21 Amendments of Estelle GRELIER related to 2011/2290(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 bis (new)
Citation 17 bis (new)
- having regard to target 6 of the Aichi Targets in the Nagoya Protocol published after the Nagoya Summit on Biodiversity which took place from 18 to 29 October 2010,
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the present communication recalls that the previous CFP failed to achieve some of its key objectives: certain stocks are overfished; the economic situation of parts of the EU fleet is fragile despite high levels of subsidy; jobs in the fishing sector are unattractive; and the situation of many coastal communities depending on fisheries is precarious;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B bis (new)
Recital B bis (new)
Ba. whereas the previous CFP did, nevertheless, have some positive impacts, by enabling the restoration of certain stocks and the creation of the RAC;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas small-scale fleets and those of a larger-scalmore industrial nature have very different characteristics and problems that cannot be fitted into a uniform model, and thus need to be treated differently;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the objective of achieving MSY based on fishing mortality (FMSY) should be established immediatelyby 2015 if possible and as of 2020 for all stocks, 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 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Understands the Commission’s motivations when proposing to implement a discard ban by 2016, and considers that it is right to viewconsider that such practices as unacceptable in principle, particularly given their harmful impact on numerouswill make it difficult to conduct essential evaluations relating to sustainable stock management, sound scientific advice, and marine ecosystem surveillance and the financial viability of fisheries;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 bis (new)
Paragraph 8 bis (new)
8a. Proposes therefore that complete documentation of the quantities of species fished over a certain volume and not landed be made mandatory in order to meet the needs of scientific research and enable the fully informed development of selective equipment for vessels;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that a ban on discards should onlynot be put in place, if accompanied by technical measuresand that priority should be given to the creation of selective equipment to reduce unwanted bycatch and incentives to encourage selective fishing practices, provided the ecosystem balance is maintained; priority should go to avoiding unwanted catches in the first place, rather than finding ways to market them; also stresses the importance of stakeholder engagement and careful design of the landing obligation, in order not to shift from unwanted fish in the sea to unwanted fish on land;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider, before implementing this measure, the option of establishing ‘pilot projects’ before 2015 in order to identify technical difficulties, such as practical problems related to landing all discards, implementing controls, and management of socio-economic consequences, in the hope that the results could be used to help formulate measures for management plans;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes the difficulty of applying such a measure in the Mediterranean, given the existence of mixed fisheries, specific fishing practices and specific climatic and geological conditions; believes that further consultations are needed to tackle the difficulties linked to establishing the infrastructure for collecting and processing the bycatch as proposed by the Commission; calls for measures to reduce the catch of juveniles and discourage the market in juveniles;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Expresses its doubts over the proposals relating to the market in bycatches, and stresses that, in case of implementation, adequate safeguards should be provided in order to avoid the emergence of a parallel market that would paradoxically encourage fishermenbut in the case of species rejected because of a lack of market demand, strongly encourages any measures seeking to increase their catchonsumption;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes thatRejects the proposal to introduce ‘Transferable Fishing Concessions’ (TFCs), contained in the basic regulation, which raises concerns regarding their concentration and the creation of monopolies; stresses that in a number ofthe safeguards countries transferable fishing rights have allowed fishing capacity to be reduced, which is commendable; emphasises, however, that adequate safeguards would need to be introduced in order toavene the principle of free enterprise and do not allow the protection of small- scale and coastal fishing, which is the mostan economically endangered part of the industry but also that providing most of the jobs and economic activity in coastal regions;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Believes that such a measurepriority access should be offer priority accessed to those who fish in a socially and environmentally responsible way; believes that TFCs should not be the only measure proposed for reducing overcapacthe principle of subsidiarity, and that a Member State should be exempted from the obligation to introduce TFCs if it achieves the necessary capacity reductionlready allows the Member States to introduce a system of transferable fishing concessions in their national legislation if they so wish; believes that the inclusion of TFCs in the basic regulation is therefore useless; recalls that the capacity reduction of certain fisheries can be achieved without their use;
Amendment 205 #
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 EUindividual Member State level, thus making it possible to proposefor each state to implement appropriate and targeted instruments for its reduction if necessary;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Is concerned that more than 30 % of jobs were lost in the catching sector in the past decade; considers that the reduction of fish stocks, the absence of a guaranteed minimum wage, the absence of uniform social standards and difficult working conditions are obstacles to the necessary renewal of human resources in the sector;
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Believes that the reform of the CFP maycould, in the short termabsence of suitable accompanying measures, lead to job losses, especially in the catching and onshore packing sectors, thus permanently affecting the fragile growth of coastal communities and islands in these sectors; stresses, in this respect, that there is a need for accompanying socio- economic measures, including a plan for jobs, in order to offset the temporary effects of achieving the MSY targets and 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 264 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Believes, more generally, that the role of the RACs should be strengthened; in this respect, urges the Commission to table a new proposal aimed at strengthening the participation of stakeholders and small- scale fisheries, thus leading to genuine regionalisation in the CFP; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission’s proposal to set up a Black Sea Advisory Council and requests the creation of an OR Advisory Council;