Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-28-Speech-4-143"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991028.4.4-143"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, the matter of renegotiating the EU-Morocco fisheries agreement which is due to expire on 30 November has been referred to us. This is one of the 29 fisheries agreements signed by the European Union with around fifteen countries of Africa and countries bordering the Indian Ocean. These negotiations are going to take place in a specific context, characterised by two new elements, firstly, the death of His Majesty Hassan II, the last giant figure in the history of the twentieth century, and, secondly, the principle of Turkey’s candidacy for accession, accepted a few days ago. When proposing to integrate a country which has nothing in common with Europe, it is hard to voice significant reservations with regard to Morocco which at least shares with Spain or France its language, history and economic relationships.
Technically, Morocco wants comprehensive negotiations on fishing, the preservations of fish stocks, on local industry and even, more generally, on our agricultural dealings with Morocco. The position of our countries is essentially a budgetary position, with a cost of EUR 125 million per year. The main beneficiary is Spain which carries out 20% of its fishing production within the framework of the agreement with Morocco, Mauritania and Senegal. As for Portugal and France, they benefit to a lesser extent, and Italy too would like to derive advantage from it. Furthermore, Morocco wishes to preserve fishing resources within its economic area, and other countries, such as Great Britain, are announcing their concerns about the budget. It is true that the Community budget allocated to fisheries agreements is not inconsiderable: EUR 300 million, or 5% of the budget for European external policies. It is a not inconsiderable sum then, even if we lose nothing in the deal. If IFREMER is to be believed, then, for every euro invested, the turnover generated for Europe would be around three euros, and the added value would be 900 million. The Spanish are the main beneficiaries, with the Canaries where 91% of the fleet is dependent on this agreement, and with Andalusia where 75% of the fleet is involved, and there would be a cost to pay if there were to be no agreement. And indeed Morocco does not lose out either since almost a thousand jobs are affected by this agreement, for an annual added value of 36 million. But the Moroccans bring up, quite rightly, the risk of over-exploitation of fishing resources. Forty years ago, fishing catches worldwide were less than 20 million tonnes, today they are around 100 million tonnes, even if Europe is not responsible, as we are fishing less and less in the Mediterranean, where our share is no more than 40% of the catch. It is important, then, to monitor these fishing resources, which I know well, from the small ports of Oualidia or Media down to Mauritania by way of the Western Sahara, which I must remind Mrs McKenna is not independent, but has belonged to Morocco for centuries.
How are we to find a compromise with the Moroccan Minister, El Khyari? On the European side, we could make concessions on the development of the local Moroccan processing industry, on aid for scientific research and on landings in Moroccan ports. There are still two stumbling blocks: firstly, the matter of abandoning community preference in the field of agriculture, and we already know the problems affecting the sectors of tomatoes, early fruit and vegetables or horticulture, and secondly, another point, on which we cannot yield involves trading the Spanish fleet’s fishing rights for an increase in immigration in a Europe which already has 18 million unemployed.
Mr Fischler, you reminded us that you will be in Seattle. The problem must therefore be considered at a much higher level. These are not negotiations regarding just fishing, but are far wider-ranging negotiations, Euro-Mediterranean talks, or even WTO talks. If, in Seattle, we are going to give in to the United States on the subject of compensation funding in agriculture, then it will be difficult to refuse Morocco similar concessions in the agricultural sector. Clearly, too, Morocco-Europe relations must be evaluated at the summit. We must take advantage of His Majesty Mohamed VI’s forthcoming visit to Parliament to undertake comprehensive renegotiations, and we must ensure that Morocco is not destabilised by the sort of foolish remarks made just now by Mrs McKenna regarding some putative Saharan sovereignty. We know full well what the consequences would be if Algeria had access to the Atlantic coastline.
Europe needs Morocco and vice-versa. The agreement must therefore be sought with respect for our shared identities, for sovereignty and also for our separate identities, while acknowledging that history has made Morocco, if not a cultural exception, then at least a Mediterranean exception, for Europe in general and for France in particular."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples