17 Amendments of Ian DUNCAN related to 2014/0138(COD)
Amendment 20 #
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety calls on the Committee on Fisheries, as the committee responsible, to propose rejection of the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down a prohibition on driftnet fisheries, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 850/98, (EC) No 812/2004, (EC) No 2187/2005 and (EC) No 1967/2006 and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 894/97.
Amendment 24 #
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 a (new)
Recital 18 a (new)
(18a) Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 1380/2013 reformed the Common Fisheries Policy on the basis of the principles of regionalisation and subsidiarity. This approach is an essential component of the new CFP and is positively viewed by Member States and industry experts as vital to successfully tackling the main challenges faced by Europe's fishermen.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 b (new)
Recital 18 b (new)
(18b) Accordingly, any ban on the use of driftnets should fully take account of the heightened role of Regional Advisory Councils and should be supported by a full and accurate impact assessment, complete with robust data demonstrating precisely where the use of driftnets continues to pose a significant environmental problem. To date, such a comprehensive impact assessment has yet to be carried out. As a result, implementing a universal ban on driftnet fisheries throughout all EU waters would run in stark contradiction to the Commission's previously stated commitment of promoting an agenda of regionalisation and subsidiarity.
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 c (new)
Recital 18 c (new)
(18c) One of the principal justifications for introducing a blanket ban on driftnet fisheries throughout EU waters is that the current rules have been easily circumvented. These rules should be more stringently enforced. Furthermore, regulations relating to gear characteristics (maximum mesh size, maximum twine thickness and hanging ratio etc.) and use (maximum distance from the coast, soaking time and fishing season etc.) will be amended next year in the overhaul of technical measures. Pre- empting this process with a universal ban on driftnets is disproportionate and unreasonable.
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 d (new)
Recital 18 d (new)
(18d) The significant efforts made by many European driftnet fisheries businesses to embrace sustainable environmental management, and achieve accreditation by bodies such as the UK's Marine Stewardship Council, should be recognised, applauded and, by implication, supported by any relevant Union legislation.
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 e (new)
Recital 18 e (new)
(18e) The Commission stresses that the precautionary principle and an ecosystem-based approach should be taken when regulating the use of driftnet fisheries in EU waters. However, certain fishermen have already met these standards and should not be punished accordingly.
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18 f (new)
Recital 18 f (new)
(18f) In the event that sustainability accreditation has been achieved, such driftnet fisheries should be exempt from any proposed ban on the use of driftnets. Where fisheries fail to achieve such accreditation, yet continue to use large- scale driftnet practices, firmer enforcement of existing regulations is required.
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation shall apply to all fishing activities within the scope of the Common Fisheries Policy as set out in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013. with the following exemptions: a) vessels using driftnets within 12 miles of the coastline of a member state b) vessels using driftnets outside of 12 miles of the coastline of a member state where the minimum mesh size is 47 mm for pelagic fisheries and 90mm for demersal fisheries
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3
Article 3
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Before the prohibition of any type of driftnet, the European Parliament shall carry out a detailed impact assessment by driftnet type.