364 Amendments of Estelle GRELIER
Amendment 70 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Welcomes the Commission's decision to include in the DB for the third consecutive year payment appropriations (EUR 50 million) for the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF); underlines the fact that this not only gives higher visibility to the fund but also avoids transfers from other budget lines pursuing different aims and covering different needs;
Amendment 110 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)
Paragraph 37 a (new)
37a. Welcomes the amounts proposed by the Commission for the PEAD; calls on the Council to respect the joint decision taken at the end of 2011 on maintaining funding for this programme for 2012 and 2013;
Amendment 113 #
2012/2016(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Considers important to maintain the financial backing to the common fisheries policy (CFP) with a view to its imminent reform; stresses in particular the need to support SMEs in the fisheries sector and the access to jobs for young people in this field, as well as all measures ensuring the social, economic and environmental viability of the sector; welcomes in this regard the proposed increase for the European Fisheries Fund by respectively 2,2% (to EUR 687,2 million) in CA and 7,3% (to EUR 523,5 million) in PA, compared to the 2012 Budget; however, regrets the decrease planned in the field of governance of the CFP, conservation, management and exploitation of fisheries resources and control and enforcement of the CFP;
Amendment 29 #
2012/2000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the fact that the results of the Europe 2020 Strategy depend to a large extent on today’s youth, which is the highest-educated, most technically advanced and most mobile ever, and therefore is and will be the biggest asset for growth and jobs in the EU; this being the case, stresses that every effort must be made at EU and national level to ensure that growth and jobs are a reality, especially for young people, who represent the EU’s common future; equally highlights the need to address urgently the challenges of unemployment and poverty in the spirit of the flagship initiative “European Platform against poverty and social exclusion”;
Amendment 75 #
2012/2000(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Takes note of the Commission proposal of a new system of own resources, which could reduce the annual contributions of the Member States to the European budget and reinforce it; asks the Council to reach an agreement and to facilitate its short-term implementation;
Amendment 10 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas 853 % of fish stocks globally for which information is available are either fully exploited orand 32 % are overexploited, according to the most recent assessment by the FAO;
Amendment 19 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas quotas in RFMOs are primarily based on historical catches, which maintains preferential access for developed countries to global fish stock by the Contracting Parties, but the legitimate aspirations of neighbouring countries to develop resources exploited by the EU’s external fleet are also taken into consideration; whereas it is essential to maintain this principle within the framework of responsible fisheries;
Amendment 53 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that fishing by EU interests or destined for the EU market inside and outside Union waters by EU or non-EU vessels should be based upon the same standards in terms of ecological and social sustainability and transparency;
Amendment 61 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates its belief in the need for coherence between the fisheries policy of the Union and its policies with respect to development and, the environment and trade; notes that such coherence requires coordination both within the Commission itself and between the Commission and the governments of the individual Member States;
Amendment 68 #
2011/2318(INI)
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 thatwould like the Commission to explain why it appears to be pursuing contradictory approaches to the management of capacity by proposing a freeze in certain RFMOs while proposing to remove the main regulatory limits to capacity within the EU’s internal and external fleets;
Amendment 73 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Urges the Commission to support clearly defined principles and objectives for environmentally, economically and socially sustainable fisheries on the high seas and in waters under national jurisdiction at the upcoming United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in Brazil in June 2012;
Amendment 85 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that the EU should launch an initiative at UN level to set up a global catch documentation scheme as a key tool to combat IUU fishing, compatible with what has been put in place for the European fleet;
Amendment 90 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that the EU should be active within the UN system to explore means for the global community to address the need for more integrated global ocean governance, regarding both living marine resources and other resources as well as pollution and the impacts of climate change on the oceans, and social standards and working conditions;
Amendment 97 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that bilateral fisheries agreements, or Sustainable Fisheries Agreements (SFA) as the Commission proposes to call them, negotiated between partners and equitably implemented, should be of benefit to both parties, providing economic resources, technical and scientific expertise and support for improved fisheries management and good governance to the third country, while allowing the continuation of fishing activities by EU vessels that provide a modest but important supply of fish toare a significant source of supply for the EU and ofor ther markets of certain developing countries, for both fresh and tinned products;
Amendment 132 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that the Fishing Authorisations Regulation should be amended so that EU-flagged vessels which have temporarily left the register of a Member State to seek fishing opportunities elsewhere are not allowed to benefit from fishing opportunities under the SFA or the protocols they already had in force at the time when they left the register if they subsequently return to an EU register;
Amendment 137 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the currently used social clause should be strengthened to include respect for International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention 188, ILO Recommendation 199 on work in fishing, as well as the eight ILO Fundamental Conventions, namely: the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No 29), the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No 87), the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No 98), the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No 100), the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No 105), the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No 111), the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No 138), the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No 182);
Amendment 148 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Reaffirms that EU vessels should not compete with local fishermen for the same resources in the same fishing grounds and on the local markets;
Amendment 207 #
2011/2318(INI)
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, rather than the simplistic as well as the criterion of historical catches, while ensuring that management and conservation measures are fully implemented by all members;
Amendment 242 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls upon the Commission and the Member States to give serious consideration to methods for preventdiscouraging EU-flagged vessels from being deregistered unless they are to be reflagged to States in good standing in all relevant RFMOs and to make every effort to ensure that there is fair competition between EU flags and the flags of non-EU States, which is the best way of combating deflagging; to this end, calls for a solution to be found to the legal vacuum that exists when a fisheries partnership agreement (FPA) is in force, but the protocol for this FPA has expired and the new protocol is being negotiated, to avoid tempting shipowners to deflag;
Amendment 248 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
Amendment 257 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 bis (new)
Paragraph 38 bis (new)
38a. Points, however, to the need to adopt an individually tailored approach to management of EU external fleet capacity ceilings, working together with the RFMOs, and to take into account the different context in which this segment of the fleet operates;
Amendment 259 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 272 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 – indent 1
Paragraph 42 – indent 1
– be preceded by environmental and social impact assessments, for both non-EU and EU countries, and of the networks already created by pre-existing agreements,
Amendment 279 #
2011/2318(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 – indent 5
Paragraph 42 – indent 5
– not lead to increased trade that, which would results in over-exploitation and depletion of resources;
Amendment 2 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
– having regard to Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on measures taking account of the special characteristics and constraints of the outermost regions,
Amendment 23 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas management models based on transferable fishing rights or concessions comprise real risks for the subsistence of fishing, and in particular certain sectors of inshore and artisanal fishing, as demonstrated by the experience in some countries;
Amendment 29 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the economic and social crisis in the fisheries sector is particularly affecting small- scale fishing;
Amendment 34 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 41 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the specific characteristics of small-scale fishing is one aspect that must be taken into account in the future CFP, but most not constitute the sole focus of the social dimension of the reform, given the severe crisis currently affecting the entire sector;
Amendment 57 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 69 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Rejects a definition of small-scale fishing that is restrictive and detached from reality; considers that the definition of small-scale fishing should cover a range of criteria, in addition to the strict boat-size criterion, including, inter alia, the impact of fishing techniqueseffort on the marine ecosystem, time spent at sea, the zone where fishing is carried out, the legal status of the business and the characteristics of the economic unit exploiting the resources;
Amendment 80 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Points out that the specific characteristics of small-scale fishing vary greatly from one Member State to another, and that the choice of the lowest common denominator has rarely been a constructive approach to European decision-making;
Amendment 87 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that local management, that is based on scientific knowledge and that involves the sector in setting out and implementing policy, is the management type that best meets the needs of small- scale fishing;
Amendment 122 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Points out that some sectors of the fleet do not meet the criteria for small- scale fishing, in particular in terms of vessel size and the time spent at sea, that they are also sources of employment for many coastal communities, that they do not necessarily have a different legal status and greater capital than small-scale fishing businesses and that they can fish for sustainable stocks not targeted by small-scale fisheries; therefore stresses the need to avoid equating the definition of small-scale fishing with that of the only fishing desirable in European waters;
Amendment 155 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 – indent 1
Paragraph 11 – indent 1
– renewal and modernisation of fleets with a view to making them safer, and more economically and environmentally sustainable (selection of techniques, energy efficiency, etc.); (Linguistic correction to the French version.)
Amendment 198 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Advocates the creation (within the framework of the EMFF or of other instruments) of specific support mechanisms to be implemented in emergencies, such as natural disasters, fishing stoppages imposed by plans for restoring stocks or sudden increases in fuel prices, applicable to all segments of the fleet affected;
Amendment 209 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Advocates the establishment and expansion of the exclusion zone (currently 12 nautical miles) and adjoining areas, in line with the continental shelf; cConsiders that, in the case of the outermost regions, this areae exclusion zone should go from 100 to 200 nautical miles;
Amendment 213 #
2011/2292(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Considers it necessary to involve small-scale fishing, in particular, in exchanges on the spatial planning of the 12-mile zone, where there are generally more usages, offshore wind turbines, gravel extraction and marine protected areas often having to exist alongside fishing activities in the same zone;
Amendment 28 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the direct link between discards, unwanted by-catch and overfishing, and the need to develop an efficient no-discards policy at EU level whereby the Community Fisheries Control Agency (CFCA) should have greater powers to ensure a fair system of rules and sanctions, i.e. the principle of equal treatment; argues that a gradual reduction in discard bans should be fishery-based and not relate to different fish stocks; stresses that selected fishing gear and other devices which reduce or eliminate by-catches of non-targeted species, as well as other sustainable fishing methods, should be promoted; underlines the importance of addressing the management of mixed fisheries to this end;
Amendment 35 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Points out that discards are a consequence of European legislation, in particular of the introduction of quotas.
Amendment 59 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Urges the Member States to carry out mandatory cuadjustments to achieve set targets for a sustainable level of capacity, predefined for every fishery, so as to tackle the remaining significant overcapacity of the fishing fleets, with sanctions for failure to meet the targets, i.e. the freezing of funds from the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF);.
Amendment 77 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Underlines the need for financial support on a short-term basis for fishermen who are facing the negative consequences of the measures taken, in order to reduce overcapacity and adjust the sizeeffort of the fishing fleets in line with fishing opportunities and long-term sustainability;
Amendment 82 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises the need for clear deadlines for fleet effort reductions and pace targets, and urges the Commission to provide for a scheme of measures to sanction Member States which do not fulfil their respective obligations within the set timelines and to further develop the concept of conditionality in the context of access to fishing resources and remuneration which rewards sustainable fishing;
Amendment 98 #
2011/2291(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Commission to establish a system of result-based management for awarding access rights whereby the burden of proof of sustainable fishing is upon the industry;, based on predefined criteria.
Amendment 1 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 26 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 135 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 141 #
2011/2290(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 168 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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 #
2011/2290(INI)
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;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2195(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1a bis (new)
Paragraph 1a bis (new)
1a. Recalls that Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union emphasises the need to consider the specific nature of the outermost regions for which development is restricted by their remoteness, insularity, small size, difficult topography and climate, economic dependence on a few products; recalls that these specific measures relate in particular to conditions of access to Structural Funds;
Amendment 7 #
2011/2195(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2a bis (new)
Paragraph 2a bis (new)
2a. Deplores the fact that the budget restrictions proposed by the European Commission for the next Multiannual Financial Framework do not take into account the particular constraints of the outermost regions and the need to maintain financial support for these regions; particularly regrets that additional financial allocation has been reduced from EUR 35 to EUR 20 per resident and per year; also regrets that the Commission's proposal relating to the specific measures for agriculture in the outermost regions does not take into consideration the Commission’s position as expressed in ‘Agriculture and Rural Development’ of the European Parliament on 26 September 2011;
Amendment 10 #
2011/2195(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 bis (new)
Paragraph 2 bis (new)
2 bis. Emphasises the need, in accordance with the conclusions of the fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion, to increase the flexibility of Cohesion Policy instruments, in such a way so as to allow investments capable of ensuring a level of growth and development in line with EU 2020 Strategy objectives, even when there are particular geographic and demographic conditions;
Amendment 11 #
2011/2195(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 ter (new)
Paragraph 2 ter (new)
2 ter. Emphasises the need to facilitate synergy between Cohesion Policy Funds and the framework programme for research and development in order to increase the development of the outermost resgions and curb the under-utilisation of research funds;
Amendment 12 #
2011/2195(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 14 #
2011/2195(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses, however, that cuts in other cohesion areas have been even more severe than those pertaining to the outermost regions - more precisely, the Commission proposes an overall cut to economic, social and territorial cohesion financing of 5.9 % in constant 2011 prices for the next programming period, including a cut of 7 % in the financing for convergence regions (including transition regions), an 8.2 % drop in the financingthese regions will always have development problems due to their very nature, that allocated funds are only a small percentage of all Cohesion Funds; Calls for, in accordance with section 67 of its Resolution on the Multiannual Financial Framework [1] 'the amounts allocated to it in the current financial programming period should be at least maintained in the next programming period’; [1] P7_TA-PROV(2011)0266 European Parliament Resolution of 8 June 2011 on Investing in the future: a new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for a competi tiveness regions and a 3.3 % decrease in the Cohesion Fund allocations; , sustainable and inclusive Europe (2010/2211(INI)).
Amendment 15 #
2011/2195(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 16 #
2011/2195(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a bis (new)
Paragraph 4 a bis (new)
1 bis Draws attention to the need for the proposal for the future Multiannual Financial Framework to consider the change of some European territories to the status of 'outermost regions' from 2014 - 2020; Calls for the European Commission to adapt its budgetary projections accordingly.
Amendment 2 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the EGF application submitted by France does not cover the Renault workers who opted for the early retirement scheme and to which the EGF aid could not be allocated under Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006, but saw their pension rights altered by the pension reform which came into force in the meantime; whereas the efforts made by all partietrade unions involved to find a viable solution so that these former Renault workers can complement their pension rights should be noted; whereas in this regard, the efforts made by the French government, as well as the written engagement made by Renault should be underlined; whereas the constructive dialogue between all parties concerned should be continuensured until a satisfactory solution is found;
Amendment 2 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates in this sense the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following the Parliament's request for accelerating the release of grants, aimed at presenting to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment on the eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the Fund; hopes that further improvements in the procedure will be reached in the framework of the upcoming reviews of the EGF and that greater efficiency, transparency and visibility of the Fund will be achieved; takes note, however, of the lengthy assessment period in respect of this particular application for the mobilisation of the EGF for Renault s.a.s and seven of its suppliers; notes that this particular request has so far had the longest period of assessment of any EGF application since the EGF's creation in 2007.
Amendment 3 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Requests the institutions involved to make the necessary efforts to improve procedural and budgetary arrangements in order to accelerate the mobilisation of the EGF; appreciates in this sense the improved procedure put in place by the Commission, following the Parliament's request for accelerating the release of grants, aimed at presenting to the budgetary authority the Commission's assessment on the eligibility of an EGF application together with the proposal to mobilise the Fund; hopes that further improvements in the procedure will be reached in the framework of the upcoming reviews of the EGF and that greater efficiency, transparency and visibility of the Fund will be achieved; takes note, however, of the lengthy assessment period in respect of this particular application for the mobilisation of the EGF for Renault s.a.s and seven of its suppliers; notes that this particular request has so far had the longest period of assessment of any EGF application since the EGF's creation in 2007;
Amendment 3 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes that this delay harmed some of the workers who did not take part in the measures financed by the EGF and opted for early-retirement schemes instead, and whose pension benefits were altered by the pension reform that came into force in the meantime; is of the opinion that following this evolution of the legal environment, the Commission should have requested that these workers be offered the possibility of taking part in EGF measures;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes that this delay harmed some of the workers who opted for early- retirement schemes instead, and whose pension benefits were altered by the pension reforms that came into force in the meantime; is of the opinion that following this evolution of the legal environment, the Commission should have requested that these workers be offered the possibility of taking part in EGF measures; requests Renault and France to formally commit to take legal and financial measures so that the full pension rights and benefits of those workers can be restored while granting them an exemption from work at the equivalent conditions;
Amendment 4 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that, given the delay between the implementation of the measures targeting the dismissed workers and the validation of the EGF request by the Commission, the first results on the efficiency of those measures are already available; deplores the low success rates and calls for a stronger assessment and more Commission guidance in ensuring that the training on offer matches the local economic trends;
Amendment 5 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Notes that, given the delay between the implementation of the measures targeting the dismissed workers and the validation of the EGF request by the Commission, the first results on the efficiency of those measures are already available; deplores the low success rates and calls for a stronger assessment and more Commission guidance in ensuring that the training on offer matches the local economic trends;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Requests the Commission to mention the urgent need for additional measures to solve the issue of former workers who saw their pension benefits severely altered by the French pension reforms which came into force in its final recommendation report regarding the assessment progress made by France in the implementation of a sustainable and fair pension system;
Amendment 7 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Requests the Commission to closely survey and update, notably in the country specific recommendation, its evaluation of the sustainability and adequacy of the French pension reforms and their potential loopholes regarding all workers' situation to deliver on the additional measures needed;
Amendment 8 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 9 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Observes that Renault is currently resorting to temporary workers and deplores that the EGF might provide an incentive for multinational companies to replace their contractual workforce with a more flexible and precarious one; believes that this issue needs to be addressed in the forthcoming revision of the EGF regulation;
Amendment 11 #
2011/2158(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Approves the decision annexed to this resolution, except the total proposed amount; requests the Commission to provide the sum of EUR 17 493 525 in commitment and payment appropriations;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that, regardless of the present focus on the South, maintaining a reasonable balance between East and South components is important, especially since Eastern neighbouring countries have a long-term prospect of joining the EU; believes, however, that this balance cannot be considered permanently fixed; fully supports the principle of differentiated and performance-driven flexible financial assistance, based on real needs, absorption capacity and targets attained;
Amendment 26 #
2011/2157(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Has doubts about the added value that would be provided if a ‘European Democracy Fund’ were set up; points out that the EU has several effective instruments that could be improved and strengthened, including the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights and the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument; stresses the need to avoid any inflation in terms of instruments and warns of the risk that would arise if a future fund were to be financed in part from the Community budget but managed outside the range of Parliament’s budgetary scrutiny; deplores the failure of the Commission and Council to spell out their position on this point.
Amendment 22 #
2011/2107(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Points out that the purpose of reforming the Common Fisheries Policy is to ensure the sustainability of fishing practices, so there is a need to fund research into the development of new technologies aimed, for example, at making fishing vessels more selective or reducing fuel consumption by their engines.
Amendment 76 #
2011/2042(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Is aware that the level of payments finally implemented every year sometimes entails a significant so-called ‘surplus’ compared to the level of payments originally agreed by the budget authority, meaning that Member States’ national contributions to the EU budget are therefore decreased accordingly and their fiscal positions improved; does not consider the Council’s concerns as to the level and timing of this ‘return’ relevant in addressing the sensitive underlying political issue of the financing of the EU budget; strongly urges the Commission, therefore, to make proposals for the establishment of new and genuine own resources, such as the financial transaction tax, as mentioned in the European Parliament resolution on the "innovative financing at a global and European level" (INI/2010/2105), so as to provide the EU with real and autonomous financial resources;
Amendment 257 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 284 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Takes the view that a general new funding category based onCalls for the creation of a new intermediate category for regions with a GDP/PE between the 75% and 90% rates would be at odds with the tried and tested principles of EU cohesion policy (to support the weakest and pool the inherent potential of the wealthier regions, taking a cross- of the EU average; the purpose of this system would be to limit the threshold effect observed at 75% of Community GDP (the current eligibility threshold between the Convergence Objective and the Regional Competitiveness and Employment objectives) and to guarantee equal treatment between these regions; it would seek to take account of the difficulties faced both by the regions which in 2013 will for the first time no longer be covered by the Convergence Objective, and by those which, while eligible for the Regional Competitiveness and Employment Objective during the current programming period, are still facing structural socio-economic difficutlting approach), and therefore rejects this intermediate categoryes owing to the implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy and are affected by internal regional disparities; the creation of this category should not penalise regions currently benefiting from the Convergence Objective or the Regional Competitiveness and Employment Objective, or which are currently in the phasing in or phasing out stage;
Amendment 1 #
2011/2020(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes the view that the amounts entered in the Draft Budget (DB) for heading 1b correspond to the needs and objectives for regional policy as set by the Union and therefore requires that budget lines of heading 1b as proposed by the Commission be maintained or, where necessary, restored; in particular, rejects the swingeing cuts which the Council has proposed in the heading 1b payment appropriations;
Amendment 13 #
2011/2020(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes the creation of a budget line for the IMP, but; calls for the corresponding basic act to be adopted so that the appropriations placed in the reserve can quickly be released; points out that the volume of appropriations proposed for that line is too small to cover this new policy’s main objectives; reaffirms that the traditional CFP budget allocations must not in any way be sacrificed to fund the IMP and that an appropriate balance needs to be struck in the use of the appropriations held in reserve for headings 1 and 2 of the multiannual financial framework;
Amendment 143 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Points out that, owing to its political importance, the financing and existing actions of the Common Fisheries Policy should be preserved, not least given its upcoming reform; takes the view that the funding of the integrated maritime policy should not be detrimental to that of other fisheries actions and programmes under Heading 2; further considers it crucial to keep on monitoring the size of the European fishing fleet;
Amendment 147 #
2011/2019(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Points out that, owing to its political importance, the financing and existing actions of the Common Fisheries Policy should be preserved, not least given its upcoming reform; takes the view that the funding of the integrated maritime policy, which should reach an adequate amount in 2012, should not be detrimental to that of other fisheries actions and programmes under Heading 2; further considers it crucial to keep on monitoring the size of the European fishing fleet;
Amendment 242 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The CFP must promote a high level of employment in the fishing and aquaculture industry, improve the working conditions of fishermen and fish farmers, guaranteeing them an adequate level of social protection and ensuring fair and equitable competition with third countries and between the EU Member States in practical terms, and preventing distortions of competition based on excessive disparities in labour costs. In this respect, the common fisheries policy determines the conditions with a view to harmonisation of the social legislation applicable to marine workers, on the basis, in particular, of ILO Convention No 188 and the Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel (STCW-F).
Amendment 250 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) At the World Summit on Sustainable Development at Johannesburg in 2002, and then at the Nagoya summit in 2010, the Union and its Member States committed to act against the continued decline of many fish stocks. Therefore, the Union should improve its Common Fisheries Policy to ensure that as a matter of priority exploitation levels of marine biological resources stocks are restored and maintained at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yields from the populations of harvested stocks by 2015 in the case of stocks for which that is possible and at the latest by 2020. Where less scientific information is available, this may require applying proxies to maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 269 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Fisheries targets were laid down in the Decision by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity on the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011 – 2020, the Common Fisheries Policy should ensure coherence with the biodiversity targets adopted by the European Council, and the targets of Commission Communication "Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020", in particular to achieve maximum sustainable yield by 2015 in the case of stocks for which that is possible and at the latest by 2020.
Amendment 276 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The Common Fisheries Policy should contribute to the protection of the marine environment and in particular to the objectives of the Habitats, Wild Birds and Natura 2000 Directives and to the achievement of good environmental status by 2020 the latest as set out in Article 1(1) of Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive).
Amendment 277 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) It is vital that the common fisheries policy should contribute to the European Union’s Energy 2020 Strategy (COM(2010)0639 final) by means of measures to promote the development of a fishing industry marked by low fuel consumption and low carbon emissions.
Amendment 281 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) An ecosystem based approach to fisheries management needs to be implemented, environmental impacts of fishing activities should be limited and unwanted catches should be minimised and progressively eliminated insofar as technically possible.
Amendment 286 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) It is important that the management of the Common Fisheries Policy is guided by principles of good governance. Those principles include decision-making based on best available scientific advice, broad stakeholder involvement through the Advisory Councils, and a long-term perspective. The successful management of the Common Fisheries Policy also depends on a clear definition of responsibilities at Union, national, regional and local levels and on the mutual compatibility and consistency of the measures taken with other Union policies.
Amendment 299 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy should take into account interactions with other maritime affairs as addressed by the Integrated Maritime Policy, recognizing that all matters related to Europe'’s oceans and seas are interlinked, including maritime spatial planning. Coherence and integration should be ensured in the management of different sectoral policies within the Baltic Sea, Atlantic Ocean, North Sea, Celtic Seas, Bay of Biscay and the Iberian Coast, Mediterranean and, Black Sea and outermost- region sea basins.
Amendment 315 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Marine biological resources around the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands should continue to be especially protected since they contribute to the preservation of the local economy of these islands, having regard to the structural, social and economic situation of those islands. The limitation of certain fishing activities in those waters to fishing vessels registered in the ports of the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands should therefore be maintained; this special protection regime should also be extended to the waters of the French Antilles, Guiana and Reunion, whose situation is identical to that of the aforementioned outermost regions.
Amendment 319 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Marine biological resources around the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands should continue to be especially protected since they contribute to the preservation of the local economy of these islands, having regard to the structural, social and economic situation of those islands. The limitation of certain fishing activities in those waters to fishing vessels registered in the ports of the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands should therefore be maintained; this special protection regime should also be extended to the waters of the French Antilles, Guiana and Reunion, whose situation is identical to that of the aforementioned outermost regions.
Amendment 320 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) It is necessary to support the development of the key sectors in which the outermost regions possess potential for specialisation and strong comparative advantages, for example fisheries and aquaculture. In order to implement a regionalised common fisheries policy it will be necessary to recognise their special status and to apply Articles 349 and 355(1) TFEU.
Amendment 321 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) It is necessary to support the development of the key sectors in which the outermost regions possess potential for specialisation and strong comparative advantages, for example fisheries and aquaculture. In order to implement a regionalised common fisheries policy it will be necessary to recognise their special status and to apply Articles 349 and 355(1) TFEU.
Amendment 322 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The objective of sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources is more effectively achieved through a multi-annual approach to fisheries management, establishing as a priority multi-annual plans reflecting the specificities of the various sea basins and of different fisheries.
Amendment 326 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Multi-annual plans should where possible cover multiple stocks where those stocks are jointly exploited. The multiannual plans should establish the basis for fixing fishing opportunities and quantifiable targets for the sustainable exploitation of stocks and marine ecosystems concerned, defining clear timeframes and safeguard mechanisms for unforeseen developments. Multiannual plans should also be governed by precisely defined management objectives in order to contribute to the sustainable exploitation of the stocks and marine ecosystems concerned. These plans should be adopted in consultation with operators in the fishing industry and scientists as well as institutional partners when the management scenarios can have a socioeconomic impact on the regions concerned.
Amendment 329 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Multi-annual plans should where possible cover multiple stocks where those stocks are jointly exploited. The multiannual plans should establish the basis for fixing fishing opportunities and quantifiable targets for the sustainable exploitation of stocks and marine ecosystems concerned, defining clear timeframes and safeguard mechanisms for unforeseen developments. Multiannual plans should also be governed by precisely defined management objectives in order to contribute to the sustainable exploitation of the stocks and marine ecosystems concerned. These plans should be adopted in consultation with operators in the fishing industry and scientists as well as institutional partners when the management scenarios can have a socioeconomic impact on the regions concerned.
Amendment 331 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Measures are needed to reduce and eliminate the current high levels of unwanted catches and discardsignificantly reduce levels of unwanted catches and discards, taking account of the specificities of each fishery and on the basis of prior assessments to analyse the causes of discards and the socioeconomic and environmental impact of the proposed measures. Indeed, unwanted catches and discards constitute a substantial waste and may affect negatively the sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources and marine ecosystems as well as the financial viability of fisheries. An obligation to land all catchePlans to reduce discards of managed stocks caught during fishing activities in Union waters or by Union fishing vessels should be established and gradually implemented, encouraging greater selectiveness in fishing gear.
Amendment 344 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Measures are needed to reduce and eliminate the current high levels of unwanted catches and discardsignificantly reduce levels of unwanted catches and discards, taking account of the specificities of each fishery and on the basis of prior assessments to analyse the causes of discards and the socioeconomic and environmental impact of the proposed measures. Indeed, unwanted catches and discards constitute a substantial waste and may affect negatively the sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources and marine ecosystems as well as the financial viability of fisheries. An obligation to land all catchePlans to reduce discards of managed stocks caught during fishing activities in Union waters or by Union fishing vessels should be established and gradually implemented, encouraging greater selectiveness in fishing gear.
Amendment 349 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 351 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
Amendment 356 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) For the sake of conservation of stocks clear objectives should be applied with respect to certain technical measures, and scales of governance should be tailored to management requirements.
Amendment 359 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) For stocks subject to a TAC and quota or effort regime for which no multi- annual plan has been established, exploitation rates delivering maximum sustainable yield should be ensured by setting catch and/or fishing effort limits, putting forward for each fishery progressive scenarios based on clear, shared scientific data.
Amendment 369 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In view of the precarious economic state of the fishing industry and the dependence of certain coastal communities on fishing activities, it is necessary to ensure the relative stability of fishing activities by allocating fishing opportunities among Member States, based on a predictable share of stocks for each Member State. This also means that any reduction in fishing opportunities should be made gradually so that it can be absorbed and compensated for over time.
Amendment 377 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) The Commission, after consulting the Advisory Councils concerned and the Member States concerned, should be able to adopt temporary measures in the event of a serious threat, requiring immediate action, to the conservation of marine biological resources or to the marine ecosystem resulting from fishing activities.
Amendment 382 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Member States should be able to adopt conservation measures and technical measures for the implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy to allow for the policy to better address the realities and specificities of the various sea basins and individual fisheries and to increase the adherence to the policy.
Amendment 383 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Member States should be able to adopt, in consultation with operators in the industry and scientists, conservation measures and technical measures for the implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy to allow for the policy to better address the realities and specificities of individual fisheries and to increase the adherence to the policy.
Amendment 394 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Member States should be allowed to adopt, after consulting professional operators and scientists, conservation and management measures for stocks in Union waters applicable solely to Union fishing vessels flying their flag. Where appropriate, the other Member States concerned by the fishery should be involved.
Amendment 396 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 399 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 418 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 423 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
Amendment 438 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Specific characteristics and socio- economic vulnerability of some small-scale fleets justify the limitaadoption of the mandatory system of transferable fishing concessions to large vessels. The system of transferable fishing concessions should apply to stocks for which fishing opportunities are allocatedcomplementary management measures.
Amendment 452 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) For Union fishing vessels not operating under a system of transferable fishing concessions, sSpecific measures may be taken to align the number of Union’s fishing vessels with available resourcescapacity with the various stocks available in each sea basin. Such measures should set compulsory maximum fleet capacity ceilings and establish national entry/exit schemes in relation to decommissioning funding granted under the European Fisheries Fund. It should be decided in advance how capacity is to be measured and, likewise in advance, capacity should be assessed for each stock and basin in the EU. In accordance with the principle of regionalisation, each Member State should be able to choose the measures and instruments which it wishes to adopt in order to reduce fishing capacity previously defined by the Commission as excessive for a stock.
Amendment 457 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32 a (new)
Recital 32 a (new)
(32a) Differentiated capacity management systems should be introduced for fleets operating exclusively outside Union waters and for fleets registered in the outermost regions in order to take account of their specificities.
Amendment 461 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) Member States should record the minimum information on characteristics and activities of Union fishing vessels flying their flag. Those records should be made available to the Commission for the purpose of monitoring the size offishing effort in Member States' fleets.
Amendment 464 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) Fisheries management based on the best available scientific advice requires harmonised, reliable and accurate data sets. Therefore Member states, in close cooperation with scientists and the industry, should collect data on fleets and their fishing activities, in particular biological data on catches, including discards, survey information on fish stocks and on the potential environmental impact of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem. These data should be gathered in relation to long time series and should concern as many stocks as possible on a European scale. The results and data should be accessible for the operators concerned and for the public.
Amendment 472 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Member States should manage and make available to end-users of scientific- data the collected data, on the basis of a multi-annual Union program. Member States should also cooperate with each other to coordinate data collection activities. Where relevant, Member States should also cooperate with third countries within the same sea basin regarding data collection, through the Regional Fisheries Management Organisations.
Amendment 492 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39 a (new)
Recital 39 a (new)
(39a) When the Union concludes sustainable fishing agreements with third countries sharing the same sea basin as outermost regions, it should ensure equitable allocation of resources.
Amendment 496 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Respect for democratic principles and human rights, as laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other relevant international human rights instruments, and for the principle of the rule of law, should constitute an essential element of Sustainable Fisheries Agreements and be subject to a specific human rights clause and where appropriate with the relevant provisions of the agreements concluded by the Union and the ACP countries.
Amendment 500 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)
Recital 41 a (new)
(41a) A transparent framework should be provided for all fisheries consultations between the Union and third countries in its neighbourhood with a view to exchanging and allocating fishing opportunities, or granting access to their respective waters for their vessels.
Amendment 504 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Aquaculture should contribute to the preservationdevelopment of the food production potential on a sustainable basis throughout the Union so as to guarantee long-term food security for European citizens and to contribute to the growing world aquatic food demand.
Amendment 510 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44 a (new)
Recital 44 a (new)
(44a) Non-binding guidelines on the social dimension of the common fisheries and aquaculture policy should be laid down in order to place human beings at the centre of the policy and to equip the Union with minimum social rules for the fisheries and aquaculture sectors with a view, in particular, to harmonising within the Union security conditions and living and working conditions and guaranteeing training and access to the profession.
Amendment 512 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44 a (new)
Recital 44 a (new)
(44a) Guidelines on the social dimension of the common fisheries and aquaculture policy should be laid down in order to place human beings at the centre of the policy and to equip the Union with minimum social rules for the fisheries and aquaculture sectors with a view, in particular, to harmonising within the Union security conditions and living and working conditions and guaranteeing training and access to the profession.
Amendment 521 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) There is a need to strengthen the competitiveness of the Union fishery and aquaculture sector, and a call for simplification in support of better management of production and marketing activities of the sector; the Common Market Organisation for fishery and aquaculture products should ensure a level- playing field for all fishing and aquaculture products marketed in the Union, should enable consumers to make better informed choices and support responsible consumption, and should improve the economic knowledge and understanding of the Union markets along the supply chain. The Common Market Organisation should also be equipped with instruments making it possible to adjust to developments on the market prompted the state of resources and particularly by the objective of attaining the maximum sustainable yield. Lastly, it must facilitate the structuring of sectors and the links between the upstream and downstream elements of these sectors.
Amendment 524 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) There is a need to strengthen the competitiveness of the Union fishery and aquaculture sector, and a call for simplification in support of better management of production and marketing activities of the sector; the Common Market Organisation for fishery and aquaculture products should ensure a level- playing field for all fishing and aquaculture products marketed in the Union, whether originating in the Union or in third countries, and should enable consumers to make better informed choices and support responsible consumption, and should improve the economic knowledge and understanding of the Union markets along the supply chaiconsumption.
Amendment 530 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
Amendment 553 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) It appears appropriate that the Commission be empowered by delegated acts to create atwo new Advisory Councils and to modify areas of competence of existing ones, in particular considering the specificities of the Black Sea and the Outermost Regions.
Amendment 556 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54 a (new)
Recital 54 a (new)
(54a) In order to take into account the specificities of the outermost regions, it is appropriate to provide for the establishment of an Advisory Council for those regions.
Amendment 558 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54 a (new)
Recital 54 a (new)
(54a) In order to take into account the specificities of the outermost regions, it is appropriate to provide for the establishment of an Advisory Council for those regions.
Amendment 561 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55
Recital 55
(55) To achieve the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission for the purpose of specifying fishing related measures to alleviate the impact of fishing activities in special areas of conservation, adaptation of the obligation to land all catches for the purpose of complying with the Union's international obligations, default conservation measures in the framework of multiannual plans or technical measures, the recalculation of fleet capacity ceilings, definition of information on characteristics and activity for Union fishing vessels, rules for carrying out pilot projects on new control technologies and data management systems, amendments to Annex III in relation to the areas of competence for Advisory Councils and the compositioning and functioning of Advisory Councils.
Amendment 566 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work for the adoption of delegated acts, including at expert level and with those working in the profession concerned and with national and regional authorities.
Amendment 619 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 2
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 2
2. The Common Fisheries Policy shall apply the precautionary approach to fisheries management, and shall aim to ensure, by 2015 in the case of stocks where this is possible, and not later than 2020, that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and/or maintains populations of harvested species abovet levels which can produce the maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 658 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 4
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 4
4. The Common Fisheries Policy shall integrate the Union environmental legislation requirementsrequirements of all Union legislation, including environmental and social legislation, and shall ensure that its policy is consistent with the other policies of the European Union, particularly on development, health and consumer protection.
Amendment 666 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 4
Part 1 – article 2 – paragraph 4
4. The Common Fisheries Policy shall integrate the Union environmental legislation requirementsrequirements of all Union legislation, including environmental and social legislation, and shall ensure that its policy is consistent with the other policies of the European Union, particularly on development, health and consumer protection.
Amendment 683 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) eliminatesignificantly reduce the levels of unwanted catches of commercial stocks and gradually ensure that all catches of such stocks are landed, where technically possible, eliminate them;
Amendment 694 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) eliminatesignificantly reduce the levels of unwanted catches of commercial stocks and gradually ensure that all catches of such stocks are landed, where technically possible, eliminate them;
Amendment 704 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) provide conditions for efficient fishing activities within an economically viable and competitive fishing industry, ensuring balanced competitive conditions in the context of trade in fisheries and aquaculture products with third countries;
Amendment 734 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) contribute to a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing activities, seeking in particular to improve their working conditions and harmonise the guarantees provided within the Union with regard to remuneration, social protection and training;
Amendment 747 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) contribute to a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing activities, seeking in particular to improve their working conditions and harmonise the guarantees provided within the Union with regard to remuneration, social protection and training;
Amendment 762 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) create conditions for the achievement of the maximum sustainable yield, setting a specific objective for each stock for which that is possible, on the basis of environmental and socioeconomic criteria.
Amendment 771 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) encourage the promotion of employment and the development of human resources to facilitate a high and sustainable level of employment and combat exclusion;
Amendment 774 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
Part 1 – article 3 – paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
(fb) encourage the promotion of employment and the development of human resources to facilitate a high and sustainable level of employment and combat exclusion;
Amendment 794 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) establishment of measures in accordance with the best available scientific advice, after consulting the STECF;
Amendment 804 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) broad involvement of stakeholders, in particular through the regional Advisory Councils, at all stages from conception to implementation of the measures;
Amendment 810 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 1 – article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) broad involvement of stakeholders, in particular through the regional Advisory Councils, at all stages from conception to implementation of the measures;
Amendment 839 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 5 a (new)
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 5 a (new)
– ‘entry to the fishing fleet’ means registration of a fishing vessel in the fishing vessel register of a Member State;
Amendment 843 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 6
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 6
– ‘maximum sustainable yield’ means the maximum catch that may be taken continuously from a fish stock indefinitely(on average) under average environmental conditions without significantly affecting the reproduction process;
Amendment 853 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 6
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 6
– ‘maximum sustainable yield’ means the maximum catch that may be taken continuously from a fish stock indefinitely(on average) under average environmental conditions without significantly affecting the reproduction process;
Amendment 861 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 7
– ‘'precautionary approach to fisheries management’' means an approach according to which the absence of adequate scientific information should not justify postponing or failing to take management measures to conserve target species, associated or dependent species and non- target species and their environment. Whether this approach is adopted should depend on the relationship between the social and economic costs and the anticipated environmental benefits;
Amendment 869 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 8
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 8
– ‘ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management’ means an approach ensuring that benefits from living aquatic resources are high while the direct and indirect impacts of fishing operations on marine ecosystems are low and not detrimental to the future functioning, diversity and integrand multiple without jeopardising opportunities for future generations to derive benefit from the whole range of advantages afforded by the marine environment. The ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management seeks to take account of the fruit of the interaction between biotic, abiotic and human components, within the limitys of those ecosystemexisting knowledge and uncertainties;
Amendment 875 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 8
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 8
– ‘ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management’ means an approach ensuring that benefits from living aquatic resources are high while the direct and indirect impacts of fishing operations on marine ecosystems are low and not detrimental to the future functioning, diversity and integrand multiple without jeopardising opportunities for future generations to derive benefit from the whole range of advantages afforded by the marine environment. The ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management seeks to take account of the fruit of the interaction between biotic, abiotic and human components, within the limitys of those ecosystems;existing knowledge and uncertainties.
Amendment 892 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 12
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 12
– ‘'conservation reference point’' means values of fish stock population parameters (such as biomass or fishing mortality rate) used in fisheries management, for example with respect to an acceptable level of biological risk or a desired level of yieldf deterioration of the reproductive capacity of stocks;
Amendment 897 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 12 a (new)
Part 1 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 12 a (new)
– ‘reference level associated with the maximum sustainable yield’ means the values of parameters relating to fish stocks (such as biomass or mortality rate due to fishing) which are used to establish management objectives geared to the mortality of stocks of harvested species and are capable of keeping each stock stable and sustainable. These reference values must be explicitly defined before objectives associated with the maximum sustainable yield are set.
Amendment 918 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 15
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 15
– ‘fishing opportunity’ means a quantified legal entitlement to fish, expressed in terms of maximum catches and/or fishing effort and conditions functionally linked thereto which are necessary to quantify them at a certain levelmaximum landed catches and/or maximum fishing effort for a given management area;
Amendment 923 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 17
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 17
Amendment 924 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 17
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 17
Amendment 933 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 18
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 18
Amendment 940 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 19
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 19
– ‘fishing capacity’ means a vessel’s tonnage in GT (Gross Tonnage), counting only the areas used for fishing and storage, and its power in kW (Kilowatt) as defined in Articles 4 and 5 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2930/8635;
Amendment 945 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 19 a (new)
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 19 a (new)
- ‘living capacity’ means the areas on board intended solely to provide a living and resting space for the crew;
Amendment 963 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 27
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 27
– ‘end-user of scientific data’ means a body with a research or management interest in the scientific analysis of data in the fisheries sector which is included on a list of approved bodies;
Amendment 979 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 31
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 31
– ‘mixed fisheries’ means fisheries where more than one species are present in the area being fished and are vulnerable to being caught simultaneously in the fishing gear.
Amendment 991 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 32 a (new)
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 32 a (new)
– ‘unwanted catches’ mean catches of non-marketable species or individuals of marketable species which do not meet the requirements specified in the provisions of Community fisheries law laying down technical, monitoring and conservation measures.
Amendment 999 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 32 b (new)
Part 1 – Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 32 b (new)
– ‘professional fishermen’ means all persons engaged in professional fishing, as recognised by the Member State concerned, on board a fishing vessel or engaged in the professional harvesting of marine organisms on land, as recognised by the Member State concerned.
Amendment 1028 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Part 2 – Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In the waters situated in the exclusive economic zones of Guadeloupe, Guyana, Martinique and Réunion, the Member States concerned may from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2022 restrict fishing to vessels registered in the ports of those islands. Such restrictions shall not apply to Union vessels that traditionally fish in those waters, in so far as those vessels do not exceed the fishing effort traditionally exerted. Member States shall inform the Commission of the restrictions put in place under this paragraph.
Amendment 1032 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Part 2 – Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. In the waters situated in the exclusive economic zones of Guadeloupe, Guyana, Martinique and Réunion, the Member States concerned may from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2022 restrict fishing to vessels registered in the ports of those islands. Such restrictions shall not apply to Union vessels that traditionally fish in those waters, in so far as those vessels do not exceed the fishing effort traditionally exerted. Member States shall inform the Commission of the restrictions put in place under this paragraph.
Amendment 1042 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Measures for the conservation and sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources may include the following:
Amendment 1068 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) establishing incentives, including those of an economic nature, to promote more selective or low impact fishing, to enhance knowledge of fishery resources and to encourage the implementation of measures to protect the environment;
Amendment 1090 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
Amendment 1095 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) adopting measures concerning the obligation to land all catcheswhich make it possible to significantly reduce or gradually eliminate unwanted catches, where this is possible on the basis of the specific characteristics of each fishery;
Amendment 1103 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 3 – Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall be drawn up on the basis of the scientific, technical and economic opinions available, in particular the reports drafted by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), and in the light of the opinions received from the regional advisory councils concerned, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaty and this Regulation.
Amendment 1141 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) requirements for fishing vessels to cease operating in antemporarily in a defined area for a defined minimum period in order to protect a temporary aggregation of a vulnerable marine resource or a significant portion of a fishery population;
Amendment 1146 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point f
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) specific measures to reduce the impact of fishing activities on marine eco-systems and non target species, adopted for each fishery, in particular in the context of the multiannual plans;
Amendment 1150 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
Amendment 1154 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall be drawn up on the basis of the scientific, technical and economic opinions available, in particular the reports drafted by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), and in the light of the opinions received from the regional advisory councils concerned, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaty and this Regulation.
Amendment 1162 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Multiannual plans providing for conservation measures to maintain or restore fish stocks aboveincluding management targets to maintain fish stocks at or restore them to levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield shall be established as a priority.
Amendment 1181 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the basis for fixing fishing opportunities for the fish stocks concerned on the basis of developments in the state of these stocks as compared with predefined conservation reference points; and
Amendment 1188 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Amendment 1194 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
(bb) the procedures for determining and revising conservation reference points tailored to achieving the objective of restoring fishery stocks to or maintaining them at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield;
Amendment 1198 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
(bc) discard reduction targets set for each fishery as part of discard management plans.
Amendment 1214 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 4
Part 3 – Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. Multiannual plans shall be based on the precautionary approach to fisheries management and shall take into account the scientific implications of the limitations of the available data and of the assessment methods and all quantified sources of uncertainty in a scientifically valid manner.
Amendment 1246 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 10 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. Multiannual plans shall provide for adapguarantee the sustainable exploitations of the fishing mortality rate, resulstocks on the basis of the maximum sustainable yield. That objective shall be achieved by targeting in a fishing mortality rate that restoreswhich makes it possible to restore all stocks to and/or maintains all stocks above them at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield by 2015. The plans shall also set discard reduction targets set for each fishery as part of discard management plans.
Amendment 1269 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 10 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. In cases where the determination of a fishing mortality rate that restores and maintains stocks abovestocks to and/or maintains them at levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield is not possible, multiannual plans shall provide for precautionary measuresmanagement measures designed to ensuringe a comparable degree of conservation of the relevant stocks, on the basis of proxies which must be precisely defined.
Amendment 1278 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
A multiannual plan shall include in particular:
Amendment 1280 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the scope, in terms of stocks, fisheryies and the marine ecosystems to which the multiannual plan shall be applied;
Amendment 1288 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part
(c) quantifiable targetobjectives expressed in terms of: fishing mortality rates;
Amendment 1290 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Amendment 1293 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Amendment 1299 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iii
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iii
Amendment 1302 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) Quantified indicators linked to socio- economic objectives;
Amendment 1304 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 3 – Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) clear time frames to reach the quantifiable targets, as regards both conservation and socio-economic objectives;
Amendment 1316 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) technical measures including measures concerning the eliminareduction of unwanted catches and, where possible, the gradual elimination of discards, under the terms of discard management plans;
Amendment 1325 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) technical measures including measures concerning the eliminareduction of unwanted catches and, where possible, the gradual elimination of discards, under the terms of discard management plans;
Amendment 1336 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) quantifiable biological, economic and social indicators for periodic monitoring and assessment of the progress related to achieving the targets of the multiannual plan;
Amendment 1347 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point h
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) minimisation of impacts of fishing on the eco-system, ensuring sustainable development of its activities;
Amendment 1356 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Part 3 – article 11 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(ia) the socioeconomic impact of the measures provided for by the plans for the fisheries concerned;
Amendment 1384 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 12 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 12 – paragraph 1
1. In special areas of conservation within the meaning of Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC, of Article 4 of Directive 2009/147/EC andspecial protection areas within the meaning of Article 4 of Directive 2009/147/EC and marine protected areas within the meaning of Article 13(4) of Directive 2008/56/EC, fishing activities shall be conducted by Member States in such a way so as to alleviate the impact from fishing activities in such special areas of conservation, in accordance with the rules in force provided for by this Regulation. Member States shall be guided by a common European approach to fisheries management in Natura 2000 areas in order to ensure fair treatment of the various vessels operating in European Union waters. This common European approach shall incorporate a method to use in analysing risks arising from fishing in Natura 2000 areas and risks to the habitats and species for which the areas have been designated, shall facilitate access to the information on sea fisheries which is required for the use of this analysis (irrespective of flag flown) and shall lay down the procedures for consulting stakeholders by means of the ordinary legislative procedure, after consulting the regional Advisory Councils.
Amendment 1393 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 12 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 12 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1403 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 1
1. On the basis of evidence, derived from reliable scientific data and a shared diagnosis, of a serious threat to the conservation of marine biological resources, or to the marine eco- system and requiring immediate action, the Commission, upon a reasoned request of a Member State or on its own initiative, may decide on temporary measures to alleviate the threat. , for a period not exceeding six months, to alleviate the threat. The Commission may take a new decision to extend the emergency measures for no more than six months.
Amendment 1422 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall perform a socioeconomic impact assessment of the proposed measures.
Amendment 1425 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 3 – article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall perform a socioeconomic impact assessment of the proposed measures.
Amendment 1429 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 3 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Technical measures frameworks based on the opinions of the STECF to ensure the protection of marine biological resources and the reduction of the impact of fishing activities on fish stocks and on marine eco- systems shall be established. after consulting the Advisory Councils. Technical measures frameworks shall:
Amendment 1439 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 3 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) contribute to maintaining or restoring fish stocks abovet levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield through improvements in size-selection and where appropriate species selection;
Amendment 1472 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – title
Part 3 – article 15 – title
Amendment 1476 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1
Amendment 1478 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1
Amendment 1525 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. On the basis of the opinions of the STECF and of the regional Advisory Councils concerned and of the conclusions of impact assessments to analyse the causes of unwanted catches, the European Parliament and the Council shall set objectives with the aim of significantly reducing unwanted catches from managed commercial stocks and, where appropriate in the corresponding managed fisheries, ensuring that all unwanted catches from these stocks are gradually eliminated, taking account of the specificities of each fishery. These objectives may figure in multiannual plans established for each fishery or regional zone.
Amendment 1531 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. On the basis of the opinions of the STECF and of the regional Advisory Councils concerned and of the conclusions of impact assessments to analyse the causes of unwanted catches, the European Parliament and the Council shall set objectives with the aim of significantly reducing unwanted catches from managed commercial stocks and, where appropriate in the corresponding managed fisheries, ensuring that all unwanted catches from these stocks are gradually eliminated, taking account of the specificities of each fishery. These objectives may figure in multiannual plans established for each fishery or regional zone.
Amendment 1535 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1536 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1557 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 3
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1566 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 4
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that all catches by Union fishing vessels flying their flag are equipped to ensure full documentation of all fishing and processing activities for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the obligation to land all catchesfrom stocks subject to catch quotas are precisely recorded and documented.
Amendment 1573 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 4
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that all catches by Union fishing vessels flying their flag are equipped to ensure full documentation of all fishing and processing activities for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the obligation to land all catchesfrom stocks subject to catch quotas are precisely recorded and documented.
Amendment 1589 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 6
Part 3 – article 15 – paragraph 6
Amendment 1607 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 16 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 16 – paragraph 2
2. By-catch fishing opportunities may be reserved under the total fishing opportunities. Each Member State shall decide, for vessels flying its flag, on the method of allocating the fishing opportunities assigned to that Member State in accordance with EU law. It shall inform the Commission of the allocation method.
Amendment 1631 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 17 – title
Part 3 – article 17 – title
Conservation measures adopted in accordance with multiannual plans and technical measures
Amendment 1636 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 1
1. In a multiannual plan established pursuant to Articles 9, 10, 11 and 114, Member States, in close cooperation with regional Advisory Councils, may be authorised to adopt measures, in accordance with that multiannual plan, which specify the technical or conservation measures applicable to vessels flying their flag in relation to stocks in Union waters for which they have been allocated fishing opportunities or within their 12-mile limit.
Amendment 1650 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Part 3 – article 17 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States, in close cooperation with the regional Advisory Councils, shall ensure that technical and conservation measures adopted pursuant to paragraph 1:
Amendment 1692 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 19 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 19 – paragraph 1
The Commission may at any time assess the compatibility and effectiveness of conservation measures adopted by Member States pursuant to Article 17(1), drawing on the expertise of the STECF.
Amendment 1701 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 20
Part 3 – article 20
Amendment 1703 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 20
Part 3 – article 20
Amendment 1760 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 24
Part 3 – article 24
Amendment 1762 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 24
Part 3 – article 24
Amendment 1786 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 25 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Part 3 – article 25 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
ca) The Member State shall for control purposes inform the other Member States concerned of provisions adopted pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article.
Amendment 1793 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 3 – article 26 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Member States and Regional Advisory Councils concerned may submit their written comments to the Commission within five working days of the date of notification. The Commission shall confirm, cancel or amend the measure within 15 working days of the date of notification. The Commission decision shall be notified to the Member States concerned. It shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Amendment 1799 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 27
Part 4 – article 27
Amendment 1800 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 27
Part 4 – article 27
Amendment 1851 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 27 a (new)
Part 4 – article 27 a (new)
Amendment 1853 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 28
Part 4 – article 28
Amendment 1855 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 28
Part 4 – article 28
Allocation of transferable fishing 1. A transferable fishing concession shall establish an entitlement to use the individual fishing opportunities allocated in accordance with Article 29(1). 2. Each Member State shall allocate transferable fishing concessions on the basis of transparent criteria, for each stock or group of stocks for which fishing opportunities are allocated in accordance with Article 16, excluding fishing opportunities obtained under sustainable fisheries agreements. 3. For the allocation of transferable fishing concessions pertaining to mixed fisheries, Member States shall take account of the likely catch composition of vessels participating in such fisheries. 4. Transferable fishing concessions may only be allocated by a Member State to an owner of a fishing vessel flying the flag of that Member State, or to legal or natural persons for the purpose of being used on such a vessel. Transferable fishing concessions may be pooled together for collective management by legal or natural persons or recognized producer organisations. Member States may limit eligibility for receiving transferable fishing concessions on the basis of transparent and objective criteria. 5. Member States may limit the period of validity of transferable fishing concessions to a period of at least 15 years, for the purpose of reallocating such concessions. Where Member States have not limited the period of validity of the transferable fishing concessions, they may recall such concessions with a notice of at least 15 years. 6. Member States may recall transferable fishing concessions with a shorter notice in the event of an established serious infringement committed by the holder of the concessions. Such recalls shall be operated in a manner which gives full effect to the Common Fisheries Policy, the proportionality principle and, whenever necessary, with immediate effect. 7. Notwithstanding paragraph 5 and 6, Member States may recall transferable fishing concessions that have not been used on a fishing vessel for a period of three consecutive years.rticle 28 deleted concessions
Amendment 1910 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 29
Part 4 – article 29
Amendment 1914 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 29
Part 4 – article 29
Amendment 1952 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 30
Part 4 – article 30
Amendment 1955 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 30
Part 4 – article 30
Amendment 1965 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 31
Part 4 – article 31
Amendment 1970 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 31
Part 4 – article 31
Amendment 1996 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 32
Part 4 – article 32
Amendment 2015 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 4 – article 33 – paragraph 1
Part 4 – article 33 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall decide how fishing opportunities assigned to it in accordance with Article 16, and which are not subject to a system of transferable fishing concessions, may be allocated to vessels flying its flag. It shall inform the Commission of the allocation method.
Amendment 2027 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 1
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 1
Amendment 2037 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Measures to adjust fishing capacity shall be diverse in nature and not limited to a reduction in the number of vessels in a fleet.
Amendment 2044 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. 1. The notions of capacity shall cover two distinct types of capacity, as defined in Article 5 of this Regulation: a) ‘fishing capacity’ means a vessel's tonnage in GT (Gross Tonnage), counting only the areas used for fishing and storage, and its power in kW (Kilowatt) as defined in Articles 4 and 5 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2930/86; b) ‘living capacity’ means the areas on board intended solely to provide a living and resting space for the crew.
Amendment 2046 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 2
Part 5 – article 34 – paragraph 2
2. No exit from the fleet supported by public aid granted under the framework of the European Fisheries Fund for the 2007- 2013 programming period shall be permitted unless preceded by the withdrawal of the fishing licence and the fishing authorisations and unless it takes effect in fisheries for stocks of harvested species the levels of which are incapable of producing their maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 2063 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 5 – article 35 – paragraph 1
Part 5 – article 35 – paragraph 1
1. EThe fleet capacity of each Member State fleet shall be subject to fishing capacity ceilings as set out in Annex IIbroken down by sea basin in which each fleet segment operates, which will in particular involve a specific breakdown for vessels operating in the outermost regions and for vessels operating exclusively outside Community waters.
Amendment 2096 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 6 – article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 6 – article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The conservation, management and sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources must be based on the best fish-stock data and the best environmental, technical and socio- economic knowledge. To this end, Member States shall collect biological, technical, environmental and socio- economic data necessary for ecosystem based fisheries management, manage them and make them available to end users of scientific data, including bodies designated by the Commission. Those data shall in particular enable the assessment of:
Amendment 2103 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 6 – article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Part 6 – article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The conservation, management and sustainable exploitation of marine biological resources must be based on the best fish-stock data and the best environmental, technical and socio- economic knowledge. To this end, Member States shall collect biological, technical, environmental and socio- economic data necessary for ecosystem based fisheries management, manage them and make them available to end users of scientific data, including bodies designated by the Commission. Those data shall in particular enable the assessment of:
Amendment 2148 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 6 – article 37 a (new)
Part 6 – article 37 a (new)
Article 37a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) 1. The STECF shall be consulted at regular intervals on matters pertaining to the conservation and management of marine biological resources, including biological, economic, environmental, social and technical considerations. 2. The Commission shall take into account the opinion of the STECF when presenting proposals on fisheries management under this Regulation.
Amendment 2149 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 6 – article 37 a (new)
Part 6 – article 37 a (new)
Article 37a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) 1. The STECF shall be consulted at regular intervals on matters pertaining to the conservation and management of marine biological resources, including biological, economic, environmental, social and technical considerations. 2. The Commission shall take into account the opinion of the STECF when presenting proposals on fisheries management under this Regulation.
Amendment 2152 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 6 – article 38 – paragraph 1
Part 6 – article 38 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall adopt national fisheries and aquaculture scientific data collection, research and innovation programmes. They shall coordinate their fisheries data collection, research and innovation activities with other Member States and Union research and innovation frameworks. Where appropriate, they shall involve the relevant Advisory Councils.
Amendment 2159 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 6 – article 38 – paragraph 2
Part 6 – article 38 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure availability of relevant competences and human resources to be involved in the scientific advisory process, as far as possible, in particular by using the Union's financial resources.
Amendment 2177 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 7 – article 39 – paragraph 2
Part 7 – article 39 – paragraph 2
2. The positions of the Union in international organisations dealing with fisheries and RFMOs shall be based on the best available scientific advice to ensure that fishery resources are maintained abovet or restored aboveto levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 2205 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Union shall conclude bilateral fisheries agreements in the mutual interest of the Union and of partner third countries, with the objective of ensuring sustainable exploitation of the stocks of target species. Such agreements shall contribute to maintaining the activity of European fishing fleets operating under these agreements and shall aim to obtain an appropriate share of the available surplus, fully commensurate with the interests and needs of the European fleets concerned.
Amendment 2206 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Union shall conclude bilateral fisheries agreements in the mutual interest of the Union and of partner third countries, with the objective of ensuring sustainable exploitation of the stocks of target species. Such agreements shall contribute to maintaining the activity of European fishing fleets operating under these agreements and shall aim to obtain an appropriate share of the available surplus, fully commensurate with the interests and needs of the European fleets concerned.
Amendment 2210 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 2
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 2
2. Union fishing vessels shall only catch surplus of the allowable catch determined by the third country as referred to in Article 62(2) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and identified on the basis of the best available scientific advice and relevant information exchanged between the Union and the third country concerned about the total fishing effort on the affected stocks, in order to ensure that fishery resources remain abovet levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 2221 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 7 – article 41 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. For agreements covering straddling or highly migratory fish stocks, scientific assessments conducted at regional level as well as conservation and management measures adopted by the Regional Fisheries Management Organisation shall be duly taken into account in the determination of fishing opportunities.
Amendment 2262 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 8 – article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 8 – article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) improving the competitiveness of the aquaculture industry and supporting its sustainable development and innovation;
Amendment 2352 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 8 a (new)
Part 8 a (new)
Amendment 2353 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 8 a (new)
Part 8 a (new)
PART VIII a SOCIAL PROVISIONS Title I Objectives The Commission shall, by 2013, establish voluntary guidelines regarding joint priorities and objectives for the development of socially sustainable fishery and aquaculture activities. It is essential to ensure a human element at the core of the common policy. These guidelines shall seek to: (a) guarantee the safety of fishermen and fish farmers in the exercise of their professional activities; (b) promote minimal social rules applicable to the entire EU fleet and to third coutnry fleets operating in EU waters; (c) improve on-board living and working conditions for seafarers; (d) perpetuate and develop direct and indirect employment in the fisheries and aquaculture sectors, both upstream and downstream; (e) make fishery and fish farming more attractive in career terms and ensure the recruitment of successive generations to these professions; (f) provide fishermen and fish farmers with initial and ongoing training in line with developments in the field; (g) encourage mobility of young trainees; (h) conserve expertise and facilitate the dissemination thereof; (i) recognise the role of women and encourage them to enter these professions.
Amendment 2357 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) strengthen the competitiveness of the Union fishery and aquaculture industry, in particular producers, by implementing production and marketing plans;
Amendment 2361 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point d
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) improve the transparency of the markets, in particular as regards economic knowledge and understanding of the Union markets for fishery and aquaculture products along the supply chain and consumer awareness, by means of notification and/or labelling providing comprehensible information;
Amendment 2372 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) ensure a level playing field for European products and imported products;
Amendment 2376 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) cope with structural market fluctuation by means of a tailored storage mechanism for fishery products and a stabilisation mechanism or specific arrangements for aquaculture products in the event of a serious crisis.
Amendment 2379 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(eb) cope with structural market fluctuation by means of a tailored storage mechanism for fishery products and a stabilisation mechanism or specific arrangements for aquaculture products in the event of a serious crisis.
Amendment 2386 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Part 9 – article 45 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) common rules with a view to the introduction of an eco-labelling scheme for European fishery and aquaculture products.
Amendment 2396 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the use of modern control technologies for the availability and quality of data on fisheries and aquaculture;
Amendment 2401 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) EU-wide harmonisation of the rules on controls and penalties;
Amendment 2402 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
(bb) complementarity between controls at sea and on shore;
Amendment 2403 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
Part 10 – article 46 – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
(bc) non-discrimination vis-à-vis fishing vessels with access to the waters of another Member State;
Amendment 2419 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 10 – article 48
Part 10 – article 48
Amendment 2458 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 52 – paragraph 1
Part 12 – article 52 – paragraph 1
1. Advisory Councils are established for each of the areas or spheres of competence set out in Annex III, to promote a balanced representation of all stakeholders and to contribute to the achievement of the objectives set out in Articles 2 and 3.
Amendment 2466 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 52 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Part 12 – article 52 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The Advisory Council which is to be set up for the outermost regions shall be divided into three sections: a greater Caribbean section covering Guadeloupe, Martinique and Guyana, a Southwest Indian Ocean section, covering Reunion and Mayotte, and a Macaronesia section covering the Canaries, the Azores and Madeira.
Amendment 2468 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 52 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Part 12 – article 52 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Third countries sharing a sea basin with territories of the Union may have observer status on the regional Advisory Councils.
Amendment 2474 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 1 – point a
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) submit, in direct cooperation with scientists, recommendations and suggestions on matters relating to fisheries management and aquaculture to the Commission or to the Member State concerned;
Amendment 2496 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) Prior to any proposal for a management measure falling within the field of responsibility of a given Advisory Council the Commission shall consult that Council.
Amendment 2497 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 2 a (new)
(2a) Prior to any proposal for a management measure falling within the field of responsibility of a given Advisory Council the Commission shall consult that Council.
Amendment 2499 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Part 12 – article 53 – paragraph 2 b (new)
(2b) The Commission must take due account of the Advisory Councils’ opinions and must publish, within a reasonable time, an objective analytical justification of any decision that is at odds with such an opinion.
Amendment 2503 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 1
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 1
1. Advisory Councils shall be composed of organisations representing the fisheries operators and other interest groups affected by the Common Fisheries Policyprincipally of fishermen and other representatives of interests affected by the Common Fisheries Policy, such as representatives of the fisheries and aquaculture sectors, environment and consumer interests and scientific experts from all Member States having fisheries interests in the area concerned. Representatives of national and regional administrations having fisheries interests in the area concerned shall have the right to participate in the regional Advisory Councils as members or observers. The Commission and the European Parliament may take part in Advisory Council meetings.
Amendment 2513 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The representation of the stakeholders must be such as to guarantee that at least 50% of the seats on the general assembly and the executive committee are held by representatives of professional fisheries activities.
Amendment 2521 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 4
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 55 concerning rules for the composition and the functioning of Advisory Councils.
Amendment 2525 #
2011/0195(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Part 12 – article 54 – paragraph 4 a (new)
(4a) The Advisory Councils shall establish their internal rules of procedure on the basis of common rules drawn up by the Commission.
Amendment 97 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) promoting viable and sustainable fishing activities of their members in full compliance with the conservation policy laid down in the Regulation on the Common Fisheries Policy and environmental legislation;
Amendment 115 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) managing the resource access rights assigned to their members in accordance with the provisions of Chapter IV of the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation;
Amendment 117 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) helping to maintain and create jobs in coastal regions;
Amendment 132 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Measures to be deployabled by fishery producer organisations
Amendment 135 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Fishery producer organisations mayshall make use of the following measures to achieve the objectives set out in Article 7:
Amendment 141 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Amendment 162 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) channelloncentrating the supply and the marketing of their members' products;
Amendment 274 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1(a) a fishery producer organisation is deemed representative where it accounts for at least 6530 % of the quantities marketed of the relevant product during the previous year in the area where it is proposed to extend the rules.
Amendment 275 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1(a) a fishery producer organisation is deemed representative where it accounts for at least 6530 % of the quantities marketed of the relevant product during the previous year in the area where it is proposed to extend the rules.
Amendment 285 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4
Article 26 – paragraph 4
4. The rules to be extended to non- members shall apply for a period between 930 days and 12 months.
Amendment 290 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 3
3. Within two month15 days of receipt of the notification, the Commission shall take a decision authorising or refusing to authorise the extension of rules and shall inform the Member States. Where the Commission has not taken a decision within the two-month15-day period, the extension of rules shall be deemed to have been authorised by the Commission.
Amendment 296 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. Each producer organisation shall submit a production and marketing plan to their competent national authorities to fulfil the objectives laid down in Articles 3, 7 and 10.
Amendment 341 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) classification by quality, size or weight, as well as presentation;
Amendment 350 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. The products for which marketing standards have been laid down may be marketed for human consumption in the Union only in accordance with those standards.
Amendment 353 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3
Article 40 – paragraph 3
3. All fishery products landed, including those not complying with marketing standards, may be, under the responsibility of the Member States, distributed free of charge to philanthropic or charitable institutions established in the Union or to persons who are recognised by the legislation of the Member State concerned as being entitled to public assistance.
Amendment 463 #
2011/0194(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex II – New entries to be inserted/added
Annex II – New entries to be inserted/added
03026999 Skate (Raja spp, Amblyraja spp and Leucoraja spp) 03028410 European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax)
Amendment 1 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 2 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph A
Paragraph A
A. Highlights the small scale of the proposed MFF 2014-–2020, which in fact represents a reduction in relative terms by comparison with the current MFF 2007-– 2013; takes the view that the crisis cannot serve as an argument for reducing the EU budget but that, on the contrary, it strengthens the need for a robust, substantially increased budget that will make it possible to putachieve the political objectives of the EU, namely supporting economic growth, employment and putting the principle of economic and social cohesion into action within the framework of the EU 2020 strategy; argues, therefore, that the proposal for the MFF 2014-–2020 submitted by the Commission should be amended by the Council in this regard;
Amendment 4 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph C
Paragraph C
C. Notes that the proposed multiannual financial framework 2014-–2020 contained in the Commission communication ‘A budget for Europe 2020’ makes provision for an overall indicative allocation of EUR 6.685 billion for fisheries and maritime affairs in 2011 constant prices (EMFF, including market measures + FPAs + RFMOs), representing an annual average of EUR 955 million for the period covered by the MFF 2014-2020 – a sum lower than that earmarked for 2013, the last year of the current MFF (EUR 984 million), even when inflation is taken into account; stresses with concern that the sums set aside for each of the years covered by the MFF 2014-–2020 fall below the amount set aside for 2013 under the current MFF; reiterates that Parliament called in its resolution of 8 June 2011 on ‘Investing in the future: a new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for a competitive, sustainable and inclusive Europe’ for a global level of resources for the next MFF of at least 5 % extra compared to the 2013 level;
Amendment 6 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph D
Paragraph D
D. Points out that some of the policy objectives proposed by the Commission –— such as closing the innovation gap between fisheries and other sectors of the economy; facilitating the transition towards low impact fisheries, with the elimination of discards and low impact on marine ecosystems; the viability of communities dependent on inshorefishing and diversification, inter alia –— require increased financial resources, a lack of which will compromise their achievement;
Amendment 7 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph G
Paragraph G
G. Takes the view that the future common strategic framework that is to apply to funds under shared management, including the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), should mtake it possible to take the convergence principle more fully into account when allocating these funds, in accordance with the principle of solidarity and economic and social cohesion; stresses that new objectives in the field of cohesion (such as the creation of the new category of ‘transition regions’) should be matched by new, additional financial resources, without which the cohesion principle will be compromisednto account the diversity of the objectives of these financial instruments; recalls that the EMFF is a sectoral support fund, the allocation of which should not depend in any way on the economic status of the geographical area in which the beneficiary operates;
Amendment 8 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph H
Paragraph H
H. Expresses its concern atRejects the possible introduction and/or reinforcement of macroeconomic conditionality rules in connection with the use of European funds; takes the view that those countries facing the greatest financial difficulties and with the most fragile economies should not be doubly penalised, in the form of restricted access to funds that are essential for their recovery and development, which would call the cohesion principle into question;
Amendment 9 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph I
Paragraph I
I. Highlights the importance of the EMFF in the 2014-–2020 period, as the main instrument for financing the future CFP; stresses that new policies, objectives or priorities that will have an impact on the marine environment must be matched by newadequate financial resources; rejects the idea that new priorities, objectives and policies –— such as the integrated maritime policy –— should be financed at the expense of the appropriations required by fisheries policy;
Amendment 10 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph L
Paragraph L
L. Advocates the drawing-up of a Community programme supporting small- scale fishing that links uplinking up of existing instruments, particularly at the financial level, so as to respond to the specific problems of this segment and of the coastal communities most heavily dependent on it;
Amendment 11 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph Q
Paragraph Q
Q. Points out that the fishing industry plays an important part in the socio-economic situation, in employment and in promoting economic and social cohesion in the outermost regions (ORs), whose economies suffer from permanent structural constraints and limited possibilities for economic diversification; believes that Community support for the fishing industries in the ORs should be maintained and increased, notably through the programme compensating for the additional costs incurred in the marketing of certain fishery products from a number of ORs as a result of those regions’ remoteness (‘POSEI -– Fisheries’); in this connection, believes that this programme should continue in force indefinitely, since outermost status is a permanent factor; deplores the sharp cut in overall financing for these regions in the proposed MFF 2014-–2020, even though the number of ORs recognised by the EU is set to rise in the coming years, and calls for these appropriations to be increased substantially;
Amendment 12 #
2011/0177(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph R
Paragraph R
R. Urges the Commission to reconsider the draftCalls for the interinstitutional agreement and to make provision for the European Parliament to be fully involved in the process of negotiating international fisheries agreements; demands that representatives of the European Parliament should be able to take part in all stages of the negotiations, with observer status and on an equal footing with Member State representatives, taking account of Parliament’s powers in the field of fisheries agreements;
Amendment 15 #
2010/2291(ACI)
Proposal for a decision
Paragraph 6 – point b
Paragraph 6 – point b
(b) the scope of the register, which covers all relevant actors but excludes, among others, social partners as actors in the social dialogue, as well as churches, political parties and local, regional and municipal authorities; – including representations belonging to their administrations – as theirs is, according to the Treaties, an institutional role and they do not, under paragraphs 10(b), 11, 12 and 13 of the agreement, fall within the scope of the register;
Amendment 40 #
2010/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Urges the Commission to continue its efforts to promote the exchange of information in order to integrate maritime surveillance, in particular information aimed at harmonising coastguard services at European level;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2165(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that, in the context of mobilising the EGF, an alternative source of payment appropriations to unused ESF funds, has been proposed by the Commission, following the frequent reminders by the European Parliament that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that appropriate budget lines for transfers must therefore be identified for the year 2010;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2164(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that, in the context of mobilising the EGF, an alternative source of payment appropriations to unused ESF funds, has been proposed by the Commission, following the frequent reminders by the European Parliament that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that appropriate budget lines for transfers must therefore be identified for the year 2010;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2163(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that, in the context of mobilising the EGF, an alternative source of payment appropriations to unused ESF funds, has been proposed by the Commission, following the frequent reminders by the European Parliament that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that appropriate budget lines for transfers must therefore be identified for the year 2010;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2141(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that, in the context of mobilising the EGF, an alternative source of payment appropriations to unused ESF funds, has been proposed by the Commission, following the frequent reminders by the European Parliament that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that appropriate budget lines for transfers must therefore be identified for the year 2010;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2136(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that, in the context of mobilising the EGF, an alternative source of payment appropriations to unused ESF funds, has been proposed by the Commission, following the frequent reminders by the European Parliament that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that appropriate budget lines for transfers must therefore be identified for the year 2010;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2134(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that, in the context of mobilising the EGF, an alternative source of payment appropriations to unused ESF funds, has been proposed by the Commission, following the frequent reminders by the European Parliament that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that appropriate budget lines for transfers must therefore be identified for the year 2010;
Amendment 2 #
2010/2133(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the fact that, in the context of mobilising the EGF, an alternative source of payment appropriations to unused ESF funds, has been proposed by the Commission, following the frequent reminders by the European Parliament that the EGF was created as a separate specific instrument with its own objectives and deadlines and that appropriate budget lines for transfers must therefore be identified for the year 2010;
Amendment 4 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas globalisation is a timeless phenomenon and whereas the impact of the economic crisis will continue to be felt after 2013,
Amendment 33 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the contributions granted with reference to, among other things: the beneficiaries' re- integration into employment; the difference between the number of potential beneficiaries and the number of workers that have received support; the disparities between Member States in terms of the funding provided per worker and the reasons for those disparities; compliance with the non-discrimination criterion with reference to the contractual position of the workers made redundant; the systems established by the Member States to assess needs for assistance from the fund and to prepare applications; the procedures for consulting the social partners that were or were not used when preparing applications and the checks carried out on their implementation; and the procedures for verifying the implementation of contributions and any repayments Member States are requested to make; calls on the Commission to reflect the findings of that evaluation in its proposal for the revision of the regulation;
Amendment 34 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the contributions granted with reference to, among other things: the beneficiaries' re- integration into employment; the difference between the number of potential beneficiaries and the number of workers that have received support; the disparities between Member States in terms of the funding provided per worker and the reasons for those disparities; compliance with the non-discrimination criterion with reference to the contractual position of the workers made redundant; the procedures for consulting the social partners that were or were not used when preparing applications and, the checks carried out on their implementation and the way in which account is taken of the web of subcontractors and SMEs potentially affected by the redundancy plan, whose employees could derive benefit from the fund; and the procedures for verifying the implementation of contributions and any repayments Member States are requested to make; calls on the Commission to reflect the findings of that evaluation in its proposal for the revision of the regulation;
Amendment 62 #
2010/2072(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Wishes the EGF to be made a permanent fund in the next multiannual financial framework, with its own commitment and payment appropriations, instead of on which depends on the non- utilisation or under-utilisation of appropriations from previous financial years; therefore requests the Commission to come forward with proposals for resourcing a permanent fund;
Amendment 4 #
2010/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the world’s oceans and seas are interlinked and interdependent and whereas, moreover, the ever more intense use of the oceans and seas by sectors such as shipping, fisheries, energy, tourism, and research and fisheries, combined with climate change, have added to the pressure on the marine environment,
Amendment 35 #
2010/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Asks the Commission to ensure that the new IMP will receive appropriate funding in the next financial perspective, and to study,, to this end, to study all possible options, including as one option, the Committee of the Regions’ proposal of a coastal fund;
Amendment 38 #
2010/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Stresses that fishery workers should be involved in this governance, in view of the problems which they face and the importance of their work for food supplies in an international context marked by the food crisis;
Amendment 59 #
2010/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Understands that stability, predictability and transparency of the management of marine spaces is key to securing optimal and sustainable development of economic activities and new growth and jobs on the sea, including the further development of renewables such as wind and wave energy, without prejudice to more traditional activities; draws attention to the fact that, according to a recent Commission study, this sector could give rise to a net increase of 410 000 jobs by 2020;
Amendment 60 #
2010/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Is of the view that the management of intensifying and increasingly competing sea uses on an eco-system basis requires coordinated, streamlined and cross-border Maritime Spatial Planning as a neutral tool, which has the potential to contribute significantly to the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and to facilitate the harmonious coexistence of different sea uses;
Amendment 8 #
2010/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5a new
Paragraph 5a new
5a. Underlines the importance of a strong European reaction to the crisis and to the instability of financial market that should logically imply additional financial capacity and flexibility for EU Budget;
Amendment 16 #
2010/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that, as stated in its resolution of 25 March 2010 on priorities for the 2011 budget, youth is one of the key priorities for the 2011 budget, which should be promoted as an EU cross-cutting theme, developing synergies between different policy areas relating to youth, notably education, employment, entrepreneurship and health, while facilitating and encouraging young people's social inclusion, empowerment, mobility and skills development; points out that 'youth' should be seen as a broad concept encompassing the ability of individuals to change positions and status several times throughout their lives, switching without restriction between settings such as apprenticeships, academic or professional environments and vocational training, and that, to this end, one of the objectives wshould be transition from the education system to the labour market also taking into account the economic needs related to this process;
Amendment 64 #
2010/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Welcomes the increase of appropriations for decoupled direct aid (9,7%), school fruit and vegetables scheme (50%, to 90 million), and school milk (5,3%), ands well as the appropriations foreseen for the program "aid for deprived persons" for which it expects the Council to eventually reach an agreement on the Commission's proposal to change the legal basis; notes with satisfaction the constant decrease of export refunds since 2007 (to 166 million in DB 2011);
Amendment 72 #
2010/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a new
Paragraph 33 a new
33a. Is surprised that the appropriations earmarked in the 2011 draft budget for the Programme of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity (POSEI) (Item 05 03 02 50) are lower than in the 2010 budget, whereas the trading agreements recently negotiated by the Union (the Agreement on Trade in Bananas, signed at the WTO in December 2009, and the EU-Colombia/Peru free- trade agreement) could directly affect European producers in the banana, sugar and rum sectors and those producers' compensation requirements could increase; calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment promptly on this matter;
Amendment 112 #
2010/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Recalls that encouraging and promoting cooperation in the field of youth and sports is a priority for the 2011 budget and stresses that financial support for special annual events is an important tool to this end; deplores the fact that no CA have been included in the draft budget for 2011 (p.m. in CA and only EUR 2.9 million in PA), as against EUR 9.8 million and EUR 10.25 million respectively in the 2010 budget; furthermore underlines that sport is a new competence under the Lisbon Treaty which should be adequately funded in the 2011 budget;
Amendment 115 #
2010/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a new
Paragraph 45 a new
45a. Takes the view that the resources currently given over to citizenship, i.e. 0.5% of the Community budget, are nowhere near enough to genuinely realise our objective of bringing Europe closer to citizens;
Amendment 118 #
2010/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a new
Paragraph 45 a new
45a. Deplores the cuts of nearly 4 million in commitments for the programme 'Europe for Citizens' and recalls the importance of this programme in the development of European citizenship through support for concrete actions such as town-twinning;
Amendment 357 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 57 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Part 1 – article 57 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
To this effect, the entities and persons referred to in paragraph 1 shall, in accordance with the principle of proportionality and with standards accepted by the European Union or, where such are not so, internationally accepted standards and defined in the agreement entrusting the certain specified implementation tasks:
Amendment 425 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 130 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)
Part 1 – article 130 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)
(a) 'Equity investment' means the provision of capital to a firm, invested directly or indirectly through investment fund in return for partial ownership or that firm or that fund where, in addition, the investor may assume some management control of the firm or the fund and may share in future profits.
Amendment 427 #
2010/0395(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 1 – article 130 – paragraph 3
Part 1 – article 130 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission may implement financial instruments in direct management mode, or in indirect management mode by entrusting tasks to the entities referred to in points (iii) and (iv) of Article 55(1)(b). The statute and nature of the operator to which the management is entrusted should be defined in the basic act.
Amendment 8 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)
Recital 10 a (new)
(10a) In addition, when the Programme is reviewed, a proposal should be drawn up to provide for its extension beyond 2013, together with a proposal laying down an appropriate financial envelope.
Amendment 9 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) to enhance the coordinated planning of competing maritime activities, the strategic management of maritime areas, the overall level of safety, the quality of surveillance activities and the enforcement of laws.
Amendment 11 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8a Spending maximums for the objectives (a) Integrated maritime governance and activities in relation to the sea basins – EUR 7 100 000; (b) Tools for integrated policy-making – EUR 33 000 000; (c) Promoting the international dimension of the Integrated Maritime Policy and raising the profile of maritime Europe – EUR 2 900 000; (d) Determining the boundaries of sustainability of maritime activities through the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, and sustainable economic growth, employment, and innovation – EUR 6 600 000. The above amounts are intended for guidance only and may be redeployed within the objectives where necessary.
Amendment 13 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. The budgetary resources allocated to the Programme shall be entered in the annual appropriations of the general budget of the European Union. The available annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits of the current financial framework, without jeopardising the implementation of current programmes and activities, thus avoiding redeployment within the relevant heading of the current financial framework.
Amendment 15 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council a mid-term report on the implementation of the Integrated Maritime Policy by 30 June 2012. At the same time the Commission shall submit a proposal for the extension of the Programme with an appropriate financial envelope beyond 2013.
Amendment 110 #
2010/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council an ex- mid-term reposrt evaluation report no later than 31 Decemberon the implementation of the Integrated Maritime Policy by 30 June 2012. At the same time the Commission shall submit, if appropriate, a proposal for the extension of the Programme beyond 20143.
Amendment 30 #
2010/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Implementation of this Regulation must not jeopardise the level of special support from which the outermost regions have benefited up to now. For that reason, so that they can implement the appropriate measures, the Member States should have at their disposaln order to ensure that the objectives of this Regulation, in particular the safeguarding and development of agricultural activities in the outermost regions, are met, the sums equivalent to the support already granted by the CommunityUnion to these regions under Regulation (EC) No 247/2006 should be reviewed.
Amendment 31 #
2010/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
(35a) Successive reductions in the single tariff set for banana imports pose periodic threats to the profitability of banana production in the outermost regions. There is therefore an ongoing need to assess the impact of tariff concessions granted by the European Union in order to determine whether the aid granted to EU producers should be reviewed.
Amendment 33 #
2010/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Since 2006, requirements in essential products have increased in some outermost regions, particularly in the Azores and in the French overseas departments, as a result of the increasing livestock population and demographic pressure. The annual budgetary allocation for the POSEI programmes and the proportion of the budget which Member States may use for the specific supply arrangements for the regions concerned should therefore be increased.
Amendment 58 #
2010/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 - paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 29 - paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Once the territory of Mayotte has acquired outermost region status, the Commission shall put forward a new proposal which seeks to increase proportionally the budget earmarked for the overseas departments, in order to take account of Mayotte's new status, and to incorporate specific provisions concerning Mayotte.
Amendment 59 #
2010/0256(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 - paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 29 - paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Commission shall submit a report to Parliament and the Council assessing the impact that any new tariff concessions for imports of bananas into the European Union will have on producers' incomes. That report shall be accompanied, where necessary, by a legislative proposal on the adjustment of the sums laid down in paragraph 2 with the aim of offsetting the losses of income suffered by European producers.
Amendment 5 #
2009/2236(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas agricultural expenditure only accounts for 0.49% of total EU GDP (2008 figure), which, when converted into per capita financial support to farmers, puts the European Union level of support on a par with that of its main trading partners, such as the USA,
Amendment 6 #
2009/2236(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas expenditure in the form of direct aid accounts for 0.38% of EU GDP (2008 figure); emphasises also that this corresponds to income support that is unevenly distributed among Member States, regions and farmers,
Amendment 7 #
2009/2236(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas expenditure linked to the rural development policy accounts for 0.11% of EU GDP; emphasises the heterogeneous nature of this policy that includes funding for development actions in rural areas and indirect support for certain products,
Amendment 8 #
2009/2236(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas, since 2007, voluntary modulation mechanisms have allowed for the redeployment of financial aid between direct payments and rural development, without however improving the transparency, legitimacy and simplification of the financial resources allocated to agriculture,
Amendment 10 #
2009/2236(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the current small margins available under Heading 2 as from the 2011 budget year make it very difficult for the Union to respond appropriately to unexpected political events and may deprive the annual budgetary procedure of its substance,
Amendment 16 #
2009/2236(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that over the last four years of the current MFF, it was only possible to agree the annual budgets either by using up the existing margins in the different headings of the MFF or through recourse to the revision and reprogramming, reducing the ceilings of Heading 2 in order to finance other EU priorities; provided for by paragraph 23 of the IIA of 17 May 2006 by using the margins available below the ceilings of Heading 2 in order to finance other EU priorities; points out that from the 2011 budget year until the expiry of the current MFF (2013), the margins below the ceiling of Heading 2 will be drastically reduced and it will no longer therefore be possible to use these to finance other EU policies;
Amendment 22 #
2009/2236(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the need, given the new Common Agricultural Policy objectives, to provide adequate funding in the new MFF, in order to be able to better support the policy, through the introduction of a new aid system that ensures it is more legitimate, fairer and more effective;