Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-02-22-Speech-2-369"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050222.20.2-369"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, first of all, I would like to thank the honourable Member for her report on the proposal for a Council regulation establishing a Community Fisheries Control Agency and amending Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy.
The Commission has difficulty in accepting Amendment 5. It involves an increase in the scope of the agency into areas beyond its inspection and control remit. The Commission is convinced that the scope of its proposal is adequate as it stands and should remain focused on its core tasks – that is, those of control and inspection. Research activities directly related to control can, of course, be considered.
The Commission can accept Amendment 6.
As far as Amendment 7 is concerned, the Commission has difficulty in accepting the substance of this amendment as currently worded. It is too restrictive in that not all fisheries agreements currently include an enforcement arrangement.
Although the Commission cannot accept Amendment 8, the scope of the agency can, of course, include the control of vessels involved in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing as long as it is within the framework of schemes adopted by regional fisheries organisations.
The Commission can accept Amendments 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13.
However, the Commission has a difficulty with Amendment 14 concerning the provision of information on the applicability and cost-effectiveness of the rules of the common fisheries policy with regard to control and inspection, since it would substantially modify the mission and tasks of the agency.
The Commission cannot accept Amendment 15 since Article 7 refers only to the obligations of Member States. It should be noted, however, that the Commission has a right to request that the agency provide services relating to the obligations of the Community under Article 5 of the proposal.
I can certainly agree to the important role that the agency will play in training; however, I have difficulty in accepting Amendment 16 since the agency should not be obliged to create a training centre. Member States may, for practical and operational reasons, prefer to have training courses and seminars provided locally. The remit of the agency should not lead to a curtailment of this eventuality.
The Commission can accept Amendment 17.
As for Amendment 18, the Commission has difficulty in accepting the substance of the amendment as currently worded. The suggested role of the Advisory Committee for Fisheries and Aquaculture (ACFA) cannot be accepted, as it would put this body, which is of an advisory character only, in a position that is similar to those of the Community institutions such as the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council. Therefore, as much as the Commission welcomes those proposals by which Parliament can be better informed about the works of the agency, it is not in favour of giving the same standing to advisory bodies such as ACFA and the RACs. For the same reason the Commission cannot accept Amendments 22, 42 and 43.
The Commission views the establishment of the agency as a crucial element in the implementation of the reform of the common fisheries policy. You will recall that the creation of this agency is a clear signal that more uniform and effective enforcement of the rules is a priority for the reformed common fisheries policy. We believe that a well-functioning agency will be critical not only in enhancing the control capacity of Member States but also in further committing ourselves to combating illegal fishing. In addition, it is our firm belief that, as our control capabilities are enhanced, so too is the reliability of the data that is available to scientists, thus contributing to sounder scientific advice on which to base our policy for sustainable fisheries. It is for this reason that the Commission is committed to an effective and reliable agency.
While the Commission cannot accept Amendment 19, it accepts that there is a need to amend the text of the second recital so that it refers to activities both within Community waters and outside Community waters.
The Commission has no comment to make on Amendment 20 as the location of the agency falls within the competence of the Spanish authorities.
The Commission cannot accept Amendment 21.
The Commission has difficulty with Amendments 23 and 24. Firstly, ACFA is an advisory body and should not be involved in management. Secondly, concerning the appointment of the fishing industry representatives, the Commission proposal follows the pattern of other agencies wherever stakeholder representatives are present in administrative boards. In such cases it is usually the Commission that nominates the representatives of the sector.
The Commission has difficulty in accepting Amendment 26 as the administrative board must be able to examine specific items on its agenda without the presence of industry representatives where there is an issue of confidentiality or conflict of interest.
The Commission can accept Amendments 28, 29, 30 and 31.
The Commission has difficulty with Amendment 32. The Commission believes that it is in the Community interest that it retains the power to propose the dismissal of the executive director and that this should be on the basis of a simple majority; otherwise, the position of the Commission is weakened.
The Commission cannot accept Amendment 33 as it is felt that three years is too short a period within which to have an external evaluation.
The Commission has difficulty in accepting Amendment 34 as the text of the Commission proposal is consistent with standard agreed drafting rules whereas the amendment is not.
While the Commission understands the principle of Amendment 35, it cannot accept it since it would be contentious and difficult to implement in practice.
On an operational level, we see the agency as a means of strengthening the tools and methods of control undertaken by Member States.
The Commission cannot accept Amendments 36, 38, 39, 40 and 41. They have the effect of weakening the proposal. As I said at the outset, we must succeed in establishing a fisheries control agency that is effective and that can function well. In any case, I understand that the Committee on Fisheries voted against similar amendments at its meeting of 2 February.
The Commission cannot accept Amendment 37 – as I have stated previously, RACs have an advisory role and should not be involved in management.
The Commission is very pleased with the close cooperation it has had with the rapporteur and the members of the Committee on Fisheries during our work on this important proposal. I am happy to be able to inform you that we accept more than half of the amendments of the Committee on Fisheries which greatly reinforce our proposal and which we will readily defend in the Council.
Let me now turn to the amendments proposed in the report before us.
The Commission can accept Amendment 1.
The Commission has difficulty in accepting Amendment 2. It is not advisable to prioritise tasks in the regulation since priorities may change in future years as a result of tasks fulfilled and objectives attained. The Commission does, however, note the merit in including controls of illegal, unreported and unregulated fisheries in the work programme of the agency.
The Commission can accept Amendment 3.
The Commission cannot accept Amendments 4, 25 and 27. Voting arrangements must take into account the specific characteristics of this body, which is charged with control tasks. The proposal is based on the need to strike a balance between the part played by the Member States and the necessity at Commission level to ensure that the agency develops in conformity with the stated objectives of the common fisheries policy."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples