21 Amendments of François-Xavier BELLAMY related to 2021/2168(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
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 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12
Citation 12
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13
Citation 13
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14
Citation 14
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
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 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
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 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
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 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the EU has failednot 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 2020maximum 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 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas sommost of the stocks are mainly targeted by different fleet types, but many osome of thersm are targeted by both small- scale and large-scale fleets;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
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 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
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 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
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 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that transparent allocation criteria is one of the parameters allowing to provides stability and legal certainty for operators;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
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 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
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 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
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 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises that the allocation of fishing opportunities to operators with a lower environmental impact and a better history of compliance willcan contribute to restoring fish populations to a sustainable level and improve biodiversity protection;