Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-09-Speech-3-163"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021009.12.3-163"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I would like to express my thanks to Mr Holmes for his work and join in wishing him a speedy recovery. The ELDR firmly believes that there is an urgent need to regulate this fishery. Available scientific evidence on deep-water species suggests that they are outside safe biological limits and that measures should be introduced to allow rebuilding of the stocks. Action is particularly essential in light of the fact that these fish live a long time, grow slowly and have low reproductive capacity. The majority of the amendments made by the committee seek to exempt ling and tusk from the scope of the regulation, although they would still be covered by quotas.
Whilst the group accepts that these two species are caught on the continental shelf, it is imperative that they are properly regulated. If these amendments are adopted by Parliament, the ELDR will vote against the proposal as a whole.
As for Amendment No 5, the ELDR believes that kilowatt fishing days are a more accurate tool to measure effort in view of the so-called technological creep and so cannot support this amendment.
We are, however, favourable to Amendment No 6 which requests a review of the progress being made in achieving the aims of the regulation. The ELDR has tabled three amendments of its own. Amendment No 8 calls for an economic and operational impact assessment in relation to the expected loss of revenue and effort displacement resulting from the implementation of the regulation.
Amendment No 9 seeks to outlaw the use of fixed gill nets in this fishery as they risk inflicting substantial unintended mortality on heavily depleted stocks.
Finally, Amendment No 10 proposes the use of area closures to protect species which accumulate particularly densely in certain areas at certain times of the year. The ELDR is also minded to support Amendments Nos 12 and 16 by Mr Hudghton and others on greater involvement by the fishing industry and on safety respectively. It has, however, doubts as to whether fishing effort control should be the sole management tool and therefore also has doubts about Amendments Nos 11 and 14.
The ELDR is concerned that Amendment No 13 may delay the implementation of the management measures and also believes that Amendment No 15 could potentially have a negative impact on the environment.
On a personal level, however, I feel that regulation of catch opportunities in a mixed fishery by means of both TACs and quotas and an effort regime, based on licences, will lead to the discarding of species for which a quota is not held or where the quota has been exceeded. For this reason, I shall support Amendments Nos 11 and 14. I will also support Amendment No 15 as it represents a fairer basis for the distribution of quotas.
Finally, I would like to express, on behalf of the ELDR, a profound dissatisfaction that the Council has effectively taken a decision on this dossier without awaiting the opinion of Parliament. We would hope that the Fisheries Council will see fit to take its views on board when it reaches its formal decision."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples