Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-18-Speech-1-128"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-11-18"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Common fisheries policy (CFP)2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20021118.7.1-128"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-11-18-Speech-1-1292
lpv:speaker	lp:Inger Schörling2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)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--2004-07-19)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Miljöpartiet (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, I want to begin by saying that the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance supports the Commission’s proposals for reforming the common fisheries policy. The measures and proposals presented should have come about a very long time ago. That is why they are now absolutely necessary. The only thing we are doubtful about and see problems with is the Commission’s proposal concerning the possibility of reducing the fishing fleets by means of the simple ‘one boat in, one boat out’ proposal. I do not really understand how that could work and how it could possibly lead to our obtaining a smaller fishing fleet. I can also understand the Commission’s frustration in view of the difficulties in getting the Council and the Member States to accept their responsibility. For so many years, ministers and the Council have failed to see the connection between fisheries policy and a reduced access to fish. They have taken no responsibility at all for sustainable development and for ensuring that fish stocks are preserved, this being the only possible way of rescuing the fishing industry. Where, for example, the Irish Sea is concerned, a quota 28% higher than what researchers have considered to be acceptable has been permitted over the last ten years. In this context, it does not matter whether the fishing fleets come from Ireland or Spain or some other country. I should therefore like to say that we now face our hour of destiny when it comes to fish stocks. The Council has not wished to decide about restrictions on catch quotas, which have not been at all realistic. There have been no adequate supervisory programmes, and there has been no desire to place limits upon fishing fleets. We already know that this is the cause of the whole problem. What shall we do, therefore? I think we must be able to adopt the Commission’s proposals. Sweden plans to introduce a unilateral moratorium on cod fishing in the Baltic. That is in actual fact a demand made by the Greens/ALE Group in connection with the formation of a government. Cod is threatened, not only in the Baltic but also in the Kattegat and throughout the North Sea. The International Marine Research Council believes that the EU’s reconstruction plan is entirely inadequate and that the situation is urgent. We must therefore adopt measures as drastic as introducing a moratorium. I now hope that the Commission will support this proposal. I also assume that the Commission will, as soon as possible, respond positively to the possibility of using the structural funds for compensation, for that is completely in line with the Commission’s own proposal about the possibility of acting responsibly to safeguard and preserve fish stocks in the future too."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph