Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-11-22-Speech-4-262-750"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20121122.31.4-262-750"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I fully agree with this report on the removal of shark fins, and I have also received suggestions from some non-governmental organisations devoted to shark protection. I think that the simultaneous landing of shark parts is an inadequate response to the current problems, because finning could go on unnoticed even were rules on matching fins to shark bodies to be applied rigorously, which would in any case be a difficult, expensive and laborious method. Furthermore I think that the proposal to raise the fin-to-carcass weight ratio to 14 % of processed weight would result in an unprecedented slackening of controls on finning (since this limit is three times higher than that imposed by most countries who use this system). There is another problem: given the high volume of fish landed, counting fins and matching them to carcasses would complicate rather than improve application. Traceability is a much simpler matter if the attached fins rule is applied. ‘Independent’ control systems are costly and could involve the risk of inaccuracies. Claims by industrial fisheries with regard to possible economic losses are hasty and superficial, have not been subject to external checks and appear to be arbitrary and inconsistent."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples