Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-13-Speech-4-111"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-06-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020613.4.4-111"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-06-13-Speech-4-1122
lpv:speaker	lp:Ilda Figueiredo2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (2002-03-06--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Partido Comunista Português (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; EMPL (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AGRI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries and the Gulf (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; PECH (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	". With regard to hake, given the current relative level of exploitation, regardless of the reliability or the limitations of the basic information, the level of fishing is too high, and so temporary reductions in fishing would be beneficial and a reduction for the 2002-2006 period seems to be essential if we are to achieve an appropriate exploitation of these stocks. We can, therefore, accept the Commission’s concern to reduce fishing efforts, but under no circumstances can we accept that this reduction should be undertaken by reducing vessel numbers, entailing the definitive loss of fishing licences. There are other, equally effective means of managing fisheries so as to ensure appropriate fishing levels, such as, for example, reducing the amount of days per year on which fishing can take place until stocks recover to acceptable numbers. This would significantly reduce the socio-economic problems of businesses currently holding fishing rights. Where cod is concerned, the stock situation appears to be more serious, requiring rather more severe measures than those proposed for hake, although they could vary according to the species. In any event, these measures must also be temporary and must never involve vessel reductions or the definitive loss of fishing licences. We regret that the distinction between the two cases, hake and cod, should not have been accepted and this is another reason for our vote against the report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph