Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-25-Speech-4-156"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011025.4.4-156"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Committee on Fisheries has unanimously approved the report for which I was rapporteur and that today is included in the Lannoye report. I requested the Hughes procedure, because the matter has a profound effect on both fisheries and development cooperation.
I sincerely believe that we in the Committee on Fisheries have significantly improved the original draft of the Lannoye report. We have contributed to focusing and balancing the hitherto exclusive point of view of the Committee on Development and Cooperation and particularly the opinions of the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance, that were held on this matter.
International fisheries agreements are not harmful to fishing, to the European Union, or to third countries, as is sometimes claimed. On the contrary, they are beneficial to all. We should try to ensure that this mutual benefit is enjoyed by all those concerned, and this cannot be achieved only by means of the CFP. The development cooperation policy should become more involved, with more economic, financial and technical measures, as requested by our report and as shown in the information given in the explanatory statement.
International fisheries agreements are trade agreements as the Council of the European Union acknowledged, even though they are dedicating more and more of their own funds to cooperation, yet they are of fundamental importance to cover the deficit in the supply of fish in the European Union and for jobs in Europe’s Objective 1 regions that we must also treat as a priority. Employment and economic and social cohesion in Europe are fundamental political principles of our Union.
Are we keen to preserve the resources of third countries? Of course. Is anyone more conservation-minded than the European Union? Would other foreign fishing powers, in Asia, for example, which would take our place if we left them to it, have more respect for these resources? Of course not.
I think that the criticisms voiced in the Lannoye report on the agreements with Mauritania and Senegal are completely unfounded. I also disagree with the regional approach that is proposed, because international fisheries agreements apply to exclusive economic zones that are come under the sovereignty of third countries, and each State is sovereign and has different political and economic interests. Multilateral cooperation in international waters would be another matter altogether.
I think, Mr President, that our Parliament has taken a positive step forwards. We would still ask the Commission to coordinate its cooperation and fishing competences. Parliament has set an example by coordinating our two committees and I think that this is right way to defend European interests, combining principles that we all advocate, such as the conservation of mankind’s natural resources and the eradication of poverty in the Third World, which requires development cooperation."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples