35 Amendments of Nils TORVALDS related to 2015/2092(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the reform of theoverall objective of common fisheries policy (CFP) included among its objectives the achievement ofs to restore and maintain populations of harvested species above levels which can produce the maximum sustainable yield (MSY), us by implementing anthe ecosystem- based approach to fisheries management introduced by the MSFD; whereas technical measures and multiannual plans, which are concerned with conservation, are the main tools to achieve these objective shall be consistent with EU environmental law and shall ensure long term economic, social and employment benefits;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the main changesimportant changes were also introduced under the 2013 CFP reform also include discard elimination and regionalisations the landing obligation and regionalisation; whereas the EMFF foresees financial support to adapt to the changes of the new CFP;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas technical measures are currently so complex, diverse and disorganised, as to be frequently inconsistent or ehe complexity and diversity of technical measures as well as the fact they are spread across many different regulations and haven contradictory, not to mention being difficult for those in the fisheries sector to comprehendibuted to making implementation difficult for fishermen, which risks making fishermen mistrustful;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the review of technical measures, based on a solid scientific approach, should seek to improve the long- term sustainability of fishery resources without compromising the economic viability of fishing activity;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the discard ban and maximum sustainable yield objective requireachieving the objectives of the CFP requires, among others, the use of more selective fishing gear;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the definition of basic principles common to all basins through a framework regulation adopted by codecision ('ordinary legislative procedure' under the Lisbon Treaty), is necessary to ensure the implementation of the CFP objectives across the EU, to ensure a level playing field between operators and facilitate the implementation and monitoring of technical measures;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas codecisionordinary legislative procedure is not necessary for measures taken at regional level or subject to frequent changes, but must be used for the adoption of rules that are common to all sea basins or not likely to be amended in the foreseeable future; whereas regionalisation can ensure that rules are adapted to the specific requirements of each fishery and each basin, ensuring flexibility and facilitating a rapid response to any emergences arising;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the adoption of technical measures on a regional basis should follow the model agreed by the co-legislators under the new common fisheries policy, namely for adoption by the Commission of delegated acts on the basis of joint recommendations from the Member States concerned within the deadline stipulated;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital S
Recital S
S. whereas the multiannual plans adopted between 2002 and 2009 were not all equally effective, the least satisfactory being attributed to the shortcomings of certain instruments and verification procedures; whereas new multiannual plans shall be adopted under the new rules of the CFP;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
T. whereas CFP reform introduced landing requirements while failing to do anything to make the TAC and quota systems less inherently rigidand foresees a range of flexibility, exceptions and financial support under the EMFF;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas difficulties in implementing the discard balanding obligation in mixed fisheries are likely to arise with 'choke' species; whereas the multiannual plans should therefore seek to promote a number of instruments, such as fishing effort regulation, that are unconstrained by the rigidities of the TAC and quota system, thereby helping to ensure maximum sustainable yield and improve the economic performance of fleets at a given fishing mortality rate;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Z
Recital Z
Z. whereas, within the inter-institutional taskforce on multiannual plans, a maximum sustainable yield targelimit and deadline for achieving it, a conservaprecautionary safeguard trigger mechanism, a minimum target biomass, a mechanism for adapting to unforeseen changes in best available scientific thinkingadvice and a review clause were identified as the elements common to future multiannual plans;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AA
Recital AA
AA. whereas the plans must set a general objective that is achievable in administrative and scientific terms; whereas it should include highlong-term and stable yields, something which must be reflected in annual Council decisions regarding fishing opportunities in the light of the latest scientific intelligenadvice; whereas these annual decisions should be strictly confined to the allocation of fishing opportunities, and should as far as possible seekall seek to achieve the maximum sustainable yield by 2015 where possible and on a progressive incremental scale at the latest by 2020 for all stocks and to avoid large fluctuations in this respect;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AH
Recital AH
AH. whereas, for the same species, minimum conservation reference sizes may vary from one area to another in order to take into account the specific nature of the fisherspecies and the fishing gear employederies; whereas, whenever possible, horizontal decisions for all areas are desirable in order to facilitate monitoring;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that, in order to ensure the implementation of the CFP objectives, future technical measures should be simplified, contained in a clearly structured legal framework and based on a solid scientific approachdata;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that, as far as possible, technical measures should be adapted to the specific needs of each fishery and each region, thus helping to improve compliance by the industry concerned;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that, in order to make CFP rules more acceptable to the fisheries sector andfacilitate the implementation of the CFP rules and to ensure compliance therewith, fishermen and other stakeholders must be more involved in decision making, given incentives such as more aid for innovation and encouraged to use more selective fishing gearmeasures; recalls the EMFF foresees financial support to accompany the fisheries sector in adapting to the new rules;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers it necessary to maintain the co-decisionordinary legislative procedure for the adoption of rules common to all sea basins or for those are not likely to be amended within the foreseeable future; believes that measures adopted at regional level - through regionalisation - should be in line with the technical measures framework and coherent with the objectives of the CFP; considers that measures that need frequent changes shall be evaluated at regular periods on order to ensure they remain relevant purposeful;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Maintains that, notwithstanding the discard balanding obligation, provisions regarding technical measures in areas such as catch composition must be sufficiently flexible to adapt in real time to progress in the fisheries and more selective fishing techniques;
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that a review of technical measures must take account their impact in terms of not only resource conservation but alsomarine environment and fishing operating costs and profitability;
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that multi-annual plans should form a robust and lasting framework for fisheries management, be based on best and most recent scientific advice and socio- economic findings and be adapted to the evolution of stockble to ensure the implementation of the CFP objectives, as well as providing flexibility for annual Council decisions on fishing opportunities; notes that these annual decisions should not exceed the strict scope of the allocation of fishing opportunities, and should, as far as possible, seek to avoid large fluctuations thereof;
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Maintains that it is necessary to devise future multiannual plans for achieving and maintaining stocks above the maximum sustainable yield, including an advance timetable, a conservaprecautionary safeguard trigger, a minimum target biomass, a mechanism for adapting to changes inupdated scientific thinkingadvice and a review clause; ;
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that, in order to avoid problems arising from compulsory landings for mixed fisheries, it would be advisable to find ways of regulating the fishing effort free of the rigidities of TACs and quotathe implementation of the landing obligation, the basic legislation foresee the possibility to adopt flexibility measures;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that the transitional validity of the delegated acts regarding discard plans, including changes to the minimum conservation reference sizes, should not in any case exceed three years and should be replaced, where appropriate, by a multi- annual plan and that, to that end, multiannual plans should be adopted as soon as possible;
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Takes the view that, in the context of regionalisation, it is necessary to avoid the prolifdecisions on minimum conservation of decisions on minimumreference sizes for each species, since this would make verification harder and could lead to marketing irregularities or fraudhall be based on scientific advice; stresses the need to avoid marketing irregularities or fraud that could jeopardize the functioning of the internal market;