14 Amendments of Sylvie GODDYN related to 2017/2052(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that a substantial and accessible fisheries fund is necessary in order to implement the common fisheries policy (CFP), to ensure the sustainability of European aquaculture and fisheries, including through implementation of the discard ban and landing obligation and achieving the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) objective, and to helpprovide the sector with financial support for carrying out the necessary restructuring process;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points out that it is essential for the EMFF to be simplified and sufficiently well endowed to pay compensation to fishermen if they were to lose access to United Kingdom waters to some extent;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses, in addition, that costs in connection with the landing obligation should be covered by the EMFF, which presupposes that the fund has been simplified and is sufficiently well endowed;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Is of the opinion that steps need to be taken in order to ensure that the post- 2020 EU fisheries fund is implemented in a swifter and, more flexible and less bureaucratic manner, without the delays that continue to plague the 2014- 2020 EMFF;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Supports the view widely held by the industry and Member State administrations that the current financing rules are too complicated and could bmust be made less cumbersome as quickly as possible;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that, even if we take account of the commitments made by the Union externally, the next MFF must be above all compatible with the commitments made by the Union externallyinterests of the Union, and with its own long-term goals in the field of climate- relevant spending; believes that this can only be achieved by a thorough climate mainstreaming of EU spending; calls on the Commission therefore to develop a transparent and reliable method of calculation that can provide evidence of expected impacts for climate-relevant spending, as well as their weighting for ex post assessment in reporting obligations;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that, even though the EU remains a net seafood importer, European fisheries continue to be a very important source of healthy and traceable food for the European market; underlines the fact that the EU should continue to prevent substandard products from entering the EU marketEU market entry for products failing to meet standards imposed on European fishermen that they comply with;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the transition to a sustainable economy is the only way to ensure a healthy living environment and the long-term wellbeing of Union citizens and the European economy; cConsiders that the EU should be the global front runner inof the transition to a low-carbon economy and a sustainable production-consumption system, as long as it does not undermine its own competitivity and economic acquis;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that European added value in fisheries management has to date been largely associated with a reduction in the capacity of fishing fleets; iIs of the opinion that in the post- 2020 MFF a balance between the fisheries resources available and fleet capacity will have to be taken into account; highlights the fact, however, that other elements with a non- quantifiable added valudded value that is not easily quantifiable should be considered as well, such as the role the European fishing sector plays in improving selectivity and in communities highly dependent on this activity in terms of employment and local growth; underlines, therefore, that fisheries must remain independent in order to support these communities;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights that European coastal communities are, and will remain, highly dependent on the fisheries sector, even though its contribution to local economies is constantly declining; stresses, therefore, that community-led local development (CLLD)the involvement of the coastal communities concerned and fisheries local action groups (FLAGs) should remain a focus and their funding must be increased, as they serve to enable local fisheries communities to address these challenges at grass-roots level, using the knowledge of local stakeholders to tackle local issues; underlines, in this regard, the importance of keeping the financing structure of fishermen’s producer organisations intact;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the next MFF should help the Union achieve its 2030 climate and energy framework objectives; underlines that the EU should not finance projects and investments that are contrary to the achievement of these goals; points out that the EU should not use socio- economic goals to encourage the creation of conditions that are at odds with its environmental interests;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the increasingly important role of the so-called ‘blue economy’; is of the opinion that the priorities of the Blue Growth strategy should be aligned with those of the EMFF, i.e. environmental sustainability, resource efficiency, competitiveness, creation of high-quality employment opportunities and territorial cohesion; calls on the Commission to reassess the financial allocations for Blue Growth in the MFF and stresses that a fisheries fund shoulding already plays an important role in this regard in many regions;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls the need to improve the gathering of scientific data and ensure better access to it, and to foster cooperation between the maritime and fisheries sector on the one hand and the scientific community, NGOs and other private- and public-sector entities on the other;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recognises the European added value of collaboration in tackling common public health threats; considers that, on the basis of the first positive outcomes of the ongoing health programme, the next MFF should include a robust health programme that tackles health issues on a cross-border basis.