Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-03-Speech-2-326"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030603.10.2-326"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would firstly like to congratulate the rapporteurs for the three reports we are dealing with tonight, Mr Fava, Mr Stevenson and Mr Hudghton, and I would also like to say to the latter, Mr Hudghton, that I agree with many of the comments he made in his speech. I would also like to condemn the conceit of the Commission, which takes decisions behind the backs of the sector, the lack of communication between scientists and fishermen and I agree with him that none of this helps in promoting a credible image of Europe amongst our citizens.
The time available for this debate is limited, and the issues dealt with by these three reports are very important. I will restrict myself to a brief comment on each of them. I believe that these three reports, particularly when debated together in this way, demonstrate the contradictory way in which the Commission presents its proposals on reform of the CFP.
The report by Mr Fava on the action plan to counteract the social, economic and regional consequences of the restructuring of this industry in the European Union raises the need for the Community to deal with the losses with sufficient financial resources and without so much uncertainty, particularly in terms of employment, which this reform of the CFP will cause in the regions dependent on fishing.
The Committee on Fisheries is requesting additional funding to alleviate the effects of this reform. The Commission must ensure that the socio-economic structure of these areas is maintained. It will be cheaper to support the maintenance of the existing socio-economic fabric than to stand back and watch it disappear and then try to create other replacement economic activities, with which these regions – and I agree with Mr Stevenson – would have great difficulties, since they are located in peripheral areas and suffer from a lack of professional training, new technologies, infrastructures and access to the markets.
The Commissioner is well aware that each job on a ship generates from 4 to 5 jobs on land, and therefore the disappearance of fishing would cause serious disruption to the socio-economic fabric of these regions.
With regard to the report on the management of fishing in relation to certain areas and resources, I believe that, when drawing up resolutions, we Members of Parliament must take account of reality. And the reality is that the transitional period following the accession of Spain and Portugal has come to an end. The CFP has quite enough exceptions already without restoring and perpetuating those which at one time were mere transitional mechanisms. Mr Stevenson, this exception, which has come to an end, is not one favour which is being exchanged for another. If anybody has led you to believe this, I am very sorry, because it has come to an end. It is a problem of legal basis and it has come to an end, and it is not being exchanged for anything. You helped us in Morocco; we will help you as much as we can, but the exception has ended.
Finally, my group supports the Commission's proposal on the protection of juveniles. Correct and effective technical measures should be the basis for achieving the balance between fleet and resources. The excessive scrapping which some people want to see is anti-economic and antisocial, and could lead us to a situation in a few years when we have created sufficient quantities of fish but do not have either the ships or the fishermen to catch them. With regard specifically to the Irish Box, I believe that to use 1998-2002 to measure fishing is far too little, it is shameful.
With regard to the consultative committees, I support this measure, but quite frankly I would like the Commission to clarify whether all the Member States are currently in an equal position to implement this new element. I would like to know whether we are all in an equal position, because, if we are not, we would be generating a new source of disparity, of unequal treatment and injustice, and I am told by the sector in my country that we are not all in an equal position."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples