Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-05-09-Speech-1-070-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110509.17.1-070-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I can say in replying to the Members that I can understand all your concerns. I share your concerns about the poor income of our fishermen, especially of the owners of small vessels in coastal regions. But is this problem caused by the increase in fuel prices? Are you sure about that? We have discussed this problem again and again and we recognised that we had this problem even before prices were raised.
Of course I can understand that the increase in fuel prices could worsen the problem, but the main reason for the problem has always been overfishing – the fishing over the set limits which cannot leave stocks in a healthy state. We have discussed it and this is the main problem we have to solve through our CFP reform.
Of course, now we are discussing fuel prices. This is a problem and we must discuss how we can face it. The only way to face this problem on a permanent basis is to improve the resilience of our sector to the increase in fuel prices. This is the only way, because we cannot be sure about the evolution of fuel prices. Let me give you an example of what could happen: in Belgium, they improved the engines in their fleet after the last crisis and now they have reduced spending on fuel in their fleets by 20 percent. So this is the way to go and this is what we are trying to do.
Nevertheless, referring to your proposals, there is a proposal to the Commission to increase the
ceiling. Let us look at this problem. What is this ceiling? This is the ceiling of the aid that Member States can give to their sector. If the Commission now increases this ceiling, it means that only the Member States with a healthy budget can give this. So this would result in creating an uneven playing field in our sector, favouring the richest countries. Let me put it clearly so that we understand the situation.
Also, if we increase the ceiling, only the bigger vessels will gain any advantage from it. I am surprised that some Members of Parliament – who I would not have expected to say this – are asking me to increase this ceiling. The Member States can give their own State aid. The richer Member States can already give it now.
Regarding the funds, let me explain. The Member States use only 20% of our funding. Some Members of Parliament say to me that our funding is the problem because they cannot use it in the way they want; but we have flexibility; the Member States can reallocate their funding – every Member State can do this. Only Italy has asked us for a reallocation and we approved it. So why do you not try to persuade the Member States – the governments of your countries – to use the funds properly? If we really want to help, and if there is a problem with absorption of the funding, I am here to facilitate it for everybody, but until now, no such effort has been made.
To answer the questions in a very direct way: yes, the funding is there; yes, the Member States can use it; and, yes, the Member States can give from their own resources to this
ceiling. So if I change the situation, the only result it will have is to distort fair competition between the Member States and between the small and bigger vessels. We have to understand this. Of course there is a problem in general and, referring to our reform, we can discuss what we can do to help our small-scale fisheries, in particular. We can also discuss every other proposal, but this proposal to increase the
ceiling is one that cannot help."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples