2021/2168(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Member States to make their respective methods of distributing fishing opportunities ~~and the final quota allocation of each producer organisation and each vessel~~ publicly available, in line with the applicable data protection legislation;

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Member States to make their respective methods of distributing fishing opportunities and, when it exists, the final quota allocation of each producer organisation and each vessel publicly available, in line with the applicable data protection legislation;

Amendment 103 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Considers that the Commission, in its capacity of guardian of the treaties, has the obligation to guarantee the full respect of the prescriptions enshrined in Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 1380/2013; In this regard, calls on the Commission to ensure the correct application by all the member states of the binding transparency provision of Article 17 with regards to national quota allocation processes through an active and constant monitoring activity and, if necessary, to open an infringement procedure for those Member States that fail to comply with that requirement;

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls on the Commission to propose measures to improve transparency in the fishing sector, for example by establishing an EU fleet register that would list vessels, their owners and the fishing opportunities allocated to them.

Amendment 105 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Takes the view that producer organisations, cooperatives and quota owners may disclose their quota allocation on a voluntary basis, but can in no way be obliged to do so, owing to data protection legislation;

Amendment 106 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that producer organisations (POs) play an essential role in distributing fishing opportunities among the different vessels, yet relatively few small-scale fishers belong to POs, and even fewer small-scale fishers have their own dedicated POs limiting therefore their capacity to exploit this channel to access fishing opportunities;

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that producer organisations play an essential role in distributing fishing opportunities among the different vessels; notes that relatively few small-scale fishers belong to Producer Organisations, and that even fewer small-scale fishers belong to Producer Organisations dedicated to small-scales fisheries;

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that producer organisations may play an ~~essential~~important role in distributing fishing opportunities among the different vessels; points out, however, that not all vessels are organised into producer organisations;

Amendment 109 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that producer organisations and fishers guilts play an essential role in the distributingon and management of fishing opportunities among the different vessels;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12

Amendment 110 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls that producer organisations play an essential role in distributing fishing ~~opportunities~~quota among the different vessels;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that the allocation methods smust involve all stakehould ~~be developed in consultation with~~ers in an interactive and collaborative manner and should ensure representation from all fleet segments, producers organizations, Cofradias associations, workers organizations, fishing communities and other relevant stakeholders,; considers that allocation methods should be based on the best available scientific advice, and should include notice periods to allow fishers to adapt;

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that the allocation methods ~~should be developed in consultation with fishing communities and o~~for fishing opportunities should be developed by Member States in line with their needs and the situation in their ~~relevant stakeholder~~Exclusive Economic Zone in consultation with fishing communities, based on the best available scientific advice, and should include ~~notice periods to allow fishers to adapt~~the measures and support needed for any ensuing adaptations;

Amendment 113 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that the allocation methods should be ~~developed in consultation with fishing communities and other relevant stakeholders, based on the best available scientific advice, and should include notice periods to allow fishers to adapt~~shared with regional authorities, fishing communities, fishers´ guilts and may be aimed at achieving economic, social and environmental sustainability but that it is the Member States that are responsible for developing and implementing these methods;

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that the allocation methods should be ~~develop~~applied in consultation with fishing communities ~~and other relevant stakeholders~~, based on the best available scientific advice, and ~~should include notic~~account should be taken of the peri~~ods to allow fishers to adapt~~nciple of relative stability;

Amendment 115 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that the allocation methods should be developed in consultation with fishing communities ~~and other relevant stakeholders~~, based on the best available scientific advice, and should include notice periods to allow fishers to adapt;

Amendment 116 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Member States to design allocation systems in a way so as to guarantee simplicity, avoid obscure bureaucratic practices and, ultimately, allow operators and stakeholders to be able to monitor the allocation criteria and process;

Amendment 117 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on Member States to ensure a level playing field and equal opportunities for all fishers to allow for fair access to marine resources;

Amendment 118 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

~~7. Notes that the Member States have only marginally modified their fishing opportunity allocation methods since the reform of the CFP in 2013;~~deleted

Amendment 119 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes that the Member States ~~have only marginally modified their fishing opportunity allocation methods~~in general have not drawn a direct line between Article 17 and their national quota allocation systems; In this regards, notes that there are no recorded instances of member states changing their allocation methods in 2014 when the reformed CFP and Article 17 came into force, suggesting a minor or non-existent impact since the reform of the CFP in 2013;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 13

~~— having regard to the 2018 World Wildlife Fund report entitled ‘Evaluating Europe’s course to sustainable fisheries by 2020’,~~deleted

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes that the Member States have only marginally modified their fishing opportunity allocation methods since the reform of the CFP in 2013; takes the view that the system therefore works and has not required any adjustment for years;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Notes that the ~~Member States have only marginally modified their~~re is no report from the European Commission to know whether EU Member States have changed their methods of allocating fishing opportunity ~~allocation methods~~ since the reform of the CFP in 2013;

Amendment 122 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that historic catch levels are currently the most common criteria applied by Member States to distribute fishing opportunities~~, whereas vessel size (le~~ since it has proven to be the most social criterion for recognising th~~, power and weight) is the second-most- applied criteria~~e dependence of the resource on the different fleets;

Amendment 123 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Notes that very few Members States use criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature to distribute fishing opportunities and that, if used, they do not have much weight in the final distribution;deleted

Amendment 124 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Notes that ~~very few~~some Members States use criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature to distribute fishing opportunities and that, if used, they do not have much weight in the final distribution;

Amendment 125 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Recalls that the use of ~~criteria~~transparent and objective criteria including those of an environmental, social or economic nature is an obligation for Member States under Article 17 of the CFP;

Amendment 126 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Recalls that the use of transparent and objective criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature is an obligation for Member States under Article 17 of the CFP;

Amendment 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Recalls that the use of transparent and objective criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature is an obligation for Member States under Article 17 of the CFP;

Amendment 128 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Recalls that for the Member States referred to in Article 16 the use of criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature is an obligation ~~for Member States~~ under Article 17 of the CFP;

Amendment 129 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Recalls that the use of criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature is not an obligation for Member States under Article 17 of the CFP;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 13

~~— having regard to the 2018 World Wildlife Fund report entitled ‘Evaluating Europe’s course to sustainable fisheries by 2020’,~~deleted

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Recalls that the use of criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature is a~~n obligation~~ possibility for Member States under Article 17 of the CFP;

Amendment 131 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Considers that, where Member States are not using environmental and social criteria, it creates legal risks and legal uncertainty as quota allocations systems are more likely to be challenged in courts;

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Considers that the current allocation methods, exceedingly based on historical rights criteria, allow for a certain level of economic stability in the fishing sector, but, at the same time, contribute to reinforcing trends, such as economic concentration in the fishing sector ~~and the difficulty of~~, that distort competition, erect barriers at the entrance and renders the sector little attractingve for new young fishers; considers, furthermore, that these methods do not provide incentives to fishers who implement fishing practices with a reduced environmental impact, do not provide fair opportunities to small- scale fishers and threaten their existence; in this regards, calls on Member States to adequately protect small-scale fisheries with substantial ad hoc quotas and guarantee that any future increase in quotas, due to good stock management or a successful recovery plan, is redistributed mainly among this segment of the fleet;

Amendment 133 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Considers that the current allocation methods allow for a certain level of economic stability in the fishing sector, but can contribute to reinforcing trends such as economic concentration in the fishing sector and the difficulty of attracting new young fishers; considers, furthermore, that these methods do not provide incentives to fishers who implement fishing practices with a reduced environmental impact, do not provide fair opportunities to small-scale fishers and threaten their existence;

Amendment 134 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Considers that ~~the current allocation methods allow for~~Member States should ensure a certain level of economic stability in the fish~~ing~~eries sector, but contribute to reinforcing trends such as economic concentration in the fishing sector and the difficulty of attracting new young fishers; considers, furthermore, that these methods do not provide incentives to fishers who implementy providing incentives for segments that use fishing practices with a ~~reduced~~lower environmental impact~~, do not provide fair opportunities to small-scale fishers and threaten their existence~~ by offering opportunities for social, economic and environmental sustainability;

Amendment 135 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Considers that the current allocation methods allow for a certain level of economic stability in the fishing sector, ~~but contribute to reinforcing trends such as economic concentration in the fishing sector and the difficulty of attracting new young fishers;~~ considers, furthermore, that these methods ~~do not~~could provide incentives to fishers who implement fishing practices with a reduced environmental impact, ~~do not~~and to provide fair opportunities to small- scale fishers ~~and threaten~~to ensure their existence;

Amendment 136 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Considers that the current allocation methods allow for a certain level of economic stability in the fishing sector, but may contribute to reinforcing trends such as economic concentration in the fishing sector ~~and the difficulty of attracting new young fishers~~; considers, furthermore, that these methods do not provide incentives to fishers who implement fishing practices with a reduced environmental impact, do not provide fair opportunities to small- scale fishers ~~and threaten their existence~~;

Amendment 137 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Considers~~Appreciates the fact that the current allocation methods allow for a certain level of economic stability in the fishing sector, but acknowledges that these methods can also contribute to reinforcing trends such as economic concentration in the fishing sector and the difficulty of attracting new young fishers; considers, furthermore, that ~~these methods do not~~stability and security provide crucial incentives to fishers whto i~~mplement~~nvest in fishing practices with a reduced environmental impact, ~~do not provide fair opportunities to~~for both small- scale ~~fishers and threaten their existence~~and large- scale fleets;

Amendment 138 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Stresses that artisanal and traditional fisheries and their associations, such as "cofradias", are a fundamental feature of the local society, economy, culture and tradition in many coastal areas and islands across the EU and, therefore, they should receive special attention and treatment;

Amendment 139 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Considers that using criteria of a social or environmental nature when allocating fishing opportunities is not necessary per se in order to fully achieve the objectives set out in the CFP, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030; stresses that innovation also takes place in Member States that primarily use economic criteria to achieve sustainable, low impact and selective fishing; considers that historic fishing rights contribute to the future prospects of fishers and form the basis for innovation and sustainability;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14

~~— having regard to the report by Low Impact Fishers of Europe and Our Fish of 27 October 2021 entitled ‘How the EU can Transition to Low Environmental Impact, Low Carbon, Socially Just Fishing’,~~deleted

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Considers that using all three criteria of ain Article 17 of the CFP, namely criteria of a economic, social or environmental nature when allocating fishing opportunities is ~~necessary~~desirable in order to fully achieve the objectives set out in the CFP, as well as in the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 but that it is the Member States that are responsible for developing and implementing the allocation criteria;

Amendment 141 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Considers that using criteria of a social or environmental nature when allocating fishing opportunities ~~is necessary~~can help in order to fully achieve the objectives set out in the CFP, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030;

Amendment 142 #

Peter van DALEN, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Considers that using criteria of a social or environmental nature when allocating fishing opportunities ~~is necessary in order to fully~~could help to achieve the objectives set out in the CFP, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030;

Amendment 143 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Considers sustainability and selectivity to be the guiding principles of the European institutions when it comes to fisheries policy, irrespective of scale in the fisheries sector; recalls the low environmental impact of electric pulse fishing, which is also recognised by ICES;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Recalls that quality data on the environmental, social and economic impacts of recreational fisheries are often lacking or incomplete, preventing the use of criteria of an environmental, social and economic nature to implement article17;

Amendment 145 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Urges the Commission to improve and strengthen collection of such data for recreational fisheries through an improved Data Collection Framework and other policy instruments;

Amendment 146 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to ensure that each Member State allocates fishing opportunities ~~using a combination of environmental, social and economic criteria, while making sure the criteria ar~~in accordance with the CFP and specially Article 17, using transparent and objective criteria including those of an environmental, social and economic nature; considers that the criteria should aim to be balanced according to local specificities and challenges that need to be tackled in order to maintain its sustainability;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. ~~Calls on the Commission to ensure that each Member State allocates fishing opportunities using a combination of environmental, social and economic criteria~~Expresses the view that finding a balance between the allocation criteria is up to the Member States, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, while making sure the criteria are balanced according to local specificities and challenges that need to be tackled;

Amendment 148 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to ~~ensure that each~~create incentives to Member State allocatesing fishing opportunities using a combination of environmental, social and economic criteria, while making sure the criteria are balanced according to local specificities and challenges that need to be tackled;

Amendment 149 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to ensure that each Member State allocates fishing opportunities using a combination of environmental, social and/or economic criteria, while making sure the criteria are balanced according to local specificities and challenges that need to be tackled;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14

Amendment 150 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to ~~ensure that each Member State~~ allocates fishing opportunities using a combination of environmental, social and economic criteria, while making sure the criteria are balanced according to local specificities and challenges that need to be tackled;

Amendment 151 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Deplores that the Commission has not started infringement procedures against Member States who are not using criteria of an environmental nature to allocate fishing opportunities;

Amendment 152 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that the re ~~are no one- size-fits-all criteria of an environmental~~ality and type of fisheries at the European level is different so that there is no single economic or social ~~nature~~criterion that can be applied uniformly throughout the EUnion;

Amendment 153 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that there are no one- size-fits-all criteria of an environmental or, social or economic nature that can be applied uniformly ~~throughout the EU~~in all the Member States;

Amendment 154 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Recalls that recreational fisheries are not excluded from the scope of Article 17 and that Member States may allocate fishing opportunities to recreational fisheries;

Amendment 155 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Recalls that, in several countries, where Member States and producer organisations have in created quota reserve~~ral countries created quota reserves~~s distributed to fishers based on environmental and social criteria, small- scale fisheries have ended up excluded or the sector has become more concentrated; considers it inappropriate, therefore, to introduce individual and transferable quota systems, which could ~~be distributed to fishers based~~ lead to the privatisation of fishery resources and the con cen~~vironmental and social criteria;~~tration/verticalisation of catches, with negative socio-economic and environmental consequences.

Amendment 156 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Recalls that Member States and producer organisations have in several countries created quota reserves which could be distributed to fishers based on environmental, economic and social criteria;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Considers that new criteria of an environmental and social nature could be introduced in priority for the distribution of fishing quotas for those stocks for which the TACs are increasing;

Amendment 158 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15b. Considers that Member States could introduce criteria of social and economic nature for the distribution of fishing opportunities for those stocks for which the TACs are decreasing, in order to mitigate the impact of the quota reduction on the fishing fleet by protecting those whose viability is at risk or those who have the most positive impact on the local economy;

Amendment 159 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls on the Member States to incentivise fishers to use the most environmentally friendly fishing practices and to include climate and ecosystem considerations in their allocation processes (e.g. the impact on the seabed and the carbon footprint of each fisher or producer organisation), on the basis of a set of transparent criteria;

Amendment 16 #

Peter van DALEN, Jan HUITEMA, Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)

— Having regard to the 2020 report of the Working Group on Electric Trawling, volume 2, number 37 of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) and the ICES Special Advice of 20 May 2020, entitled 'Request from the Netherlands regarding the impacts of pulse trawling on the ecosystem and environment from the sole (Solea solea) fishery in the North Sea';

Amendment 160 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls on the Member States to incentivise fishers to use the most innovative, sustainable and environmentally friendly fishing practices and ~~to include climate and ecosystem considerations~~ methods; considers that such incentives should also be considered while designing their allocation ~~processes (e.g. the impact on the seabed and the carbon footprint of each fisher or producer organisation)~~method according to Article 17;

Amendment 161 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Calls on the Member States to incentivise operators, through their allocation processes, to establish and strengthen social dialogue with unions and workers’ organisations as well as to fully apply collective bargaining agreements in order to promote social sustainability and fair working conditions within the fisheries sector;

Amendment 162 #

16a. Recalls that Member States shall endeavour to provide incentives to fishing vessels deploying selective fishing gear or using fishing techniques with reduced environmental impact; notes that some Member States are providing such incentives; calls on other Member States to provide such incentives;

Amendment 163 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16b. Recalls that, when calculating the carbon footprint of fishing activities, one should take into account the direct emissions due to fuel consumption but also the climate impact of the fishing techniques used as well the emissions along the supply chain;

Amendment 164 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that the allocation of fishing opportunities to operators with a lower environmental impact and a better history of compliance ~~will~~can contribute to ~~restoring fish populations to a sustainable level and~~ improve biodiversity protection;

Amendment 165 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that the allocation of fishing opportunities ~~to operators with~~using criteria such as a lower environmental impact and ~~a better~~considering an operators history of compliance ~~will~~ contribute to restoring fish populations to a sustainable level and improve biodiversity protection;

Amendment 166 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that the allocation of fishing opportunities to operators with a lower environmental impact and a better history of compliance ~~will~~may contribute to restoring fish populations to a sustainable level and improve biodiversity protection;

Amendment 167 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Members States, in line with Article 17 of the CFP, to ~~use age criteria when allocating~~allocate a fair share of the fishing opportunit~~ies~~y available to them~~, in order to support the entry into the business of young fishers~~ on the basis of experience and age criteria as well as to those who decide to enter the sector for the first time in order to even entry barriers, correct market failures, support the entry into the business of young fishers and ultimately facilitate the much needed generational renewal in the fisheries sector;

Amendment 168 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Members States, in line with Article 17 of the CFP, to ~~use~~study the use of age criteria when allocating the fishing opportunities available to them, in order to support the entry into the business of young fishers;

Amendment 169 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Members States, in line with Article 17 of the CFP, to ~~use~~consider using age criteria when allocating the fishing opportunities available to them, in order to support the entry into the business of young fishers;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)

— having regard to Article 6.18 of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries concerning the protection of the rights of artisanal and small-scale fishers and their preferential access, where appropriate, to traditional fishing grounds and resources,

Amendment 170 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Members States, in line with Article 17 of the CFP, to use a~~ge criteria~~ methodology when allocating the fishing opportunities available to them, in order to ~~support the entry into the business of young fishers~~improve transparency;

Amendment 171 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Members States, in line with Article 17 of the CFP, to ~~use age criteria when allocating the fishing opportunities available to them, in order to support the entry into the business of young fisher~~support the entry into the business of young fishers, including through the allocation of fishing opportunities;

Amendment 172 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Encourage the incorporation of young people who can apply innovative and highly sustainable models and can benefit from the transparent application of quota allocation taking into account Article 17 and calls on Member States to use all the opportunities within the European Fisheries Fund to solve the problems of generational change;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Encourages Member States to consider the recreational fisheries sector when allocating fishing opportunities

Amendment 174 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls on the Commission to engage in more proactive work with the Member States to investigate ways to distribute fishing opportunities in line with the recommendations laid down in Article 17 of the CFP, and to publish guidelines on the use of social and environmental criteria when allocating fishing opportunities;deleted

Amendment 175 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls on the Commission to engage in more proactive work with the Member States to investigate ways to distribute fishing opportunities in line with the recommendations laid down in Article 17 of the CFP, and to publish guidelines on the use of social and environmental criteria when allocating fishing opportunities;deleted

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls on the Commission to engage in more proactive work with the Member States to investigate ways to distribute fishing opportunities in line with the recommendations laid down in Article 17 of the CFP~~, and to publish guidelin~~; calls on the Commission to continue to assist Member States oin ~~the~~making use of these social and environmental criteria ~~when allocating fishing opportunitie~~should they wish to make use of them; emphasises that consideration must also be given to offering fishermen prospects for the future and that this is primarily a matter of the long-term security of fishing rights;

Amendment 177 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

Amendment 178 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls on the Commission to engage in more proactive work with the Member States to investigate ways to distribute fishing opportunities in line with the ~~recommendations laid down in~~provisions of Article 17 of the CFP, and to publish guidelines on the ~~use~~correct implementation of the transparent and objective criteria of a social and environmental ~~criteria~~nature when allocating fishing opportunities;

Amendment 179 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the Commission, in its upcoming action plan, to preserve fishery resources, protect marine ecosystems and ~~include a fishing opportunity target to be distributed according to environmental criteria and developed based on an impact assessment~~give fishers the prospect of being able to continue to fish;

Amendment 18 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)

-A. whereas objective 14.b of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals calls for providing “access of small- scale artisanal fishers to marine resources and markets”;

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the Commission, in its upcoming action plan, to preserve fishery resources, protect marine ecosystems, ensure the livelihood of fishermen and include a voluntary fishing opportunity target tohat can be distributed according to environmental criteria and developed based on an impact assessment;

Amendment 181 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the Commission, in its upcoming action plan, to preserve fishery resources, and protect marine ecosystems ~~and include a fishing opportunity target to be distributed according t~~on environmental ~~criteria~~grounds and to developed actions based on an impact assessment;

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the Commission, in its upcoming action plan, to preserve fishery resources, protect marine ecosystems and include a fishing opportunity target to be distributed according to social, economic and environmental criteria and developed based on an impact assessment;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the ~~Commission, in its upcoming action plan,~~Member States to continue efforts to preserve fishery resources, protect marine ecosystems and ~~include a~~distribute fishing opportunit~~y target to be distributed~~ies according to environmental ~~criter~~, social and ~~developed based on an impact assessment~~economic criteria;

Amendment 184 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Stresses the fact that the translation of the original Article 17 wording “shall use” into other languages may have weakened the legally binding imperative of this element inasmuch as in certain cases it has been translated to be suggestive rather than imperative; Stresses therefore the fact that the adoption of Article 17 into national law, particularly regarding the legally binding terminology, should be reviewed and updated where necessary; calls in this regard the Commission to address this issue within its upcoming report on the functioning of the CFP as well as in a possible future review of the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation;

Amendment 185 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission, in its upcoming report on the functioning of the CFP, to analyse the implementation of Article 17 by the Member States and make proposals on how to improve its implementation; in this regard, calls on the Commission to consider the establishment of a legal instrument aimed at introducing the obligation to list publicly the details of the criteria used for allocating quota among the different segment of the fleet and the beneficiaries of the allocations through a national transparency register; Calls on the Commission to also consider the setting up of a permanent mechanism aimed at monitoring the correct implementation of the transparency requirement and the correct balancing of social, economic and environmental obligations listed in Article 17;

Amendment 186 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission, to take this resolution into account in its upcoming report on the functioning of the CFP~~, to~~ and to further analyse the implementation of Article 17 by the Member States and where appropriate, make proposals on how to improve its implementation;

Amendment 187 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Stresses that the EU is still missing a legislative tool in order to implement the ICCAT decisions taken during its latest sessions; Stresses with deep concern that such a normative void risks to endanger the allocation of important quota for the EU fisheries sector; Urges therefore the Presidency of the Council to come up with an alternative proposals to the agreement already reached between the parties that is able to correspondingly meet the position of the European Parliament;

Amendment 188 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Believes in the necessity of a reform of the common fisheries policy that provides Member States with sovereignty over their Exclusive Economic Zone, which promotes the decentralisation of fisheries management and supports local management;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the ~~CFP includes the objectives of minimising the ‘negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem’, of ‘achiev~~objectives of the CFP are to ensure that fishing and aquaculture activities are environmentally sustainable in the long term and managed in a manner consistent with the objectives of generating economic, social and employment benefits~~’, of~~ and contributing ‘to ~~a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing activities, bearing~~ the availability of food products by applying the precautionary approach to fisheries management and seeking to ensure that the exploitation of living m~~ind coastal fisheries and socio-economic aspects’ and of promoting ‘coastal fishing activities, taking into account socio- economic aspects’;~~ arine biological resources restores and maintains populations of harvested species above levels that can produce the maximum sustainable yield;

Amendment 2 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)

— having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy [CFP], amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC2 and specially Article 17

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the CFP includes the objectives of minimising the ‘negative impacts of fishing activities on the marine ecosystem’, of ‘achieving economic, social and employment benefits’, of contributing ‘to a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing activities, bearing in mind coastal fisheries and socio-economic aspects’ and ‘to the availability of food supplies’ and of promoting ‘coastal fishing activities, taking into account socio- economic aspects’;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

AA. whereas the centralisation of fisheries management that the common fisheries policy promotes and the ensuing loss of Member State sovereignty has hampered the requisite local management, which is essential to ensuring that the sector is socio- economically viable, which has repercussions on and is reflected in the distribution of fishing opportunities and in the intensification of concentration phenomena in the sector;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the EU is responsible for setting the annual total allowable catches and total fishing efforts, which are then distributed among the Member States; whereas each Member State distributes these fishing opportunitiesCouncil allocates fishing opportunities to the Member States ensuring the relative stability of fishing activities of each Member State in relation to each stock or fishery and each Member State allocates them among ~~its~~ fishers and producer organisations with this goal;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

BA. whereas fisheries resource management policy needs to be set that provides for collective access to fishery resources, is based primarily on their biological aspects and should take the form of a fisheries co-management system that takes account of the specific conditions of fishery resources and the respective sea areas, with the effective participation of those working in the sector;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, Member States are responsible for allocating fishing opportunities; whereas there may be large differences between the sectors in different countries, with the result that a 'one size fits all' approach is not desirable;

Amendment 25 #

François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas, in that connection, the principle of relative stability, which has proved reliable in the long term and provides the visibility and continuity that fishers badly need, is important.

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas relative stability is important for the Union's fishing fleets;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas Article 17 of the CFP concerns non-transferable fishing rights;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas Article 17 of the CFP cannot be dissociated from Article 16;

Amendment 29 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas according to Article 17~~, it is an obligation for~~ Member States ~~to ‘~~shall use transparent and objective criteria~~’ to allocate fishing opportunities, ‘including those of an environmental, social and economic nature’~~, including those of an environmental, social and economic nature and may include other criteria such as the impact of fishing on the environment, the history of compliance, the contribution to the local economy and historical catch levels to allocate fishing opportunities;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2

— having regard to Article 3(3) of the Treaty on European Union and to Articles 113, 11, 38, 120 and 191 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas ~~according to Article 17, it~~there is an obligation for the Member States referred to in Article 16 to ‘use transparent and objective criteria’ to allocate fishing opportunities, ‘including those of an environmental, social and economic nature’;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas Article 17 includes possible criteria of an environmental, social and economic nature such as ‘the impact of fishing on the environment, the history of compliance, the contribution to the local economy and historic catch levels’;deleted

Amendment 32 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas Article 17 does not exclude recreational fisheries from its scope, and it is up to Member States to decide how to allocate fishing opportunities at national level;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas Article 17 states that ‘Member States shall endeavour to provide incentives to fishing vessels deploying selective fishing gear or using fishing techniques with reduced environmental impact, such as reduced energy consumption or habitat damage’ ~~which implies an obligation of means~~;

Amendment 34 #

Peter van DALEN, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK, Bert-Jan RUISSEN, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas electric pulse fishing, a proven selective and less environmentally harmful fishing technique, was initially proposed by the Commission but has nevertheless been banned;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas ~~Article 16.6 obliges Member States to inform the Commission of the allocation method used, and thus how Article 17 is being implemented~~according to Article 16 Member States shall decide on the method of allocating the fishing opportunities allocated to them which are not subject to a system of transferable fishing concessions, and each Member State shall inform the Commission of the method of allocation;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas Article 16.6 ~~oblig~~requires Member States to inform the Commission of the allocation method used, and thus how Article 17 is being implemented;

Amendment 38 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the STECF assessment of the social dimension of the CFP found that in 2020 only 16 out of 23 coastal Member States replied to the Commission’s request to inform it of the allocation method used; whereas according to STECF, several of those responses were of limited use as they contained only broad descriptions of the national fishing fleet or simply emphasised the intent of their allocations without outlining the ‘transparent and objective criteria’;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the STECF assessment of the social dimension of the CFP found that in 2020 ~~only~~ 16 out of 23 coastal Member States replied to the Commission’s request to inform it of the allocation method used;

Amendment 4 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4

Amendment 40 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. Whereas according to STECF the Commission’s 2020 request to Member States to provide information on their allocation system included a question on impact assessment and only two Member States (Sweden and Denmark) reported conducting such an assessment;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

~~H. whereas, according the NEF report, only two countries, Denmark and Estonia, have public quota registers;~~deleted

Amendment 42 #

Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

~~H. whereas, according the NEF report, only two countries, Denmark and Estonia, have public quota registers;~~deleted

Amendment 43 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

~~H. whereas, according the NEF report, only two countries, Denmark and Estonia, have public quota registers;~~deleted

Amendment 44 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

Ha. Whereas according to STECF Ireland is the only member state that is reported to cite Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 in its management rules and descriptions;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the EU has ~~failed~~not met the deadline to achieve good environmental status of EU marine waters by 2020, as set out in Article 1(1) of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, and ~~to meet its legal deadline to end overfishing by 2020~~maximum sustainable yield (MSY) exploitation rate by 2020 for all fishing stocks; whereas, however, considerable progress has been made towards achieving both objectives: particularly for the MSY target, in the north-east Atlantic almost 100 % of the landings from EU-regulated stocks come from stocks fished at MSY levels and, in general, overfishing in the EU is constantly decreasing;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the EU has failed to achieve good environmental status of EU marine waters by 2020, as set out in Article 1(1) of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, and to meet its legal deadline to end overfishing by 2020; report that the Commission adopted in 2020 on the first cycle of implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, taking into account its holistic nature, established that the EU system of protection is one of the most ambitious in the world and concluded that it needs to be improved to address problems such as overfishing in some seas and unsustainable fishing practices, plastic waste, excess nutrients, underwater noise, and other types of pollution;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. whereas 99% of landings from the Baltic and the North Sea, where stocks are managed by the EU, were 'sustainable managed stocks' in 2020; whereas all TACs in the North-East Atlantic Ocean are in line with maximum sustainable yield (MSY) for all 78 stocks for which scientific advice was available;

Amendment 48 #

Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Jan HUITEMA

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. Whereas the EU committed itself to delivering on the UN 2030 Agenda which includes SDG14: to "Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development";

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas in its resolution on the Farm To Fork Strategy, Parliament called on the Commission and the Member States to ‘build on existing sustainable practices and to facilitate, encourage and provide adequate support for the transition to low- impact fisheries~~’ including ‘~~ and aquaculture and the sustainable development of the sectors, including small-scale coastal fisheries, such as through the application of selective fishing gear, environmentally friendly aquaculture, including organic aquaculture, and energy efficiency solutions and by increasing the percentage of the national quotas allocated to small- scale coastal fisheries’;

Amendment 5 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)

— having regard to the Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 28 April 2021 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2021/… of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a multiannual management plan for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean, amending Regulations (EC) No 1936/2001, (EU) 2017/2107 and (EU) 2019/833 and repealing Regulation (EU) 2016/16271a _________________ 1a (EP-PE_TC1-COD(2019)0272)

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)

Ja. whereas ‘small-scale coastal fishing’ is defined in the EMFAF regulation as fishing activities carried out by marine and inland fishing vessels of an overall length of less than 12 metres and not using towed gear, or by fishers on foot, including shellfish gatherers;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)

Ka. Whereas objectives of the EU Biodiversity Strategy include the reduction of by-catch of species to a level that allows their recovery and conservation;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas EU fisheries ~~greatly contribute to society by creating direct and indirect employment and are of critical importance~~is a strategic sector of the Union, providing a significant number of direct and indirect jobs in fishing and coastal areas, maintaining a sustainable economy by linking employment to the territory, to people’'s livelihoods and to the ~~cultural heritage of several EU coastal commun~~maintenance of cultural traditieons;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)

La. Whereas the EMFAF provides financial support for young fishers starting up fishing activities, while there is no subsequent guarantee for acquiring fishing opportunities;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)

La. whereas fishing makes an indispensable contribution to the Union's food security;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L b (new)

Lb. Whereas there is a large scientific consensus regarding the strong impacts of mobile bottom-contact gears on the seabed, according to STECF;

Amendment 56 #

Lc. Whereas fishing creates jobs both at sea and on land, whereas some regions rely on landings happening locally to ensure the viability of many businesses and maintain lively coastal communities;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas the World Wildlife Fund has evaluated the systems used for distributing fishing opportunities and considers that 69 % of coastal EU Member States (16 out of 23) have not yet implemented the criteria for ensuring a ‘just and sustainable allocation of fishing opportunities’;deleted

Amendment 58 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

Amendment 6 #

Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Søren GADE

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6

— having regard to the Commission communication of 20 May 2020 entitled ‘A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system’ (COM(2020)0381) and its resolution of 20 October 2021 on a farm to fork strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally- friendly food system4 , _________________ 4 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2021)0425.

Amendment 60 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas the NEF notes that of the 22 coastal Member States, 17 use historical landing criteria, 13 use vessel size criteria (e.g. length, power and weight), 12 use social criteria (e.g. fisher age and type of employment contract), 12 use economic criteria (e.g. quota uptake, profitability and economic value), and 11 use environmental criteria (e.g. gear type and pingers); whereas in most cases, the social and environmental criteria do not have much weight in the final quota distribution;deleted

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

Amendment 62 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

O. whereas for the 2020 fishing season, the allocation of the quota of bluefin tuna to small-scale vessels was 3.03 % in Italy, 11.6 % in Croatia, 11.89 % in France~~, 13.68 % in Portugal~~ and 36.93 % in Spain;

Amendment 63 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)

Oa. Whereas very often the management of fishing opportunities is bureaucratic and distant from fishers and the stakeholders involved in the sector; whereas regulations are often complex and opaque and in many cases, policy consultations are not accessible to most fishers;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas ~~som~~most of the stocks are mainly targeted by different fleet types, but ~~many o~~some of thersm are targeted by both small- scale and large-scale fleets;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas some stocks are mainly targeted by ~~different~~particular fleet types, but many others are targeted by both small-scale and large-scale fleets;

Amendment 66 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas some stocks are mainly targeted by ~~different~~particular fleet types, but many others are targeted by both small-scale and large-scale fleets;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)

PA. whereas the application of individual transferable quotas has led to small-scale fleets being excluded from access to important species or to concentration phenomena in a number of countries1-A _________________ 1-A according to Small-scale Fisheries in Europe: Status, Resilience and Governance, pages 15 e 16

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas the Low Impact Fishers of Europe and Our Fish report found that by implementing Article 17 of the CFP and allocating fishing quotas based on transparent and objective criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature, the EU can achieve a just transition to a low-carbon, low-impact fishing fleet;deleted

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Amendment 7 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

— having regard to the 2021 report of STECF on criteria and indicators to incorporate sustainability aspects for seafood products in the marketing standards under the Common Market Organisation (STECF-20-05),

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

Q. whereas ~~the Low Impact Fishers of Europe and Our Fish report found that~~ by implementing Article 17 of the CFP and allocating fishing quotas based on transparent and objective criteria of an environmental, social or economic nature, the EU can achieve a just transition to a low-carbon, low-impact fishing fleet; whereas, however, this objective must go hand in hand with the objective of “achieving economic, social and employment benefits, and of contributing to the availability of food supplies”;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q a (new)

Qa. Whereas introducing social and environmental criteria in the allocation of fishing opportunities is likely to take more time in countries where transferable fishing concessions have been introduced;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital R

R. whereas the Commission is developing an action plan to conserve fishery resources and protect marine ecosystems, which must contribute to one of the main objectives of the European Green Deal by ~~making fisheries more sustainable and~~ensuring sustainability of fisheries and ensure adequate protectingon of marine ecosystems and their biodiversity;

Amendment 73 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Recital R a (new)

Ra. whereas on November 10th, 2020 the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission have reached an agreement on the Regulation establishing a multiannual management plan for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean, amending Regulations (EC) No 1936/2001, (EU) 2017/2107 and (EU) 2019/833 and repealing Regulation (EU) 2016/1627; Whereas such agreement was then voted down by the Council contradicting a decision already agreed with the other two institutions;

Amendment 74 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Recital R a (new)

Ra. whereas Brexit has also had an impact on the distribution of fishing rights in the European Union;

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that fish stocks are a natural ~~common goods that~~public resource and so too are shares or rights to harvest them; Stresses in this regard that they should not be considered commodities and should be managed in a way that guarantees the highest long-term benefits for society and minimises the impact on ecosystems; Stresses also, in this regard, that no actor should be granted an indefinite, exclusive right to fish stocks that are owned commonly;

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that fish stocks are natural common goods that should not be considered commodities and should be managed in a way that guarantees the highest long-term benefits for society and minimises the impact on ecosystemsing activity is an asset in managing our natural common goods and it belongs to our common heritage and that the objectives are to preserve fish stocks, protect the marine environment, ensure the economic viability of the Union's fleets through environmentally, economically and socially sustainable exploitation and based on reliable scientific advice and the precautionary principle;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that fish stocks ~~are natural common goods that should not be considered commodities and~~ should be managed in a way that guarantees the highest long-term benefits for society ~~and~~, minimises the impact on ecosystems and is profitable for those working in the fishing sector;

Amendment 78 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that fish stocks are natural common goods ~~that should not be considered commodities~~ and should be managed in a way that guarantees the highest long-term benefits for society and minimises the impact on ecosystems;

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls that fish stocks are natural common goods that should ~~not be considered commodities and should~~ be managed in a way that guarantees the highest long-term benefits for society and minimises the impact on ecosystems;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)

— having regard to the 2020 study by Said et al. titled ‘Small-scale fisheries access to fishing opportunities in the European Union: Is the Common Fisheries Policy the right step to SDG14b?’,

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Points out that the EU share of wild caught fish and sustainable aquaculture products should be increased in the food supply for the EU population, as they have a small ecological footprint and make an important contribution to a healthy and sustainable diet as indicated by the EC; also notes that stocks in the North-East Atlantic Ocean are managed sustainably and caught according to maximum sustainable yield (MSY).

Amendment 81 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that in fisheries under quota management the problem of choke species has the potential to shut down fishing operations before the end of the season with potentially significant economic implications for fishers; underlines in this regards that a good quota system should include a fair degree of flexibility as it would allow fishers who need an extra quotas for a choke species and fishers who have available quotas to arrive at a mutually beneficial outcome;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Underlines that the fisheries and aquaculture sectors play a key role in providing healthy food with a smaller ecological footprint; emphasises that, especially in the case of wild-caught fish, no artificial feeds, antibiotics, fertilisers or chemical pesticides are used;

Amendment 83 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that it is up to the Member States to determine the criteria they use when allocating fishing opportunities;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Notes that the European Commission has not initiated infringement proceedings against any Member State regarding compliance with Article 17 of the CFP;

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Stresses that it is up to the Member States to determine the criteria they use when allocating fishing opportunities;

Amendment 86 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Deplores the fact that the Member States are not transparent and are not making public what criteria they apply when distributing fishing opportunities; recalls that an objective allocation methods entails the clear and unambiguous description of well-defined allocation criteria including a clear description of the relative weightings of criteria or the conditions for their use in case of multiple criteria for allocation;

Amendment 87 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Deplores the fact that the Member States are not~~Stresses that there is no European Commission study analysing the application of the criteria for the allocation of quotas under Articles 16 and 17 of the CFP, including the transparentcy and ~~are not making public what criteria they apply when distributing fishing opportunitie~~objectivity of the criteria, in the various Member States, the basis for the analysis being studies by various foundations or NGOs;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Deplores the fact that thsome Member States are not transparent and are not making public what criteria they apply when distributing fishing opportunities;

Amendment 89 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Deplores the fact that the Member States are not transparent and are not making public what criteria they apply when distributing fishing opportunities~~Emphasises that transparency with regard to allocation criteria should take into account the sensitivity of business data;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)

— having regard to the judgement number 1801790 given on July 15th, 2021 by the fourth chamber of the Administrative Court of Montpellier

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Deplores the fact~~States that thsome Member States ~~are not~~should improve transparentcy and ~~are not~~ making public what criteria they apply when distributing fishing opportunities;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Deplores the fact that the Member States are not transparent and are not~~Encourages Member States to demonstrate transparency by making public what criteria they apply when distributing fishing opportunities;.

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to start infringement procedures against Member States who are not respecting their obligations in terms of transparency on the allocation of fishing opportunities;

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to draw up a report on the application of the criteria of Articles 16 and 17 of the CFP by each of the Member States;

Amendment 94 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Ivo HRISTOV, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that transparent allocation criteria provides stability and legal certainty for operators; stresses therefore that information on the functioning of the system of fishing opportunities, including the method of allocation, should be easily accessible and capable of being understood by the general public so as to facilitate a consistent, rule-based allocation method that allows fora better scrutiny, less influence by particular interests and a more predictability for fishers;

Amendment 95 #

Gabriel MATO, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Emphasi~~Stresses that t~~ransparent allocation criteria provides stability and legal certainty for operators~~he criteria for the allocation of fishing opportunities based on past performance are those that provide greater stability and legal certainty for operators and also recognises the dependence of the resources of the different fleets, and that it is desirable to make progress on transparency at European level with regard to the criteria and their practical application;

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that transparent allocation criteria is one of the parameters allowing to provides stability and legal certainty for operators;

Amendment 97 #

Pietro BARTOLO, Manuel PIZARRO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Isabel CARVALHAIS, Carmen AVRAM, Clara AGUILERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that transparent allocation criteria should provides stability and legal certainty for operators;

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Calls on~~Underlines that quota shares represent the entitlement to a public resource; calls on in this regard the Member States to make their respective methods of distributing fishing opportunities and the final quota allocation of each producer organisation and each vessel publicly available through the establishment of a compulsory public register at the national level, in line with the applicable data protection legislation;

Amendment 99 #