Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-01-13-Speech-2-207"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040113.10.2-207"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, honourable Members, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to begin by thanking you, Mr Varela, very warmly for producing this excellent own-initiative report. I generally endorse your analysis of the situation in the tuna industry. I take the view that all actors in the tuna industry – from the fishermen to the processing industry – are a chain, and a chain, as we know, is only as strong as its weakest link.
From the Commission’s perspective, three issues are especially important in supporting the interests of the tuna industry. Firstly, we will continue to need access to tuna stocks in third countries’ waters in future. Secondly, we must defend the interests of the tuna industry through our mandate in the regional fisheries organisations, and thirdly, we want to utilise our market policies in order to create a safety net for stakeholders.
On access to tuna stocks in third countries’ waters, our fishing industry can only benefit from the new form of partnership agreements, which this House also supports. In your resolution, you call for a study on the state of tuna resources. The Commission is at present producing a kind of framework agreement for the assessment of the tuna fish chapters of the various fisheries agreements, and I will gladly take up your proposal within this context.
On the regional fisheries organisations, I can confirm that I am determined to defend the Community’s interests in sustainable fishing within the regional fisheries organisations. We are pursuing several priorities in this context, which also match the priorities set by this Parliament. Firstly, we want to clamp down on illegal fishing, because it is nothing but unfair competition and the destructive exploitation of fish stocks. Our Community action plan for the eradication of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing was supported both by this Parliament and the Council. This is a political priority for the Commission and we have already launched appropriate initiatives in various fisheries organisations. Secondly, we must adapt the fleet capacity to match the fishing that is available. The Community cannot accept an aggressive expansion of third countries’ fleets at a time when its own fleet is undergoing cuts. Thirdly, we need a mid- to long-term strategy for sustainable resource management. At our instigation, multiannual framework programmes have been adopted in various regional fisheries organisations. Examples are the management plans for Northern bluefin tuna and swordfish in the Atlantic, and the capacity restrictions on the tuna fishing fleet in the Indian Ocean.
This brings me to market issues. First of all, I would like to make it clear that the compensation payments within the framework of the common market organisation must remain a regulatory instrument for crisis situations; they cannot become a kind of long-term intervention mechanism.
I would also remind you that a separate tariff exemption applies to tuna imports that are processed by Community industry. By contrast, imports of canned tuna and semi-processed products, such as tuna fillets, are subject to a tariff rate of 24%. This is the highest tariff in the fisheries sector and has been bound and applied for more than thirty years. Furthermore, canned tuna and fillets are classified as a sensitive product in international negotiations, which is why very few commercial licences have been granted for them. The combination of Community tariffs and trade preferences has clearly enhanced the competitiveness of the tuna industry.
As you are aware, the Community has already introduced a ban on the import of products derived from illegal fishing. The Commission attaches great importance to a multilateral approach here. That is why we are also complying with the recommendations of the regional fisheries organisations. Secondly, it is also important that we apply the rules of origin and the health rules to imports without discrimination. The Commission is keen to continue working with the sector in identifying gaps in the veterinary control system. However, the responsibility for control primarily lies with the Member States.
My final point is this: product labelling is intended to guarantee fair commercial practices. In this context, we must distinguish between the responsibilities of the market participants and the competence of regulatory authorities. The Commission intends to take up this issue again soon. We will of course consult Parliament and the tuna industry as part of this process.
I would like to conclude by emphasising that the Commission is keen to engage in dialogue with all the interest groups. To this end, we are holding preparatory meetings on the negotiations on fisheries agreements or when determining our positions prior to the meetings of the regional fisheries organisations, which also involve the industry itself. This approach has proved extremely successful."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples