Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-07-03-Speech-3-332"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-07-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Common fisheries policy2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020703.12.3-332"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-07-03-Speech-3-3332
lpv:speaker	lp:Arlindo Cunha2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Temporary committee on foot and mouth disease (2002-01-17--2002-12-17)3 member; AGRI (2002-01-17--2003-09-30)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2003-09-30)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2002-02-06--2003-09-30)3 unknown; Partido Social Democrata (1999-07-20--2003-09-30)3 member; PECH (2002-01-17--2003-09-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, with growing signs of the depletion of many fish stocks, the common fisheries policy (CFP) has incorporated and progressively stepped up the component of stock protection and conservation. This is an issue of civic and political responsibility, because such measures are crucial to safeguarding the future of the fisheries sector itself and of fishermen, even though the measures might not be very popular in the short term. In order to ensure the effective implementation of this important aspect of the CFP, we have for a long time had a set of Community control, inspection and surveillance mechanisms, compliance with which depends, basically, on the Member States. What the Commission has now presented is an evaluation report on the way in which these mechanisms are implemented in the various Member States. This report shows that profound inequalities exist in the interpretation and implementation of these measures, specifically: in inspection and surveillance equipment, in the training of inspectors, in the frequency of inspections and in sanction procedures. Mrs Attwooll’s report also focuses on some of these very problems. This being the case, it is obvious that such disparities are creating genuinely unequal treatment of fishermen in the various Member States. These inequalities also lead, ultimately, to a distortion of competition. This is what has happened, for example, with the famous Multiannual Guidance Plans for Fisheries – the MAGPs – under which the Member States failing to meet the established objectives have not had any sanctions imposed on them and it is ultimately those who have broken the rules who have become the beneficiaries. What the Commission is now suggesting in this report is the need substantially to strengthen the mechanisms for the control and surveillance of fisheries, including the possibility of the Commission’s corps of inspectors’ being able to act independently of national authorities. We agree with this proposal, and this debate must now be incorporated into the debate on the CFP following 2002. To conclude, I simply wish to thank Niels Busk for his support for the Committee on Fisheries, and for his report, the content of which we broadly agree with."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph