Activities of Ska KELLER related to 2021/2169(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy and future perspectives (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the state of play in the implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy and future perspectives
Amendments (55)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
— having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular Articles 3, 4, 5, 11, 13, 38, 39, 43 and 349,
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 21 January 2021 titled 'More fish in the seas? Measures to promote stock recovery above the maximum sustainable yield (MSY), including fish recovery areas and marine protected areas' 1a _________________ 1a Texts adopted, P9_TA(2021)0017
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 b (new)
Citation 4 b (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 7 June 2022 titled 'The implementation of Article 17 of the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation' 2a _________________ 2a Texts adopted, P9_TA(2022)0226
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Regrets that, since 2014, the implementation ofWelcomes that the CFP has primarily focused on the environmental aspect of this policy, as a prerequisite to and at the expense of socioeconomic and food security considerations; considers that the resulting negative impacts on the fishing sector have been exacerbated since, economic and social sustainability as a basis for thriving fish stocks and coastal communities and to preserve long-term sustainable food security; considers that the challenges for the fishing sector such as Brexit and, the COVID-19 pandemic, and that these negative impacts continue to increase and have become unsustainable due to recent international geopolitical developmente Russian war of agression against Ukraine have caused impacts on EU fisheries, especially small- scale fisheries;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that seafood has a generallycertain seafood products can have a lower carbon footprint than land- based food, which indicates the strategic value of seafoodfully and swiftly implementing the CFP in the context of the European Green Deal and the Biodiversity Strategy;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that the CFP reform should aim to reach a re-equilibration between its objectives; therefore supports strengthening the CFP’s socioeconomic and food security dimensionimplementation of the CFP should continue to ensure that fishing and aquaculture activities are environmentally sustainable and are managed in a way that is consistent with the objectives of achieving economic, social and employment benefits, and of contributing to the availability of food supplies and the reaching of a level playing field in its international dimension;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission, to that end, to systematically conduct full ex ante and ex post impact assessments, including socioeconomic analyses, before any strategy or legislation is proposed or any policy decisions are taken;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission and the Council to place more value in policy- making on the importance of low-impact, climate friendly fisheries in contributing to food supplies;
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that the introduction of MSY as a fisheries management reference point has been a driver for improving the overall state of fish stocks; considers, howev so that a fair standard of living is reached for those who depend on fishing activities; consider,s that the MSY objective should be implemented for all stocks in line with the legal requirement of the CFP, in light of the practical reality and in consideration of the socioeconomic, proportionality and food security dimensions enshrined in the Treaty and in the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) code of conduct;
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls in this regard that the MSY target ‘for all stocks by 2020’ had already evolved in the regulations on regional multiannual plans adopted after 2013; recalls that the legal obligation to achieve MSY according to the CFP was not achieved by 2020;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Recalls the objective of the CFP to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintains populations of harvested species above levels which can produce the maximum sustainable yield;
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers therefore that the MSY objective in Regulation (EU) 1380/2013 (the CFP Basic Regulation) should be adapfully implemented accordingly; highlights in this regard that where the MSY objective has been achieved the profitability of the respective fleet segments increased;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates the views expressed in its resolution of 18 May 2021 on the landing obligation2; recalls that the landing obligation, introduced as a fundamental paradigm shift in fisheries management, is not properly implemented; highlights again that the landing obligation is not a goal in itself but a tool to minimise unwanted catches and that an assessment ofthe socioeconomic impact of this obligation must be carried out to gradually eliminate discards, taking into account the best available scientific advice, by avoiding and reducing, as far as possible, unwanted catches, and by gradually ensuring that catches are landed, is not properly implemented; highlights again that the landing obligation is not a goal in itself but a tool to minimise unwanted catches and that the Commission was requested by the European Parliament to inter alia assess the extent to which the reduction of discards has been achieved and whether it has contributed to improving the status of stocks (MSY) and to reducing the impact on the marine ecosystem,the socioeconomic impact of this obligation, the impact on the sustainability of the species removed by the Council from the list of stocks subject to TACs, and to identify and remove the administrative difficulties encountered in developing and implementing selectivity pilot projects; highlights that investment and simplification of pilot projects on selectivity is needed to support the fishing sector in their efforts to become more sustainable; _________________ 2 OJ C 15, 12.1.2022, p. 9.
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – indent 1
Paragraph 12 – indent 1
- the current landing obligation should be applied in a flexible manner, taking into account the specific characteristics of each fisheryfully implemented;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – indent 2
Paragraph 12 – indent 2
- the scope of the landing obligation should be reviewed so as to limit the problems of choke species and complex derogationsproblems of choke species to be approached in a fully comprehensive manner through quota swaps between Member States and between Producer Organisations, through quota pools, through technical and temporal-spatial selectivity, and where necessary through existing and potential derogations based on the best available scientific advice as foreseen in the CFP;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 – indent 3
Paragraph 12 – indent 3
- the landing obligation should be made more attractive, notably through incentives, to improve ownership by operators and thereby compliance, and at the same time better controlled and enforced;
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Insists that the objective of minimising unwanted catches should be primarily met by using technical measures and should be supported by better documenting catches; calls on the Commission to propose to the co- legislators other alternatives to the such as through remote electronic monitoring, last haul information, and digital catch and landing obligdeclarations;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recalls that total allowable catches (TACs) and quotas are the most direct way of managing fishing mortality, but single stock TACs can be problematic in mixed fisheries (due to the choke effect); highlights the need to therefore improve the scientific advice for mixed fisheries also in the light of impacts of climate change on the ocean;
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Believes therefore that it is necessary to adjust the present relative stability while preserving the basic tenets of this principle; to this end, cCalls on the Commission to provide a comprehensive assessment of the present relative stability and of possible scenarios for adaptation;
Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Recalls the role of the allocation of fishing opportunities as a tool to promote low-impact fisheries and small-scale fisheries, and to incentivise fisheries with a reduced impact on the environment;
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Deplores that Member States are not transparent and are not making public what criteria they apply when distributing fishing opportunities;
Amendment 275 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Deplores the fact that very few Members States use criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature to distribute fishing opportunities and that, if used, they do not have much weight in the final distribution;
Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17 d. Calls on Member States to make their respective methods of distributing fishing opportunities and the final quota allocation of each producer organisation and each vessel publicly available, in line with the applicable data protection legislation;
Amendment 277 #
17 e. Welcomes the announcement by the Commission of the request made to the STECF to analyse the criteria used by Member States for the allocation of fishing opportunities at national level;
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 f (new)
Paragraph 17 f (new)
17 f. Calls on Member States to make full use of the possibilities offered by Article 17 of the CFP regulation to promote small-scale coastal, low-impact fisheries and to provide incentives to fishing vessels deploying selective fishing gear or using fishing techniques with reduced environmental impact, such as reduced energy consumption or reduced habitat damage;
Amendment 279 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 g (new)
Paragraph 17 g (new)
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to proposevide a study about adapting the structural policy in order to facilitateregarding the decarbonisation of the fishing industry and, calls on Member States and the fishing industry to improve safety and working conditions, notably by fully utilising the available gross tonnage within national capacity ceilings and excluding the ‘social and safety’ related tonnage from the calculation of the fishing capacityin line with Article 22 of the CFP;
Amendment 319 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Commission to propose increased flexibility in these plans so thatMember States to submit joint recommendations in line with Article 18 of the CFP theyat take into account socioeconomic considerations and changing conditions;
Amendment 322 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Stresses the need to improve the implementation of the ecosystem approach at regional, national and European level and the need for consistent fisheries management measures concerning stocks straddling over regions covered by several MAPs;
Amendment 342 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Supports the currenta balanced composition of the ACs, with a majority representation of socioeconomic operators as compared to other interest grouphere all relevant stakeholders are properly represented, compared to the current composition of the ACs that is dominated by socioeconomic operators; highlights the importance of a good working atmosphere in ACs based on respect, inclusion of all opinions by the different stakeholder groups, impartial secretariats, rotating chairpersons and external, regular and independent performance reviews;
Amendment 344 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Highlights the importance of involving the ACs with the European Parliament’s workACs submitting recommendations and suggestionson on matters relating to the management of fisheries and the socio- economic and conservation aspects of fisheries and aquaculture to the Commission and to the Member State;
Amendment 347 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Deplores the insufficientWelcomes the monitoring of and transparency on how the AC’s advice is taken into account in decision-making; calls on the Commission and Member States to systematically and actively participate in the AC’s meetings and to better communicate on the value of their advice;
Amendment 353 #
28. Considers that co-management with the ACs mustof fisheries with all stakeholders should be developed to foster a bottom-up approach;
Amendment 361 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Calls on the Commission to base all its political and legislative initiatives (including implementing acts that set restrictions on fisheries) on scientific, technical and economic advice (including fishers’ experience)on the best available scientific advice and stakeholder consultations, and con priorduct impact assessments prior to legislative proposals;
Amendment 362 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Considers that the ACs should be giRecalls that AC members and other interested persons haven the possibility to contribute to the Commission’s requests for advice fromattend meetings of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) and of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) as observers and invited experts in order to foster closer collaboration between scientists and stakeholders;
Amendment 366 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31 a. Recalls that Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognises animals as sentient beings and states that, in formulating and implementing the Union's fisheries policies, the Union and the Member States shall pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals; recalls that aquatic animals are sentient beings and that full regard should be paid to their welfare;
Amendment 367 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 b (new)
Paragraph 31 b (new)
31 b. Regrets in this regard that very little action has been taken since the adoption of the CFP; considers that animal welfare considerations could be better taken into account in the CFP, for example when assessing fishing techniques;
Amendment 368 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 c (new)
Paragraph 31 c (new)
31 c. Calls on the Commission to request to the STECF a report on animal welfare in fisheries and on potential measures that could be implemented to take animal welfare into account;
Amendment 371 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Recalls the ECA Special Report 26/2020 that considered the procedure to adopt joint recommendations under Article 11 of the CFP inadequate to ensure protection from fishing for Natura 2000 protected areas; calls on the Commission to address this through swift and better enforcement of existing rules;
Amendment 373 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Underlines that fisheries and environmental policy must be aligned, but that environmental objectives cannot prevail over the CFP objectiv to ensure that fishing and aquaculture activities are environmentally sustainable and are managed in a way that is consistent with the objectives of achieving economic, social and employment benefits, and of contributing to the availability of food supplies, coherent with the CFP; highlights in this respect especially the importance of coherence with the Birds and Habitats Directive and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive; recalls that healthy marine ecosystems are the basis for sustainable fisheries and thriving fishing communities;
Amendment 383 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 12 a (new)
Subheading 12 a (new)
On generational renewal
Amendment 384 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Amendment 385 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)
Paragraph 34 b (new)
34 b. Notes that the protection of the environment is a growing concern for young people in Europe; stresses the importance of sustainable management of fisheries to attract young fishers; calls for the promotion of low-impact fishing not only as a way to reduce the impact of fisheries on the marine environment but also to attract new generations of fishers;
Amendment 386 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 c (new)
Paragraph 34 c (new)
34 c. Recognises the important contribution of women to the fisheries sector, highlights that gender inequalities are still high in the fisheries sector, calls on the Commission and Member States to take action for gender equality in the fisheries sector;
Amendment 387 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on the Commission to promote the CFP as a policy model for ocean governance and to defend the EU fishing sector’s interestpromote EU fisheries policy objectives in Regional Fisheries Management Organisations and Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements, and more generally in international forums; Stresses the need to align sustainable fisheries partnership agreements (SFPAs) with the 2030 SDGs; urges the EU to increase the transparency, data collection (particularly on catches, vessel registrations and labour conditions) and reporting requirements in SFPAs; Stresses the need to include all stakeholders in SFPA negotiations and during their implementation period, and to ensure that the needs of the communities most affected by these partnerships are taken into account;
Amendment 411 #
37 a. Calls on the EU and the Commission to invest more effort into promoting at international level the protection of the marine environment for humanity and future generations;
Amendment 412 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Considers that the CFP does not sufficiently address the specific needs of the outermost regionsHighlights the specific needs of the outermost regions, recalls that these needs have inter alia been enshrined in the CFP by establishing a dedicated Advisory Council as well as in the EMFAF through compensation for additional costs, higher aid intensity rates, and possibilities for Member States to grant additional financing for the implementation of such support;
Amendment 414 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 417 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Insists on the need to support selective fishing methods, such as anchored fish aggregating devices used by artisanal fleet, low-impact climate friendly fishing methods in the outermost regions and elsewhere;
Amendment 419 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Stresses that mitigation and adaptation are key in all EU legislation, as well as in the CFP, to address the climate change challenge;
Amendment 429 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Highlights the need for more resilient ecosystems and more resilientthrough connected and effectively managed marine protected areas, as a basis for resilient and profitable economic fishing sectors;
Amendment 439 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 a (new)
Paragraph 46 a (new)
46 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to address and follow up on all provisions of the CFP that have not been implemented;
Amendment 440 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 b (new)
Paragraph 46 b (new)
46 b. Recalls that all sectors in the EU need to contribute to the EU climate objectives and calls on Member States to make full use of the EMFAF to support the EU fishing sector in its transition to sustainable, low-impact and low carbon fishing; calls on the Commission to support this transition by requesting scientific advice on carbon sequestration of fish populations and on fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from the EU fishing sector;
Amendment 441 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 c (new)
Paragraph 46 c (new)
46 c. Calls on Member States to eliminate harmful fisheries subsidies in line with the SDGs, including by removing fuel tax exemptions under the Energy Taxaction Directive;