Activities of Marco AFFRONTE related to 2015/2092(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on a new CFP: structure for technical measures and multiannual plans PDF (181 KB) DOC (140 KB)
Amendments (27)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the reform of the common fisheries policy (CFP) includeds among its objectives the achievement ofrestoring and maintaining the fish stocks at levels above the maximum sustainable yield (MSY), using an ecosystem-based approach; whereas technical measures and multiannual plans, which are concerned with conservation, are the main tools to achieve these objectives;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. believes that minimum conservation reference sizes should be established according to the maturity size of the species, with the aim of ensuring the protection of juveniles of marine organism and allowing every individual to spawn at least once before capture
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the current technical measures are currently so complex, diverse and disorganised, as to becomplex and therefore difficult to understand and implement from the fisheries sector; whereas frequently there are inconsistentcies or even contradictory, not to mention being difficult for those in the fisheries sector to comprehend;ions among the rules.
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the complexity of the technical measures and the difficulties arising, coupled with the absence of any tangible results or incentives under the CFP have contributed to making fishermen mistrustful, notwithstanding the financial support foreseen in the EMFF to adapt to the changes of the new CFP, the complexity of the technical measures and the difficulties arising, have contributed to making adherence to the rules difficult for fishermen;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the review of technical measures, based on a solid scientificin accordance with best available scientific advice and ecosystem- based approach, should seek to improve the environmental sustainability of the fishery resources without compromising the and marine resources in a way that is consistent with the socioeconomic viability of fishing activitythe sector;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas regionalisation can help make the rules simpler and more comprehensible, which would be greatly welcomed by the fisheries sector and other stakeholders, especially where it isthey are involved in the adoption thereof;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas certain proposals for specific regulations containing technical measures (concerning driftnets, cetacean bycatches, ban on on-board shark finning or deep-sea fishing) have proved controversial; whereas some proposals, such as those concerning deep-sea fishing in the northeast Atlantic, have been blocked for over three years; whereas deliberations on driftnet fishing are also deadlocked; whereas a number of specific provisions regarding technical measures, such as those concerning on-board shark finning, have been rejected by the RFMOs,shark finning is now prohibited by most RFMOs and the 28 Member States of the EU, RFMOs finning bans still contain loopholes that hinder compliance, monitoring and enforcement
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas technical measures need also to be applicable in the Mediterranean are not always adapted to the needs of the different local fisherieswhere according to recent scientific advice, 22 of the 23 Mediterranean fish stocks assessed are overexploited, the management of fish stocks in a sustainable way is vital; in that respect the simplification and adaptability of the legislation to the realities on the ground is important;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital T
Recital T
T. whereas CFP reform introduced landing requirements while failing to do anything to make the and the maximum sustainable yield objective requiring that annual fishing opportunities (TACs) and quota systems less inherently rigid;s must necessarily respect scientific advice.
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital U
Recital U
U. whereas difficulties in implementing the discard ban in mixed fisheries are likely to arise with 'choke' specieslanding obligation that arise with 'choke' species can be facilitated through the flexibilities and exemptions provided in the CFP; whereas the multiannual plans should thereforealso seek to promote instruments, such as fishing effort regulation, that are unconstrained by the rigidities of the TAC and quota systemregulating the exploitation rate through improved gear selectivity, time and area closure and sustainable, low impact fishing practices, thereby helping to ensure maximum sustainable yield and improve the economic performance of fleets at a given fishing mortality rate;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
V. whereas, following the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Parliament has joint legislative powers with regard to fisheries, aside from TACs and quotas;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Z
Recital Z
Z. whereas, within the inter-institutional taskforce on multiannual plans, aan exploitation rate under the maximum sustainable yield targelimit and deadline for achieving it, a conservaprecautionary safeguard trigger mechanism, a mechanism for adapting to unforeseen changes in scientific thinking to protect against perturbations in the fishable biomass, a minimum target biomass above level capable to produce MSY, a mechanism for adapting to the best available science and a review clause were identified as the elements common to future multiannual plans;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AA
Recital AA
AA. whereas the plans must set a general objective that is achievable in administrative and scientific terms; whereas it should include high andlong-term stable yields following scientific advice, something which must be reflected in annual Council decisions regarding fishing opportunities in the light of the latest scientific intelligenadvice; whereas these annual decisions should be strictly confined to the allocation of fishing opportunities, and should as far as possible seek to avoid large fluctuations in this respect;chieve the maximum sustainable yield.
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AD
Recital AD
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AE
Recital AE
AE. whereas, in the absence of multiannual plans, minimum conservation reference sizes may be modified under discard plans adopted by the Commission in delegated acts on the recommendations of the Member States concerned as far as the protection of juveniles of marine organisms is ensured and scientific scrutiny is followed;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that technical measures must be reviewed in a bid to simplify and standardise current rules, improve the scientific base and make it more consistent and more acceptable to the fisheries sectorement the objectives of the CFP, simplify current rules, increase the scientific base;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Maintains that the simplification and regionalization of technical measures should be always consistent with the real purpose of the technical measures regulation which is the minimization of unwanted catches and impacts on the marine environment;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that any measure adopted at regional level should conform with the technical measures framework regulation and be coherent with the objectives of the CFP and Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2008/56/EC
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers it necessary to assess the suitability, effectiveness and socio- economic implications for EU fleets of specific regulations based on technical measures, such as those concerning driftnets, incidental cetacean catches, the ban on on-board shark finning or deep-sea fishing;, while respecting the objectives of the CFP and of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD).
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Believes that minimum conservation reference sizes should be established according to the maturity size of the species, with the aim of ensuring the protection of juveniles of marine organism and allowing every individual to spawn at least once before capture
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that the conservation objective of the regulation on technical measures could be achieved more effectively through actions aimed at improving supply and demand management, foc7using to a greater extent on producer organisations, thereby optimizing the results being sought by EU provisions;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that multi-annual plans should form a robust and lasting framework for fisheries management, be based on best and most recent scientific and socio- economic findings and be adapted to the evolution of stocksdvice and be able to implement the objectives of the CFP , as well as providing flexibilityguidance for annual Council decisions on fishing opportunities; notes that these annual decisions should not exceed the strict scope of the allocation of fishing opportunities, and should, as far as possible, seek to avoid large fluctuations thereof;
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Maintains that it is necessary to deviseprogress must be made on future multiannual plans for achieving min order to ensure the sustainable management of fisheries and the goal to achieve Maximum sSustainable yYield for all stocks, including an advance timetable, a conservation safeguard trigger, a mechanism for adapting to changes in scientific thinking and a review clause;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that, in order to avoid problems arising from compulsory landings for mixed fisheries, it would be advisable to find ways of regulating the fmproving selectivity and minimishing effort free of the rigidities of TACs and quotasunwanted catches is necessary;
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that the European Parliament should give particularly closeStresses the importance of the European Parliament co-decision role on monitoring the CFP and its power of scrutiny tover delegated acts regarding the discard pls bans;
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21