Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-02-25-Speech-4-021"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100225.4.4-021"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, everything is at stake in this reform. If we are not courageous now, there will not be another opportunity to create a genuine fisheries policy and we will be partly responsible for its failure.
The CFP has, for years, suffered increasingly justified criticism and it would be disheartening if, when we are being offered one last opportunity, this Parliament were to prove incapable of proposing alternatives to what we have criticised so many times, in particular, the obvious failure of the conservation and management system, as demonstrated by both the state of resources and the decline in the sector.
I simply cannot understand any reluctance to clearly suggest alternatives, as discussed in this House in 1996, such as transferable quota systems or effort-based management, which have had such positive results and which could help to maintain the more industrial fleets at least.
The report says that there cannot be a one-size-fits-all solution, but at the same time, it closes the door on the possibility that there might be other solutions. I do not understand the contradiction, nor do I understand why, if someone does not want to use an instrument, the solution must be to prohibit it for everyone.
That is not protection of the weakest; it is fear on the part of some sectors that only see permanent subsidies as solutions.
The CFP should also guarantee competitiveness in a globalised world of fisheries products. The market for these products will undoubtedly continue to grow but it seems that it will grow without us.
The policies within the Union should be coherent and we must ensure that the trade policy and rules on origin, such as those that appeared in the new economic partnership agreements, do not destroy the competitiveness of Community fisheries without being anything other than mere gestures to third countries; otherwise, it is our fisheries sector that will suffer.
Mr President, consensus is a good thing when it results in progress, but not when we remain motionless in the face of problems, and we have many problems to solve."@en1
|
lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples