Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-04-Speech-3-250"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080604.25.3-250"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, first of all, the level of the debate on this important subject demonstrates that we share a strong commitment to address the issue of IUU in an effective and comprehensive manner. The truth of the matter is not only that IUU is an activity that threatens the sustainability of fish stocks, but it is also an activity that threatens the future of honest fishermen within and outside the European Union.
We also offer fishermen some possibilities for providing immediate assistance, if this is linked to restructuring in the form of rescue and restructuring aid. However, I need to say here that I am also looking at this and am discussing it with my colleagues, with a view to trying to identify other ways and means whereby we can help fishermen face up to this new reality in the very short term. But I need to underline that we can only do this if there is a firm and a fixed-term commitment to restructuring, because the problem is also that of over-capacity. Therefore, unless we tackle the problem of over-capacity, we will have a recurring problem for as long as fuel prices remain as they are, or – worse still – if they continue rising, as the indications suggest.
This is what we have done with France, where agreement was reached between the Commission and France on a package of measures which are intended to help the French fisheries sector to restructure. I have to admit that this was not enough and did not satisfy the French fishermen.
I need to underline that, for the Commission to respond, we also need the cooperation and active engagement of Member States. We cannot act on our own. In this regard I understand that this crisis will be raised and discussed at the forthcoming June Council, and I personally welcome it.
On the question raised at the very end by Mrs Doyle concerning the application of subsidies by some Member States and not others, the information that the Commission has is that these subsidies that have been granted by different Member States either fall within the parameters of the de minimis (and any Member State can grant subsidies as long as they fall within the threshold of de minimis) or are under restructuring programmes to which I made reference before. There is the communication with regard to rescue and restructuring aid and, if agreement is reached – if the Commission gives the green light to a restructuring programme – then there are certain possibilities with regard to subsidies, with regard to state assistance, which would not otherwise be possible.
Where we have had information with regard to other subsidies which are not covered either by de minimis or under restructuring programmes, we are investigating them. There has just been, for example, a notification to France that the amount which was paid in the form of an insurance scheme has to be re-collected. So we do take action in order to see to it that the European rules with regard to competition are properly observed. However, I would end by saying that the immediate crisis is such that we need to address it very carefully in order to find ways and means whereby we try to find solutions of an immediate nature but which would also have the conditionality that there is a firm commitment within the short term for the fisheries sector to restructure in order to bring about capacity levels to match what can sustainably be fished out of the seas.
In order for us to be successful in our efforts, we must ensure three crucial principles. The first is that the scope of the proposal remains comprehensive. Secondly, the certification scheme put in place must be effective yet ensure that there are no unnecessary burdens imposed as a result. And the sanctions scheme we proposed must be such that these can serve as effective punitive measures and, therefore, be dissuasive by their very nature.
With regard to these three principles, I have heard confirmation that you have managed to sort out various issues with Member States concerning the scope, the certification scheme and the sanctions. You have done so without diluting or diminishing the effectiveness of the proposal. Specifically on the sanctions, let me say that one of the major problems with control is the fact that the range of sanctions applied by Member States is so diverse that it is the sector itself which has consistently and constantly called for a level playing field in this area. It is for this reason that, at the very least, we have proposed levels which should be applied in a proportionate and in an effective manner.
On the wider issue regarding the reform of the common fisheries policy, I can confirm that we have started reflecting on this and will be having an orientation debate in Council in the coming months. In fact the idea is to have an informal ministerial meeting in September. We are also dealing with over-regulation, with a view to simplifying the regulatory regime that is in place.
Let me also say that I cannot agree more with the comment made by Mrs Aubert that the fight against IUU, if effective, will help fishermen to better face up to the problems and the difficulties they are now facing, and this point was made by certain other Members who intervened. I also, however, agree that it is not sufficient.
On the issue of developing countries, we are committed to addressing this issue effectively, as I said in my opening remarks. Taking measures to assist developing countries is key if we are to solve the problem and not simply to displace it.
As regards control issues, let me assure the rapporteur that the Commission is coming up with a strong proposal during the third quarter of this year which will also be merged, or harmonised, with the IUU proposal that we have before us. In that way, both will be convergent and attain the same results.
As regards the fuel crisis, we already have the possibility of medium- to long-term measures that are in place, and this would be in combination with the restructuring of the sector. We will be looking at the market measures in place – this point was raised by some Members who intervened – which work in such a way that increased costs are borne by the fishermen and are not passed on to the consumer, as happens in other sectors. We therefore need to look into this in order to find out why.
There are systems in place which bring about a situation whereby it is the fisherman who ends up suffering, who ends up having to bear the increased costs himself, rather than those being passed on to the consumers."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples