Procedure : 2015/0096(COD)
Document stages in plenary
Document selected : A8-0367/2015

Texts tabled :

A8-0367/2015

Debates :

PV 18/01/2016 - 15
CRE 18/01/2016 - 15

Votes :

PV 19/01/2016 - 5.3
CRE 19/01/2016 - 5.3
PV 23/06/2016 - 8.7

Texts adopted :

P8_TA(2016)0003
P8_TA(2016)0286

REPORT     ***I
PDF 725kWORD 355k
15 December 2015
PE 567.746v02-00 A8-0367/2015

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a multiannual recovery plan for Bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean repealing Regulation (EC) No 302/2009

(COM(2015)0180 – C8-0118/2015 – 2015/0096(COD))

Committee on Fisheries

Rapporteur: Gabriel Mato

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
 PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a multiannual recovery plan for Bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean repealing Regulation (EC) No 302/2009

(COM(2015)0180 – C8-0118/2015 – 2015/0096(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2015)0180),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0118/2015),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 1 July 2015(1),

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A8-0367/2015),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment    1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3 a new

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(3a) The Recovery plan takes into account the specificities of the different types of gears. When implementing the recovery plan, the Union and Member States should pay particular attention to non-industrial fishing activities and to the most artisanal and sustainable gear types, such as traditional traps ("almadrabas", "tonnare"), which contribute very positively to the rebuilding of tuna stocks, due to their high level of selectivity and low environmental impact in marine ecosystems, and which are valuable in scientific terms.

Justification

Artisanal gears, such as traditional traps ("almadrabas") have a very low impact in the marine ecosystems thanks to the low level of energy consumption and accidental catches and should, therefore, receive special attention.

Amendment    2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14) All the amendments to the Recovery plan adopted by ICCAT in 2012, 2013 and 2014, which have not been subject to transposition yet, should be integrated into Union law. As this transposition concerns a plan whose objectives and measures were defined by ICCAT, this Regulation does not cover all the content of multiannual plans as set out under Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council1.

(14) All the amendments to the Recovery plan adopted by ICCAT in 2006, 2012, 2013 and 2014, which have not been subject to transposition yet, should be transposed into Union law. As this transposition concerns a plan whose objectives and measures were defined by ICCAT, this Regulation does not cover all the content of multiannual plans as set out under Articles 9 and 10 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council1.

____________

____________

1Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 1).

1Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1954/2003 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002 and (EC) No 639/2004 and Council Decision 2004/585/EC (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 22).

Justification

The term “transposed” is more precise than “integrated”. The proposal aims at transposing ICCAT Recommendations into Union law.

Amendment    3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15) It is necessary to transpose into Union law future binding amendments of the Recovery plan. In order to swiftly incorporate into Union law such amendments, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the European Commission (the "Commission"). It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and Council.

deleted

Justification

The transposition of RFMOs’ Recommendations has to remain a joint European Parliament and Council competence under the ordinary procedure (co-decision).

Amendment    4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(15a) Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 establishes the concept of minimum conservation reference sizes. In order to ensure consistency, the ICCAT concept of minimum sizes should be transposed into Union law as minimum conservation reference sizes. Consequently, the references in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/981a to minimum sizes of bluefin tuna should be read as references to minimum conservation reference sizes in this Regulation.

 

_______________

 

1a Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/98 of 18 November 2014 on the implementation of the Union's international obligations, as referred to in Article 15(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, under the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas and the Convention on Future Multilateral Cooperation in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries (OJ L 16, 23.01.2015).

Justification

The CFP basic Regulation introduces a landing obligation, in which the concept of minimum size, linked to the discard obligation applied up to the last reform, has no longer sense.

Amendment    5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 17

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17) The Commission should adopt immediately applicable implementing acts where, in duly justified cases relating to transfer operations, caging operations and recording and reporting of trap and vessel activities, imperative grounds of urgency so require.

deleted

Justification

The expression “in duly justified cases” is too vague to justify Commission implementing acts. In any case, Article 12(1) of the CFP basic Regulation, which stipulates that “on duly justified imperative grounds of urgency relating to a serious threat to the conservation of marine biological resources or to the marine ecosystem based on evidence "the Commission may adopt implementing acts, remains applicable here.

Amendment    6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 24

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(24) Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 introduced a landing obligation which applies as of 1 January 2015 to Bluefin tuna. However, under Article 15(2) of that Regulation, the landing obligation is without prejudice to the Union's international obligations, such as those resulting from ICCAT Recommendations. Under that same provision the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts, for the purpose of implementing such international obligations into Union law, including, in particular, derogations from the landing obligation. Accordingly, the discard of bluefin tuna will be allowed in some situations laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/98 of 18 November 2014. This Regulation does therefore not need to cover such discard obligations,

(24) Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/98 provides for derogations from the landing obligation of bluefin tuna set out in Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 for the purpose of Union compliance with its international obligations under the Convention. It implements certain provisions of ICCAT Recommendation 13-07 that establish a discard and release obligation for vessels and traps catching bluefin tuna in the Eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean in certain situations. This Regulation therefore does not need to cover such discard and release obligations and will consequently be without prejudice to the corresponding provisions laid down in Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/98,

Justification

The Commission has already adopted Delegated Regulation (EU) N° 2015/98 in order to introduce derogations from the landing obligation of bluefin tuna, as provided by the ICCAT Recovery plan, on the basis of Article 15(2). Therefore, for the sake of clarity, the reference to this last Article should be deleted.

Amendment    7

Draft legislative resolution

Article 1 – paragraph 1

Draft legislative resolution

Amendment

1. This Regulation lays down the general rules for the application by the Union of the Recovery plan as defined in Article 3(1).

1. This Regulation lays down the general rules for the application by the Union of the Recovery plan as defined in Article 3(1), taking into account the specific features of the various types of fishing gear and paying particular attention to traditional, more sustainable and artisanal gear, such as traps.

Justification

Support and particular attention should be given to long-established traditional and artisanal fishing gear such as traps, which have a low impact on marine ecosystems thanks to their low energy consumption and high degree of selectivity, and which also help to create jobs.

Amendment    8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – point 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) "farming capacity" means the capacity of a farm to hold fish for fattening and farming purposes in tonnes";

deleted

Justification

There is not such a definition of the term “farming capacity” in the ICCAT Recovery plan.

Amendment    9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the fishing activities of its catching vessels and its traps are commensurate with the fishing opportunities on Bluefin tuna available to that Member State in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean.

1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the fishing effort of its catching vessels and its traps are commensurate with the fishing opportunities on Bluefin tuna available to that Member State in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean, and to safeguard the socio-economic viability of its traps.

Justification

“Fishing effort” is the term used by point 9 of ICCAT Recommendation 14-04.

Amendment    10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

The annual fishing plan submitted by each Member State shall provide for an even breakdown of quotas among the gear groups in order to help ensure compliance with individual quotas and by-catch allowances.

Amendment    11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

1a. Member States shall use transparent and objective criteria, including those of an environmental, social and economic nature, for the national allocation of the quotas, giving special consideration to the preservation and prosperity of small-scale, artisanal and traditional fishermen using traps and other selective fishing methods, and to the encouragement of such methods

Amendment    12

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The maximum number of fishing vessels flying the flag of a Member State engaged in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean Bluefin tuna fishery shall be limited to the number, and the total corresponding gross tonnage, of fishing vessels flying the flag of that Member State that fished for, retained on board, transhipped, transported or landed Bluefin tuna during the period from 1 January 2007 to 1 July 2008. That limit shall apply by gear type for catching vessels.

3. The maximum number and the corresponding gross tonnage of fishing vessels flying the flag of a Member State engaged in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean Bluefin tuna fishery shall be limited to the number, and the total corresponding gross tonnage, of fishing vessels flying the flag of that Member State that fished for, retained on board, transhipped, transported or landed Bluefin tuna during the period from 1 January 2007 to 1 July 2008. That limit shall apply by gear type for catching vessels.

Justification

The insertion of the words “and the corresponding gross tonnage” is in line with point 37 of ICCAT Recommendation 14-04.

Amendment    13

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. By way of derogation from paragraph 3 and 6, for the years 2015, 2016, and 2017, each Member State shall limit the numbers of its purse seiners not authorised to fish for Bluefin tuna under the derogation referred to in Article 13(2)b to the numbers of purse seiners it authorised in 2013 or 2014.

7. For the years 2015, 2016, and 2017, each Member State shall limit the numbers of its purse seiners to the numbers of purse seiners it authorised in 2013 or 2014. This shall not apply to purse seiners operating under the derogation provided for in point (b) of Article 13(2).

Justification

The amendment aims at literally transposing specific wording of ICCAT Recommendation 14-04 (point 45).

Amendment    14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Fishing for Bluefin tuna by gears other than those referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4 and Article 11, including traps shall be permitted throughout the year.

5. Fishing for Bluefin tuna by gears other than those referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4 and Article 11, including traps, shall be permitted throughout the year in accordance with ICCAT conservation and management measures.

Amendment    15

Proposal for a regulation

Section 2 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

MINIMUM SIZE, INCIDENTAL CATCH, BY-CATCH

MINIMUM CONSERVATION REFERENCE SIZE, INCIDENTAL CATCH, BY-CATCH

Justification

The CFP basic Regulation introduces a landing obligation, in which the concept of minimum size, linked to the discard obligation applied up to the last reform, has no longer sense. 

Amendment    16

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The provisions of this Section shall be without prejudice to Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, including any derogation in line with Article 15(2) of that Regulation.

The provisions of this Section shall be without prejudice to Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013, including any applicable derogations thereto.

Justification

The Commission has already adopted Delegated Regulation (EU) N° 2015/98 in order to introduce derogations from the landing obligation of bluefin tuna, as provided by the ICCAT Recovery plan, on the basis of Article 15(2). Therefore, for the sake of clarity, the reference to this last Article should be deleted.

Amendment    17

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Minimum size

Minimum conservation reference size

Justification

The CFP basic Regulation introduces a landing obligation, in which the concept of minimum size, linked to the discard obligation applied up to the last reform, has no longer sense.

Amendment    18

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The minimum size for Bluefin tuna caught in the eastern Atlantic and in the Mediterranean shall be 30 kg or 115 cm fork length.

1. The minimum conservation reference size for Bluefin tuna caught in the eastern Atlantic and in the Mediterranean shall be 30 kg or 115 cm fork length.

Justification

The CFP basic Regulation introduces a landing obligation, in which the concept of minimum size, linked to the discard obligation applied up to the last reform, has no longer sense.

Amendment    19

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

By way of derogation from paragraph 1, a minimum size for Bluefin tuna of 8 kg or 75cm fork length shall apply to the following fisheries:

By way of derogation from paragraph 1, a minimum conservation reference size for Bluefin tuna of 8 kg or 75cm fork length shall apply to the following fisheries:

Justification

The CFP basic Regulation introduces a landing obligation, in which the concept of minimum size, linked to the discard obligation applied up to the last reform, has no longer sense.

Amendment    20

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. If the quota allocated to the Member State of the fishing vessel or trap concerned has already been consumed, the catching of any Bluefin tuna shall be avoided. Dead Bluefin tuna must be landed and shall be subject to confiscation and the appropriate follow-up action. In accordance with Article 27, each Member State shall report information on such quantities on an annual basis to the Commission who shall forward it to the ICCAT Secretariat.

4. If the quota allocated to the Member State of the fishing vessel or trap concerned has already been consumed, the catching of any Bluefin tuna shall be avoided. Dead Bluefin tuna must be landed whole and unprocessed and shall be subject to confiscation and the appropriate follow-up action. In accordance with Article 27, each Member State shall report information on such quantities on an annual basis to the Commission who shall forward it to the ICCAT Secretariat.

Justification

The amendment is in line with point 29, 4th indent, of ICCAT Recommendation 14-04.

Amendment    21

Proposal for a regulation

Section 3 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

USE OF AIRCRAFTS

USE OF AERIAL MEANS

Justification

ICCAT Recommendation 14-04 regulates the use of all aerial means (point 25).

Amendment    22

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

3a. Any Bluefin tuna landed shall be whole, gilled and gutted. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, the release of Bluefin tuna caught alive, especially juveniles, in the framework of recreational and sport fishing.

Justification

In accordance with Paragraph 34 of ICCAT Recommendation 14-04.

Amendment    23

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) a list of all catching vessels flying its flag authorised to fish actively for Bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean by issue of a special fishing authorisation;

(a) a list of all catching vessels flying its flag authorised to fish actively for Bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean by issue of a fishing authorisation;

Justification

There is no such a “special” authorisation provided for neither in the ICCAT Recovery plan nor in the EU Control Regulation.

Amendment    24

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

Article 19a

 

Relationship with Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009

 

The control measures provided for in this Chapter shall apply in addition to those provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009, except where otherwise provided for in this Chapter.

Justification

This is a reminder, for the sake of clarity, that the EU Control Regulation remains applicable, unless otherwise is provided for in the relevant chapter of the proposal.

Amendment    25

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The flag Member State shall withdraw the fishing authorisation for Bluefin tuna and shall require the vessel to proceed immediately to a port designated by it when the individual quota is deemed to be exhausted.

2. The flag Member State shall withdraw the fishing authorisation for Bluefin tuna and may require the vessel to proceed immediately to a port designated by it when the individual quota is deemed to be exhausted.

Justification

This amendment is in line with point 13 of ICCAT Recommendation 14-04, as well as with the EU Control Regulation. The Commission proposal goes beyond the above mentioned texts.

Amendment    26

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. By 15 February each year, each Member State shall send to the Commission electronically a list of its traps authorised, by issue of a special fishing authorisation to fish for Bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean. The list shall include the name of the traps and the register number and shall be set up in accordance with the format set in the Guidelines by ICCAT for submitting data and information required.

1. By 15 February each year, each Member State shall send to the Commission electronically a list of its traps authorised, by issue of a fishing authorisation to fish for Bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean. The list shall include the name of the traps and the register number and shall be set up in accordance with the format set in the Guidelines by ICCAT for submitting data and information required.

Justification

There is no such a “special” authorisation provided for neither in the ICCAT Recovery plan nor in the EU Control Regulation.

Amendment    27

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 59 (3).

deleted

Justification

The expression “on duly justified imperative grounds of urgency” is too vague to justify Commission implementing acts. In any case, Article 12(1) of the CFP basic Regulation, which stipulates that “on duly justified imperative grounds of urgency relating to a serious threat to the conservation of marine biological resources or to the marine ecosystem based on evidence "the Commission may adopt implementing acts, remains applicable here.

Amendment    28

Proposal for a regulation

Article 29 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Where Member States apply Article 80(3) of Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 to the notification under paragraphs 1 and 2, the estimated quantities of Bluefin tuna retained on board may be notified at the agreed time of notification prior to arrival.

3. Where Member States apply Article 80(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011 to the notification under paragraphs 1 and 2, the estimated quantities of Bluefin tuna retained on board may be notified at the agreed time of notification prior to arrival. If the fishing grounds are less than four hours from the port, the estimated quantities of Bluefin tuna retained on board may be modified at any time prior to arrival.

Justification

The insertion of the last phrase is in line with point 64, second indent, of ICCAT Recommendation 14-04.

Amendment    29

Proposal for a regulation

Article 37 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 59(3).

deleted

Justification

The expression “on duly justified imperative grounds of urgency” is too vague to justify Commission implementing acts. In any case, Article 12(1) of the CFP basic Regulation, which stipulates that “on duly justified imperative grounds of urgency relating to a serious threat to the conservation of marine biological resources or to the marine ecosystem based on evidence” the Commission may adopt implementing acts, remains applicable here.

Amendment    30

Proposal for a regulation

Article 46 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 59(3).

deleted

Justification

The expression “on duly justified imperative grounds of urgency” is too vague to justify Commission implementing acts. In any case, Article 12(1) of the CFP basic Regulation, which stipulates that “on duly justified imperative grounds of urgency relating to a serious threat to the conservation of marine biological resources or to the marine ecosystem based on evidence” the Commission may adopt implementing acts, remains applicable here. 

Amendment    31

Proposal for a regulation

Article 47 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Member States shall ensure that their Fisheries Monitoring Centres forward to the Commission and a body designated by it, in real time and using the format ‘https data feed’, the VMS messages received from the fishing vessels flying their flag. The Commission shall send electronically those messages to the ICCAT Secretariat.

4. Member States shall transmit the data provided for in this Article in accordance with Article 28 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 404/2011. The Commission shall send electronically those messages to the ICCAT Secretariat.

Justification

The Commission proposed obligations are not provided for neither in ICCAT Recommendation 14-04 nor in the EU Control Regulation.

Amendment    32

Proposal for a regulation

Article 49 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(ca) during all transfers from one farm to another;

Amendment    33

Proposal for a regulation

Article 49 – paragraph 5 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

 

(aa) observe and monitor fishing and farming operations in compliance with the relevant ICCAT conservation and management measures;

Justification

This amendment is in line with point 90 of ICCAT Recommendation 14-04.

Amendment    34

Proposal for a regulation

Article 57

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 57

deleted

Procedure for amendments

 

1. As far as is necessary, in order to incorporate into Union law amendments to the existing provisions of the Bluefin tuna recovery plan which become binding to the Union, the Commission may amend non-essential provisions of this Regulation by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 58.

 

Justification

The transposition of RFMOs’ Recommendations has to remain a joint European Parliament and Council competence under the ordinary procedure (co-decision).

Amendment    35

Proposal for a regulation

Article 58

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 58

deleted

Exercise of the delegation for amendments

 

1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article.

 

2. The delegation of power referred to in Article 57 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time.

 

3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 57 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.

 

4. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and to the Council.

 

5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 57 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of 2 months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by 2 months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.

 

Justification

The deletion of Article 57 entails deletion of this Article.

Amendment    36

Proposal for a regulation

Article 59 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 8 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011, in conjunction with Article 5 thereof, shall apply.

deleted

Justification

This amendment is in line with the proposed deletion of the urgency procedure in “duly justified imperative grounds of urgency” in Articles 24(5), 37 and 46.

Amendment    37

Proposal for a regulation

Article 61 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Amendment    38

Proposal for a regulation

Annex I – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In addition to the provisions set out in Article 8(3), the maximum number of catching vessels authorised to fish for Bluefin tuna in the Adriatic sea for farming purposes under the specific conditions applying to the derogation referred to in Article 13(2)(b) is set at the number of Union catching vessels participating in the directed fishery for Bluefin tuna in 2008.

In addition to the provisions set out in Article 8(3), the maximum number of catching vessels authorised to fish for Bluefin tuna in the Adriatic sea for farming purposes under the specific conditions applying to the derogation referred to in Article 13(2)(b) is set at the number of Union catching vessels participating in the directed fishery for Bluefin tuna in 2008. For that purpose, the number of Croatian catching vessels participating in the directed fishery for Bluefin tuna in 2008 shall be taken into account.

Justification

It is important to specify that, even for Croatia, the number of vessels engaged in fishing of BFT is taken into account, starting from the reference year.

Amendment    39

Proposal for a regulation

Annex IV – point 2 – line 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Number of individuals:

Species:

Number of individuals:

Species:

Weight:

Justification

The addition of the reference to the weight, the species as well as the declaration of the BFT transfer for processing, clarifies the document. Also it takes over the provision laid down in Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 302/2009

Amendment    40

Proposal for a regulation

Annex VII – point 7 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) allowed access to the vessel and farm personnel and to the gear, cages and equipment

(a) allowed access to the vessel, farm and trap personnel and to the gear, cages and equipment

Justification

This is in line with point 12, which concerns also traps.

(1)

Not yet published in the Official Journal.


EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The European Union is Contracting Party to the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), the Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (RFMO) responsible for the management of tuna and tuna-like species in the Atlantic Ocean and adjoining seas.

ICCAT has the authority to adopt decisions (“Recommendations”) for fisheries conservation and management in its area of competence; these acts are binding; they must be enacted into Union law.

In 2006 ICCAT has adopted a multiannual recovery plan for bluefin tuna, ending in 2022. In order to rebuild the stock, the plan sets up a gradual reduction in the total allowable catch level from 2007 to 2011, restrictions on fishing within certain areas and time periods, a new minimum size, measures concerning sport and recreational fishing activities, farming and fishing capacity measures and reinforced the ICCAT Scheme of Joint International Inspection. This plan has been amended successively by ICCAT in its annual meetings.

Bluefin tuna is the most important species regulated by ICCAT. Fishermen have made considerable efforts to adjust their catches to as shrunk TAC issued from the decisions taken in 2006 by complying with the strict fishing conditions established in the plan. The total admissible catches, set at 33.000 tonnes before the recovery plan, were reduced progressively to achieve the lowest level in 2012 (12.900 tonnes).

In view of the positive evolution of the state of the stocks, ICCAT decided to slightly increase the total allocation to 13.400 tonnes for 2013. In 2014 the TAC has not been modified, but the EU quota increased to 7.939 tonnes due to the inclusion of the Croatian quota of 390,6 tonnes. The current TAC in 2015 is 15.821 tonnes, and the EU allocation is 9.372,9 tonnes.

Bluefin tuna biomass has been showing a dramatically positive trend since 2008. The regional organisation decided in 2014 to increase the TAC by 20 percent for the following three years (from 2015 to 2017), since there are solid scientific data proving that stocks are stocks are at healthy levels of abundance.

In the opinion of the rapporteur, the spectacular recovery observed in bluefin tuna stocks during the last years could justify a decision by ICCAT to advance to 2016 the TAC foreseen for 2017 (23.155 tonnes), which would still remain much below the TAC in place before the entry into force of the recovery plan.

Content of the proposal

With a view to ensure uniform and effective application throughout the European Union of all measures of the Recovery plan adopted between 2012 and 2014, the current proposal aims at incorporating them into a Regulation.

The proposal contains technical measures such as those on transfer and caging operations of live bluefin tuna, including also measures on the use of stereoscopic cameras to estimate the quantities of bluefin tuna and releases, catch reporting requirements, and the implementation of the ICCAT Regional Observer Programme.

The new CFP basic Regulation introduced a landing obligation which applies as of 1 January 2015 also to bluefin tuna. However the landing obligation is without prejudice to the Union's international obligations, such as those resulting from ICCAT recommendations. Under provision 15(2) of the CFP Basic Regulation, the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts for the purpose of implementing such international obligations into Union law, including, in particular, derogations from the landing obligation. Accordingly, the discard of bluefin tuna will be allowed in some situations laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 2015/98.

Position of the rapporteur

Even if the Commission proposal is, in general, correctly transposing the relevant ICCAT Recommendations, in certain cases it goes beyond what was decided in ICCAT but also what the EU legislation provides for. This is the case, for example, when the individual quota for bluefin tuna is deemed to be exhausted: the ICCAT Recommendations, as well as the EU Control Regulation foresees that the flag Member State may – and not “shall”, as the Commission proposes – require the vessel to proceed immediately to a port designated by it.

In this respect, the rapporteur wishes to remind that the aim of the transposition of the ICCAT Recommendations is to have uniform application throughout the EU; it is not to reopen the discussion about what has already been decided after, often, lengthy negotiations, where every single word and every comma count.

Uniform application should aim at ensuring a level playing-field for all operators engaged in tuna fishing, including – most importantly – non-EU operators. Otherwise, all the efforts put and restrictions applied to EU fishermen will have no result, if different rules apply to foreign fleets. EU operators should not be penalised, by imposing them stricter measures than those agreed, because the Commission could not impose such measures in the negotiations in ICCAT.

Taking advantage of the Commission proposal on the procedure to apply for future amendments of this Recovery plan, the rapporteur could not, once more, not address the issue of the absence of the European Parliament from international negotiations. The Commission proposes to transpose future amendments to this Recovery plan through delegated acts. If this – already extremely limited – power that the Parliament has in the last phase of approval of international agreements is taken away, this would practically mean that it has no say at all in ICCAT and, in the future, in other international fora. The transposition of RFMOs’ Recommendations has to remain a joint European Parliament and Council competence under the ordinary procedure (co-decision).

ICCAT Recommendations take in account the specificities of the different tuna gears. In this context, the rapporteur would like to stress the role of artisanal traps, such as traditional traps ("almadrabas"), in the conservation of the stocks. In the implementation of the recovery plan, the European Union should pay particular attention to these traditional traps, which contribute to the rebuilt of tuna stocks, as they are extremely selective. Moreover, these gears have a very low impact in the marine ecosystems thanks to the low level of energy consumption and of accidental catches.


PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title

Multiannual recovery plan for Bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and the Mediterranean

References

COM(2015)0180 – C8-0118/2015 – 2015/0096(COD)

Date submitted to Parliament

24.4.2015

 

 

 

Committee responsible

       Date announced in plenary

PECH

30.4.2015

 

 

 

Committees asked for opinions

       Date announced in plenary

ENVI

30.4.2015

 

 

 

Not delivering opinions

       Date of decision

ENVI

7.5.2015

 

 

 

Rapporteurs

       Date appointed

Gabriel Mato

6.5.2015

 

 

 

Discussed in committee

13.10.2015

10.11.2015

 

 

Date adopted

10.12.2015

 

 

 

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

17

1

2

Members present for the final vote

Clara Eugenia Aguilera García, Renata Briano, Alain Cadec, Richard Corbett, Raymond Finch, Carlos Iturgaiz, Werner Kuhn, António Marinho e Pinto, Gabriel Mato, Norica Nicolai, Liadh Ní Riada, Ulrike Rodust, Remo Sernagiotto, Ricardo Serrão Santos, Ruža Tomašić, Peter van Dalen, Jarosław Wałęsa

Substitutes present for the final vote

Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Nicola Caputo, Lidia Senra Rodríguez

Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote

Dario Tamburrano

Date tabled

15.12.2015

Last updated: 13 June 2016Legal notice