Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-12-14-Speech-3-299"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-12-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Common fisheries policy and the Law of the Sea2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20051214.20.3-299"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-12-14-Speech-3-3002
lpv:speaker	lp:Carmen Fraga Estévez2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Partido Popular (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2004-08-31--2009-07-13)3 member; PECH (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (including Libya) (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; AGRI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, although this is a premature discussion, since the financial perspective has not yet been approved, I believe that we should approve Mrs Stihler’s report as an anticipatory measure, but I would like to make several comments, some of which coincide with those of the Commissioner. Firstly, we do not agree with the rapporteur’s statement that, in the event of a reduction of the appropriations laid down in the Commission’s proposal, they should be taken without any justification whatsoever from the heading corresponding to fisheries agreements, despite the fact that the rapporteur appears to have forgotten that the majority of these funds are now intended to meet the costs of development aid, and not the commercial part of those agreements. Furthermore, the usual cliché of linking the funding of fisheries agreements to prior cost-benefit analyses is not practical at this stage. Firstly, the and studies carried out by the Commission for each protocol show that the agreements are still bringing benefits that are greater than the cost to the European Union and, at the same time, due to their new status as association agreements, we need to take account of other parameters which cannot be measured by means of a mere cost-benefit analysis. Secondly, neither do we agree that Natura 2000 network measures should be funded by means of CFP funds. In this regard, I would refer to what this Parliament said in the Böge report on the financial perspective. Finally, and with regard to the regional fisheries committees, I do not believe that there is any justification, for the moment at least, for extending the period for their funding laid down in Community legislation, particularly when the majority of the RACs are not yet operating, since less than half of those planned have been set up. The logical thing is for the RAC to be an instrument that will eventually be self-funding, if it is as useful as we hope, and not to become an additional burden for contributors, particularly within a policy for which the financial contribution is always below the minimums."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"ex-ante"1 "ex-post"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph