Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-04-Speech-3-256"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20080604.26.3-256"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Madam President, Mr Freitas’ report deals with a proposal that opens the way to the introduction of the principle of environmental impact assessments in the fisheries field. I cannot overstate how important this is in terms of a regime shift and an alignment of fisheries regulation with many other maritime activities. In addition, this principle responds to a very specific objective – that of preventing damage to vulnerable marine ecosystems. The proposal fully embodies the ecosystem approach, which the Commission is committed to implementing under the Common Fisheries Policy. Through this proposal, we respond to the calls made in 2006 by the United Nations General Assembly to take effective action to prevent vulnerable marine ecosystems in the high seas from being destroyed or significantly damaged by bottom fishing activities. In relation to vessels that operate in areas for which no international conservation and management regime is in place, it is up to the flag State to regulate the activities of its vessels to ensure this protection. Since the European Union exerts the regulatory competence of the flag State under international law, we must adopt appropriate measures to respond to this UN call by the end of this year. The regulation, as proposed, will thus apply to EU flagged vessels operating in non-RFMO areas of the high seas. We currently have a sizeable fleet operating in the South West Atlantic, which is one such area. The text has been designed to established result obligations by flag Member States, namely to ensure that no fishing permits are to be given to fish with bottom gears unless an assessment of potential impacts clearly demonstrates low risk for vulnerable marine ecosystems. What this means is that the Commission does not go into the detail as to how Member States are to conduct such assessments, but rather we fix the minimum standards relating to scientific information and then leave it up to Member States to see how to achieve the required results. Our proposal stipulates that bottom gears cannot be deployed below a depth of 1 000 metres. The argument that the proposed rule has no scientific basis cannot be sustained. On the one hand, we are still developing our knowledge of the deep oceans and face so much uncertainty that the full application of the precautionary approach is warranted. The proposed depth limit is a reasonable choice, as it does not impinge on current EU fleet activities, which are much shallower. On the other hand, this rule seeks to ensure that we give ourselves time to test how this new regulatory approach works before we allow our fishers to expand into deeper waters. This is about keeping the present state of our activities in place until we know enough to be more confident about expanding them safely. The Commission is ready to come back to this specific point in two years’ time, when we submit a report to the Council and to this Assembly on the regulation’s implementation and effectiveness. It is for these reasons that the Commission cannot accept the deletion of this rule as proposed in the report. Secondly, Mr Freitas’ report proposes to amend the provision whereby the regulation would impose full observer coverage in the fleets, and stipulate instead a sampling system. The Commission also has difficulty in accepting this amendment since, with the absence of observers, only VMS remains as a control tool for monitoring compliance by each vessel with its approved fishing plans. This is not enough, and it is probably unrealistic to expect national fisheries monitoring centres to ensure real-time, individual monitoring of each unit in the fleet. In addition, without an observer on board, the very important ‘move away rule’ in case the vessel accidentally encounters an uncharted ecosystem will simply be inoperative as it is impossible to monitor compliance with this rule by VMS. As in the previous case, this requirement can be reviewed in two years’ time to assess its effectiveness. Most of the remaining proposed amendments are acceptable to the Commission, and many have indeed already been brought forward on similar lines during the Council discussions. I would like to thank Parliament for the support it has expressed to the Commission in our efforts to provide an effective response on this issue."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph