Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-04-14-Speech-4-054"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050414.5.4-054"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the rapporteurs, and in particular Mrs Miguélez, because I am going to refer to her report, but not because the report of the chairman of the committee is not magnificent.
Firstly, I would like to point out that the first discrepancy between the Commission and the fishing sector usually relates to the duration of plans. In this regard, we must bear in mind that establishing a plan for the recovery of a species with a short life and rapid growth is not the same as establishing a plan for another species with the opposite characteristics. Furthermore, great emphasis must be placed, as many previous speakers have said, on the socio-economic effects of each plan, which vary widely depending on the fleets in question. In this case, therefore, we have established a minimum duration for recovery of ten years, which allows these conditions to be taken into account.
We must insist that the first stage in any recovery plan must be to prevent a continuing decline of the species in question and for its recovery to begin. The speed with which this is achieved is of less biological relevance, but may be a disaster for the regions dependent on fishing. We therefore believe that once the scientists have established the biological parameters — and this report includes, for example, the biomass objective to be achieved in order for a population to be considered recovered — the Member States must be allowed a degree of flexibility in achieving this objective in a manner most suited to the characteristics of their fleets. Once again, the important thing is that the species recovers, rather than how the reduction of the fishing effort is achieved. So, as Mr Freitas has said, we have presented an amendment on behalf of our group which calls for greater flexibility for fleets.
With regard to the issue of closures, I would refer to what the rapporteur has said; there is no scientific basis for it and, therefore, I would simply call on the Commission and the Council to support the amendments by Mrs Miguélez and the Committee on Fisheries, which introduce a good dose of common sense into this proposal."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples