Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-07-09-Speech-3-493"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2008-07-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:EC/Mauritania Fisheries Partnership Agreement for the period 1 August 2008 to 31 July 2012 (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20080709.41.3-493"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2008-07-09-Speech-3-4942
lpv:speaker	lp:Cornelis Visser2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Christen Democratisch Appèl (2007-10-17--2009-07-13)3,3 member; ECON (2007-11-12--2009-07-13)3,3 member; PECH (2007-11-12--2009-07-13)3,3 substitute; CULT (2007-11-05--2009-07-13)3,3 member; EPP-ED (2007-10-17--2009-07-13)3,3 member; Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China (2007-11-12--2009-07-13)3,3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Israel (2007-11-05--2009-07-13)3,3
lpv:translated text	"The fisheries agreement with Mauritania, concluded as recently as 1 August 2006, was due to be extended this year. On 14 December last year the Commission suddenly suggested that it should be terminated since the fishing opportunities were not being fully used by the European fishing fleet, particularly those relating to small pelagic species. This came as a great surprise to us. Partly at the urging of Parliament itself talks were held to re-negotiate the fisheries protocol. The new protocol now put to us by the Commission represents very rigorous cuts compared with the old one. Not only are the fishing opportunities for species not fully taken up in previous years cut, but there are severe cuts for all fish species: 25% for cephalopods, 10 to 50% for demersal species and 43% for pelagics, whilst the financial compensation paid to Mauritania remains unchanged or only slightly reduced in the years ahead. We wonder if these cuts were really necessary and what was the rationale behind them, especially since the fishery sector is currently experiencing great difficulties due to the crisis over fuel prices and the cuts in fishing opportunities. There would thus seem to be no obvious reason to limit fishing opportunities further, certainly when there was no biological or scientific need to do so. The fishery sector must be able to use any fishing opportunity there is just at present. One possibility, for example, might be to switch the Mediterranean tuna fishery to Mauritania. The Dutch pelagic fishing fleet is also hit by the proposed restrictions, especially on pollock, herring and mackerel. So much for Mauritania. A brief word or two on the Commission's proposals. I am very happy with these, if not with the proposals on Mauritania. I think there are many useful pointers for adapting the fleet in response to the fuel crisis and I hope that these new measures will be enough to prevent job losses in the sector."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph