Activities of Isabelle THOMAS related to 2015/2092(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
A new CFP: structure for technical measures and multiannual plans (A8-0328/2015 - Gabriel Mato) FR
Amendments (19)
Amendment 48 #
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 a level playing field between operators, allow a democratically devised framework to be put in place and facilitate the implementation and monitoring of technical measures;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Recital J a (new)
J a. whereas the infra-regional level is that which is situated lower than the sea basin level;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas codecision is not necessary for measures taken at infra-regional level or subject to frequent changes, but must be used for the adoption of rules that are common to all sea basins, already covered by separate regulations or not likely to be amended in the foreseeable future;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the adoption of technical measures on a regional basis may in particular 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;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)
Recital O a (new)
Oa. whereas delegated acts for regionalisation are one of the means provided for, but to date the method used to decide on the delegated act has already shown its weaknesses and flaws, in terms of transparency and consultation with those involved (notably the RACs, European Regions, etc.), but also in terms of information and consultation as regards the content;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O b (new)
Recital O b (new)
Ob. whereas the technical delegated acts adopted to date cover the same geographic perimeter as the existing technical regulations (namely the sea basins), and it is justifiable to question the reason why some stem from codecision and other delegated acts;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O c (new)
Recital O c (new)
Oc. Whereas the revision of the framework of technical measures should present an opportunity to continue reflecting on regionalisation and to think about alternatives to delegated acts;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas difficulties in implementing the discard ban in mixed fisheries are likely to arise with 'choke' species; whereas the multiannual plans should therefore seek to promote 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 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that future technical measures should be simplified in order to remove any contradiction and/or duplication, rational, contained in a clearly structured legal framework and based on a solid scientific approach reviewed by peers;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that, in order to make CFP rules more acceptable to the fisheries sector and ensure compliance therewith, fishermen must be more involved in decision making, given incentives such as, for example, more aid for training, innovation and, equipment, and anything else that will encouraged them to use more selective fishing gear;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Considers that innovation and research will need to be promoted to ensure that the CFP is properly implemented, in particular as regards the landing of discards, in order to increase selectivity and modernise fishing and monitoring techniques;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers it necessary to maintain the co-decision procedure for the adoption of rules common to all sea basins , or which are already covered by separate regulations, or for those are not likely to be amended within the foreseeable future;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes codecision to be unnecessary for measures adopted at infra-regional level or possibly subject to frequent changes;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that rules regarding technical measures should be structured on three co- decisional axes and a fourth regionalisation axis. The first three would comprise a set of common centralised rules, a set of specific rules for the larger sea basins and a number of specific technical regulations, all off which would be adopted by co- decision; Notes that regionalisation would apply to rules applicable at infra-regional level or subject to frequent changes
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Recalls that as regards delegated acts, pursuant to Article 18 of the basic regulation, Member States may, within a time limit to be set in the regulation on the technical measures, submit recommendations to the European Commission, and that the latter will not be able to adopt any act prior to the expiration of that time limit;
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that the conservation objective of the regulation on technical measures could be achieved more effectively through actions aimed at improving supply and demand management, foc7using to a greater extent on producer organisationsby making it easier to implement a sector-based approach, thereby optimizing the results being sought by EU provisions;
Amendment 229 #
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 and socio- economic findings recognised by peers, and be adapted to the evolution of stocks, 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 230 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that multi-annual plans should form a robust, rational and lasting framework for fisheries management, be based on best and most recent scientific and socio- economic findings and be adapted to the evolution of stocks, 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; also believes that approximative approaches to quantification cannot be accepted;
Amendment 240 #
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 ta balanced distribution of quotas should be established between fishe rigidities of TACs and quotases, in particular through a transparent allocation by fishing sector;