10 Amendments of Bert-Jan RUISSEN related to 2022/2003(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas co-management can only function if the principle of subsidiarity is respected; whereas the European Union could play a facilitating role to make co- management possible;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, to date, there is no legislationare few instruments at European level governfacilitating the implementation of co-management mechanisms, even if in many of its Member States this system is being used to manage some of their fisheries, applying rules that fit in perfectly with the current Common Fisheries Policy;
Amendment 21 #
G. whereas traditional management in some cases has not had the desired effects on improving stocks and maintaining employment;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that the lack of specific Community legislationEU instruments for the implementation of fisheries co- management systems could in some cases hinders their use in the management of fisheries in the Member States, as this depends solely and exclusively on the specific commitment of the competent authorities;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that this lack of Community legislation makes it difficult to implement models legally, despiteany EU instruments should be aimed at facilitating the implementation of co-management models, to meet the interest that the sector and administrations may show in applying them in a given area, and that opportunities are missed to implement co-management projects in more areas;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Asks the Commission for a regulatory framework onto assess how fisheries co- management, which is directly applicable in the Member States can be better facilitated, taking into account the principle of subsidiarity;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses that there iscould be, moreover, a need in the current co- management systems for concrete legislative measures to pave the way for the setting up of co- management committees and to speed up the process of implementing measures, as the legislative framework is currently unclear in most regions, which means that the requisite timeframe for their creation and implementation is in the long term, whereas solutions are needed in the short to medium term;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that, in the absence of a clear legal framework, successful co- management of fisheries projects is difficult as it involvrequires medium- and long- term processes and a committed leadership, which is why European support for this system is essential;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Emphasises that, with regard to the European Union, co-management – and similar concepts such as co-governance or participatory management – has been briefly described in the preamble to various regulations at European level, but it has not been properly developed in their articles, nor has it generated sufficient debate to promote specific legislation for; welcomes a debate to promote this fisheries management system, which has proved its worth in different regions and in different cases;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Emphasises that the European Union could facilitate the implementation of co-management; emphasises that EU measures for co-management should focus on enabling initiatives at local, regional and national level, as well as the exchange of best practices;