Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-27-Speech-3-333"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060927.25.3-333"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I should like to thank the honourable Members for their contributions.
Let me start by trying to clear the air with regard to the North Sea Regional Advisory Council. The Commission has held a series of consultation meetings and exchanges of views since June 2004. I do not believe that any other fisheries issue has been the subject of such extensive dialogue with the RACs. After the North Sea RAC decided to reserve its position until the Commission had made a specific proposal concerning long-term management targets and reference points, the Commission stated that it would put forward a proposal and even inform the RAC of its technical content at a meeting in November 2005. A discussion has since proceeded in good order on the basis of the Commission’s proposal. I am pleased that the North Sea RAC has recognised that many elements of the Commission’s proposal are valuable and appropriate.
Regarding maximum sustainable yields, a number of stocks were brought into long-term management plans some years ago, which included low-target fishing mortalities, such as mackerel, herring and, more recently, haddock. These plans have proved valuable and helpful to the industries concerned. I believe similar benefits can be extended to the flatfish sector. Discussions concerning the maximum sustainable yield should also take place, but that is a wider-scale issue. The immediate concern is to provide the flatfish fishery with a sound economic basis.
With regard to the point raised concerning TACs for three years, I must again underline that a three-year TAC would not help to recover the stock, simply because adjustments cannot be made in good time. How can one make adjustments mid-course if there is an urgent reason to reduce the TAC? The North Sea RAC has revised its position and it no longer advises such a measure. I can accept the argument that a three-year TAC will give greater security to fishermen, but not the argument that a three-year TAC would mean greater sustainability.
With regard to discards, we are actively considering what can be done to solve this problem. It is one of the top priorities for the remainder of my mandate. I cannot agree more with Mr Davies that fishermen need to be integrated into the process. We are doing our utmost to meet with and consult all fishing representatives."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples