Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-04-Speech-3-327"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010704.9.3-327"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I should in any case like to congratulate Mr Costa Neves on the strategy which he has outlined on behalf of Parliament. It gives a powerful signal indicating what Parliament does and does not want. Coming from the Committee on Fisheries, I also notice that, with regard to agriculture, the European Commission has in any case understood that Parliament would like to set aside a large proportion of the budget for food safety and the fight against animal diseases, but as for the fishery guidelines, I have to say that it appears as if the Commission is still on a different planet.
It does not breathe a word about the problem that, after the failure of the fisheries agreement with Morocco, less money is being spent. Neither does it mention the problems this has caused in vulnerable coastal regions in Spain and Portugal. Nothing about the problems in the northern regions as a result of the temporary fishing ban due to the worrying cod stocks.
Even the Council is, for the time being, not taking any action further to implement Nice. Needless to say, it is evident that the transfer of money from one heading to another, from heading 4 (external actions) to heading 2 (structural policy) is no child’s play. Also because the ceiling of Berlin has been determined per heading. But financial crisis management, such as the fight against the BSE crisis and aid for the Balkans, has shown that decisive politicians are not hindered by strict budget rules.
The EP’s Committee on Fisheries agrees with rapporteur Costa Neves where he states that both the Commission and the Council may actually be slightly too relaxed in some areas. At the same time, it prompts him to boost the creativity and decisiveness of the Commission and the Council. Our proposals are as follows. We would earmark the funding that has not been used for fishery agreements under external actions, heading 4, to alleviate the effects in the coastal regions of South-Eastern Europe. We would target structural funds to address the crisis in fisheries, which have been left over following the failure of the fishery agreement with Morocco, and further to the measures which have been taken to protect cod and hake stocks. We would, for the time being, set aside any balance in the account in 2001 to restructure the fisheries sector and, if possible, use the instrument of flexibility to fight the fisheries crisis.
Finally, we would also like specific research to be initiated into the use of genetic modification techniques in fish farming. Europe is lagging far behind the United States and Canada in this respect, and only sound research will provide a basis to keep this technique in European fish farming at bay."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples