WRITTEN QUESTION No. 502/98 by Dominique SOUCHET to the Council. Prohibition on the use of driftnets
21. 10. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 323/43 As far as telecommunications interceptions are concerned, the Council is currently examining a draft convention on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, drawn up on the basis of Title VI of the Treaty on European Union, which will, inter alia, set rules on the lawful interception of telecommunications in cross-border situations in the framework of criminal investigations. (98/C 323/55) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0502/98 by Dominique Souchet (I-EDN) to the Council (27 February 1998) Subject: Prohibition on the use of driftnets The United Nations Resolution of 22 December 1989 clearly lays down the principle that, as a precaution, álarge-scale pelagic driftnet fishingí should be prohibited whatever the region or fishery. The Community has already settled the question of the definition of large driftnet by fixing its upper limit as 2. 5 km in the Atlantic and the Mediterranean by the Regulation of 27 January 1992 issued in application of that resolution. Why does the Council wish to prohibit the use of driftnets in the Atlantic although they are already restricted to 2. 5 km and it is allowing fishing with 21 km driftnets to continue in the Baltic Sea? Does the Council believe that this measure is fair, non-discriminatory and just? (98/C 323/56) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0504/98 by Dominique Souchet (I-EDN) to the Council (27 February 1998) Subject: Prohibition on the use of driftnets According to the Commissionís latest proposals, the use of driftnets would be prohibited on the high seas in the Atlantic and still be authorised in coastal waters. In these circumstances, driftnets would be prohibited for French fishermen fishing for deep-sea albacove tuna (Azorean area) and solely authorised for Spanish fishermen, since one of the migration routes of this species passes along the Spanish Cantabrian coast (Iberian area). In other words, driftnets would be regarded as ágoodí fishing gear (in other words selective not harmful to shipping or the natural migration routes of tuna, etc. ) within the twelve-mile limit and ábadí fishing gear beyond that limit in the international zones situated more than 500 km offshore. Can the Commission explain the scientific, ecological or technical arguments justifying these different rules so that French fishermen are not under the impression that the latter favour Spain and Portugal to their detriment? (98/C 323/57) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0506/98 by Dominique Souchet (I-EDN) to the Council (27 February 1998) Subject: Prohibition on the use of driftnets According to the statements made by Mr Morley before the Committee on Fisheries on 3 February 1998, it would seem that the Councilís intention is to use Community funds to stop French, British and Irish albacove tuna netters from fishing in the Atlantic. Mr Morley referred to the diversification policy in Italy as an example to follow. Before even thinking about applying this principle in the Atlantic, should not the Council first ascertain the outcome of the Italian plan? Does the Council have irrefutable evidence that fishing with driftnets of an illegal length has actually stopped in the Mediterranean, that boats which have received aid have not changed their Flag State and that the owners and crews concerned have in fact stopped their previous activities?