Press release
Future fisheries policy: MEPs and experts debate reform plans
Fisheries - 02-12-2009 - 13:33
Committees
Committees
Deciding what the next common fisheries policy reform should deliver is easier than deciding how - and there is unlikely to be a "one size fits all" solution, it emerged from a public hearing of experts on Tuesday. MEPs looked for fresh angles and new solutions, such as alternatives to the quota system, decentralising fishery management and stepping up scientific investment, to help Parliament to shape the reform.
MEPs debated the future shape of the EU's common fisheries policy (CFP) at a public hearing with representatives of fishermen, fishing regions, and NGOs on Tuesday 1 December, the day when the Lisbon Treaty, which empowers Parliament to legislate reform measures on an equal footing with national governments, took effect.
Participants accepted that the key policy aims of ensuring the sustainability of fish stocks and the welfare of fishing communities had not been achieved by the previous CFP reform, in 2002. The additional challenges facing the next one, to be approved by 2013, include over-fishing, wasteful over-investment, fish discards, economic and social decline, climate change and market globalisation.
Ends easier to agree than means
Stakeholders could reach a broad consensus on the need to further decentralise fisheries management, improve social conditions for fishermen, increase profitability and boosting investment in scientific knowledge, but they differed as to how these aims could best be achieved, said Parliament's rapporteur on the CFP reform green paper Maria do Céu Patrão Neves (EPP, PT).
Views differ not only among Member States, but within the sector, noted Guus Pastoor of the European Fish Processors Association. For instance, small-scale and industrial fisheries would take very different views on transferable fishing rights as an alternative to the current quota allocation system. Decentralisation and regionalisation would be a good solution in many areas, but not for highly migratory species, argued Sean O'Donoghue of the Federation of Irish Fisherman.
Chris Davies (ALDE, UK) expressed surprise at the call from some associations to prioritise social sustainability over the viability of fish stocks, comparing this approach to building a house without caring about its foundations.
Need for more reliable scientific data
Members and sector representatives also stressed the need for more reliable scientific data as a basis for legal certainty and fairer distribution of fishing opportunities. However, while some speakers, including Europêche President Javier Garat and Mr O'Donoghue suggested new or improved scientific bodies, others argued that emphasis should instead be put on compliance. "You are suggesting new structures but we are not following the existing advice. As a result, thousands of tonnes of fish are thrown overboard", said Isabella Lövin (Greens/EFA, SV).
How much decentralisation?
Some speakers also warned against oversimplifying reform components upon which there is a "broad consensus". Ulrike Rodust (S&D, DE) questioned whether "everything needed to be transferred back to the regions" and suggested that more stress should be put on training. Many regional representatives also argued against taking a "top down" approach to decentralisation.
Struan Stevenson (ECR, UK) said that although micro-management from the centre has been unsuccessful, Brussels should remain the ultimate arbiter for fair play. Decisions should not be rushed through just to meet deadlines, he argued.
Next steps
In 2010 the Fisheries Committee will hold other public debates, to look at possible solutions in detail. Parliament's contribution to the public debate - the report on the Green Paper - will be put to a committee vote in January. The plenary vote on this report is scheduled for the end of February.
Committee on Fisheries
In the chair: Carmen FRAGA ESTÉVEZ (EPP, Spain)
With the Lisbon Treaty, in force as of 1 December 2009, the European Parliament has important new lawmaking powers. Virtually all EU legislation is now decided by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers together - including agriculture, immigration, energy and the EU budget. As the only directly elected EU institution, Parliament's position in making sure the EU is accountable to its citizens is also strengthened, for example by MEPs having a bigger say in appointments to many of the EU's top jobs.
REF.: 20091130IPR65543