4 Amendments of Ian HUDGHTON related to 2011/2292(INI)
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that the over-centralised model of fisheries management that has characterised the CFP over the last 30 years has been a failure and that the current reform must bring about meaningful decentralisation; further notes that small-scale fishing varies hugely across the EU; believes therefore that a one-size-fits-all approach to defining small-scale fishing would be inappropriate and that Member States should be able to apply designations to their fleets as they see appropriate;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that local management, that is based on scientific knowledge and that involves the sector in setting out and implementing policy, is the management type that best meets the needs of small- scale fishing and indeed larger scale fishing, in line with the principles of regionalisation and decentralisation;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. RStrongly rejects the mandatory implementation of TFCs; argues that the decision on whether or not to adopt TFCs and on which sectors of the fleet to include in this scheme should be left to the Member States;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Urges the Commission to work with the Member States to improve the definition of small-scale fishing in the EU in a manner which fully recognises the huge variation in fisheries across the Union and respects the rights of Member States to manage their fleets in the most appropriate way;