Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-02-Speech-2-192"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030902.8.2-192"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I should like to thank Mrs Miguélez Ramos for the thorough airing she gave to this subject and for the usefulness of her report. I also want to thank the Commissioner for having tidied the whole matter up and made what was certainly an unacceptable situation a bit more acceptable in these renegotiations. I should like to refer to what my friend Mr Casaca said about the appropriation by the European Union of the fish of Greenland. That also applies to the Azores, I am sure, and to Ireland, though the Azores' waters are not so rich.
The truth is something different. At the time they joined the European Union there was only a six-mile limit in existence. It was subsequently that the European Union extended it to 200 miles. Then the fishermen of Greenland, Ireland and perhaps the Azores as well, began to see what might have been. I agree – and have frequently repeated – that in order to have a common agricultural policy it was not necessary to take fish into common ownership. We could have had a decent common fisheries policy without taking fish into common ownership. We got the worst of all worlds, in that the Union owned the fish, but the national governments had the job of policing them. That is where a very bad job was done. That is why the stocks are run down. What was everybody's business was nobody's business. It was not the common fisheries policy in itself that destroyed the stocks, it was the lack of the necessary supervision. If the Union had had the job of policing the catching of fish, we might have had some success.
Greenland withdrew from the Union. It was not exactly as Mr Casaca said, but it withdrew after the 200-mile limit was extended. It should have stood its ground and maintained solidarity. It would have benefited from the structural funds, amongst other things. At the very best, structural funds have only given EUR 300 per capita to any state in this Union – that was in Ireland. The Portuguese, Greeks and southern Italians got a lot less than that. However, according to Mr Busk's calculation, the people of Greenland are receiving EUR 900 per capita per annum. That is too generous. I believe we have mixed up our foreign policy with our fisheries policy. We have given Greenland a deal that it had no right to expect, seeing that it voluntarily walked away and did not accept in good faith that it would have been fairly treated within the Union."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples