Texto integral 
Processo : 2017/2712(RSP)
Ciclo de vida em sessão
Ciclo relativo ao documento : O-000058/2017

Textos apresentados :

O-000058/2017 (B8-0324/2017)

Debates :

PV 06/07/2017 - 7
CRE 06/07/2017 - 7

Votação :

PV 12/09/2017 - 7.13

Textos aprovados :

Relato integral dos debates
Quinta-feira, 6 de Julho de 2017 - Estrasburgo Edição revista

7. Caça à baleia na Noruega (debate)
Vídeo das intervenções

  Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest debata nad pytaniem wymagającym odpowiedzi ustnej skierowanym do Komisji przez Sirpę Pietikäinen, Renatę Briano, Marka Demesmaekera, Catherine Bearder, Anję Hazekamp, Keitha Taylora, Eleonorę Evi w imieniu Komisji Ochrony Środowiska Naturalnego, Zdrowia Publicznego i Bezpieczeństwa Żywności w sprawie polowań na wieloryby w Norwegii (O–000058/20172017/2712(RSP) – B8–0324/2017).


  Sirpa Pietikäinen, author. – Mr President, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) put in place a worldwide moratorium on commercial whaling in 1986. Nevertheless, Norway continued whaling and fully resumed commercial whaling activities in 1993, using a formal objection to the moratorium, as well as reservations to CITES listings. Norway establishes its own catch limits. For this year’s whaling season it increased the quota of North Atlantic minke whales to 999, up from 880 last year. Norway’s exports of whale meat have increased sharply in recent years. Some of these exports are shipped through EU ports. For example, according to animal welfare institutes, in October last year alone almost 3 00 kilos of Norwegian whale products were exported to Japan, having transited through at least three EU ports. The transit of whale meat through EU ports is permitted provided that shipments are accompanied by valid CITES documentation on the Council’s regulation.

What action has the Commission taken so far to persuade Norway to halt its whale hunting and adhere to the IWC moratorium? Will the Commission use its influence at upcoming CITES and IWC meetings to urge contracting governments to adopt a common position urging Norway to put an immediate stop to all whaling activities? Can the Commission provide data on the quantities of whale meat shipments transported through EU ports, their destinations and whether they are accompanied by valid CITES documentation? What measures is the Commission taking to ensure that this documentation obligation is strictly enforced? Does the Commission agree that, by allowing the transit of whale meat through its ports, the EU is facilitating trade in whale species which are protected by multiple EU laws and whose hunting contravenes the current international ban on commercial whaling? What does the Commission believe can be done to prohibit such shipments at both EU and Member State level? If no agreement is reached with Norway, will the Commission recommend a ban on whale meat transit through EU ports as an exceptional measure?

I hope that the Commission can give very clear answers and also take prompt action because whale hunting – the hunting of endangered species – is inhumane and breaches international legislation. That is something which is not acceptable, so hopefully we can act together to end Norway’s unacceptable practices.


  Christos Stylianides, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I shall try to answer all these questions on behalf of my colleague Commissioner Vella.

The European Union is fully committed to the conservation of all cetaceans and is equipped with environmental legislation to pursue this objective. Commercial whaling is not allowed in the Member States’ waters or by ships under the jurisdiction of a Member State. All whale species are protected from deliberate disturbance, capture or killing under the Habitats Directive. In addition, imports to and exports from the EU of cetaceans for primarily commercial purpose are banned under our wildlife regulations.

The European Union has consistently supported in the International Whaling Commission (IWC) the global moratorium on commercial whaling. It has also clearly positioned itself against trade in whale products in CITES meetings. It is therefore problematic that Norway, a European country, not only continues to take whales for commercial purpose but has also become the most prolific world whaler, killing more whales in the past two years than Japan and Iceland combined. Norway’s practice of exporting whale products via EU Member States’ ports also threatens the consistency of EU policies in relation to whales and other cetaceans.

The EU has made its position clear to Norway. Firstly, at the last International Whaling Commission meeting in October 2016, the Union invited Norway to cease its whaling activities. The EU also called on Norway to stop its trade in whale products – a call which it also addressed to Iceland and Japan – and to reconsider its reservations on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) listing of large whales.

In November 2016, my colleague Commissioner Vella discussed this issue with the Norwegian Minister for Environment, Vidar Helgesen, who confirmed the Norwegian position, referring to the fact that ‘only’ 17 Norwegian vessels catch minke whales. Still, these 17 vessels killed 1 251 minke whales during 2015 and 2016!

In December 2016, the Council adopted new and stronger conclusions on EU relations with the non-EU Western European countries, calling on Norway and Iceland to respect the internationally agreed moratorium on commercial whaling and to withdraw reservations under CITES. Given its reservation on the CITES listing of large whales, Norway can, however, trade whale products with other countries which have the same reservations, provided that such products have valid CITES export permits. The transit of such shipments via EU Member States is also legal under international law, provided that the authorities in the Member States can check that the shipments are accompanied by valid CITES permits.

I need to say that the EU Member State authorities are fully aware of their obligations to control shipments transiting through their ports. The Commission has discussed this transit issue with them on several occasions. We do not have statistics on the extent of this transit but, at the same time, we are not aware of shipments of whale meat which would have gone through EU territory without the required documentation.

The Commission will continue to take a strong position on this subject and to work with its international partners to engage with Norway towards reaching decisions more consistent with the EU approach and leading to better conservation of whales worldwide.


  Paul Rübig, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Ich bin Mitglied der SINEEA-Delegation und der Delegation für den Europäischen Wirtschaftsraum. Für uns ist klar, dass Norwegen beim internationalen Übereinkommen zum Walfang Einspruch gegen das Moratorium angemeldet hat und daher völkerrechtlich nicht an dieses Moratorium gebunden ist.

Als Österreicher ist mir aber vor allem die tiergerechte Fischfangmethode wichtig. Ich glaube, dass es entscheidend ist, dass für die kleinen und mittleren Fischer neue Ausbildungsmethoden gefunden werden müssen. Wir wissen, dass es ungefähr 100 000 Minkwale gibt; ein Prozent unterliegt derzeit der Fischerei und wird gefangen. Natürlich ist es so, dass in Norwegen Walfisch sehr traditionell als Lebensmittel verwendet wird und hier auch die naturschutzrechtlichen Bestimmungen eingehalten werden müssen.


  Renata Briano, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, circa un anno fa eravamo qui in plenaria a chiedere di fermare la mattanza delle balene portata avanti dal Giappone. Oggi ci troviamo di nuovo qui per la stessa ragione, ma per un paese diverso.

La Norvegia ha sistematicamente cacciato a fini commerciali le balene dagli anni Trenta e, nonostante la moratoria internazionale entrata in vigore nel 1987 – direi nel lontano 1987 – non ha mai smesso di uccidere e commerciare questi cetacei, sulla base di presunti scopi scientifici. Dico "presunti" perché, come avevo detto per il Giappone, queste "prove scientifiche" spesso finiscono negli scaffali dei supermercati o nei piatti di un ristorante.

In questi ultimi anni il business è addirittura cresciuto, tanto che i norvegesi hanno cacciato nel 2014 e nel 2015 più balene di Giappone e Islanda messi insieme, guadagnandosi il triste ruolo di leader mondiale nel campo di questa odiosa pratica. Un dato: la quota norvegese relativa alle balenottere è passata dagli 880 esemplari del 2016 ai 999 di quest'anno.

Oggi ci stiamo rendendo complici della mattanza norvegese, poiché attualmente la legislazione UE permette il transito di carne di balena se accompagnata dalla documentazione CITES. Per fare un esempio, da gennaio a ottobre 2016 circa tre tonnellate sono passate attraverso porti dell'Unione, senza pensare a tutta la carne commercializzata per altre vie.

Chiediamo quindi che la Commissione intervenga in modo deciso, risoluto, e che lo stretto rapporto naturale che c'è tra Norvegia e Unione europea non diventi uno scudo dietro cui non esporsi, ma che anzi sia sfruttato come canale diretto per influenzare le decisioni norvegesi.


  Mark Demesmaeker, namens de ECR-Fractie. – Al ruim 30 jaar is commerciële walvisvangst wereldwijd verboden en toch blijken landen als Noorwegen hardleers. Noorwegen hervatte in 1993 de commerciële walvisvangst. Het land stelt zijn eigen vangstquota op en die gaan in stijgende lijn. Dit jaar zullen nagenoeg 1 000 Noord-Atlantische dwergvinvissen worden gevangen en gedood en ook de uitvoer van walvisvlees neemt toe.

Ik nam mee het initiatief om dit onderwerp op de agenda te plaatsen, want we moeten deze gruwelijke praktijken blijven aankaarten. De walvis is een iconisch en geliefd dier, dat onze bescherming verdient. Walvisvangst ondermijnt niet alleen de bescherming van de biodiversiteit en marine ecosystemen. Het is ook in strijd met internationaal recht. Er is bovendien geen maatschappelijk draagvlak voor.

Mijnheer de commissaris, ik dank u alvast voor uw antwoord en ik begrijp dat u onze bezorgdheid deelt. Wij staan, denk ik, aan dezelfde kant en onze boodschap moet dan ook zijn dat we u verder aanmoedigen om alles in het werk te stellen om Noorwegen ertoe te bewegen het wereldwijde moratorium te respecteren. Onze havens mogen niet als het ware medeplichtig worden aan illegale verscheping. Ik begrijp uit uw antwoord dat we daar nog meer gegevens en cijfers over nodig hebben, dat we meer controle nodig hebben. Ik moedig u aan om daar ook aan te werken.


  Anja Hazekamp, namens de GUE/NGL-Fractie. – Het heeft wat moeite gekost, maar het is dan toch gelukt om de Noorse walvisjacht hier in het Europees Parlement te bespreken. En dat is hard nodig, want Noorwegen lapt al meer dan 30 jaar het internationale verbod op commerciële walvisvaart aan zijn laars.

Sinds het verbod inging, heeft Noorwegen al meer dan 13 000 walvissen gedood en op dit moment is de jacht in volle gang op bijna 1 000 walvissen, waaronder zwangere dieren. Dat is een grote schande. Bedreigde dieren moet je beschermen en niet uitmoorden met harpoenen. Omdat de meeste Noren allang geen walvisvlees meer eten, wordt een deel van het walvisvlees gebruikt als veevoer voor de dieren in de bontindustrie. De rest van het walvisvlees dat Noorwegen overhoudt aan haar barbaarse walvisjacht, wordt verscheept naar Japan via Europese havens. Europa werkt op die manier mee aan de handel in walvisvlees. Dat moet echt stoppen!

We vragen de Europese Commissie om niet langer mee te werken aan het transport van illegaal gedode walvissen. Voorzitter, deze legal opinion laat zien dat de Europese Commissie de mogelijkheden heeft om het transport van walvisvlees via de Europese havens te stoppen, óók met Cites-papieren. Je zou het in de woorden van de heer Juncker ridicuul kunnen noemen dat de verantwoordelijke commissaris niet de moeite heeft genomen om hier vandaag aanwezig te zijn. Maar ik heb er alle vertrouwen in dat commissaris Stylianides uitlegt hoe de Commissie en de lidstaten zo snel mogelijk de Europese havens sluiten voor walvisvlees.

Voorts ben ik van mening dat de Europese landbouwsubsidies moeten worden afgeschaft.


  Keith Taylor, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, over the past few years Norwegian whalers have hunted more whales than Iceland and Japan combined. In 2016 alone, 591 minke whales were killed, and for 2017 the quota has been set for 990 whales. Yet in Norway, as was previously said, the domestic demand for whale meat has fallen to the point that unwanted whale meat is now being sent to fur farms to be used as feed. What a doubly grotesque state of affairs that is.

This decline in demand should not come as any surprise, given the very high levels of toxic contaminants found in whale products, including PCBs, hormone-disrupting chemicals and mercury. Sadly, as large mammals, whales are greatly at risk from persistent organic pollutants because of bio-accumulation in the food chain. In fact, the Japanese Government itself has rejected imports of Norwegian whale meat after tests revealed pesticide levels double the amount Japan permits in imports, making the meat unfit for human consumption, so that it simply has to be destroyed.

Despite this, Norway has sharply increased its exports to Japan. However, as there is no direct shipping route to Asia, EU ports offer a convenient stopping off point for the ships.

In the European Union our legislation could not be any clearer: all cetacean species are strictly protected and any incidental capture, killing or sale by EU Members is prohibited. Under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), international trade in whale products is also specifically prohibited.

It simply beggars belief that the EU is assisting another country that holds the polar opposite views and values on this issue to transport whale meat via its ports. This clearly goes against our conservation laws designed to protect these magnificent creatures.

I would like the Commission to give Parliament all the data available on these exports, to use its influence in CITES and in the International Whaling Commission to encourage Norway to end its cruel and unnecessary practice of whaling. If this does not result in the desired outcome, I call on the Commission to recommend a ban on whale-meat transiting through EU ports, as an exceptional measure.


  Mireille D’Ornano, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, l’augmentation des captures de baleines par la Norvège est particulièrement préoccupante, surtout quand il s’agit de femelles en gestation.

Or, la Norvège, qui n’est pas membre de l’Union européenne, avait fait le choix de s’opposer au moratoire mondial de 1986 sur les captures de baleines. Aussi, pour parvenir à convaincre ce pays d’appliquer ce moratoire, les marges de manœuvre de la Commission européenne sont particulièrement faibles.

Un embargo ou des interdictions de transit de la viande de baleine dans les ports européens constitueraient des sanctions punitives, mais non constructives. Le monde ne se résumant pas à l’Union européenne, la viande de baleine continuerait d’ailleurs de circuler dans les ports des pays tiers.

Traitons donc le problème à la source dans le cadre de la convention CITES et de la Commission baleinière internationale, deux organisations dont la Norvège fait partie. Laissons les États agir de concert sur un sujet aussi délicat.


  Francesc Gambús (PPE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, le agradezco... ayer estaba aquí, tarde por la noche; hoy nos encontramos por la mañana...

Mucho ha llovido desde la prohibición de la caza de ballenas en Noruega a principios del siglo XX, una actividad que, de hecho, se remonta al siglo VII, pero, con el tiempo, el interés y la demanda interna de productos balleneros en Noruega ha ido decreciendo.

A pesar de la moratoria que nos dimos entre todos en 1986 a través de la Comisión Ballenera Internacional, en bien de la preservación, Noruega no llegó a aplicarla totalmente nunca y en 1993 retomó la caza de cetáceos con fines comerciales, llegando a capturar —se ha dicho ya esta mañana, en varias ocasiones— en estos últimos años más ejemplares que Japón e Islandia juntos.

Quiero recordar —ayer debatíamos sobre ello— el objetivo 14 de la Agenda 2030: conservar y utilizar de forma sostenible los océanos, mares y recursos marinos para el desarrollo sostenible. La Unión debe liderar la consecución de dichos objetivos y, por tanto, también debe ser capaz de controlar que las mercancías que llegan a sus puertos cumplen con todos los requisitos legales.


  Marco Affronte (Verts/ALE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, non è la prima volta che parliamo di baleneria in quest'Aula: mi ricordo almeno tre o quattro discussioni negli ultimi due anni, anche se di solito l'imputato sul banco era il Giappone e non la Norvegia. Ogni volta finiamo con due considerazioni: la prima è che tutta l'Aula condanna questa pratica, che ormai non ha più ragione di essere, che è una pratica del passato e che è in umana, e il secondo punto che emerge sempre è la frustrazione per non avere nessuna possibilità, concretamente, di fare qualcosa per fermare questo tipo di caccia alla balena, da parte sia del Giappone che della Norvegia.

Questa volta, in questi giorni, abbiamo invece la possibilità di fare qualcosa di un po' più concreto, finalmente, sotto due punti di vista. Il primo è questo passaggio di carne di balena nei porti europei: non ci basta che la Commissione dica che hanno tutti i documenti a posto, possiamo effettivamente fare qualcosa per cercare di fermarla. E la seconda cosa: stiamo trattando in questi giorni il trattato commerciale con il Giappone; perché non ricordarsi anche all'interno di quel trattato che noi non vogliamo che il Giappone continui a cacciare le balene?


Zgłoszenia z sali


  José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, caros Colegas, não obstante em 1986 a comissão baleeira internacional ter imposto uma moratória mundial sobre a atividade baleeira comercial, a verdade é que a Noruega continua a caça à baleia e a estabelecer os seus próprios limites de captura. O facto é que a Noruega chegou até a aumentar em 2017 a quota de baleias anãs capturadas no Atlântico Norte para 999, em comparação com as 880 de 2016, e entre 2014 e 2015 matou mais baleias do que o Japão e a Islândia juntos, como disse o Sr. Comissário há pouco.

Sr. Comissário, a maioria das baleias mortas são fêmeas grávidas, é o que mostra o documentário “batalha da agonia” com imagens terríveis da indústria baleeira norueguesa, incluindo uma sangrenta cena durante a qual um pescador corta uma baleia grávida.

Caros Colegas, a caça de baleias é agora mais inaceitável do que nunca. Sr. Comissário, a Comissão tem que tomar medidas urgentes para adotar uma posição comum para exortar a Noruega a pôr imediatamente fim a todas as atividades baleeiras no quadro da Convenção Internacional para a regulação da atividade baleeira. Os produtos derivados das baleias são exportados da Noruega para o Japão e termino, Sr. Presidente, dizendo que atravessando pelo menos três portos da União Europeia. A União Europeia não pode permitir isto. Sr. Comissário. Apelo para que ponha um ponto final a esta situação de uma vez por todas. É inadmissível, neste momento, continuarmos a assistir às cenas sangrentas que vimos.


  Jean-Paul Denanot (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, rendez-vous compte, 1 250 baleines capturées par les baleiniers norvégiens entre 2015 et 2017 malgré le moratoire international de 1987, ce n’est pas tolérable. L’Union européenne doit mettre en œuvre tous les moyens possibles pour que la Norvège mette fin à ces pratiques.

Il faut d’abord convaincre les chasseurs de baleines norvégiens eux-mêmes qu’à ce rythme, ils n’auront bientôt plus rien à chasser. Ensuite, il faut agir politiquement auprès du gouvernement norvégien, partenaire de l’Union européenne, pour qu’il prenne ses responsabilités, mais – me semble-t-il – le moyen le plus fort dont dispose l’Union européenne est celui du contrôle commercial. Assurer la transparence par le contrôle des documents CITES dans les ports, c’est sans doute une lourde charge, mais elle est nécessaire pour se faire respecter.

Au moment – et cela a été dit par plusieurs collègues – où nous négocions un traité commercial avec le Japon, consommateur de viande de baleine, nous aurions intérêt à ce que cette question soit abordée dans les documents officiels.


  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η φαλαινοθηρία για εμπορικούς σκοπούς έχει απαγορευθεί παγκοσμίως, μέσω του μορατόριουμ που επιβλήθηκε από τη Διεθνή Επιτροπή Φαλαινοθηρίας. Βλέπουμε, όμως, ότι χώρες όπως η Ιαπωνία και η Νορβηγία παρανομούν συνεχώς και παραβιάζουν τις αποφάσεις της διεθνούς κοινότητας. Έτσι, η Νορβηγία από το 1993 συνεχίζει τη φαλαινοθηρία, παραβιάζοντας το μορατόριουμ και τον κατάλογο της CITES. Για το 2017, η Νορβηγία αύξησε την ποσόστωση όσον αφορά τη φαλαινοθηρία, από 880 σε 999 ρυγχοφάλαινες. Μάλιστα η Νορβηγία χρησιμοποιεί λιμάνια της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για την εξαγωγή προϊόντων φάλαινας στην Ιαπωνία.

Πώς επιτρέπει η Ένωση τη διαμετακόμιση κρέατος φάλαινας μέσω των λιμανιών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, τη στιγμή που για να γίνει αυτό απαιτείται τα φορτία να συνοδεύονται από έγκυρα έγγραφα της CITES; Ποιος χορηγεί αυτά τα έγγραφα; Ή μήπως γίνεται τελικά διακίνηση του κρέατος της φάλαινας χωρίς τα έγγραφα αυτά, οπότε έχουμε παραβίαση του κανονισμού 338/1997 του Συμβουλίου;


  Eleonora Evi (EFDD). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, i mari artici sono già oggi quelli a maggiore rischio e quelli dove si stanno manifestando in maniera più evidente gli effetti dei cambiamenti climatici. Purtroppo c'è chi nella fusione dei ghiacci artici vede solo delle grandi opportunità di guadagno: dall'estrazione di combustibili fossili alle attività minerarie e all'apertura di nuove zone di pesca e di rotte di navigazione.

Questo è uno scenario allarmante. È uno scenario allarmante nel quale noi dobbiamo fare del nostro meglio affinché si possa evitare che al degrado globale si aggiunga la dannosa ed inutile caccia alle balene. Caccia che la Norvegia ha aumentato nel corso degli ultimi anni, anche a fini commerciali. Dobbiamo fare di tutto, usare tutti gli strumenti di pressione che abbiamo, affinché la Norvegia rispetti la moratoria del 1986 e affinché i porti dell'Unione europea facciano gli adeguati controlli e non siano complici di questo traffico illecito e di questa assurda pratica che ancora oggi, nel 2017, ha luogo.


  Λάμπρος Φουντούλης (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ζούμε σε μία περίοδο όπου η καταστροφή του πλανήτη και του περιβάλλοντος τείνει να γίνει μη αναστρέψιμη. Τόσο οι επιστήμονες όσο και οι περιβαλλοντικές οργανώσεις προειδοποιούν. Τις επιπτώσεις τις βιώνουμε όλοι στην καθημερινότητά μας με την κλιματική αλλαγή και την αύξηση της θερμοκρασίας του πλανήτη. Σε αυτή την καταστροφή έρχεται να προστεθεί και η απληστία των ανθρώπων, που μπροστά στο κέρδος δεν σέβονται τίποτα. Οι φάλαινες είναι θηλαστικά που ζουν εδώ και εκατομμύρια χρόνια στον πλανήτη και είναι γνωστό ότι κινδυνεύουν με αφανισμό λόγω της μόλυνσης των θαλασσών, αλλά και λόγω της υπεραλίευσης.

Η Νορβηγία ξεκινά και φέτος το πιο φρικτό έθιμο· την ετήσια σφαγή εκατοντάδων εγκύων φαλαινών. Κάθε χρόνο κομματιάζουν εγκύους φάλαινες για να φτιάξουν καλλυντικά και ζωοτροφές. Θεωρούν την εγκυμοσύνη των θηλυκών φαλαινών δείγμα καλής υγείας. Η Νορβηγία είναι ο νούμερο 1 δολοφόνος φαλαινών. Φέτος η κυβέρνηση ανακοίνωσε ότι προτίθεται να διπλασιάσει τον αριθμό των φαλαινών που σκοτώνει. Στη συνέχεια, εξάγουν το κρέας στο εξωτερικό μέσω των ευρωπαϊκών λιμανιών. Η Νορβηγία δεν έχει δεχθεί κυρώσεις για τις μαζικές δολοφονίες που διαπράττει. Σήμερα, λοιπόν, όλοι μαζί πρέπει να στείλουμε ένα ηχηρό μήνυμα προς τη Νορβηγία, αλλά και να αφυπνίσουμε όσους δεν γνωρίζουν για το έγκλημα αυτό.


(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)


  Christos Stylianides, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to thank the speakers for their constructive comments. I have already underlined some steps that have been taken by my colleague Commissioner Vella to put pressure on Norway to stop whale hunting, and I would like to answer the question: why does the Commission not have information about the quantities and destinations of whale meat transported via EU ports?

From my homework on the subject, it is clear that the Commission does not have statistics on the quantities of whale meat transiting through ports of EU Member States, as there is no obligation under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) to report the volume of CITES-listed products transiting through the territories of CITES states parties. The authorities in the EU Member States are, however, fully aware of their obligations to control shipments of CITES-listed products transiting through their ports. The Commission has discussed this issue with EU Member States on several occasions.

As I stated before, the Commission intends to make sure that the EU continues to take an active position on whaling and works with its international partners to press for decisions consistent with the EU approach and leading to better conservation of whales worldwide. For that reason, the Commission will present in September a proposal for a Council decision establishing the position to be adopted on behalf of the European Union at the next three meetings of the International Whaling Commission, including related inter-sessional meetings and actions. This proposal might also be the basis for further EU bilateral action vis-à-vis whaling countries.


  Przewodniczący. – Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się we wrześniu.

Oświadczenia pisemne (art. 162)


  Marlene Mizzi (S&D), in writing. – The EU has consistently supported in the International Whaling Commission (IWC) the global moratorium on commercial whaling. It has also clearly positioned itself against trade in whale products in CITES meetings. It is therefore problematic that Norway not only continues to take whales for commercial purposes but has also become the most prolific world whaler, killing more whales in the past two years than Japan and Iceland combined. Norway’s practice of exporting whale products via EU Member States’ ports also threatens the consistency of EU policies in relation to whales and other cetaceans. Animals are sentient beings. Whether they are wild, farm or domestic, animals should be treated with dignity and respect. Animals have no voice or vote to protest against the atrocious behaviour of humans. We have to show how civil and caring we are by giving voice to these beings – which at times are more civil and loving than man. Therefore, it is extremely important that the EU continue to take its strong position and necessary measures, together with its international partners, to engage with Norway towards reaching decisions more consistent with the EU approach and leading to better conservation of whales worldwide.

Aviso legal - Política de privacidade