Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-27-Speech-3-319"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060927.24.3-319"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
".
Madam President, I wish to begin by thanking Members for the various points they have raised. I will try to respond to some of them.
It was commented that the Commission was proposing too little too late. I acknowledge that the communication was issued later than desired, but one has to appreciate the complexity of the situation we are dealing with and the constraints of Community legislation, in particular regarding competition rules. This is why it was important to describe carefully the rules and conditions necessary for designing rescue and restructuring schemes.
Many fishing enterprises will benefit from the measures proposed if Member States take up the challenge and prepare the necessary framework swiftly. These measures are substantial: financial restructuring, renewal of engines and of fishing gear and aid to temporary cessation. According to the guidelines, state aid for the rescue and restructuring of SMEs in the area of fisheries can cover up to 75% of the total cost of a rescue and restructuring plan.
May I suggest that we work together and do our utmost to make the best use of these possibilities.
Firstly, with regard to the need for a guarantee fund, the basic problem with guarantee funding is that it can amount to operating aid, which is not permissible under competition rules. We are looking further into this and welcome any proposals from Member States on how such funds may be operated in accordance with competition rules. The Commission could approve such schemes at national level if they guaranteed reimbursement of all public aid under commercial conditions.
As regards the long-term aim to help the industry adapt to high fuel prices, the Commission places a high priority on research and development for more fuel-efficient and more environmentally friendly fishing techniques. Significant funds are being provided to support such work under the Seventh Framework Programme for Research. Renewable energy, in particular biofuels, represents one such measure.
Research on the design of new, more selective or more fuel-efficient fishing gear is encouraged and can be funded under the framework programme, with initial acquisition of such equipment also financeable under the European Fisheries Fund.
The European Fisheries Fund, agreed to last June, provides for engine renewals and, in this regard, small-scale vessels are treated more favourably. In fact, regarding small-scale coastal fisheries, we have catered for specificities in the rescue and restructuring scheme and in the European Fisheries Fund. One example is the acquisition of new engines or engine renewal. We are studying what else can be done in order to help small-scale coastal fisheries.
Regarding the comment by Mr Allister and others that the Commission is taking advantage of the increase in fuel prices to reduce the fleet, let me repeat the facts as I know them. There have been years on end of over-fishing and this has caused falling catches. This means a vast over-capacity today: we have vessels with a capacity vastly exceeding what can sustainably be caught. Those are the facts. The vast majority of stocks are being fished in a completely unsustainable manner.
Acknowledging this will help us find solutions for the long-term benefit of future fishermen. If we continue to bury our heads in the sand, we will only prolong the agony before fisheries die a natural death through continued over-fishing.
We agree that special attention needs to be paid to marketing with a view to increasing the added value of fishery products for fishermen. We are actively looking at this and the renewal of the common organisation of the market should answer the sector’s concerns in this area, in particular by helping the sector to improve first-sale prices.
The
ceiling of 30 000 proposed by the Commission is a balanced and reasonable compromise. The Commission has proposed raising the ceiling from the previous amount of 3000 to 30 000. The review of this threshold has been carried out in the light of the specific characteristics of fishing enterprises, independently of the sector’s current difficulties."@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples