What Isabel spoke about.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, some political groups on the right are trying to make an equivalence between rejecting current legislative proposals and an alleged defence of farmers. That, to defend farmers, nothing can change or that this is not the time for change. A fallacious rhetoric that purports to be on the side of farmers, but is not. It is not, because the vast majority of farmers want to move forward, to contribute to the restoration of nature, to protect biodiversity, and to combat climate change, which results in extreme droughts, such as the one that farmers in my country, in Portugal, are already facing again. What they are asking for is that they be given the means, the resources, to continue to be guardians of nature. What farmers are asking for is not to stop, but for us politicians here to understand that the social and economic characteristics of our farming communities do not allow them to make every effort overnight. But that's why we're here. This is our responsibility: finding solutions that deliver clear social, economic and environmental benefits for all farmers today and tomorrow.

Mr President, in fact, international studies indicate that, on average, less than half of children eat fruit on a daily basis and consumption is even less frequent at ages 13 to 15. The fruit, vegetable and milk distribution scheme is therefore of great value in countering this trend and promoting access to healthy and sustainable nutrition for all European children, regardless of their socio-economic status. It is therefore crucial to ensure a more robust budget in order to reach more children and promote simplification and streamlining of administrative processes, often blocking the implementation of this programme on the ground. I would also stress the importance of strengthening educational measures that encourage children to become involved in agriculture, teach them about healthy eating habits, encourage organic food and introduce objective criteria that include seasonality and availability of local products, environmental, ethical and health considerations.

Mr President, Commissioner, the European Citizens' Initiatives are one of the most enriching and demonstrative instruments of the vitality of the civic participation of our citizens, and so my first word is a strong and special greeting to all the authors of this initiative. Protecting pollinators is vital for the future of agricultural production and our food security, in particular as regards crop diversity. Farmers are deeply committed to building systems that are more balanced with nature, but to do so they need support and concrete alternatives to fight pests and diseases. Reducing the risk and use of pesticides is an undisputed path. That is why we need a strong focus on biological control methods and other non-chemical methods, as well as on advising our farmers, in particular by strengthening warning systems networks. Within this framework, the systematic and comprehensive implementation of IPM in the European Union is undoubtedly one of the most powerful weapons at our disposal. But we need – I stress – a clear commitment from all and this requires a strong investment from all Member States in this matter.

Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we must learn lessons from these moments of crisis. And one of the lessons of this crisis is clearly the need to increase the strategic autonomy of the European Union, also in the area of fertiliser production, one of the most important and cost-intensive factors of production – as we have heard here. The strategic autonomy of the European agricultural sector therefore requires less dependence on inputs external, with increased fertiliser production in Europe and based on the use of renewable energy and nutrient recycling. In fact, greater autonomy in the production of fertilisers should include, in particular, a clear commitment to more circular systems from the point of view of nutrient management, which place the promotion of a living and healthy soil at the centre of agricultural practice. Circularity should be promoted either by reducing nutrient losses and more efficient application systems that reduce the need for fertilisers or by recovering nutrients from various organic waste streams so that they can be reused in agricultural production. Complex problems cannot have simplistic and unique solutions. We must be able to rethink our production systems and move on several fronts towards more sustainable food systems in harmony with the environment and the health of our citizens.

Madam President, I would like to begin by welcoming the work of the rapporteur and the shadow rapporteurs on this report, which is important – it has been said here for around 76 %, but there are even figures pointing to 85 % of the European Union fishing fleet; I'm talking about the small-scale fleet. We know that, because of human characteristics, working at sea has always been more difficult than working on land. It is therefore no coincidence that fishing is considered a high-risk activity. High-risk activity, in particular for these small-scale coastal vessels, as their size leaves them particularly vulnerable, especially when fishing takes place under adverse weather conditions. In this context, it is essential to develop coordinated policies and measures aimed at mitigating the risks of the activity, increasing the safety and comfort of fishermen on board, while seeking to develop technological solutions that allow the adaptation of small vessels to the demands of reducing the carbon footprint. This is the ideal scenario, but the reality is that, due to their size and gross tonnage rules, small-scale vessels can hardly provide safe and comfortable spaces on board today. And that translates into obvious risks for their fishermen. The limitation of gross tonnage for these vessels therefore needs to be rethought and adapted to the reality of the sector, the need to improve the safety and working conditions of fishermen, the need to accommodate technical changes, more compatible with the environmental sustainability of boats, and the very need for the small-scale fishing sector to be able to attract something so difficult, but so important, that it is the new generations of male and female fishermen.

Commissioner, I am here on this side, I do not know if you have seen where I am, since you have always looked in another direction, and not exactly here. I appreciate the detail of the information you brought. In any case, it is always a question of what else the Commission can then do to protect the interests of the most vulnerable consumers. Thank you for your explanations and details.

Mr President, Commissioner, we know that the main problem with food safety in the European Union is not availability, but accessibility to food. This rise in the prices of energy, fertilisers, and also – it is good to say – some speculation in the markets has led to an escalation in prices, and this is reflected and constraining above all for the most vulnerable households, and we know that these factors have a huge weight on household spending on food. That is why, for example, in our group, S&D, we have strongly advocated the creation of packages of measures in what we call a solidarity winter package for families and businesses, and we have also advocated permanent management instruments to support the labour market, limit energy prices, etc. All this seems important to us. I would like to know from the Commission what other measures can still be effectively implemented, and should be implemented, not only to support our farmers, but also to help the weakest families in the European Union.

Madam President, Commissioner, I did not address you a moment ago, because I had not yet seen you while I was speaking. It was a pleasure listening to you. I would like to say very briefly that, in fact, I would like to thank all the colleagues and shadow rapporteurs who have collaborated on this report very strongly. I have to say that it was a very committed and very intense work in order to achieve a text that mirrored what our different views on the rural world are, but that touch on so many points. I'll say it again, just look at how many colleagues are here. This is proof that the rural world does not move crowds. There are so few opportunities we have to talk about the rural world. So what I ask colleagues is to remember the following: The 80 paragraphs of this report are about and are for these 137 million people who live in the 80% of rural areas of our territory, of the European Union. It is for them this report, it is about them, it is about their problems, it is not against carnivores, it is not against wolves. Let this be very clear. Anyone who honestly and seriously reads paragraph 36 of this report and compares it with the drafting of the resolution on carnivores of the last plenary session fully understands the negotiating effort it has required. Either it was this, or it was simply having nothing and ignoring something that is deeply impacting on populations. It is the rural people who are making us aware of their concern and we have to help them. Nobody convinces me that opening up the Habitat Directive on time and eventually means killing wolves, unless there are lobbyists who want it, because that doesn't have to be the solution. In my country, for example, we did the relocation, the relocation, the displacement of these populations that were practically decimated. There will certainly be other possibilities that do not involve the death of these beings, but this report is not about wolves, it is not about wild boars, it is not about bears, it is about people. Let us have the courage, the political decency, to ever acknowledge the importance of these 137 million people who expect us to be consistent in our messages. I am very grateful for the Commissioner's words and, finally, for the Commission's commitment to meeting these demands so that we really do have a bright and resilient future for our rural world, moving beyond paper and rhetoric.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I see rural areas as decisive in addressing the major societal challenges that we face, particularly in these difficult times, with an ongoing war in Ukraine inflicted by Russia and the consequences of the pandemic. The future of rural areas, which cover 80% of the European Union's territory, is more important than ever for Europe's food security and the success of the European Green Deal. But more than that, it is above all the ethical and political imperative that men, women, children, young people, the elderly and, finally, all people living in rural areas should have the same conditions as any other citizen of the European Union in order to be able to make full use of their citizenship. So, ladies and gentlemen, we must do much more and better, because what we have seen is more than insufficient. I have already said here at other times that the European Commission's communication on the long-term vision for the European Union's rural areas is very welcome, but I must regret that it was presented so late, precisely at an advanced stage in the programming of the main instruments of the multiannual financial framework, in particular those linked to cohesion policy and agricultural policy for rural development. I also regret the lack of explicit concrete targets to be achieved. The rural pact, the mechanism rural proofing, the rural observatory and the action plan are very positive initiatives, but now need to be materialised, with clear targets for delivery. More immediate action is also needed now, because rural areas, Colleagues, cannot wait. The Commission should first ensure that the rural territorial dimension is duly taken into account in the design of legislative action and should annually assess its implementation and impact on CAP Strategic Plans, Cohesion Policy programmes and Recovery and Resilience Plans. In parallel, all European Union policies and funds, both under shared management and under direct management, should be called upon to contribute to the development of rural areas. The Commission should also adopt legislative and non-legislative measures in order to improve the effectiveness of current policies, for example by working on removing remaining obstacles in the approach to multi-funds and helping to develop more integrative approaches in rural areas, as well as improving synergies and coordination between EU funding instruments and between them and national instruments. We also call for swift legislative measures to enable, for example, the extension of the core fund approach to interventions co-financed by more than one shared management fund and the simplification of its implementation, as well as the possibility of transferring financial resources between all shared management funds when, and only when, it aims at implementing concrete rural territorial strategies, something that is not possible at the moment. At the same time, Member States should also take into account the specific challenges of their rural areas during the implementation of the current Multiannual Financial Framework programmes. In particular, they should provide the necessary investments for social inclusion, job creation, fostering the competitiveness of the rural economy and stimulating a truly fair digital and green transition. They should also promote the partnership principle, overcoming the resistances that still exist at this level, as well as the stronger involvement of local actors in the construction of solutions adapted to their communities. This is also the time to start reflecting on the next programming period and on creating a context that ensures prosperity and well-being for our rural communities. The long-term vision for rural areas must evolve into a genuine rural strategy at European Union level, including all the different policies relevant to its implementation, so as to be fully integrated into future programming periods. Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, this is the time to send a clear and consistent message to rural areas across Europe that we want to be an active part in defending their communities and revitalising their territories, that we are genuinely committed not only to proclaiming it, but actually to doing so.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we know today that there are 75 to 95 million people, new people, living in extreme poverty; 150 million more people are chronically undernourished; there are about 828 million people affected by different levels of hunger. Now, all G20 agriculture ministers have shown themselves to be aware of this data and are well aware of the multiple reasons that explain this dramatic condition of food insecurity for millions of people. You know this is in climate change, but it's also in the pandemic, but it's also in greed, it's also in speculation and it's also in wars. And so I can only regret, for example, that the same states have not been able to agree, in a clear and unequivocal way, to condemn the Russian aggression against Ukraine and its serious repercussions on agricultural production, food security and nutrition for millions of people. It is this hypocrisy that we cannot accept and we are surely attentive to it.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, our farmers are living through very difficult times, facing successive crises, from one of the worst droughts in memory, with particularly devastating effects in southern Europe, to the impacts of the Russian war against Ukraine, with a focus on shortages and the brutal increase in the price of fertilisers. These and other recent disruptions have a strong impact on agriculture, food production and, of course, also on the cost of agricultural food products and also increase the risk of food insecurity for millions of citizens in Europe. Systems, as we well know, do not change overnight, and we cannot fail to protect the most vulnerable, so all short-term measures that support farmers and food production by facilitating the supply of fertilisers on the domestic market in the short term will always be useful. But this crisis must also be understood as an opportunity to rethink the entire production system and move towards action on multiple fronts. For example, we need to diversify the source of raw materials, we need to bet on decarbonising the European fertiliser production sector and we need to do this through a clear investment in renewable energy. But, at the same time, it is important, above all, that we know how to make the transition to more efficient and more circular nutrient management systems, which allow us to sustainably reduce the need for chemical fertilisers, as advocated in the Farm to Fork strategy, with clear benefits for our farmers, society and the environment. There needs to be a clear focus on optimising nutrient recycling, particularly waste recycling and agro-ecological practices, and I am therefore pleased to note, Commissioner, that you have announced a future communication on fertilisers and nutrient management here. But I hope that the communication will not just come with an essentially punitive focus and that it will actually serve for us to think about nutrient management and to think about this issue from a point of view of the strategic autonomy of fertilisers for Europe. One day we can't announce a communication and another day we can announce a nutrient management plan. We must have a focus, we must have a path and we will be here to assist in this construction.

Mr President, I would just like to thank the Commissioner for her answer and I believe that she confirms - if I may interpret it freely - the importance of actually having a rural strategy in the next European Union funding programme, accompanied, of course, by national and regional strategies. This is because it is very useful, effectively, this idea that is conveyed here and that we know is working from the beginning. integrated territorial instruments. But then it is important to ensure or to ensure that, in fact, the vision of what the rural is and even the functional definition of the rural area is not lost. I believe that the strategy for the rural world will be extremely important there.

Commissioner, as we know, according to Expon, by 2050 the population of Europe's urban regions is expected to increase by about 24 million people, while people in rural areas will, in principle, have a reduction of about 8 million. So we are talking here about a loss and, if we think that this happens particularly when we talk about young people and more qualified people, this puts rural areas, as we well know, in a perpetual vicious cycle of decline which, in some cases, may even result in the absence of human capital that will then allow them to respond to their own development. A good policy mix is essential to combat it. Therefore, going to the point - and I know that it is also extremely sensitive in this matter - I ask, in particular, how the Commission can, for example, improve and simplify multi-fund approaches so that there is an even more effective articulation between policies, and this is one of the points most frequently highlighted by all the Member States. stakeholders What does it mean to work with the rural world?

Madam President, I should like to begin by thanking Mrs Aguilera and the shadow rapporteurs for their excellent work, both for their competence and technical rigour and for their clear ability to strike the right balance between the three pillars of sustainability for the aquaculture sector. Competitive and resilient aquaculture is key to achieving the objectives of Europe’s strategic food autonomy. Alongside the provision of healthy food, with high nutritional value and a low ecological footprint, this is a sector that, if well targeted, can greatly assist in protecting the environment and biodiversity, reducing pressure on marine resources and supporting the effective restoration of fishing stocks. It is therefore important to consider the importance of strengthening support to enable this sector, in partnership with science and technological innovation, to develop solutions that allow it to further reduce the impact of aquaculture production on the environment. This will be the path that seems to me vital, fundamental, to lessen the pressure on the oceans, ensuring the strategic food autonomy of our populations.

Madam President, in this brief speech I would like to welcome the commitment of all those who are actively involved in this important work. The health of the oceans and their biodiversity is essential to life, as we already know, as well as to the long-term sustainability of the different sectors of the blue economy. From contributing to the food security of millions of people, to providing renewable energy and mineral resources, to creating jobs in coastal communities, the oceans are a source of life and also of immense wealth. However, ensuring the good health of the oceans also means ensuring, among other measures, of course, that the European Union fleet continues to comply with the measures for the management and conservation of fishing stocks. It is essential to ensure that harmonised rules are granted to the EU fleet, regardless of the geographical area in which it operates, and that the conditions of fair competition for all fleets operating under international conventions are not overlooked. This means, finally, that there must also be a continuous effort to ensure that the conservation and management measures adopted under the various regional conventions are as close as possible to the ambitious objectives of the common fisheries policy, as a way of extending the language of ocean sustainability to all latitudes.

Madam President, Commissioner, cohesion policy has indeed been crucial in promoting convergence within Europe. And yet many regions are lagging behind, with a clear focus on our rural areas. The Union’s policies and actions, combined with those at national and regional level, are, as has been said so often, key to enabling rural European citizens to meet the challenges of demographic loss, lack of access to basic services, lack of quality job opportunities, climate pressures, reduced connectivity and limited access to innovation. I have repeatedly welcomed the strategy, not the strategy, the long-term vision for rural areas. But I always remember, and here I also take the opportunity to say so, that this vision needs to become a genuine European rural strategy, to be fully integrated into future programming periods and accompanied by national rural strategies. It is imperative to demonstrate to all regions and all our citizens that the European Union is there to support them. Only in this way do we really promote the true spirit of European solidarity. Allow me just one last word of enormous thanks and gratitude for the great woman who is our Constanze Krehl, and she knows how her extraordinary work in this House is in our hearts.

Mr President, Commissioner, climate change is clear! Europe is experiencing a dramatic drought that, according to the JRC, may even be the worst in 500 years. The scenario is particularly severe in southern Europe. Just to give you an idea, Commissioner, as early as May this year, in my country, 97% of the entire territory was in severe drought, and since July the whole territory has been in severe or even extreme drought, which, added to the extremely high temperatures, has unfortunately created the conditions for severe fires to occur during this summer. The immediate result is the second worst cereal season since there have been records in my country, Portugal, and sharp drops in fruit production and in the vegetative development of pastures and fodder. And so what I am asking the Commission, which is not original but is necessary, is to continuously and thoroughly assess the effects of the drought situation on food production and the viability of farms, taking into account the diversity of regions, and promoting the necessary action for now and for the future.

Mr President, Commissioner, thank you very much for your comments, which I have listened to very carefully. I would like to underline the following: What this Parliament is asking for, and what we do in our work, is that the measures always have the highest technical and legal rigour and that they are precisely implemented in time, because we have fishermen practising their profession in the areas of these conventions and who need to know, to have guarantees, in this case legal guarantees, that what they are doing is the right thing and, therefore, there must be transparency and simplicity in the measures so that they are easy to understand for everyone. And look, that's exactly what happened in the NAFO dossier, it was a very quick transposition. In almost three months the transposition was done without any problem. Now, what happened in the case of the Western and Central Pacific Convention was quite different, because there it was the Commission itself, to our astonishment, that delayed the negotiation process by not showing any kind of openness – and there is a history that obviously shows that I am not missing the truth here – and that did not in fact allow the negotiation to proceed at the best pace, and so things are what they are. We considered our proposals to be valid and I would therefore suggest, in a spirit of absolute openness and constructive spirit, that there may also be a little more openness and more flexibility on the part of the Commission in these situations where we present our proposals, because I believe that, together - Parliament, the Commission and the Council - we can do much more to simplify these implementation procedures without compromising their rigour and also seeking to improve what can be improved here, therefore without assuming that this House is just a verb to fill and that there is no room for improvement. So what we are looking for is to ensure the full applicability of the Common Fisheries Policy and so, on our part, it is in that spirit that we will continue to work with the Commission and the Council on future dossiers.

Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to begin by recalling that on 16 February this year the Commission presented a proposal to amend Regulation (EU) 2019/833 in order to transpose into European Union law the conservation and enforcement measures adopted by the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organisation, to which the European Union has been a contracting party since 1979. The main objective of that proposal is to transpose into EU law the amendments to the conservation and enforcement measures adopted by NAFO at its annual meeting in September 2021. These proposals include, for example, improvements to the wording of NAFO and adapting its wording to the legal context of the European Union, as well as transposing the revised provisions on additional procedures and serious infringements related to the use of some fishing gears. In this context, I consider that the European Commission's proposals fully comply with the principles for a rapid transposition process into EU law, and therefore no amendments have been tabled. In another file, on 23 March 2021, the European Commission submitted a proposal to incorporate into EU law the conservation and management measures adopted by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, which is responsible for the management of fisheries resources in this region and which is responsible for adopting measures for the conservation and management of marine biological resources under its responsibility, which are binding on all contracting parties. The EU fleet authorised and licensed to operate in the Convention area is rather small, but the quantities caught are considerable and have a significant impact on the management of these resources. This is why it is important to stress the importance of technical measures and monitoring of the use of fish aggregation devices and protection measures for some sensitive species. I also believe that the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) should be involved in the data transmission scheme between the Convention Secretariat, the Member States, the masters of European Union vessels and the European Commission. The European Fisheries Control Agency is the Union agency that coordinates national operational activities in the fisheries area and assists Member States in their implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy, so we should effectively start including EFCA more in all these processes. I would also stress the importance, in conclusion, of including the annexes to the regulation to be published in the Official Journal of the European Union, which stems from the need to ensure legality within the framework of the Treaties. I would also point out that the Court of Justice of the European Union has already drawn our attention to the need for this inclusion. In short, when adopting conservation and management measures taken by regional fisheries management organisations, the European Union should ensure that the measures adopted are in line with the ambitious objectives set by the Common Fisheries Policy, which means that, in order to ensure minimum impacts on habitats, resources and species, the Common Fisheries Policy should apply to all EU fleets, regardless of their geographical area of operation.

Madam President, in fact, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has created enormous pressure on global food security, which, as we know, has already been very weakened since the COVID-19 period, and so we are talking about a worrying increase in the number of people in the world facing imminent hunger. And if we think that more than 36, about 40 nations around the world imported more than 50% of their grain from countries like Ukraine and Russia, we understand the extent of the catastrophe that one might be guessing. And so, in this context, it is important that we study and speed up the alternatives on the ground to the blockade of Ukrainian ports – and I welcome here the efforts that the Commission has made to open up the functioning of solidarity lanes, which facilitate the transport of cereals and goods – but I warn that the reports are very worrying, including the lack of knowledge about the functioning of these solidarity lanes, and in parallel, to conclude, it is important to monitor the functioning of these corridors and other routes to ensure that there is no destabilisation of the functioning of the markets of the countries of passage.

I would like the treatment to be the same and it is a very quick question, since the Commissioner's answer was also very quick, okay? It is very fast and I would like to ask, if I may, to what extent the issue of integrated pest management is being addressed in this new legislation, not least with regard to greater homogeneity of the rules on integrated pest management in the context of the European Union. And I must also say that, with regard to the first question, I was not entirely satisfied, but I understand that at this point we are all very tired and with little availability for the answer.

Madam President, Commissioner, I defend and believe that the objectives outlined in the Farm to Fork and Biodiversity Strategies are key to establishing the path, the path towards more sustainable agri-food systems. And, in that sense, they should obviously also serve to stimulate the emergence of innovative and environmentally friendly solutions, such as biological active substances or the promotion of natural pest control methods. That is why I ask, in the context of this new proposal for legislation, how it is being considered, or whether it is being considered, the need to speed up the authorisation process for substances that are low-risk in agriculture and with full respect for safety for public health and the environment.

Madam President, as has often been said, the islands of the European Union generally face permanent structural disadvantages, such as the small territorial dimension, often associated with a very difficult topography, low population density, which is also reflected in small internal markets that are very dependent on local products, which they can only mitigate through another huge dependency: maritime and air transport. In addition to the structural disadvantages, our islands, in particular the outermost regions, are still at the forefront of the regions most affected by climate change, suffering an increase in the frequency and intensity of natural disasters with a huge impact on their economy, their ecosystems, not to mention the cases in which they even take human lives. It is therefore essential to draw up a specific strategy for the islands of the European Union, with clearly defined priorities for action, in order to reduce the impacts of their structural disadvantages and promote the development of measures to combat, prevent and adjust to the new challenges they face.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, as rapporteur for this own-initiative report, I should like to begin by congratulating the Commission proposal on the new strategy for a sustainable blue economy in the European Union. I must say, however, that I also regret the absence of specific targets for the different sectors, in particular for fisheries and aquaculture. Fisheries and aquaculture are key to providing Europe with healthy, high nutritional value and low carbon footprint food. But there is still a long way to go towards greater economic and environmental sustainability. In this context, our fishermen must be able to be at the forefront of the efforts to reverse the loss of marine biodiversity, due to the major socio-economic impact that such losses can have on the EU fisheries sector. This requires developing more innovative actions that boost investment in sustainable solutions in the fisheries and aquaculture sector, through funding under the new EMFAF, in synergy with other European Union programmes such as the Recovery and Resilience Facility. And let us not forget that effective marine protected areas can be extremely beneficial for fishing and for the sustainability of fish stocks. That is why science-based investments must be made to create marine protected areas that are not only on paper, but that can guarantee the long-term sustainability of resources and, with it, the economic sustainability of all fishermen and not just a few. Another message I would like to highlight concerns the scope of the blue economy. This broad segment of our economy encompasses all industries and sectors related to oceans, seas, coastal areas and even land-based aquaculture and algae production. But this also presents an increased challenge, because we talk about sectors that often have different objectives and visions, sometimes even antagonistic, which, in a context of lack of strategic planning of maritime space, causes damage, and is worrying, especially to more fragile sectors, such as artisanal fishing. The European Union and the Member States must therefore seriously address this reality which represents a further step in the right direction. stress Socioeconomic growth is on the shoulders of our fishermen. A sustainable blue economy should also include the balanced development of emerging activities such as blue biotechnology, ocean energy production or tourism, but always alongside more traditional activities such as maritime transport, fisheries and aquaculture, which should receive equal support in the quest for their sustainability. As regards international ocean governance, it should address environmental issues on a cross-sectoral basis, ensuring a level playing field and equal treatment of all maritime economic activities. In this context, I would like to welcome the role of Regional Sea Conventions and Regional Fisheries Management Organisations in strengthening governance based on the best available scientific knowledge. I must also stress the role of women. Throughout the sustainable fisheries value chain, they are key, particularly in coastal communities, and should also have access to decent working conditions and incomes, as well as greater visibility and representation in decision-making structures and processes. And I conclude by recalling that, in order to increase the competitiveness and economic performance of the fisheries and aquaculture sectors, particular attention must also be paid to vocational training, lifelong learning and the dissemination of scientific, technical and innovative practices, and this implies, among other measures, stronger and broader cooperation between schools, universities, public authorities and industry, in order to promote actions based on the best available scientific knowledge, capable of ensuring economic competitiveness, ensuring the environmental sustainability and social inclusion of these sectors so important for our food security and for the future of our food autonomy.