Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-02-Speech-4-076"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000302.4.4-076"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The Commission communication lists a series of objectives and proposals reporting the need to continue the efforts undertaken in the field of inspection and supervision, to adopt new technical measures under the heading of the selectivity of fishing techniques, monitoring the application of legislation in force, etc. In its communication, however, at the same time the Commission specifies that it is not in a position to ensure that this legislation is complied with. The fact is that there is no lack of existing measures and appropriate means. The Commission has a whole arsenal of restrictive conditions, measures and decisions (at both international and Community level) already in force in the fisheries and marine environment protection sectors. Effectiveness and excessive regulation are not compatible.
It should be remembered that people working in maritime sectors are willing to apply Community legislation on condition that it is applied equitably in all the Member States, that it is both acceptable and applicable in technical terms, and has a proper scientific foundation. I find it unacceptable that one of the officials of the European Commission in the Committee on Fisheries should have dared to state in public that the financial resources awarded by the Commission to some scientific bodies should give it the right to have control over their conclusions. This is an extremely serious abuse: obviously the Commission must not assume any right whatsoever to direct the scientists’ conclusions in order to be able to apply the policy it deems suitable, taking only its own interests into account.
As regards reducing the pressure exerted by fishing upon resources, it is important to emphasise the international nature of this obligation. What real point would there be in reducing our European fishing fleet if, at the same time, third countries were going to continue to deplete fisheries resources? Moreover, it must be observed that the development of the globalisation of trade has the effect of considerably reducing the effectiveness of inspection and supervision of fishing activities. Transhipment has become common practice and frequently fish products from one Member State which cannot be sold within the Union due to exceeding the TAC are sold as imported products or as originating from another Member State. The latter occurs very frequently in businesses whose capital came from a Member State other than the flag State of the fishing vessel (this is actually a way of concealing ‘quota-hopping’).
Food safety with regard to seafood is also of prime importance. It is essential to safeguard the positive image of seafood products and to prevent unsafe food being sold in the European Union.
The members of the Union for a Europe of Nations Group shall therefore be voting against this report which does not go into details of the deficiencies of the Commission communication and increases Natura 2000 constraints upon the fisheries sector."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples