25 Amendments of Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA related to 2011/2318(INI)
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B bis (new)
Recital B bis (new)
Ba. whereas the Community fleet is recognised for encouraging good practice and respect for social, environmental and ethical conditions, human rights, concern for consumers and a commitment to voluntary strategies to promote Corporate Social Responsibility
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B ter (new)
Recital B ter (new)
Bb. whereas European fisheries have a significant international presence on account of the fleet of the Member States that operates in all the oceans and the investments made by EU nationals in a host of countries;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E bis (new)
Recital E bis (new)
Ea. whereas the EU must endeavour to establish policy coherence among Community policies in all areas such as fishing, health, trade, etc.
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E ter (new)
Recital E ter (new)
Eb. whereas in order to make fisheries and their businesses more competitive, they must be promoted internationally through the application of a Community policy directed at achieving this objective, as the Commission recognises in its Europe 2020 strategy and under Article 3(5) of the Treaty on European Union;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F bis (new)
Recital F bis (new)
Fa. whereas the piracy problem also has negative effects in regions where fishing operations are taking place that are regulated under the framework of bilateral and multilateral fishing agreements and where many Member States are currently developing their own rules for deploying security on vessels
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 bis (new)
Paragraph 1 bis (new)
1a. Insists on the need for the EU to work on the basis that Community policy coherence converges on improving the governance of international fishing
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 bis (new)
Paragraph 3 bis (new)
3a. Calls for the promotion of more effective support of sustainable fishing among trading partners or those with whom the EU cooperates, as there is a need for end-focused assistance to develop fisheries in third countries, subject to monitoring and assessment for the purpose of showing that they are being used effectively, differentiating between this ad hoc assistance from access right payments;
Amendment 70 #
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 freezing of the fleet in certain RFMOs is compatible as part of theis management of capacity by proposing a freeze in certain RFMOs while proposing to remove the mainwith the removal of the regulatoryion limits toimposed on the capacity withinof the EU’s internal and external fleets;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the intention of the Commission to include severalAppreciates that the Commission has the intention of including different 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, aexcluding migratory fishing as a non- primary resource, a pragmatic and realistic human rights clause and the exclusivity clause, though the latter needs to be strengthened and made consistent across agreements;at ensures coherence among the different agreements, while allowing for the option of not applying them in proven cases of force majeure; (The Agreement with Gabon serves as an example of the exclusivity clause whereby the prolongation of the negotiations and the likely delay before a new Agreement comes into effect would amply justify its non-application for an advisable period)
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Fully supports the concept of decoupling compensation for access to fisheries resources from sectoral support for development; strongly i. Insists that shipowners shouldmust pay a fairpart that takes into consideration the fleet’s catches within each coastal State, and the market- based portion of the former, and that improved oversight of the l conditions, as well as the costs related to obtaining a licence and the services or charges that the third country receives for the presence of the fleet in its watter is badly needed, including the possibility of suspension of payments in cases of failure to fulfil commitments by the coastal States, which will require a joint analysis between the sector and the European Commission on a case-by-case basis, given the fact that fishing conditions are not equal in all third countries;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 bis (new)
Paragraph 20 bis (new)
20a. Believes that sectoral support for development must be taken into consideration when taking the relevant decisions for the future
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 bis (new)
Paragraph 22 bis (new)
22a. Insists on shipowners taking a more active and direct part in the processes of negotiating the agreements, compared with the simple consultations that take place at present through Member States and in some cases in technical consultations with the European Commission.
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Is convinced that full transparency on catches, payments and implementation of sectoral support will be a powerfulfor European industries and those which import into the EU will serve as tools to fight dumping and corruption;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 bis (new)
Paragraph 24 bis (new)
24a. Insists on the historic request of the European tuna boat sector for the CAP network to be extended to cover the distribution area of tropical tuna, a highly migratory species, which should include the Atlantic, Indian, and Eastern Pacific oceans; even for the Western Pacific Ocean a multilateral agreement should be reached with the countries of the Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA), similar to the one the USA currently has, by redesigning the current strategy of existing agreements and seeking strategic allies in the Central Pacific that may be more in line with the EU’s ideas under the WCPFC. (The countries to be included in these distribution areas may include Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ghana, Senegal, Kenya, Tanzania, Mauritius, India, Equador, Colombia, Panama, Tuvalu, Tokelau... This petition is all the more justified through its aim to achieve absolute transparency in the activity of the EU fleet in third countries.)
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Believes that RFMOs must develop management systems that provide for an equitable and fair resource allocation based upon transparent environmental and social criteria, rain which the principal criterion is historic catches, together withan the simplistic criterion of historical catches, whiletransparent social and environmental criteria that ensuringe that management and conservation measures are fully implemented by all members;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 bis (new)
Paragraph 31 bis (new)
31a. Believes that good governance will be brought about through the involvement of all parties concerned, from preparing the policies through to their introduction
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Believes that the EU must make efforts to provide legal guarantees for private agreements and that the Member State should provide the Commission with information on private agreements between EU shipowners and third countries, as well as joint ventures in third countries, including the number and type of vessels operating under such agreements and joint ventures, as well as their catches, should be provided by the Member State to the Commission and made publicly available;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 bis (new)
Paragraph 34 bis (new)
34a. Believes that European external fisheries investments should be included as a third component of the external dimension of the CFP, which must encourage sustainable external fisheries investment on the grounds that they are useful for making our fisheries more competitive and consolidating the EU’s position globally, emphasising its role in the generation of wealth and the creation of employment, both in the EU Member States and in third countries.
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 ter (new)
Paragraph 34 ter (new)
34b. Calls on the EU to promote a global and multilateral agenda that will incorporate responsibility as part of developing sustainable fisheries activity;
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Is firmly opposed toSupports 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 Stateswithout causing a reduction in social or environmental levels but which are fundamental for Community vessels to be competitive;
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Urges the Commission to propose the addition ofexamine whether fishing, as well as forestry, to the list of ‘extractive industries’ in thend forestry should be included in a potential revision of the Transparency Directive;
Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 bis (new)
Paragraph 41 bis (new)
41a. Urges the Commission to promote international collaboration against IUU fishing and to examine whether any possibility exists vis-à-vis the two other countries that together with the EU form the principal fisheries markets in the world, namely the USA and Japan, so that one way of completing this action would consist in the application of a Unique Identifying Number for all vessels to ensure the total traceabilty of the product in an entirely transparent way.
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 bis (new)
Paragraph 42 bis (new)
42a. In the case of external fleets fishing under the RFOs, the latter will manage rescue bans and the application of the Maximum Sustainable Yield on a case-by- case basis and not in a general way;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 bis (new)
Paragraph 43 bis (new)
43a. Welcomes the inclusion of fishing vessels as vulnerable in the context of the Operation Atalanta activities and requests that continued support and protection be given to the Community fleet;