of our responsibilities towards the developing world.
Another of the aspects dear to my own heart is the move towards establishing a far greater input into the decision-making process by fishermen, scientists and conservationists. I add, with a touch of pride, that this is an approach pioneered in my own constituency, with the involvement of organisations such as the Scottish Fisherman's Federation, The Shetland Oceans Alliance and the World Wildlife Fund.
The number of amendments at committee showed how many different and often conflicting views there can be where fisheries issues are concerned. The final report demonstrates just how well we in this House can manage to reconcile our differences. I hope that, as voted later today, it will remain something of which Parliament as a whole, the Committee on Fisheries in particular, and Mrs Miguélez Ramos, despite her modesty and her own personal reservations, can be justifiably proud."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples