Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-03-10-Speech-1-197"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080310.22.1-197"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, first of all I would like to say that I agree with the comments made by the rapporteur, Mr Capoulas Santos, that fisheries and the revenue that is derived from the fisheries partnership agreement form a very important part of the budget of Guinea-Bissau.
We are now working in a spirit of partnership as against the traditional fisheries agreements where the objective was to go and catch fish, pay for the fish caught and leave. These fisheries partnership agreements are modelled on the basis of helping the country concerned to build its fisheries infrastructure and to build related sectors so that there could also be a diversion from pure fishing to fish-related activities like aquaculture, where that is possible. The aim is also to see to it that the fishing activities that are carried out by our fleets under a fisheries partnership agreement relate only to the surplus.
For example, in this case, at our request, an evaluation study was carried out at the end of 2005 by an independent external consultant, whose recommendations in terms of management and conservation of resources have been taken into account, together with the scientific advice provided by Guinea-Bissau’s Research Institute following the 2006 trawling campaign.
Furthermore, the protocol includes a number of binding measures in its Annex III, with a view to implementing a management plan for the global fishing effort in the Guinea-Bissau exclusive economic zone. According to the fisheries plan, Guinea-Bissau committed itself to reducing the fishing effort on shrimps and cephalopods, maintaining in 2007 the existing agreements with third countries and the European Community, preventing the mobilisation in 2008 and subsequent years of fishing opportunities granted to third countries from 1 January 2007 which have remained unused, not granting any fishing opportunities for chartering in these categories, and revoking and formally terminating all agreements with European companies, associations or enterprises.
In addition, datasheets 1 and 2 of Annex II, applicable to fin-fish, cephalopod and shrimp trawlers, provide for the possibility of biological recovery periods. With regard to shrimp fishing, Guinea-Bissau has also undertaken to increase the mesh size from 40 to 50 mm, in keeping with existing legislation in the subregion.
I would say that it is in spite of these fisheries partnership agreements that a lot of illegal fishing activity is carried out and a lot of private licensing is granted to third countries not belonging to the European Union, and it is by virtue of these fisheries partnership agreements that we can control and manage our own fishing fleets so that they fish in a sustainable manner in Guinea-Bissau and other waters.
So I have to say that, yes, I believe that it is beneficial to the third country concerned for the European Union, for the European Community, to negotiate and enter into such fisheries partnership agreements under the new regime.
I agree with you, however, that the previous regime did exploit the resources, but the new arrangement is that we are only interested in negotiating agreements on the surplus, so that if the stock in the third-country waters is already fully exploited or overexploited we do not enter into a fisheries partnership agreement. If it is underexploited, then we only enter into an agreement for the surplus, and we do our utmost to see to it that our own fleets, at least, do carry out and do maintain the commitments undertaken under the agreement."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples