Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-18-Speech-1-121"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021118.7.1-121"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I would firstly like to thank Mr Souchet for his excellent report, which also represents a good basis for the report I have subsequently been responsible for. Topical events, such as the accident involving the
make what I want to say about the report by Mr Souchet much more relevant.
With regard to the report taken on by Mr Stevenson, I believe it has been the victim of various procedural problems. This report should have represented the reference framework for Parliament’s position on the reform of the fisheries policy, and it is surprising, and only attributable to procedural problems, that this report differs in many respects from what we have subsequently done on approving the legislative proposals in the Committee on Fisheries.
There is no doubt that the problems stem from a Commission proposal which arrived late, which has turned out to be perhaps a little immature, and which furthermore was incomplete at the outset. For example, the main package has been presented while lacking certain important sections, such as fishing in the Mediterranean. Furthermore, there are very clear indications that the Commission’s proposals, in structural terms, lack a reasonable basis and at times verge on the absurd.
With regard to the policy on the conservation of resources, I will resist anticipating a later debate, which we are going to hold. However, I would like to express a certain distaste at the way we have dealt with this issue.
For some time, the fishing policy has established a division between States, and the Commission’s proposal has been accompanied by a scenario which has accentuated that separation between States. Perhaps certain Ministers have taken part in this game, but that is not the important thing. What is really important is that the situation of the populations of cod, hake and other species has blurred the distinction between what have been known as the ‘friends of fishing’ and the ‘friends of the fish’.
I believe that, however many debates we have held and however many issues may legitimately divide us, it is clear that we must resolve the problem of how to guarantee sustainable fishing. To this end, I believe it is necessary to deal with fundamental issues, transcending what I would call very specific and overly national interests.
We could perhaps have left behind the rigid positions which have divided us – the distribution of quotas for example – and we could have reformed the Community policy, protecting sections of the fleet which most of the economy of the regions dependent on fishing rely on."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples