Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-09-05-Speech-3-364"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070905.25.3-364"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I regret that this is one of those occasions when I am delighted that Parliament has so few powers in this field, especially as there is a real possibility that this report might be carried in the vote tomorrow.
Do not listen to Parliament; do not listen to the Ministers who try and block you all the time – just start delivering.
If so, it may well be that some people will say, ‘well, Parliament has called on the Commission to look again at its proposals’. I would not like that public relations gesture to be made; I want the Commission to know that there are at least some MEPs who thoroughly disagree with what is being proposed here.
The Commission’s report back in 2006 was weak – motherhood and apple pie stuff, frankly – and was hardly worth putting on paper. There were plans, plans and plans being proposed but precious little by way of action. However, what is being proposed here by the rapporteur – by Parliament – is, to my mind, even worse. I look at one paragraph in particular: ‘Considers that the time is not ripe to propose the introduction of a maximum sustainable yield [MSY] system’. Apparently, we need more analysis. So, while the Commission wants plans, we simply want more talk about plans. When is something going to get done? If this is carried tomorrow by Parliament, then I hope the Commission will disregard it entirely because I regard this as completely irresponsible.
There is a question, a legitimate question, about the methodology to be applied in achieving the status of MSY. Frankly, we know what is needed; this is just playing with words half the time. If two thirds of the fish stocks are being fished beyond safe biological means, then you have to stop the fishing; you have got to put the fleets on the side, you have got to put fishermen out of work, perhaps with compensation, until such time as we have restored the stocks and given everyone the chance of a long-term, healthy future. You have got to allow the fish stocks to recover.
Frankly, we can debate the details of how we achieve perfection in MSY status when we have got the fish and the long-term security of having that fish firmly secured.
Commissioner, I have the highest respect for you; ever since we first met, I have liked what you have said. May I say two things? First of all, I think your profile is too low; I think your cabinet keeps you in meetings in the back room. I think Europe needs a champion for its fish and, just as you need to sort some problems out, you also need to be in front of Europe’s television cameras saying what needs to be done.
The second thing is this: you are three years, now, into a five-year term. There have been lots of good ideas, not enough delivery. I would like you to be a significant chapter in the European Union’s history over the deplorable common fisheries policy and its reform. So please, stop thinking of yourself as a footnote and get out there and make things happen!
Five years ago, I was at Johannesburg, where the European Union signed up to the principle of securing maximum sustainable yield status by 2015. We were not talking about introducing a policy by 2015; we were talking about getting the fish up to those levels by 2015. It should not have been just a piece – it has to be more than that.
If we are to do that, in eight years, it will probably be already too late. We have got to start having delivery, and, every day until that happens, you have to consider yourself a failure."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples