Indekss 
 Iepriekšējais 
 Nākošais 
 Pilns teksts 
Procedūra : 2011/0212(COD)
Dokumenta lietošanas cikls sēdē
Dokumenta lietošanas cikls : A7-0447/2011

Iesniegtie teksti :

A7-0447/2011

Debates :

PV 13/03/2012 - 18
CRE 13/03/2012 - 18

Balsojumi :

PV 14/03/2012 - 9.1
Balsojumu skaidrojumi
Balsojumu skaidrojumi

Pieņemtie teksti :

P7_TA(2012)0074

Debates
Otrdiena, 2012. gada 13. marts - Strasbūra Pārskatītā redakcija

18. Eiropas Zivsaimniecības fonds (debates)
Visu runu video
PV
MPphoto
 

  El Presidente. − El punto siguiente es el debate sobre el informe de João Ferreira, en nombre de la Comisión de Pesca, sobre la propuesta de Reglamento del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo por el que se modifica el Reglamento (CE) nº 1198/2006 del Consejo, relativo al Fondo Europeo de Pesca, en lo que atañe a determinadas disposiciones de gestión financiera aplicables a ciertos Estados miembros que sufren o corren el riesgo de sufrir graves dificultades con respecto a su estabilidad financiera (COM(2011)0484 - C7-0219/2011 - 2011/0212(COD)) (A7-0447/2011).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  João Ferreira, relator. − Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, na União Europeia a crise económica e financeira teve, e tem, uma expressão diferenciada nos diversos Estados-Membros. Tal reflete as divergências e os desequilíbrios existentes, reflete as desigualdades que existem entre os Estados-Membros. Estas desigualdades têm expressão em múltiplas dimensões. Uma delas diz respeito à capacidade de acesso e de utilização de fundos comunitários.

Os países de economias mais débeis, que necessitam mais dos fundos comunitários, são também, com frequência, os que têm mais dificuldade em aceder a esses fundos. Durante anos isto resultou, em grande parte, das restrições ao investimento público impostas a pretexto do Pacto de Estabilidade, o que dificultou a mobilização do esforço nacional exigido. Hoje, estas restrições são muito agravadas pelos programas do FMI e da União Europeia, em curso em países como Portugal, a Grécia ou a Irlanda.

As opções políticas plasmadas nestes programas estão a conduzir estes países, alvo da intervenção, e os seus povos a uma dramática e profunda recessão económica, com destruição importante de parte do seu tecido económico e social, afetando tanto a capacidade de investimento privado, em especial as pequenas e médias empresas, como do investimento público que é – que foi – reduzido, nalguns casos, a níveis historicamente baixos.

As comunidades costeiras mais dependentes da pesca não escapam a este quadro geral. Com uma agravante: é que, neste caso concreto, a este quadro geral somam-se anos de declínio e de desestruturação em resultado da evolução específica que se verificou neste setor.

Esta proposta da Comissão de aumento do cofinanciamento comunitário para estes países, e a correspondente redução do esforço nacional, há muito que se impõe como uma necessidade.

Já há dois anos que a própria Comissão Europeia apontou para uma grave subexecução do Fundo Europeu das Pescas. Identificou mesmo as causas desta subexecução. Esta proposta era, por isso, há muito necessária, e chega lamentavelmente tarde. Por essa razão, a urgência da sua aprovação é manifesta e consideramos importante a sua aprovação em primeira leitura. Mas, com isto, não esquecemos as limitações que a proposta apresenta também, manifestamente. E quero aqui expressar algumas delas, esperando que a Comissão as tenha em devida conta.

Consideramos que a Comissão deve avaliar em que medida esta alteração efetivamente proporciona aos Estados-Membros os fundos necessários para apoio a projetos e a recuperação da sua economia, conforme consta da proposta da Comissão. É que deve notar-se que as restrições ao investimento impostas pelos programas de assistência podem mesmo, nas novas condições, continuar a dificultar a mobilização do esforço nacional exigido de 15 e 40 % para as regiões elegíveis e não elegíveis, respetivamente, ao abrigo do objetivo da convergência.

A Comissão deverá considerar assim, em nosso entender, a necessidade de eliminar as restrições ao investimento, por um lado, mas também a possibilidade de reduzir ainda mais o cofinanciamento nacional. Por outro lado, deve sublinhar-se que a proposta da Comissão não aumenta o orçamento à disposição de cada um dos países. O resultado prático desta opção, em resultado da redução do esforço nacional destes países que estão em maiores dificuldades, será a canalização de um montante global de verbas de investimento no setor comparativamente mais reduzido em relação àquilo que estava inicialmente previsto. Serão, por isso, mais reduzidas as perspetivas de crescimento abertas pelos investimentos realizados nestes Estados-Membros. É, mais uma vez, o princípio da coesão que pode estar em causa, pelo que a Comissão deverá considerar a possibilidade de aumento dos fundos à disposição destes países.

Além disso, as regras de apuramento dos défices das contas públicas deverão separar as despesas de investimento da restante despesa pública, não devendo as primeiras ser consideradas, de forma a não sobrepor a dita consolidação orçamental ao crescimento económico, sem o qual, a médio e longo prazo, qualquer consolidação se tornará inviável.

Termino, Senhora Presidente, perguntando-lhe o porquê de o regulamento que estabelece as medidas financeiras para a execução da PCP não ter sido incluído na proposta da Comissão. Este regulamento financia domínios muito importantes, como, por exemplo, a recolha de dados e de pareceres científicos, e as percentagens de cofinanciamento comunitário neste domínio são, em geral, baixas, no máximo de 50 %. Porque não foi este regulamento – e as medidas que ele financia – também contemplado na proposta da Comissão?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, it is obvious that many of our Member States face a lot of difficulties relating to the economic crisis. I do not want to undermine the severity of the problems, and of course I do not expect to solve these problems through today’s proposal. As you perhaps know, however, the Commission committed at the Euro summit of July 2011 to provide more liquidity to the Member States most affected by the crisis by increasing the co-financing rates in EU Funds, and this proposal follows on from that.

I think the proposal is a positive measure: we are trying to facilitate the absorption of the funds. We are trying to help Member States facing difficulties, but of course the crisis, and all the problems deriving from it, are a very important issue that cannot be solved in the margins of this discussion.

This proposal is limited in scope, since the purpose of these amendments is specifically to provide more liquidity to Member States. Parliament and the Council have already adopted the necessary amendments for the European Regional Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the Social Fund and the Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. Now this House will vote on similar amendments to the European Fisheries Fund.

The sustained financial and economic crisis is indeed increasing the pressure on national financial resources as Member States reduce their budgets. I share the rapporteur’s concerns about this. Ensuring the smooth implementation of national operational programmes adopted under EU funds is, therefore, of particular importance. The implementation of fisheries operational programmes, in particular, injects funds into the fisheries and aquaculture sectors.

We want to allow the most affected Member States – those that have received financial assistance under the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism or from the Balance of Payments mechanism – to continue to implement their European fisheries programmes on the ground and disburse funds to projects. To achieve this purpose, our proposal would allow the Commission to reimburse newly declared expenditure by an increased amount for the period in which a Member State was under these support mechanisms. This increased amount would be calculated by applying an additional 10 percentage points to the applicable co-financing rates of each priority axis of the operational programmes.

The total financial allocation for the period from the EFF to the countries and the programmes concerned will not change; the proposal will thus not affect the overall budget. Actually the new budget is in front of this House, and you can discuss this greater issue in the framework of this discussion.

The cooperation between Parliament, Council, and the Commission on this file has been excellent, since all parties were aware of the importance of adopting the proposal as quickly as possible. I expect that a positive vote in plenary will lead to the proposal’s imminent adoption, which will enable us to come to the assistance of those Member States that most need this facilitation as soon as possible.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Maria do Céu Patrão Neves, em nome do Grupo PPE. – Senhor Presidente, bem-vinda, Senhora Comissária. Felicito a proposta da Comissão Europeia de estabelecer condições mais favoráveis para que os Estados-Membros que se encontram em dificuldades graves ou sob ameaça de tais dificuldades, relacionadas com a sua estabilidade financeira, possam beneficiar efetivamente do Fundo Europeu das Pescas. E aqui secundo também o relator ao sublinhar a urgência da aprovação desta proposta em primeira leitura.

Creio, porém, que se podia e se devia ter ido um pouco mais longe. Considero que existem duas vertentes fundamentais a tomar em consideração neste contexto – as quais, aliás, não devem ser separadas. Uma primeira, que se reporta a todas as medidas que facilitem o aumento da taxa de execução do FEP, e uma segunda, que deve incidir sobre a possibilidade de revisão das prioridades do FEP e mesmo da sua reprogramação para tornar este fundo mais adequado às necessidades reais de um tempo e de um espaço concretos. Só assim será possível alcançar o objetivo fundamental de não só aumentar as taxas de execução, mas também de otimizar os resultados, isto é, de promover investimentos reprodutivos, de garantir um impacto positivo efetivo nas comunidades pesqueiras.

Neste contexto, sublinho dois aspetos principais que correspondem aos dois desideratos agora apontados. Primeiramente, a exigência de se tomar em consideração o facto de cada comunidade poder ter necessidades específicas a que o FEP deve poder responder adequadamente, como seja a modernização de embarcações em termos de segurança, higiene, boas práticas ambientais, e a este nível particular destaque para o investimento em artes de pesca amigas do ambiente e em motores cada vez menos poluentes. Estas ações têm de estar contempladas.

Importa ainda tomar em devida consideração a resolução recentemente aprovada pelo Parlamento sobre a multifuncionalidade das pescas e a sua capacidade de produção de bens públicos, a qual chama a atenção para a pluralidade das atividades a que a pesca dá origem e para a partilha dos benefícios, por toda a sociedade, que a pesca produz. Os fundos devem, pois, poder ser de aplicação flexível e de largo espetro.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Κρίτων Αρσένης, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας S&D. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, στηρίζω ανεπιφύλακτα με όλη μου την καρδιά αυτή τη νομοθεσία διότι αποτελεί πραγματική κίνηση αλληλεγγύης. Θετική δεν είναι μόνο η εξοικονόμηση των πόρων που πραγματοποιείται, πόρων κρίσιμων που στην περίπτωση της Ελλάδας ανέρχονται σε 20 εκατ. ευρώ, θετική είναι η δυνατότητα πρόσβασης στους ευρωπαϊκούς πόρους που αποκτούν αυτές οι χώρες.

Πολλές χώρες πλήττονται από την κρίση. Η κρίση μαστίζει όλη την Ευρώπη αλλά σήμερα δείχνει το πιο σκληρό της πρόσωπο σε συγκεκριμένες χώρες που δεν έχουν δυνατότητα να δώσουν το δικό τους ποσοστό συμμετοχής. Με την μείωση του ποσοστού της ίδιας συμμετοχής, επιτρέπουμε σε αυτές τις χώρες να χρησιμοποιήσουν αυτούς τους πόρους, πόρους που για την Ελλάδα ανέρχονται στο ύψος των 207 εκατ. ευρώ, πόρους που αλλιώς δεν θα μπορούσαν να χρησιμοποιηθούν.

Αυτοί οι πόροι αποτελούν ευκαιρία για τη χρηματοδότηση των προτεραιοτήτων του Ταμείου για την αλιεία, όπως είναι η βιώσιμη ανάπτυξη, η βιώσιμη αλιεία και η ανάπτυξη των παράκτιων περιοχών αλλά και η ενίσχυση των νέων αλιέων. Τούτο είναι πολύ σημαντικό τη στιγμή που η πιο σκληρή πλευρά της κρίσης αφορά ακριβώς την ανεργία των νέων που πλησιάζει το 50 % σε πάρα πολλές από τις χώρες που μαστίζονται από την κρίση.

Είναι σαφές ότι αυτή η νομοθεσία αγγίζει την καρδιά του προβλήματος. Το μήνυμα που θα ήθελα πραγματικά να λάβουν οι χώρες της Μεσογείου που θα επωφεληθούν από αυτόν τον κανονισμό, αλλά και οι υπόλοιπες χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, είναι ότι πρέπει να αδράξουμε την ευκαιρία για να εφαρμόσουμε, είτε τον κανονισμό της Μεσογείου, είτε άλλους κανονισμούς για την αλιεία, ώστε να μπορούμε να εγγυηθούμε ότι θα υπάρχουν ψάρια, να εγγυηθούμε ότι θα προστατευθούν οι αλιευτικοί πόροι προκειμένου να υπάρχουν αλιείς και να υπάρχουν οι θέσεις εργασίας που έχουμε τόσο πολύ ανάγκη.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, en nombre del Grupo ALDE. – Señor Presidente, el sector de la pesca en Europa está atravesando por malos momentos y si además hablamos del sector de la pesca de países que tienen programas de ajuste económico, la situación aún es más dramática. Por ello felicito a la Comisión, porque con el aumento de la cofinanciación a los programas del Fondo Europeo de Pesca ayudaremos a distintos países —entre ellos Grecia, Irlanda o Portugal— a que puedan tener más liquidez y puedan seguir ejecutando los programas de cohesión que ayudarán a su recuperación económica mediante la creación de empleo y el estímulo del crecimiento.

La aplicación retroactiva de las medidas, desde el 1 de enero de 2012, contribuirá a ello, y esperemos que sea suficiente con su aplicación hasta el 31 de diciembre de 2013, porque ello querrá decir que Europa está saliendo de este bache.

Creo que con esta decisión las instituciones europeas estarán demostrando que están a la altura de las circunstancias. Por ello espero que, tal y como prevé el ponente, este informe pueda ser aprobado en primera lectura.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Isabella Lövin, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, there is really not much argument on the topic of this discussion tonight in plenary; those countries that are eligible to increase cofinancing of the EFF have indeed severe budget constraints today, and we support this step to make it easier for them to implement their fisheries programmes and invest in the future.

I think that in this context, it is important – especially for those countries that have declining areas which are very dependent on fisheries – to take the opportunity offered by this amended regulation also to review and update operational programmes and adapt in order to become competitive in the future. In our opinion, the proposal for a new European maritime and fisheries fund that will replace the current European Fisheries’ Fund shows the way.

There is only one way for Member States aiming to mitigate and reduce the risk of future crises in the fisheries sector, and that is to rebuild stocks. No young person in the European Union today wants to invest their future in a business that is not sustainable but is dependent on subsidies; if there were, consumers would not accept it. Fisheries have to be ecologically sustainable in order to be economically and socially sustainable in the long term. With no fish there can be no fishermen.

The future EMFF must be designed and implemented in order to support the objectives of the CFP, especially the sustainable exploitation of marine resources. In these times of budget restraints it is even more important that the entire European Maritime and Fisheries Fund be geared for supporting sustainability. Public aid should be restricted to investments that are in the public interest.

Considerable amounts of money from the Structural Funds used to be awarded to building new vessels and modernising existing ones. In the new EMFF, the Commission is proposing some significant changes, including the suggestion to terminate public aid for scrapping, which is still available under the current programme.

The European Court of Auditors has criticised the scrapping aid for not having contributed to the reduction of fleet capacity. Indeed, if a ship owner knows that a handsome subsidy for leaving the fleet in the future will always be available, there is good reason to stay on and hope that the situation improves. Such aid is not consistent with the promotion of sustainable fishing.

Aid for the modernisation of fishing vessels is rarely in the public interest either, and while the idea of paying a ship owner to install a more energy-efficient engine which emits less CO2 may be seductive, it is in reality impossible to ensure that the fishing capacity and effort are not increased when an engine becomes more energy efficient. Significant changes to the EU fishing fleets will be needed. If they are to be achieved, public aid could help in different ways. It must, however, be limited to measures which reduce the environmental impact of the fishing operations by such means as the conversion of vessels and gear to methods which are more selective or inflict less damage to the sea floor.

Social support measures during the restructuring of the EU fleet will also be critical. So far, such social support has been directed too much towards ship owners and too little towards the crew, and this imbalance must be redressed through measures such as retraining. Only in this way will the fishing sector be sustainable in the future.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marek Józef Gróbarczyk, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Chciałbym pogratulować panu Ferreirze za bardzo dobrze wykonaną pracę. Zważywszy na fakt sytuacji finansowej, w jakiej znalazły się kraje Unii Europejskiej, sprawozdanie to ma zasadnicze znaczenie dla sektora rybołówstwa. Przy tej okazji należy zwrócić szczególną uwagę na sytuację rybołówstwa na małą skalę, które najbardziej odczuwa skutki bieżącej sytuacji gospodarczej w Europie. Omawiana obecnie w Komisji Rybołówstwa wspólna polityka rybacka poświęca oddzielny rozdział temu obszarowi rybołówstwa. Ma to niezwykle ważne znaczenie nie tylko w aspekcie ekonomicznym, ale również kulturowym. Tradycja, ciągłość zawodu, przekazywalność doświadczeń, a co najważniejsze – odpowiedzialność zawsze były związane z tą formą rybołówstwa. Należy zadbać o to, aby zawód ten miał możliwość kontynuacji, aby stworzyć warunki zachęcające młode pokolenia do kultywowania tego zawodu rybaka, by ta pokoleniowa tradycja nie zanikła.

Tak więc Europejski Fundusz Rybacki musi pełnić formę pomocową, wsparcia rozwoju branży, nie zaś instrumentu stymulującego rybaków do rezygnacji ze swojego zawodu. Państwa członkowskie przy wsparciu Komisji Europejskiej w ramach Funduszu Rybackiego muszą realizować zrównoważoną politykę nie tylko w kontekście środowiska naturalnego, ale również w kontekście środowiska rybackiego. Gratulując sprawozdawcy, chciałbym powiedzieć, że poprzemy to sprawozdanie.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jacky Hénin, au nom du groupe GUE/NGL. – Monsieur le Président, mieux vaut tard que jamais. Enfin, il est proposé de baisser les taux de cofinancement exigés des États membres pour bénéficier du Fonds européen pour la pêche.

Ce principe du cofinancement Union européenne/États membres est un mauvais principe car il bride les pays les plus faibles, ceux qui subissent de plein fouet les plans d'austérité qui leur sont imposés par l'Union et revient, ni plus ni moins, à ne prêter qu'aux riches.

Il est honteux de voir des Fonds européens non dépensés car les États membres concernés sont trop en difficulté pour apporter la part de financement nécessaire au déblocage de ces fonds. Il est aussi scandaleux de voir que la majeure partie du fonds est affectée au financement de la démolition des navires de pêche au lieu d'aider à l'activité et à l'emploi dans le secteur halieutique.

Force est aussi de constater que cette proposition arrive tard car la pêche artisanale dans l'Union est en train de mourir, ce qui ne résout d'ailleurs rien concernant la nécessaire préservation de la ressource halieutique qui est menacée de destruction par les navires usines battant pavillon japonais ou russe. Ce sont les petits pêcheurs qui trinquent alors que les représentants des exploiteurs de la mer pratiquent tranquillement le lobbying dans les couloirs de Bruxelles.

C'est pourquoi, si l'on veut qu'il y ait encore une pêche sous pavillon des États membres de l'Union, il faut d'urgence réorienter le Fonds européen vers la production et l'emploi, vers la pêche durable, vers la sécurité, vers la recherche de moteurs moins coûteux en carburant. Il faut surtout à l'Europe une véritable politique globale de la pêche du vingt-et-unième siècle qui tourne enfin le dos au dogme libéral de la régulation par le marché.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Νικόλαος Σαλαβράκος, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας EFD. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, συγχαίρω τον κύριο Ferreira για την έκθεση που μας υπέβαλε με τις προτάσεις και τροπολογίες επί του κανονισμού και σημειώνω ότι με ιδιαίτερη ευχαρίστηση άκουσα τις απόψεις της Επιτρόπου, κυρίας Δαμανάκη.

Η επιτάχυνση και οι διευκολύνσεις χρηματοδότησης που προσφέρει το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Αλιείας συνεισφέρουν οπωσδήποτε στην υλοποίηση των στόχων της κοινής αλιευτικής πολιτικής. Η σημασία μιας τέτοιας πρότασης είναι μεγάλη διότι λαμβάνεται σε μια σημαντική χρονική συγκυρία. Σύντομα θα κληθούμε να αποφασίσουμε για την νέα κοινή αλιευτική πολιτική της Ένωσης που θα καθορίσει την πολιτική αλιείας για τα επόμενα δέκα χρόνια.

Η παροχή επαρκών πόρων και η εξάλειψη δυσλειτουργιών ως προς την απορρόφησή τους είναι καθοριστική για την επίτευξη των επιθυμητών αποτελεσμάτων και για την εξασφάλιση της διατήρησης και της βιώσιμης εκμετάλλευσης των θαλασσίων πόρων.

Όπως ακούσαμε, η απορρόφηση των πόρων του Ταμείου Αλιείας είναι σε πολύ χαμηλά επίπεδα. Πρέπει να τονίσω ότι ιδίως στην Ελλάδα οι μικροί και οι παράκτιοι αλιείς βιοπορίζονται από την αλιεία, γεγονός που καθιστά εξαιρετικά σημαντική την αύξηση των πόρων και την διευκόλυνση της διάθεσης των πόρων προς τους αλιείς.

Παράλληλα με την μικρότερη εθνική συμμετοχή στους διαθέσιμους πόρους, σας παρακαλούμε, κυρία Επίτροπε, να εισηγηθείτε ώστε να υπάρξει στον νέο υπό διαμόρφωση προϋπολογισμό αύξηση αυτών των πόρων διότι οι αλιείς πλήττονται, όπως γνωρίζουμε όλοι.

Με την έκθεση αυτή αναγνωρίζεται η πίεση που ασκείται και οι τρόποι με τους οποίους η συνεχιζόμενη πιστωτική και οικονομική κρίση επιδρά στο εισόδημα των αλιέων και στη διαμόρφωση της εν γένει αλιευτικής πολιτικής. Η οικονομική και χρηματοπιστωτική κρίση στην Ένωση εκδηλώνεται βεβαίως με διαφορετικό τρόπο στα διάφορα κράτη μέλη αλλά ολόκληρη η Ευρώπη επηρεάζεται. Είναι απαραίτητη λοιπόν η εξεύρεση τρόπων επίσπευσης της καταβολής κονδυλίων. Παρακαλώ πολύ να γίνουν προσπάθειες προς αυτή την κατεύθυνση και να κατευθυνθούν τα χρήματα εκεί που χρειάζονται χωρίς προσκόμματα για την ανάπτυξη της οικονομίας και την δημιουργία θέσεων απασχόλησης.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Diane Dodds (NI). - Mr President, the European fisheries fund exists to support fishing and coastal communities. It is important that the fund be allowed to contribute to the difficult economic conditions that many countries and communities find themselves in. However, I want simply to draw your attention tonight to my constituency of Northern Ireland. It is the only part of the United Kingdom to share a land border with another country that finds itself in a financial programme because of ongoing economic difficulties. You will then understand that many of the fishermen that I represent look at the disparity in the way some of these proposals will treat them as opposed to their colleagues, who are simply 100 miles down the road. Yet both these fleets suffer from exactly the same problems, and the coastal communities suffer in exactly the same ways: declining fleets and coastal communities that are experiencing ever greater unemployment and economic difficulty.

I think the death blow for many of the fishermen that I represent in Northern Ireland was the results of the December Council meeting, which almost certainly will see the end of the white fish fleet in Northern Ireland. You can understand how frustrated and concerned the fishermen that I represent are by the perception of disparity that they find. Frustratingly as well, they find problems not only with cofinancing and the rates at which they are allowed to cofinance, but also with the administrative burden that the European Fisheries Fund has laid upon them. The fund has been very difficult and burdensome, both for the administrator and for the applicant, and I would like to see some progress made on this front both for the immediate future and for the longer-term, post-2014 situation.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Dolores García-Hierro Caraballo (S&D). - Señor Presidente, señora Comisaria, a la delegación socialista española no nos cabe más que felicitarnos por la iniciativa y apoyarla, porque estamos completamente de acuerdo en que es necesaria para los países que están sufriendo de una manera mucho más cruenta la crisis económica y financiera y la política de ajustes presupuestarios que se está llevando a cabo y se está impulsando desde el Consejo de la Unión Europea.

Creemos que, a través de una mayor dotación del Fondo, es posible ayudar a estos países para que puedan llevar a cabo las políticas no solo de cohesión europea, sino también de desarrollo sostenible de la pesca y de empleo en sus territorios. Y, sobre todo, esto es posible porque creemos que el grado de ejecución del programa —que termina en el año 2013— está en el 28 %, es decir, en una cifra que realmente demuestra que estamos en una crisis que impide a esos países y a nosotros, los españoles, abordar la política que se aprobó.

 
  
  

PRESIDE: ALEJO VIDAL-QUADRAS
Vicepresidente

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Struan Stevenson (ECR). - Mr President, following the savage report from the Court of Auditors there is a need for a radical overhaul of the way in which we allocate funds in the fisheries sector. Mr Ferreira’s report seeks to overcome problems with the implementation of the current EFF due to spending constraints caused by the economic crisis. But we need to take on board the key criticisms of the Auditors before we set about creating the framework for the new European Maritime and Fisheries Fund.

Their main complaint was centred on the overcapacity of the EU fleet. They stated that, although the alignment of fishing capacity to fishing opportunities is one of the cornerstones of the CFP and the EFF, fishing overcapacity has never been defined or quantified. The Commissioner said in a recent speech that building up healthy fish stocks in our waters is the best way to increase fishermen’s incomes. But we cannot hope to build up fish stocks unless we tackle the overcapacity of the EU fleet.

We cannot tackle overcapacity if we use taxpayers’ money to subsidise the construction of new fishing vessels or the modernisation of existing vessels or indeed, as Isabella Lövin said, the upgrading of engines, supposedly to make them more fuel efficient and to cut CO2 emissions but probably to make them more effective at catching fish. So let us take close cognisance of what the Auditors said, make sure the EMFF is used for the best effect in future: for funding selective gear for safety on board vessels, marketing for POs and for boosting EU aquaculture.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL). - Η πρόταση κανονισμού δεν υπηρετεί τα συμφέροντα των μικρών και φτωχών ψαράδων αλλά, αντίθετα, επιταχύνει την εξαφάνισή τους. Η κοινή αλιευτική πολιτική, της οποίας εργαλείο είναι το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Αλιείας, οδηγεί στον αφανισμό τους μικρούς παράκτιους ψαράδες χρηματοδοτώντας την καταστροφή των μικρών αλιευτικών σκαφών, με οδυνηρές οικονομικές και κοινωνικές συνέπειες για τους εργαζόμενους και για τους κατοίκους των ηπειρωτικών και νησιωτικών περιοχών.

Ενισχύεται η συγκέντρωση και κερδοφορία των μεγάλων επιχειρηματικών ομίλων που δραστηριοποιούνται στην αλιεία, στις υδατοκαλλιέργειες, στη μεταποίηση και στην εμπορία αλιευμάτων. Δεν πρόκειται να αναχαιτιστεί ή να σταματήσει η άναρχη υπεραλίευση και η καταστροφή του περιβάλλοντος, ακόμη και προστατευόμενων περιοχών NATURA 2000, η οποία γίνεται με τη σφραγίδα των κυβερνήσεων των κρατών μελών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης διότι το κριτήριο της κοινής αλιευτικής πολιτικής είναι η αύξηση της κερδοφορίας των ευρωπαϊκών μονοπωλίων.

Η μείωση της συμμετοχής των κρατών μελών στο Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Αλιείας δεν πρόκειται να αποβεί σε όφελος των μικρών ψαράδων διότι το συνολικό ποσό χρηματοδότησης από την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση παραμένει το ίδιο, γεγονός που συνεπάγεται τη μείωση των προγραμματισμένων έργων και δράσεων και την ακόμη πιο επιλεκτική χρηματοδότησή τους.

Επιλέξιμα θα είναι όσα έργα εντάσσονται στο πλαίσιο των στρατηγικών στόχων της κοινής αλιευτικής πολιτικής και των καπιταλιστικών αναδιαρθρώσεων της στρατηγικής της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης «Ευρώπη 2020» και υπηρετούν την ανταγωνιστικότητα και την κερδοφορία των ευρωπαϊκών μονοπωλίων που δραστηριοποιούνται στον κλάδο της αλιείας, επιταχύνοντας έτσι την εξαφάνιση και την καταστροφή των φτωχών και μικρών ψαράδων, ιδιαίτερα αυτών της μικρής παράκτιας αλιείας.

Αυτή είναι η καπιταλιστική ανάπτυξη της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, των κυβερνήσεων των κρατών μελών και της πλουτοκρατίας, και για την κοινή αλιευτική πολιτική. Τα αποτελέσματά της θα είναι φτώχεια, εξαθλίωση και διωγμός των μικρών ψαράδων για την αύξηση των κερδών των ευρωπαϊκών μονοπωλίων.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Derek Roland Clark (EFD). - Mr President, the EFF has EUR 4.5 billion to spend on fishing over the period 2007 to 2013 covering scrapping of fishing vessels, aquaculture, inland fishing, sustainability and administration of the fund. But fishing managed very well before the CFP was introduced, livings were made, fish was plentiful. Since its inception in 1973, the CFP has introduced rules and regulations to control fishing. Now the EFF – why? After all, fishermen have been plying their trade for centuries without all this, and a viable industry has been passed down the generations. Fishermen are not stupid. They have looked after their stocks, just as a farmer looks after his livestock and land.

This proposal, of course, is a backdoor way of giving extra financial support to countries which have been bailed out, bailout funds under the EFSM will trigger this extra support from the EFF, and yet more taxpayers’ money goes down the drain. So this whole scheme, purporting to help fishing with more funds, is really an addition to bailouts, which are supposed to be loans by way of bond issues with time limits for repayment. Does that mean that the extra EFF money will not be included in bailout repayments? Does it mean that cash will be available without issuing bonds? If so, EFF funding will be a gift to offset a debt. What kind of finance is that?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Guido Milana (S&D). - Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, lei Commissaria è stata molto intelligente a promuovere quest'iniziativa e questo regolamento, però recuperando un problema, ed è l'unica cosa che io voglio sottolineare in questo mio intervento, cioè la sottoesecuzione dei fondi. La Commissione deve intervenire perché ci troviamo di fronte ad una sottoesecuzione dei fondi. La sua mossa è stata intelligente per accelerare questo processo.

Ottime sono le considerazioni fatte dal collega Ferreira, perché in questa direzione puntualizzano alcune questioni: io non credo che nell'esecuzione di questi due anni noi possiamo trasformare la politica comune della pesca, ma penso che possiamo direzionare nella maniera giusta queste nostre risorse soprattutto nei paesi più deboli e che hanno in questa fase maggior bisogno di sostegno.

Aggiungo che per rendere efficace questa spesa, signor Commissario, suggerirei anche che nella fase di esecuzione si possano semplificare le procedure, io metterei un punto di attenzione in questo senso. A volte uno sguardo in più all'esecuzione della spesa e alla semplificazione delle procedure può aiutare ulteriormente questo processo. Solo una battuta, Presidente, sulla vicenda della Corte dei conti, bene, stiamo attenti a considerare il rapporto della Corte di conti come omogeneo per l'Europa: dentro quel rapporto ci sono zone e zone, dove l'efficacia è stata differenziata. Grazie e mi scuso del tempo, Presidente.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR). - Mr President, Madam Commissioner as you know full well I have always taken the view that the common fisheries policy was bad for the fish and bad for the fishermen. You have been the first to recognise that a lot of mistakes have been made in the past, and the trouble is that it is very difficult to overcome some of these mistakes.

My constituency, the East of England, used to have a large and vibrant fishing industry. Sadly, this is no longer the case. Earlier today I was talking to a fisherman in my region who has been involved in fishing for some thirty years and now has one of the last seven boats in what was the great fishing port of Lowestoft. His boat is under 12 metres; in fact 97% of the UK fishing fleet is in this category, but they have an allocation of only 4% of the total allowable catch.

Of course these fishermen do not want to see stocks decimated or wasted – they want to make a decent living. To be able to do this they need flexibility and a better quota. Like most our citizens, they are outraged by the discard policy. My local fisherman has to throw away more than he is allowed to land. I know you want to put a stop to discards, but we cannot wait until after 2016. There will not be any fishermen left by then.

 
  
 

Procedimiento de solicitud incidental de uso de la palabra («catch the eye»)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE). - Lipsa capacității de cofinanțare reprezintă, fără îndoială, în acest moment, una dintre cele mai importante piedici în utilizarea eficientă a fondurilor europene, inclusiv Fondul European pentru Pescuit. Criza financiară, prin constrângerile bugetare pe care le-a determinat, a adus dificultăți suplimentare în situația statelor europene aflate sub media de dezvoltare generală a Uniunii Europene. De aceea, propunerile Comisiei cu privire la toate categoriile de fonduri reprezintă o veste bună pentru statele membre implicate.

Trebuie să subliniez că rămâne, însă, nerezolvată încă o altă problemă dificilă și anume absența resurselor pentru cofinanțarea privată a investițiilor. Această situație este valabilă în ceea ce privește toate categoriile de fonduri europene și mai ales cele destinate micilor întreprinderi și agriculturii. În această privință, avem nevoie de facilități de creditare și de garanții publice în sprijinul potențialilor beneficiari. Simplificarea procedurilor este, de asemenea, esențială.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D). - Salutăm majorarea plăților intermediare cu zece puncte procentuale față de rata de cofinanțare aplicabilă fiecărei axe prioritare. România și Bulgaria au devenit membre ale Uniunii în 2007, extinzând, astfel, în Marea Neagră politica comună în domeniul pescuitului. Aceste țări au acceptat și au îndeplinit toate cerințele pentru aderarea la politica comună în domeniul pescuitului și sunt acum eligibile pentru sprijin prin Fondul European pentru Pescuit.

Cu excepția unor acorduri bilaterale, nu există niciun acord global cu privire la gestionarea regională a stocurilor de pește din Marea Neagră. Este necesar sprijinul Comisiei pentru dezvoltarea dialogului regional, în vederea elaborării unei strategii marine comune în zona Mării Negre, la care să participe și celelalte state riverane Mării Negre. Consider oportună înființarea unui consiliu consultativ pentru Marea Neagră, care să reprezinte o platformă de comunicare și colaborare la nivel tehnic a actorilor din domeniul pescuitului. Dacă un acord de partajare de bază continuă să rămână în suspensie, există riscul de colaps al resurselor, iar daunele economice, care au avut loc deja în cazul pescuitului pentru anumite resurse, se vor răspândi pe scară largă.

 
  
 

(Fin del procedimiento de solicitud incidental de uso de la palabra («catch the eye»))

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Μαρία Δαμανάκη, Μέλος της Επιτροπής. − Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θέλω να επαναλάβω αυτό που είπα πρωτύτερα, ότι αυτό που προσπαθεί να κάνει η Επιτροπή με αυτή την πρόταση είναι να καλύψει μια επείγουσα ανάγκη. Πρόκειται για μέτρο έκτακτης ανάγκης. Προσπαθούμε να βοηθήσουμε τα κράτη μέλη που περνούν εξαιρετικές δυσκολίες εξαιτίας της οικονομικής κρίσης ώστε να μειώσουν το ποσοστό της εθνικής χρηματοδότησης όσον αφορά τα προγράμματα του Ταμείου Αλιείας. Αυτό θα τους διευκολύνει.

Φυσικά, δεν μπορεί να λύσει το πρόβλημα από μόνο του διότι η απορρόφηση των κονδυλίων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης δεν είναι μόνο θέμα εθνικής συνεισφοράς. Είναι ανάγκη να υπάρχουν και τα κατάλληλα προγράμματα τα οποία θα χρηματοδοτηθούν σύμφωνα με τον κανονισμό. Είναι ωστόσο μια ανακούφιση και αυτό προσπαθούμε να κάνουμε σε μία περίοδο εξαιρετικά δύσκολη για ορισμένα κράτη μέλη.

Στη συζήτηση υπήρξαν ορισμένες γενικότερες παρατηρήσεις για το Ταμείο Αλιείας και ιδιαίτερα για τη μελλοντική συγκρότηση του Ταμείου Αλιείας, με βάση την πρόταση που έχουμε κάνει για τη μεταρρύθμιση της αλιευτικής πολιτικής.

Συμφωνώ με πολλές από τις παρατηρήσεις. Χρειάζεται απλοποίηση των προγραμμάτων, διότι, πράγματι, έχουμε χαμηλά ποσοστά απορροφητικότητας. Χρειάζεται να προσανατολιστούμε σε δράσεις που να στηρίζουν την αειφορία, διότι, πράγματι, δεν έχει νόημα να δίνουμε τα λεφτά των φορολογουμένων ευρωπαίων πολιτών για να χρηματοδοτήσουμε μια πολιτική η οποία δεν οδηγεί σε υγιή ιχθυαποθέματα. Ο μόνος τρόπος για να ανεβάσουμε το εισόδημα των ψαράδων είναι να έχουμε υγιή ιχθυαποθέματα.

Συμφωνώ ότι πρέπει να ενισχύσουμε ιδιαίτερα την παράκτια αλιεία και τους μικρούς ψαράδες. Για τον λόγο αυτό εξάλλου θα υπάρχει στην πρόταση για το νέο Ταμείο αυξημένη χρηματοδότηση για όλους τους κατόχους μικρών σκαφών, η οποία θα φτάνει μέχρι και το 75% για όλες τις χώρες.

Βεβαίως, υπάρχουν προβλήματα για τα οποία η ευθύνη δεν ανήκει στην Επιτροπή αλλά στις εθνικές κυβερνήσεις. Θέλω να το διευκρινίσω αυτό, διότι είναι εύκολο να λέμε π.χ. ότι φταίει η Επιτροπή διότι αφανίζονται οι μικροί ψαράδες και διότι λαμβάνουν μόνο το 4% των ποσοστώσεων, όταν υπάρχει εθνική κατανομή. Εμείς κατανέμουμε τις ποσοστώσεις ανά κράτος μέλος και στη συνέχεια η εσωτερική κατανομή γίνεται με βάση τις αποφάσεις των εθνικών κυβερνήσεων.

Νομίζω λοιπόν ότι όλα αυτά πρέπει να ληφθούν υπόψη στη συζήτηση που θα κάνουμε εδώ για το νέο χρηματοδοτικό κανονισμό για την επόμενη περίοδο.

Σήμερα μιλούμε για ένα έκτακτο μέτρο, το οποίο, σημειωτέον, δεν οδηγεί σε αύξηση της χρηματοδότησης των κρατών μελών· απλώς επιταχύνει τη χρηματοδότηση. Δεν πρόκειται συνεπώς να δώσουμε επιπλέον πόρους στα κράτη μέλη – ας μην ανησυχούν κάποιοι συνάδελφοι. Αυτό που κάνουμε είναι να διευκολύνουμε την επιτάχυνση της χρηματοδότησης για να τους βοηθήσουμε σε μια δύσκολη στιγμή.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  João Ferreira, relator. − Senhor Presidente, alguns comentários muito breves no pouco tempo que ainda tenho disponível. Naturalmente, queria agradecer os comentários e as considerações que foram feitas sobre o relatório. Queria, em primeiro lugar, dizer – e a Sra. Comissária acabou de o confirmar – que nós não estamos perante uma prova ou um sinal de solidariedade. Nós estamos perante um sinal de flexibilidade, que infelizmente vem tarde, mas fica a faltar essa solidariedade, que só aconteceria se houvesse um aumento das verbas disponíveis para estes Estados-Membros, o que não acontece. Mas era importante que a Comissão considerasse essa possibilidade.

Esta proposta, por outro lado, e volto a sublinhá-lo, não garante a utilização plena dos fundos disponíveis. Os montantes exigidos de financiamento nacional são ainda de 15 e de 40 %, consoante se trate de regiões do objetivo da convergência ou não. Mas, para além do problema da subexecução do Fundo Europeu das Pescas, e houve várias intervenções que se referiram a isso, nós estamos perante um outro problema. A par das medidas que elevem a taxa de absorção das verbas, nós precisamos de uma reorientação das prioridades do próprio fundo. Isso foi referido em várias intervenções, e nós partilhamo-lo inteiramente. É necessário orientar, não esquecer que este fundo foi em mais de 50 % utilizado para abater embarcações, quando precisamos é de o orientar para a atividade produtiva, para a renovação e modernização da frota, das infraestruturas de apoio, para o rejuvenescimento do setor, criação de emprego, formação profissional, discriminando positivamente. E estamos de acordo, os setores da pequena pesca costeira e da pesca artesanal – é nesse sentido que vemos com alguma preocupação as limitações que o futuro Fundo Europeu das Pescas e dos Assuntos Marítimos coloca em alguns destes domínios em que era necessário estimular essa atividade produtiva.

Uma última palavra para concluir, Sr. Presidente, relativamente às alterações que foram apresentadas, quer no Conselho quer pelo PPE. Do nosso ponto de vista, essas alterações são desnecessárias e despropositadas. Entendemos, não obstante, que, em face da urgência de aprovação desta proposta, não nos devíamos opor a essas alterações, porque o que se impõe é, de facto, essa aprovação, tão rapidamente quanto possível.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  El Presidente. − Se cierra el debate.

La votación tendrá lugar mañana, miércoles 14 de marzo, a las 12.00 horas.

 
Juridisks paziņojums - Privātuma politika