Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-29-Speech-3-036"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020529.5.3-036"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I had hoped that the extra time taken by the Commission to fine-tune the proposals would have resulted in documents which would fully reflect the concerns raised by this House when we adopted our opinion earlier this year. I had hoped that they would pay particular attention to the social and economic implications for those regions on the periphery of the Union. These areas are heavily dependent on fishing, as by and large there is no alternative source of employment.
I regret to say that I have been disappointed with what the Commission has produced after its long deliberations at many levels. Instead of carefully crafted measures which would address the real problems affecting the fishing industry, the Commission has delivered what can only be described as a blunt instrument which, if adopted, would fail to protect fish stocks or to address the issue of fishing effort.
Ireland fully meets the legal commitments under the multi-annual guidance programmes. Our fishing fleets keep within the legally imposed TACs and quotas on fleet sizes. In this context, it is totally unacceptable for the Commission to put forward proposals that would penalise all countries for the sins of a few. I do not have time to refer to the sins of those greedy countries, the Member States from other parts of the Union that try to exploit the fishing resources in areas far from home.
These proposals underline an 8.5% reduction in fishing fleet. This is being somewhat economical with the facts. It may be a reduction of 8.5% in the fishing fleet but it is a reduction of at least 18% in capacity. The Commission's proposals to forbid all state aid for the upgrading of the fleet is nothing short of irresponsible. The essence of fleet renewal policy is to improve the safety and living conditions on board ships, not to improve the capacity or the effectiveness. Failure to do this would be a dereliction of duty and we must insist on the right of Member States to continue the policy.
Therefore, I am extremely disappointed that the Commission have not reinstated the policy prior to December 2001 – that was the safety capacity clause. How can the Commission claim to advocate a safer working environment for fishermen and crew members while at the same time penalising the owners of the vessels who want to carry out measures to improve safety on board? In simple terms, if you want to put a whaleback on a vessel to protect the crew and create a safer environment, you are now penalised. The Commission must take this into consideration and be much more reasonable.
In conclusion, I believe that these Commission proposals are just that. It is fortunate that the watchdogs of the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament will be there to protect fish stocks and also, but equally as importantly, to protect the interests of fishermen from areas, where, as I said at the outset, there is no alternative source of employment."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples