Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-18-Speech-3-166"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030618.12.3-166"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, the European Convention proposes that the conservation of the sea’s biological resources must be the exclusive competence of the EU, while fishing should be an area in which the EU and the Member States have shared competence. This issue has been sidelined in the major debate about the future. Anyone familiar with issues relating to fisheries will find it very hard to understand that the Convention has proposed separating these areas. Rules concerning the way in which fishing is conducted are the very rules through which we enact decisions concerning the conservation of biological resources. Through provisions concerning mesh sizes, fishing periods and permitted gear, fishing can be regulated and the marine environment conserved. What, moreover, is really important for the marine environment is that aid to the floating fish factories should cease.
For myself and many others, it is unclear how the Convention’s proposal would work in practice. What, for example, would it mean for seals and for the fishing industry? Where these matters are concerned, I hope that, for example, the Commissioner would explain to those who fish in the Kvarken straits, the Gulf of Finland and the archipelagoes what the outcome of this decision would be. I appeal to the Commission to clarify its positions on these issues too.
If EU measures in favour of the marine environment are to produce results, there must be closer compliance with the rules, fewer exceptions and more effective international cooperation. We are successful internationally when we cooperate on matters such as the Oil Fund, to quote just one example. It also means, however, that the Member States must be prepared to take a stand on important proposals, such as the most recent one to impose penalties in connection with deliberate discharges of oil. Unfortunately, we see, however, the way in which legal hair-splitting constitutes an obstacle to the directive in the Council. Despite the fact that a Directive on oil reception facilities has been adopted, there has been no reduction in deliberate oil discharges.
Commissioner, I would finally appeal to you to get a firm grip on HELCOM – the Helsinki Commission for Baltic Marine Environment Protection. It must not be a relic from the Cold War, merely issuing recommendations that do not lead to any measures being taken. Following the EU’s enlargement, it will be possible for HELCOM to be a body attending to its task in accordance with the Water Framework Directive. If it is to be reformed, HELCOM needs the support of the Commission, especially when, for the first time in history, the new boss, who takes office on 1 August, is a woman. This organisation can implement the regional way of tackling things that both Parliament and the Commission wish to see.
I would also ask Commissioner Wallström to convince her colleague, Mrs de Palacio, that the Commission must be more active in supporting Finland and Sweden when it comes to ice classification. Unfortunately, it was only Italy and the Commission that opposed the Nordic proposals concerning clearer shipping rules in this part of the EU too."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples