Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-09-11-Speech-2-648-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-09-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Measures in relation to countries allowing non-sustainable fishing for the purpose of the conservation of fish stocks - Common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products - Conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources - Reform of the common fisheries policy (debate)2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120911.41.2-648-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-09-11-Speech-2-649-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Maria Damanaki2
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, since my time is limited, I would like to focus on certain issues. I hope that you will forgive me for not referring to all the issues that the rapporteurs have already mentioned. So we are talking here a lot about small-scale fisheries. Can we ignore their interests? Because this is what is happening. If we are going to remove the date of catch, the fact that information is added in one way or another is not a matter of indifference. The date of catch is very important. Let me give you another example. In France, for example, or in Spain, we have this French or Spanish law about the category of fishermen that return to port within 24 hours. A lot of them are not small-scale but they are coastal fisheries and these will use this date of catch to their advantage. I would like to urge you to go for this information for consumers. I would like also to call on the Council to reconsider this approach. Secondly, I think that prepared and preserved products should show the fish name, origin and production method. I really do not see why the processed products have to miss that information out. Why? I think that the consumer has to know. He has to know and he has to make his own decisions. So one last point about eco-labelling. I know that many of you have proposed an eco-labelling approach, so what I can promise is that by 1 January 2015, the Commission will make a report. We will come to you with our proposals and then we can decide together if we are going for an eco-labelling approach. Lastly, on the trade instrument, I think we have to congratulate Mr Gallagher because he has done a lot of work and we have succeeded in having this instrument in place as soon as possible. Time matters here and I am really grateful that we have gone into this exercise so swiftly. I think that this is a very important proposal by the Commission, and I hope that Parliament and the Council can work together on this. Why? Because it can contribute a lot to creating a level playing field between our fishermen and the fishermen of other countries, non-EU Member States with whom we share the same stocks. We have discussed level playing fields a lot so we have to introduce this trade instrument and I hope that we can do it as soon as possible. I also think that this will reignite confidence in our policy, in the Commission services, in the way we treat our fishermen. It is really very important. The Commission, of course, is disappointed because we have not reached an agreement with other coastal areas about mackerel stocks. I would just like to say that I am preparing to have everything in order if you vote for this instrument. I have to underline that there are many legal procedures that have to be taken account of. I would like to thank everybody – Mr Gallagher, Mr Stevenson, Mr Torvalds and of course Mr Haglund, who is a former member of this House, and Mr Salavrakos for their work. I am pleased and I think that the Commission can be pleased because all the reports point in the same direction. This is a very important direction for us. It means more sustainable fishing inside and outside the EU. This is the main message of our proposal referring to the reform and I am happy to see this message in all the reports. I would like to comment on some issues now, beginning with Mr Salavrakos’s report. I would like to welcome the call from this House to restore and maintain stocks above the maximum sustainable yield. This is a very important message for us all and I hope that Parliament will uphold this message until the end of the debate and the negotiations. We would like to have the maximum sustainable yield introduced in our final text. It will be very important to have this as part of our new fisheries policy. I would also like to thank Mr Salavrakos because he has made a very good basis for the further discussion of our proposal for a discard ban. I know that this is a very difficult exercise. We have discussed this in this House on other occasions with many of you. The Commission would like to cooperate with the Council and I welcome the presence of the Council here. If we are going to find a step by step approach or an approach that is gradual for the timeline, we need a clear and binding solution for discard and this is the way we are going to negotiate and discuss and cooperate with everybody around this very important issue. Let me now move onto Mr Torvalds’s and Mr Haglund’s report. I fully agree that long-term management plans should be the basis of our policy because uncertainty is our enemy. We have to tackle this problem through long-termism instead of going for micro-management and a short-termist approach. But you know that there is a problem here. There is a deadlock between the Council and Parliament. The Commission is here to facilitate, but you must discuss this between you. I am very happy to have you both here and I would like to be completely open. We can do everything but we really need progress, and progress can only be achieved by compromise. If the Council stays in the same position and Parliament stays in the same position, there will be no progress. Nevertheless, this deadlock underlines the situation and the fact that we cannot say that the discard ban is only going to be implemented if we have long-term management plans in place. This very deadlock provides the real answer to how the discard ban will then be taken hostage by this situation. So I would like to urge you to support removing the link between the discard ban and the long-term management plans in this report. We cannot proceed this way. The long-term management plans – and it is not our problem – will take many years to be a reality for all fish stocks. The discard ban is very urgent as Mr Salavrakos and others have already underlined. And now for Mr Stevenson’s report. I am really satisfied that the report maintains the drive of our proposal. However, I would like to stress the issue of labelling once more and I would like to underline that I think that we are here to protect the interests of our citizens – not only of our fishermen but also of our consumers – and we have to keep the right balance between these approaches. That is why I think that the consumers have the right to have clear and very comprehensive information about the fish they buy. We have several ways of doing that, but I would like to focus mainly on two. Firstly, in our opinion, the date of catch is absolutely essential, for consumers. It is absolutely essential for our fishermen, for the small-scale fisheries and also for the fishermen that are in the coastal areas. Why? Because the date of catch will be a great weapon in their hands."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Maria Damanaki,"1 "Member of the Commission."1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph