Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-15-Speech-2-263"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010515.10.2-263"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr Ortuondo, perhaps there has been some problem with the translation here. Let me make it quite clear: what I said was first of all that there is to be an exception for vessels of less than 12 m in length – and not those longer than 12 m – with regard to the 100 millimetre nets. There is an additional condition that these should be small vessels fishing on a day-trip basis. Second, an exception is to be made for vessels that fish for crayfish.
As to your question concerning the very long nets, I would like to say that in my opinion it is not these smaller vessels that use very long nets. I believe that we can live with this compromise – and I must concede that it is a compromise – that we have entered into.
It is our opinion that absolute priority must be given on the one hand to ensuring that hake stocks recover. However, we cannot turn a blind eye to all the social implications that this certainly very stringent measure that we are proposing entails. We feel that we can respond to this best by making an exception especially for owners of very small vessels, as they depend directly on this economic activity and have no other alternative. We cannot, however, go further than this as otherwise the measure would end up in practice being ineffective."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples