32 Amendments of Carmen FRAGA ESTÉVEZ related to 2011/2318(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Motion forf a resolution
Citation 14 bis (new)
Citation 14 bis (new)
- having regard to its Resolution of 14 December 2011 on the future Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial compensation provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Morocco1 __________________ 1 Texts adopted: P7_TA(2011)0573.
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas quotas in RFMOs arehave been primarily based on historical catches, which maintainsfostered preferential access for developed countries to global fish stocks;.
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the EU has to seek policy coherence for development on the basis of Article 208(1), of the TFEU according to which ‘The Union shall take account of the objectives of development cooperation in the policies that it implements which are likely to affect developing countries’must apply all of its policies in its relations with non-member countries in a consistent and coordinated way;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s Communication and the many positive proposals it includes for encouraging the sustainability of the EU’s overall fishing activities outside EU waters; considers, however, that the scope of the document is not broad enough, being too concentrated on, both in reference to bilateral agreements and multilateral organisations;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that fishing by EU interests inside and outside Union waters should be based upon the same standards in terms of ecological and social sustainability and transparency, and that these same principles must be defended and required of third countries, both within the framework of the RFMOs and at bilateral level;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates its belief in the need for coherence between the fisheries policy of the Union and its policies with respect to development and the environmentthat for the purpose of improving the coherence of its decisions, the actions of the EU must incorporate the aspects relating to policy on trade, health, the environment, development cooperation and foreign policy; notes that such coherence requires coordination both within the Commission itself and between the Commission and the governments of the individual Member States;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that the IPOA-Capacity (International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity) committed the EU, no later than 2005, to develop and implement a system for the management of fishing capacity; notes, that the Commission appears to be pursuing contradictory approaches to the management of capacity by proposing a freeze in certain RFMOs while proposing to remove the main regulatory limits to capacity within the EU’s inerefore, that one of its objectives must be the regulation of the capacity to adjust it to available resources, both in the RFMOs and the bilaternal and external fleefisheries agreements;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Urges the Commission to support clearly defined principles and objectives for environmentally and socio-economically sustainable fisheries on the high seas and in waters under national jurisdiction at the upcoming United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in Brazil in June 2012all international forums in which it takes part;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 bis (new)
Paragraph 9 bis (new)
9a. Calls for the Commission to be more vigorous in applying Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 on IUU fishing, particularly in relation to the contracting parties of the RFMOs that do not actively collaborate in establishing and applying the principle mechanisms of the campaign against IUU fishing;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that bilateral fisheries agreements, or Sustainable Fisheries Agreements (SFA) as the Commission proposes to call them, negotiated between partners and equitably implemented, should be of benefit to both parties, providing economic resources, technical and scientific expertise and support for improved fisheries management and good governance to the third country, while allowing the continuation of fishing activities by EU vessels that provide a modest butn important supply of fish to the EU and other markets;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the intention of the Commission to include several provisions in future bilateral agreements, including respect for the principle of limiting access to resources that are scientifically demonstrated to be surplus to the coastal State’s own catch capacity, in line with Article 61 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, a human rights clause and thean exclusivity clause, though the latter needs toat must be estrengthened and made consistent across aablished in the text of the Protocols, instead of in the Fishing Agreements;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the currently used social clause should be strengthened to include respect for International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention 188 as well as the eight ILO Fundamental Conventions;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Encourages the Commission in its endeavourto contribute insofar as possible through its fisheries and development cooperation policy to increase the capacity of coastal States to obtain complete and reliable data from the coastal State on the total amount of fishing occurring in its waters, so as to prevent over- exploitation. Recalls that the research vessels of different Member States conduct regular research campaigns in areas that are fished by the EU fleet; asks for such campaigns to be bolstered as much as possible, and for greater cooperation among the Member States and the Commission in this regard, and for increased funding to expand scientific research in foreign waters outside the EU;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Fully supports the concept of decoupling financial compensation for access to fisheries resources from sectoral support for development; strongly insists that shipowners should pay a fair and market- based portion of the former, and that improved oversight of the latter is badly needed, including the possibility of suspension of payments in cases of failure to fulfil commitments by the coastal Stat. As for the contribution to be made by shipowners, requests that a prior assessment is made in regard to the proportional share that they must pay in order to gain access to a fishing licence;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 bis (new)
Paragraph 20 bis (new)
20a. Insists that the financial item intended to provide sectoral support must be more effective and achieve increased, improved quality results, in particular by focusing on scientific research, data collection and the monitoring and management of fishing activities.
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 bis (new)
Paragraph 23 bis (new)
23a. Also emphasises the need to improve transparency both during the negotiation and the lifetime of the Fisheries Agreements, both on behalf of the EU and third countries;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Believes that there should be a regional approach to the negotiation and implementation of the EU’s bilateral agreements, largely in those concerning the tuna boat fleet, and, where appropriate, a clear link between the terms they contain and the management measures and performance of the relevant RFMOs;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 bis (new)
Paragraph 25 bis (new)
25a. Must express its unease to the Commission, at regional level, regarding the clear reversal in the measures concerning the boarding of sailors, who in the majority of cases are reverting to the unsustainable policy of being contracted according to nationality, rather than by origin, in ACP countries in general.
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Insists onCalls on the Commission to take the lead within the RFMOs in applying an eco-systemic focus that guarantees the conservation of resources. Insists on the need to continue with the rapid expansion of the coverage of the RFMOs so that all high seas fisheries are effectively managed with the ecosystem approach to ensure resource conservation; n. Notes that this may require a combination of new RFMOs where none exist as well asnd an increase in the competence of existing RFMOs;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Believes that RFMOs must develop sustainable management systems that provide for an equitable transparent and fair resource allocation based upon transparent environmental and social criteria, rather than the simplistic critersocio-economic and environmental criteria, which take into consideration the legitimate aspirations of historical catches, while ensuring that management and conservation measures are fully implemented by all membcoastal countries, together with those of the fleets that have traditionally fished in those waters;
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Requests that a detailed assessment be conducted of the fishing capacity of EU fleets authorised to fish outside EU waters, using reliable indicators of the ability of vessels to catch fish and considering advances in technology based on the recommendations of the 1999 FAO Technical Consultation on the measurement of fishing capacity1; b8. Believes that all RFMOs should ensure that the fishing capacity of the fleets is commensurate with the fishery resources availablethe EU should identify the RFMOs where there are problems of overcapacity, and even the application of a fair and transparent distribution of rights ought to promote the freezing of fleet capacity as a preventive measure, with special consideration for the rights of coastal countries;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Considers that the external dimension of the CFP is not limited to bilateral fisheries agreements and the EU’s participation in RFMOs but also includes international trade in fisheries and aquaculture products, private agreements between EU shipowners and third countries, joint ventures by EU companies in third countries and activities by EU nationals on non-EU vesselsBelieves that even though the external activities of Community businesses may exceed the external dimension of the common fisheries policy, trade activities and the private agreements between EU shipowners and third countries, including those conducted under the framework of bilateral cooperation policies, they must be legitimately respected and protected as long as they are conducted within the framework of international law;
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Considers that EU vessels should not be allowed to temporarily reflag in order to take advantage of fishing opportunities under other flags, either in bilateral fisheries agreements or under the auspices of RFMOsBelieves that the EU should support the activities of EU vessels fishing in external waters, so that they have no incentive to change flag on account of the unjustified reduction of opportunities compared against other States or contracting parties, or indeed because EU fisheries policy does not allow the Community fleet to be made more internationally competitive;
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Is firmly opposed to the establishment of second registers for fishing vessels within the Member States and calls on the Commission to publish a legal analysis of the various registers already in use in the Member StateBelieves that the Directive on State aid for fisheries should be updated, for the purpose of increasing competitiveness and preventing the discrimination of fishing fleets in external waters with other maritime sectors;
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 – indent 2
Paragraph 42 – indent 2
– include clear definitions ofrespect rules of origin,
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 – indent 3 bis (new)
Paragraph 42 – indent 3 bis (new)
– Require compliance with hygiene and sanitation legislation on the same terms as those required of European industry,