Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-09-11-Speech-2-644-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120911.41.2-644-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, fisheries policy is one of Europe’s greatest failures. The fundamental problem is widespread overfishing in all EU seas. That is by far the greatest challenge we have to deal with when we reform our common fisheries policy.
These three things should form part of the core of the new fisheries policy that we are to decide on this year and that will affect the fisheries sector for the next 10 years. The Australians and Americans have shown that the right political measures are important. They were once in the same situation in which Europe now finds itself, but they succeeded in breaking out of the downward spiral.
This therefore sounds like the right approach for Europe to take, and it is something we can achieve if we take the right decisions during the forthcoming reform.
Two thirds of Europe’s fish stocks are currently overfished. The situation is worst in the Mediterranean. There, an entire 82% of stocks are overfished above the level that has been scientifically determined to be sustainable. However, the situation is almost as alarming in all of Europe’s seas. This goes, in particular, for my native waters, the Baltic Sea.
Overfishing means, in practice, that there is overcapacity in the fishing fleet and that too many vessels are hunting for too few fish. In Europe, there is no definition of overcapacity. Since Commissioner Damanaki is here, I will therefore take the opportunity once again to ask for such a definition. A definition would mean that it would no longer be possible for anyone to say that overcapacity or overfishing does not exist. Therefore, we need a definition in order to be able to hold a clearer political debate.
Overfishing is not only an ecological disaster; it is also an economic and social disaster. In the last 10 years, European fish catches have diminished from 5.5 million tonnes to 4 million tonnes. At the same time, it is estimated that 130 000 jobs have been lost in the fishing industry.
The World Bank estimates that global overfishing costs the world around EUR 40 billion per year. That is equivalent to Finland’s state budget.
The poor state of fish stocks has also made it necessary to subsidise the fishing industry using public funds, which readily results in continued overfishing. At times of financial austerity, I think that taxpayers’ money could be put to considerably better use. We must therefore make fishing profitable again, like it was for thousands of years in Europe.
One of the main points of the report by myself and my predecessor, Carl Haglund, is to achieve a maximum sustainable yield by 2015. Maximum sustainable yield means not catching fish faster than the time it takes for the fish stocks to replenish themselves. It sounds rather logical and simple but, unfortunately, it is not a foregone conclusion.
Another key point is to obtain a ban on discards. Currently, 1.7 million tonnes of dead fish are thrown overboard every year. A policy is only as good as its implementation. We must therefore ensure that the decisions taken concerning the reform of the common fisheries policy are actually followed.
As things stand, many Member States are very lax when it comes to reporting the actual size of their fishing fleet, among other things. This, in turn, makes it difficult to estimate how large the overcapacity is. There are currently few sanctions that can be used against those who break the rules. I therefore propose an option to freeze the EU aid from the common European Maritime and Fisheries Fund for countries that do not comply with the legislation and rules that we have adopted."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples