27 Amendments of Isabella LÖVIN related to 2011/2290(INI)
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that sustainable fishing restoring and maintaining stocks well above the levels that can produce Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) will be of huge environmental, social and economic advantage, as the environment will be less degraded, fishing communities willould have a secure future, and the fisheries sector willould be profitable without having to depend on public support to survive;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned at the heavy dependence of EU markets on imports of fisheries and aquaculture products,, as 60 % of all fisheries products used in the EU are imported essentiallyto a significant extent from developing countries; stresses that the best option for reducing dependence on imports is to recover and maintain European fish stocks to a level well above those capable of producing MSY;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Stresses that any access to the surplus of fisheries resources in developing countries which cannot be caught by local fishing fleets can only be given after the nutritional needs of the local populations have been met and the requirements of art 62, 69 and 70 of UNCLOS has been adhered to;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Is mindful of the provisions set out in UNCLOS articles 69 and 70 regarding land-locked States right to participate in the exploitation of marine living resources of the Exclusive Economic Zones of coastal States in the same region or sub- region to meet nutritional needs of the populations of the respective States;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Reiterates that the future CFP must be guided by principles of good governance including, inter alia, transparency and access to information in accordance with the Aarhus convention, including to the evaluations of Sustainable Partnership Agreements (SFAs);
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Reiterates that the CFP must be coherent with development and environment policies, including the protection of marine ecosystems; calls therefore for action to improve and expand scientific knowledge as well as stronger international cooperation to ensure better performance;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Reiterates that all EU nationals must abide by the rules and regulations of the CFP wherever they operate, including, inter alia, environmental and social regulations;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the reform of the CFP must ensure the future survival and prosperity of small-scale fishing fleets and areas that are heavily dependent on fishing, which may require greainterim socio-economic support under the new CFP but must not lead to increases in total fleet capacity;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the objective of achieving MSY based on fishing mortality (FMSY) should be established immediately, as this will in any case put the vast majority of stocks on the right track; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement this objective in an operational manner, based on sound scientific data and taking account of the socio-economic consequences;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines, however, the difficulties involved inat implementing the MSY principle, in particular successfully, including in the case of mixed fisheries or where scientific data on fish stocks are unavailable or unreliable is possible if fish stocks rebuild to levels sufficiently above MSY; recalls that the precautionary approach shall be respected;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Recognizes that a discard ban is a strong political statement, and that experience shows that a whole series of additional measures must accompany a ban to achieve the desired minimisation of unwanted bycatches
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the need for more scientific research to develop tackle and fishing techniques in such a way as to avoid bycatches of non-targeted species and promote other sustainable fishing methods, such as real-time closures; underlines the importance of addressing the management of mixed fisheries to this end;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Asks the Commission to assist Member States in offsetting the diverse socio- economic consequences of adopting aimplementing programmes to reduce discards, bearing in mind that reducing the economic incentives for fishermen to actually avoid bycatches could run counter to the intention of the discards ban;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses that the introduction of such a measure would imply an in-depth reform of the control and enforcement system; asks the Commission to assist Member States in this respect, in order to ensure that enforcement applies across the board in a uniform manner; believes that the Fisheries Control Agency (CFCA) should have increased powers to ensure a fair system of rules and sanctions;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes that the main reason for this lack of basic scientific data on the majority of stocks is inadequate reporting by Member States; in this respect, calls on the Commission tobelieves that the new EMFF should provide Member States with technical and financial assistance for the collection and analysis of reliable data, employing both positive and negative incentives; considers that Member States that do not fulfill this obligation should have their EMFF structural funding suspended until such time as they are in full compliance;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes that the proposal to introduce ‘Transferable Fishing Concessions’ (TFCs), contained in the basic regulation, raises concerns regarding the concentration and creation of monopolies; stressnotes that in a number of countries transferable fishing rights have allowed fishing capacity to be reduced, which is commendablsome countries, reductions in fleet capacity have followed the implementation of systems of transferable fishing rights, though such reductions have not necessarily occurred in those fleet segments that are the most environmentally destructive; emphasises, however, that adequate safeguards would need to be introduced in order to protect small-scale and coastal fishing, which is the most economically endangered part of the industry but also that providing most of the jobs and economic activity in coastal regions;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Believes that such a measure should offer priority access to those who fish in a socially and environmentally responsible way; believes that TFCs should not be the only measure proposed for reducing overcapacity, and that a Member States should be exempted from the obligation to introduce TFCs if itobliged to achieves the necessary capacity reduction with or without their use;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Considers that prior to the mandatory introduction of TFCs the Commission should undertake fleet assessments in order to obtain credible results vis-à-vis the precise situation of overcapacity at EU level, thus making it possible to propose appropriate and targeted instruments for its reduction;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Considers that the economic viability of the fisheries sector is affected by the recent rise in oil prices; calls on the Commission to come up with suitable measures to improve fuel efficiency in the fisheries and aquaculture sector, to alleviate the difficult economic situation in which European fishermen find themselves, and to propose in this respect an action plan for coastal regions and islands without increasing fishing capacity; however notes with satisfaction that when fish stocks are rebuilt to levels above MSY fuel consumption will go down since less fishing effort per catch unit will be required;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27 a. Notes with satisfaction that some studies show that considerable social and economic benefits would accrue from allowing fish stocks to increase to levels above those capable of producing MSY, including increased employment and catches and improved profitability;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Considers that the fisheries sector can remain sustainable only if there are sufficient and adequately trained and skilled workers; believes that in order to achieve this, careers in fishing need to remain attractive and standards of qualifications and training need to meet international and European requirements; calls on the Commission to promote proper training and mandatory education schemes in best practice and marine biology in different areas of the sector, since this will attract young people and help create a competitive and eco- friendly fisheries and aquaculture sector;
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Believes that the reform of the CFP may, in the short term, lead to job losses, especially in the catching sector, thus affecting the growth of coastal communities and islands; stresses, in this respect, that there is a need for accompanying socio-economic measures, including a plan for jobs,alternative jobs, but also in order to make the sector more attractive to young people and provide incentives to enter the sector; calls on the Commission to examine and promote cooperation with the European Investment Bank in order to leverage investment in the sector;
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Believes that as far as regionalisation is concerned, the key response is good governance, which meansbased on a bottom-up approach; stresses that clear and simple rules must be established at the appropriate level, thus increasing compliance; also strongly believes that the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs) promote dialogue and cooperation between stakeholders and should contribute actively to the establishing of Long Term Management Plans;
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Believes that regionalisation of the CFP must reflect the geographical scale of the fisheries being managed, with objectives and principles adopted by the EU co-legislators and the details of the management measures decided at the regional level as locally as possible, which means that for some fisheries this would be across several Member States whereas for others it could be within a part of a single Member State; recognises that new structures may need to be created to enable such a system to function;
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)
Paragraph 33 b (new)
33 b. Is also convinced that a more holistic and integrated view on the marine environment is needed, and that marine spatial planning on local and regional level, involving all stakeholders, is a necessary tool to implement a real ecosystem approach to management;
Amendment 275 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 c (new)
Paragraph 33 c (new)
33 c. Notes that effective planning on a regional or local level will facilitate the most appropriate use of the marine resources, taking into consideration local conditions, market demands, competing uses, need for protected areas, designation of specific areas where only certain best practice fishing gear are allowed etc;
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Stresses that an ambitious and real reform of the CFP can only be successfulbe facilitated if sufficient financial means are available for the next ten years, in order to support all the reform measures and tackle the socio- economic problems that may occur;