Activities of Sylvie GODDYN related to 2018/0012(COD)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on port reception facilities for the delivery of waste from ships, repealing Directive 2000/59/EC and amending Directive 2009/16/EC and Directive 2010/65/EU
Amendments (8)
Amendment 20 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In spite of these regulatory developments, discharges of waste at sea still occur. This is due to a combination of factors, namely adequate port reception facilities are not always available in ports, enforcement is often insufficient and there is a lack of incentives to deliver the waste onshore. Bonuses for fishermen who bring plastic waste to port, for example, could improve the collection of such waste.
Amendment 21 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) Fisheries sector initiatives aimed at reducing fishing waste or retrieving plastic waste, including lost fishing gear, should be welcomed.
Amendment 22 #
(12) Separate collection of waste from ships, including dereliclost fishing gear, is necessary to ensure its further recovery in the downstream waste management chain. Garbage is often segregated on board of ships in accordance with international norms and standards and Union legislation should ensure that these efforts of on-board waste segregation are not undermined by a lack of arrangements for separate collection on shore.
Amendment 25 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Although the majorityaround 80% of marine litter originates from land-based activities, the shipping industry, including the fishing and recreational sectors, is also an important contributor, with discharges of garbage, including plastic and dereliclost fishing gear, going directly into the sea.
Amendment 26 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) To address the problem of marine litter effectively, it is fundamental to provide the right level of incentives for the delivery of waste to port reception facilities, in particular garbage. This can be achieved through a cost recovery system, which requires the application of an indirect fee, which is due irrespective of the delivery of waste and which should give a right of delivery of the waste without any additional direct charges. The fishing and recreational sector, given theirits contribution to the occurrence of marine litter, should also be included in this system. Fishermen should be exempted from these fees if they undertake to bring to port all the plastic waste and fishing gear lost at sea which they recover during their fishing operations.
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) in order to provide for a maximum incentive for the delivery of waste as defined in Annex V to the MARPOL Convention, including the waste that has been collected in nets during fishing operations, the indirect fee to be charged shall cover all the costs of port reception facilities for this waste, in order to ensure a right of delivery without any additional direct chargesfishermen shall be exempted from the port fee if they have undertaken to bring back all the waste caught at sea, including lost fishing gear;
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The fees may be differentiated with respect to, inter alia, the category, type and size of the ship and the type of traffic the ship is engaged in, as well as with respect to services provided outside normal operating hours in the port. Fishermen who undertake to return all waste caught at sea, including lost fishing gear, should be exempt from the fees.
Amendment 50 #
1a. Member States may also exempt fishing vessels from port fees if fishermen have undertaken to bring back all waste caught at sea, including lost fishing gear;