Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-12-14-Speech-3-330"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051214.22.3-330"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, first of all, with regard to the four amendments that have been tabled, I repeat that, concerning acceptance or otherwise of Amendment 1, which is to a recital, it would not give any added value. I undertake to discuss this with the president of the Committee on Fisheries and with the committee itself, in order to find some solution on a permanent basis, so that the situation can be resolved, hopefully, once and for all, and the Fisheries Committee will have sufficient time to make its necessary evaluation and give its advice on the proposed agreements accordingly.
Concerning Amendment 2, as stated in Article 7 of the Protocol, it is up to the coastal State, in agreement with the Community, to decide on the way the financial contribution will be used in support of its fisheries policy. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the Seychelles authorities to identify the main priorities of their fisheries policy to be implemented with the assistance of the Fisheries Agreement. Therefore, the scope of Amendment 2 would run against such a right exercised by the third country with which such agreements are negotiated, although we try to influence and have indications within the parameters of the agreement reached on the uses of the funds. Certainly, the development of coastal populations living on fisheries is an area which we try to impress upon the States concerned and which should be given top priority.
On Amendment 3, we fully share the concern to keep the European Parliament informed of the various aspects of the implementation of the Protocol. The Commission already complies with the transmission of such information in line with the current interinstitutional arrangements. However, I will look at ways and means to improve this communication and discussion process with the European Parliament. I cannot, however, commit myself here and now to accepting the amendment before I assess the full implications on the resources available at my DG, with the increased responsibilities that we have, without any increase in the number of people. This task was a problem – we are speaking about some 30 agreements – and I need to carry out an assessment of what this would imply before I can give positive commitments. I will certainly try to find ways and means whereby we can improve this process and hopefully have that included in future agreements; once we include it in one, it will become a standard feature in all agreements. I need to underline that I must be certain that if we undertake commitments, we will be able physically to fulfil them.
The problem that we have faced so far lies in the length of the internal procedures, the consultations at an early stage with the Member States, and the translation requirements that have increased considerably – Mr Stevenson made reference to that. We hope to find a solution in the short term and I will be discussing it with General Morillon in January, so that we can work out a solution which I hope will be acceptable to the Fisheries Committee and will not have a repeat of such occurrences, which are embarrassing to the Commission and leave the European Parliament without real time to effect its rightful functions."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples