Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-14-Speech-3-374"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060614.22.3-374"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, I wish to begin by expressing my thanks and gratitude to the rapporteur, Mr Ó Neachtain, who has presented an excellent report. I should also like to extend my thanks to the whole Committee on Fisheries for having taken up this important subject in the form of an own-initiative report.
In addition, there are several areas of the common fisheries policy where coastal fisheries are treated differently or exempted from obligations, such as the requirement to use a logbook, remote sensing and VMS requirements.
In relation to conservation, however, small-scale fisheries have to take full responsibility in the management of fish stocks, because coastal waters are often the place where fish spawn and grow in the early stages.
Before concluding, let me just mention that my services have recently commissioned an important study, which is under way at this very moment, and which will give us a new and up-to-date insight into several cases of small-scale fisheries located in different regions and seas of the Community.
The findings of this study are expected in the coming year and I am sure that they will help us to assess whether further action is needed and how to tailor it. I take up your suggestions and, building on your valuable work, will join forces with all the stakeholders, the Member States and, last but not least, all those who make a living from coastal fisheries in order to engage in concrete action to improve the situation and the conditions for this segment of the fishing fleet. Thank you for your attention.
It is clear that small-scale coastal fisheries are in many ways different from fishing activities conducted by larger boats. Many of these differences are highlighted in the report, and I should like to mention just a few.
Small vessels stay close to the coast and mostly conduct fishing trips of a single day. The businesses are small and mainly family-based, and in most cases only one person operates the vessel, with the maximum being not more than three. The catches are landed and also often marketed locally, thus making this segment more dependent on the local economy. This part of the fishing industry is fragmented and not equally represented in shipowners’ organisations. These vessels operate in coastal areas, which are often biologically fragile, and where there is a lot of competition with other users, such as other fishing vessels or recreational fisheries and tourists.
However, I should like to stress that not all of these differences are disadvantages. In fact, some of them are distinct advantages, such as the freshness of the landed fish. However, it is also true that coastal fisheries have handicaps, and I agree with most of your conclusions in this respect.
I absolutely agree that it is not an easy task to define coastal fisheries, but this is exactly why I would strongly recommend basing ourselves on the definition which is used in Community legislation: vessels of up to 12 metres not using towed gear. This definition was agreed almost ten years ago and is a good basis for further action. However, it does not mean that at national or local level additional criteria could not be used when defining the role of the different players in coastal fishing areas. On the contrary, coastal management actions and plans should include further criteria depending on the specific settings of the area and the fleets involved.
Let me now turn to your specific suggestions. Here, again, I agree with most of your proposals, and in particular the establishment by local fishermen of coastal management plans, the harmonisation of data on coastal fisheries, the improvement of training for men and women involved in this type of fishing, better coordination of all aspects affecting coastal areas and fishermen, the improvement of vessel safety and of the safety culture for those involved, the need to recognise the role of women and improve their legal work status and, last but not least, the better involvement of coastal fisheries in decision-making and representatives bodies, such as the RACs.
But this leads me to the question: who does what? I am deeply convinced that it is first and foremost the local fishing communities themselves who have to come together, get organised and propose actions and initiatives. Secondly, many of the aspects that were mentioned are under the responsibility of the Member States, for example education and vocational training, jurisdiction over coastal areas up to 12 nautical miles, and the control and enforcement of safety standards, etc.
However, I also agree with you that we have a role to play at European Union level. You, the European Parliament, have started with a study, the hearing of last November and this own-initiative report we are discussing today.
The Commission has already started work too, and I have proposed specific treatment under the European Fisheries Fund, which will hopefully be adopted next week. Among other possibilities of particular interest to coastal fishers: the proposed European fisheries fund reduces to 20% the private contribution for the modernisation of vessels for owners of smaller ships. It gives them more favourable treatment in the conditions for engine replacement and urges Member States to give ‘safety tonnage’, preferably to smaller vessels. I think that this is a package of better treatment for this segment, which will contribute to bringing about some of the improvements mentioned in your report."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples