Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-05-Speech-2-270"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-09-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Fisheries agreements2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000905.15.2-270"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-09-05-Speech-2-2712
lpv:speaker	lp:Carmen Fraga Estévez2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (1999-10-06--2002-01-11)3 vice-chair; EPP-ED (1999-09-30--2002-01-11)3 unknown; Partido Popular (1999-07-20--2002-01-11)3 substitute; AGRI (1999-07-21--2002-01-11)3 member; PECH (1999-07-21--2002-01-11)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, it seems that the Commission is happy to ignore the requests of the Council and this Parliament – the former clearly expressed at the Council of Ministers of October 1997 – and delay the work on the guidelines for the negotiation of the fisheries agreements. The protocol with Guinea-Conakry is a good example. We expected the payment quota for shipowners to be increased, but it is intolerable that, in the Council working groups, the Commission is prepared to describe that increase as light, given that it means an ever-greater sacrifice for the fleet and that – I repeat – in the agreements with the northern countries, shipowners do not pay a penny. Furthermore, the Commission has been prepared to ignore the principle of relative stability by casually removing from the Community fleet fishing rights that have been acquired in accordance with that principle. The principle of relative stability is either sacred or it is not, and it cannot be untouchable in Community waters when the complete opposite is the case in the fisheries agreements with the southern countries. The Commission says that it has taken away Spain’s allowances for fishing cephalopods because it did not fully utilise them during the last protocol, and it grants them to countries which had never fished there. That is all very well. I have always argued for the total exploitation of the fishing rights granted, but in all waters, not just in relation to the agreements with the southern countries. In the agreements with the northern countries they are completely under-exploited and there is no way that the fleets with the greatest interest in fishing there can do so. Why do these differences exist? Could you please explain this once and for all. Furthermore, what makes the Commission think that, because it did not utilise the fishing allowances during the previous protocol, it will not do so during this one, given that its cephalopod-fishing fleet which was fishing in Morocco has been out of action for nine months and there is no solution in sight? Mr President, all of this illustrates the mental and physical chaos of our Community fishing authorities, and it will only be resolved when the guidelines which I referred to earlier are established in a clear and agreed way."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph