Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-16-Speech-4-084"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030116.4.4-084"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, the rapporteur, Mrs Miguélez Ramos, has referred to the communication adopted by the Commission on 23 December last year concerning an integrated framework for reaching fisheries agreements with third countries. I agree with her that this fortunate coincidence creates the need for Parliament to give further consideration to the Commission’s proposals.
The European Union has committed itself to complying with all international agreements it is party to, and to ratifying the agreement reached in New York. Currently, 14 Member States are in a position to proceed to ratification. I hope everything will be in place to allow ratification to go ahead before these six months have elapsed.
As you will be aware, Mr President, we have also addressed the question of the Mediterranean. The communication explains how we have taken the initiative. We plan to organise an international conference on the subject in conjunction with the incoming Italian Presidency. In principle, this will be held in Venice in December 2003. The Commission is also concerned about the reduction of the time allowed for transposition. I am referring to Community legislation and the recommendations by RFOs. The Commission is not responsible for the unfortunate situation that no progress has been possible on this proposal.
Regarding the social aspects, these are included in the Commission’s proposed objectives. They should have greater weight in future cooperative ventures. Concerning the need to increase scientific research, I would like to reiterate the Commission’s desire to implement an action plan on this. Although it has been somewhat delayed, it ought to be successfully accomplished before the end of the year.
Lastly, there is the question of encouraging the establishment of joint ventures. The Council has retained the possibility of providing financial support through the FIFG for the establishment of such ventures until 2004. Support will only be available however if there is a fisheries agreement in place to lend consistency to the arrangement.
I would also draw your attention to the fact that the communication on association agreements in the fisheries sector adopted by the Commission does not exclude recourse to such an instrument in order to promote future associations. On the contrary, we advocate its use, together with that of other financial instruments, in order to promote their development.
I am confident that the communication on association agreements in the fisheries sector adopted by the Commission will provide a basis on which we can achieve significant and ground-breaking progress concerning the external dimension of the common fisheries policy. I trust that together we will be able to create the motivation to guarantee the sustainability of deep-sea fishing for the benefit of all.
Given that no political initiatives are being taken at Community level, the Commission is convinced that the size of the deep-sea fishing fleet will gradually decrease. This will probably not result in vessels being scrapped. Rather, the vessels are likely to operate under other flags, or the number of private fishing agreements will rise.
I trust the House will endorse this assessment of the situation. I very much hope that, as a result, Parliament will agree it is essential we do not create a situation in which the role of Community policy in external fisheries would be significantly reduced. This would run counter to our desire to establish a policy aimed at promoting sustainable fishing the world over.
This communication addresses all the issues relating to the bilateral aspect of the Commission’s relations with third countries as far as fisheries are concerned, especially in the case of developing coastal states. We believe the communication constitutes a good basis on which to launch a debate on the issue.
We are fully aware of the importance of this chapter of the common fisheries policy, especially for certain regions of the European Union. Accordingly, the Commission proposes that the Council should draw up appropriate political guidelines enshrining the Community’s desire to work to promote responsible fishing in the interests of all concerned.
As Mrs Miguélez Ramos rightly points out in her report, the development of the external dimension of the common fisheries policy must take account of the European Union’s international commitments. Some of these fall within the scope of the CFSP and others relate to trade agreements. I would even venture to include agreements on sustainable development, notably those with developing countries. Our ongoing efforts to improve political and economic governance at a global level should not be overlooked either.
Looking to the future, the Commission believes that its action should be seen as an investment in responsible fishing, and not simply as a mechanism for compensation.
As for the multilateral aspect, I have noted comments in the House on the lack of human and material resources. I do not however agree with the rapporteur’s assessment of the need to revise voting arrangements within the RFOs. The European Union’s influence within these organisations is far greater than the number of votes at its disposal would suggest.
On the question of sanctions and the RFOs, however, we believe more control is required to ensure that fisheries products from vessels flouting international regulations cannot be traded within the European Union.
The Commission recently presented an action plan to combat illegal, uncontrolled and unregulated fishing. The proposed initiatives, particularly measures 5 to 10, seek to harmonise the control mechanisms of the RFOs. They also seek to make these systems more effective and to ensure they are in line with the principle of a multilateral approach.
I was delighted that Parliament welcomed this plan so warmly. Further, the Busk report supporting this approach was adopted unopposed at last November’s sitting."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples