Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-15-Speech-2-306"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010515.11.2-306"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Commissioner, this is now the second major fisheries agreement between the European Union and a third party. The first issue that must be raised about this agreement, which is of such huge scope, is that there appears to be an unacceptable degree of confusion between what is a fisheries agreement and what is development aid for a region which, although part of a Member State of the European Union, has decided not to be a part of the Union. We have nothing against such development aid and in fact I feel it may be totally justified, but I fail to understand why this development agreement should be disguised as a fisheries agreement. This is a fisheries agreement which reflects and lays claim to the principle of relative stability based on historical catches, but one in which the historical facts are ignored! Portugal will soon be celebrating 500 years of fishing in Newfoundland. Fishing in Greenland is actually a little more recent, and does not date back 500 years. It would, therefore, be difficult to say that any fishing tradition is older than that of Portugal in the seas of Greenland. To say that Portugal has no place in this fisheries agreement is something that we could never accept and which is completely out of touch with the reality of the situation. We can therefore not accept this interpretation of the principle of relative stability."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples