Traduction de «critère de rejet » (Français → Anglais) :

40. Believes that local fishing communities should always be given primary access to fish stocks, although access rights should be based on updated criteria and no longer solely on the criterion of historical catches, and that environmental and social criteria should gradually be introduced to determine who has the right to catch fish, and that these should include the selectivity of the fishing gear and the resulting bycatch and discards, disturbance to the marine habitat, contribution to the local economy, energy consumption and CO2 emissions, quality of the final product, employment provided and compliance with the rules of the CFP, a ...[+++]nd that priority should be given to fishing for human consumption; is convinced that the use of such criteria could foster a dynamic that would lead to improved fishing practices and a more environmentally, socially and economically sustainable fishing industry;

40. Believes that local fishing communities should always be given primary access to fish stocks, although access rights should be based on updated criteria and no longer solely on the criterion of historical catches, and that environmental and social criteria should gradually be introduced to determine who has the right to catch fish, and that these should include the selectivity of the fishing gear and the resulting bycatch and discards, disturbance to the marine habitat, contribution to the local economy, energy consumption and CO2 emissions, quality of the final product, employment provided and compliance with the rules of the CFP, a ...[+++]nd that priority should be given to fishing for human consumption; is convinced that the use of such criteria could foster a dynamic that would lead to improved fishing practices and a more environmentally, socially and economically sustainable fishing industry;

39. Believes that access to fish stocks should no longer be based solely on the criterion of historical catches, but that environmental and social criteria should gradually be introduced to determine who has the right to catch fish, and that these should include the selectivity of the fishing gear and the resulting bycatch and discards, disturbance to the marine habitat, contribution to the local economy, energy consumption and CO2 emissions, quality of the final product, employment provided and compliance with the rules of the CFP, and that priority should be given to fishing for human consumption; is convinced that the use of such cri ...[+++]teria could foster a dynamic that would lead to improved fishing practices and a more environmentally, socially and economically sustainable fishing industry;

25. Stresses the importance of an effective monitoring system once a ban on discarding fish is introduced; points out that gaps in knowledge concerning the quantity of fish discarded impair the quality of estimates of stock size and fish mortality, and make it harder to evaluate measures seeking to prevent the catching of fish which do not meet size criteria; calls on the Commission to continue to develop new monitoring techniques, and draws attention in this connection to the possibilities opened up by electronic log books and the use of CCTV;

If this isn't disqualified under the third of the criteria, which is that bills and motions must not concern questions that are substantially the same—not identical, but substantially the same—as ones already voted on by the House of Commons in the current session of Parliament.If this criterion, which was saved through the various cullings of criteria, doesn't serve to block this bill—and I would disagree: it's not the committee blocking it; it's the criteria blocking it.Any reasonable reading of the criteria going in would have suggested that it was not votable.

Bill C-63 enables us to tighten up this important means of rejection still further in order to protect Canadians properly.