Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-06-06-Speech-3-228"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070606.21.3-228"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the Council regulation which is the subject of this report is a long-awaited important legislative proposal, and constitutes an attempt to deal with the very considerable needs of the fisheries sector in one of the most significant bodies of European water. This in itself is good reason to congratulate those responsible for the report. They have tackled the difficult challenge of drafting a long-term programme for the regeneration and catches of Baltic cod. Cod is a fish that provides many families with their livelihood. It is the most important fish in the Baltic and therefore generates great interest amongst those involved in fisheries. Emotions are running high in the Baltic region concerning Parliament’s opinion and subsequent Council rulings.
A report referring to verified data taking scientific forecasts on the development of cod stocks and fishing possibilities as a content-related starting point represented an opportunity for achieving satisfactory compromises in these circumstances. It was essential for the Committee on Fisheries to intervene with regard to the Council’s legislative proposal because it was necessary for the document to take account of the inevitable socio-economic consequences of the planned catch restrictions. I am glad the Commissioner mentioned this.
One of the amendments adopted was tabled by the rapporteur and bound the European Commission to monitor these consequences and propose essential management measures to Parliament. Another amendment adopted involved reducing the restrictions on fishing days laid down in the regulation from 10% to 8% and increasing the so-called reporting limit from 100 kg to 300 kg. I am referring to the Committee on Fisheries. The Committee on Fisheries also adopted the suggestion made by the Council of Ministers regarding adjustment of the margin of error in fishing log book entries from 8% to 10%. The proposal on increasing the minimum size of cod caught in the Baltic to 40 cm was endorsed too.
It is difficult to avoid the impression that report was strongly influenced by the view that the fishing capacity of the Baltic cod fleet is currently far too large in relation to the available fishing quotas. There is still no proposal for a systematic resolution of this problem at the level of the Union and the individual Member States. Stronger and stronger warnings are being voiced urging great caution with regard to automatic decisions on scrapping the fleet. It would be preferable to seek solutions allowing the fishing capacities defined to be retained until stocks are replenished. We shall obviously need something to fish with when that time comes.
I believe that sooner or later the issue of the length of the summer bans will become part of the debate on the plan for rebuilding cod stocks. The Commissioner referred to the bans today. It should be noted that a tendency to favour so-called days absent from port rather than the bans used to date is gaining strength in those Member States seeking ways to further reduce the fishing effort by introducing additional days when fishing for cod is banned.
The scientific advice accompanying the general discussion on the Council regulation has indicated the need to review the assessment of biological reference points used to date, and I am glad the Commissioner mentioned this today. It should be added that none of the Baltic countries queries the introduction of fishing mortality as a method of defining the achievable aims of the multiannual plan for rebuilding Baltic cod stocks. I refer to Article No 4 of the plan.
It does seem essential, however, to launch an in-depth debate on the subject of appropriate values of biomass reference points adjusted to the actual state of the stocks and the current general situation of the Baltic Sea ecosystem. This will be in line with the Community’s commitment to introducing the ecosystem approach to fisheries management. I refer to Recital No 5. I should emphasise that the biomass limit values currently in force were adopted in 1998 on the basis of data gathered in the 1960s and 1970s. They cannot therefore be appropriate to the current condition of stocks.
In conclusion, it should be pointed out that the intention of the earlier Council Regulation 2371/2002 mentioned in the document dealt with in the opinion was to retain the precautionary principle in connection with the introduction of fundamental changes to the fisheries policy. The precaution applied to both management of the stocks and assessment of the socio-economic impact of the changes. This principle should remain in force following the accession of the four Baltic countries to the Union."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples