REPORT on the proposal for a Council regulation denouncing the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola on fisheries off Angola and derogating from Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999
20.4.2006 - (COM(2005)0677 – C6‑0035/2006 – 2005/0262(CNS)) - *
Committee on Fisheries
Rapporteur: Pedro Guerreiro
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
on the proposal for a Council regulation denouncing the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola on fisheries off Angola and derogating from Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999
(COM(2005)0677 – C6-0035/2006 – 2005/0262(CNS))
(Consultation procedure)
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the proposal for a Council regulation (COM(2005)0677)[1],
– having regard to Article 300(2), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty ,
– having regard to Article 300(3), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6‑0035/2006),
– having regard to Rules 51 and 83(7) of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries and the opinion of the Committee on Development (A6‑0133/2006),
1. Approves the proposal for a Council regulation and denunciation of the Agreement;
2. Approves the derogations from Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 contained in the regulation now approved;
3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the People’s Republic of Angola.
- [1] Not yet published in OJ.
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
INTRODUCTION
After two rounds of formal negotiations and various contacts between the Commission and the Angolan authorities, it has not been possible to reach an agreement on the renewal of the protocol annexed to the Agreement setting out the fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for in the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the People’s Republic of Angola on fishing off Angola for the period between 3 August 2002 and 2 August 2004.
Consequently, the Commission informed the Angolan authorities in June 2005 that it was suspending negotiations and that, in its view, it was considered necessary to formally denounce the fisheries agreement.
The reasons put forward by the Commission in proposing that the agreement be denounced relate to certain conditions laid down in the new Angolan legislative framework on biological aquatic resources, which are considered to be incompatible with the Community’s requirements in terms of fishing by Community fishing vessels in Angolan waters within the framework of a fisheries agreement with the Community.
The new legislative framework adopted by the People’s Republic of Angola in October 2004 lays down that the fishing activities subject to an agreement between the Community and Angola must henceforth be carried out in conformity with Angola’s laws and regulations on fisheries. In accordance with the new law on biological aquatic resources adopted by the People’s Republic of Angola, all fishing activities must be carried out in association with Angolan enterprises and the fish must be of Angolan origin. Furthermore, all Community vessels would have to be fitted with satellite tracking devices directly linked to the Angolan fishing vessel monitoring centre.
The Community will need to give notice to the People’s Republic of Angola of the denouncement of the fisheries agreement by 31 October 2007 so that the denunciation takes effect on 1 February 2008.
The denunciation of the agreement will affect a number of fishing vessels from Community countries which used to operate under this agreement.
SITUATION FOR THE VESSELS AFFECTED AND DEROGATIONS PROPOSED
The number of fishing vessels from Community countries affected by the denunciation of the agreement, which have until now operated exclusively or principally in Angolan waters, has been assessed at around 21, 19 of which were considered highly dependent on fishing in these waters.
As the Commission points out, under Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 of 17 December 1999 laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector, the Member States may grant compensation to fishermen and owners of vessels for the temporary cessation of activities where a fisheries agreement is not renewed, or where it is suspended, for the Community fleets dependent on the agreement. The granting of compensation may not last longer than six months, and may be extended by a further six months provided a conversion plan approved by the Commission is implemented for the fleet concerned.
These fishing vessels have benefited from this possibility through an aid scheme for a six-month tie-up which started in August 2004.
On 18 July 2005 the Commission extended this aid scheme for a further six months by approving the conversion plan submitted by the Spanish authorities for fishing vessels affected by the non-renewal of the agreement, within the framework of the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG) operational programme relating to Community structural interventions in the fisheries sector for Objective 1 in Spain during the period 2000-2006.
In order to facilitate the implementation of the conversion plan, the Commission considers it desirable for fishing vessels covered by the plan to be exempted from certain provisions of Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999. The Commission is therefore proposing that the following derogations be granted:
- for fishing vessels which decide to switch to the Angolan flag: the existing obligation to reimburse public aid for construction, renewal and equipment and for temporary tie-up should be waived;
- for fishing vessels which opt for permanent withdrawal aid: the obligation to demonstrate continuous activity in the year preceding the deletion from the Community fishing vessel register should be waived.
RAPPORTEUR’S COMMENTS
As the Commission points out, apart from the loss of fishing opportunities, jobs and added value linked to the activities previously carried out, denouncing the agreement entails the conversion of Community fishing vessels dependent on fishing in Angolan waters. For this reason, the rapporteur regrets that it was not possible to reach an agreement between the Community and the Angolan authorities.
The rapporteur takes the view that one of the key questions is to find alternative activities for the vessels affected by the denunciation of the agreement, preserving the jobs which depend on those activities.
According to the Commission, the conversion plan for these vessels offers several opportunities: the vessels in question may switch to operating under other fisheries agreements, or they may be removed from the Community fishing vessel register by means of scrapping or changing flag.
In the present case, however, as the Commission points out, some of the provisions relating to the granting of financial support under the FIFG to the vessels concerned may hinder their conversion as part of this plan. The rapporteur therefore considers it appropriate to adopt measures to facilitate and promote the conversion of these fishing vessels, such as the proposal to make these vessels exempt from complying with certain provisions, in particular the obligation to reimburse aid for construction or modernisation received in the previous ten years, along with aid for the temporary cessation of activities granted under the FIFG.
The rapporteur takes the view that a detailed study should be made of all viable possibilities allowing the vessels concerned to operate in other areas or under other fisheries agreements, negotiating new fishing opportunities or taking advantage of possibilities which already exist but are not being used. Consideration should also be given to the possibility for the vessels to remain in Angola, within the framework of Angola's national legislation, particularly through the creation of joint enterprises. As the Commission points out, this option is compatible with the CFP and, in particular, with the guidelines for the negotiation of fisheries partnership agreements.
In the rapporteur’s view, efforts should be made to avoid scrapping these vessels, which would represent a loss of invested capital, unemployment and additional expenditure. If this option were to be adopted, provision would have to be made for granting the aid to which the vessel owners and workers affected would be entitled, as envisaged in the FIFG.
It will of course be for the Spanish authorities to consider what is the best solution for the vessels and for preserving jobs.
In the light of the current situation, the rapporteur considers it advisable to review the compensation scheme for temporary tie-ups, particularly its duration and the source of funding, in order to prevent any harm to vessels and workers.
With regard to joint enterprises or other forms of joint venture with third countries, the rapporteur has no reservations provided that they are based on genuine, mutually advantageous cooperation projects and do not encourage the relocation of Community countries’ fishing fleets and industry, with the loss of jobs and economic activities upstream and downstream which this would entail.
On this issue, the rapporteur shares the view that the Commission might present a study on the current situation regarding joint enterprises and other forms of joint venture with third countries in the field of fisheries.
CONCLUSIONS
To sum up, the rapporteur takes the view that efforts should be made to ensure continuous activity for the fishing vessels concerned and to guarantee the preservation of jobs depending on those activities, and that all the relevant possibilities should be explored. In order to help achieve this objective, the rapporteur takes the view that these vessels should benefit from the derogations from certain provisions of the FIFG proposed in the present draft regulation.
In the light of the above, the rapporteur takes the view that the Committee on Fisheries should approve the proposals presented.
27.3.2006
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS ()
for the Committee on Fisheries
on the proposal for a Council regulation denouncing the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola on fisheries off Angola and derogating from Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999
(COM(2005)0677 – C6‑0035/2006 – 2005/0262(CNS))Draftswoman: Helga Trüpel
SHORT JUSTIFICATION
This proposal from the Commission is rather different from most that concern fisheries agreements with third countries - instead of announcing an extension or new protocol, the EU is denouncing the agreement with Angola that began in 1987.
The most recent protocol for that agreement allowed EU access to fishing for shrimp, other demersal species and tuna. It expired in August 2004. According to the Commission, the reasons for the non-renewal of the agreement with Angola were:
The new legislative framework adopted by Angola in October 2004 stipulates that the fishing activities subject to an Agreement between the Community and Angola shall be carried out in conformity with Angola's laws and regulations concerning fisheries. In accordance with the new Angolan Law on Biological Aquatic Resources, all fishing activities would have to be carried out in association with Angolan enterprises and the origin of the fish would have to be Angolan. In the case of tuna, the catches would be registered under ICCAT rules as Angolan catches. Furthermore, all EC vessels would have to be fitted with satellite tracking devices directly linked to the Angolan fishing vessel monitoring centre (tracking by coastal state in stead of flag state).
The Commission considered that these conditions were incompatible with the needs of the EU so negotiations were suspended and the Commission now wishes to denounce the original agreement.
The impact of this to the Community budget amounts to €15.5 million, the amount of annual payment to Angola that will no longer be included in the budget.
However, there is another budgetary aspect that deserves consideration. A number of Spanish vessels were active under the Angolan agreement, fishing for shrimp. Many of these were specifically built to fish in Angolan waters and benefited from EU subsidies for their construction, some as recently as 2002 or 2003. When the agreement was terminated in 2004, they had to cease fishing in Angolan waters and not all of them have been able to find other fishing opportunities. Consequently, many received public aid under the FIFG for temporary cessation of fishing activities, first for a period of 6 months and then, following the adoption of a reconversion programme, a further period of 6 months (Article 16 of Regulation 2792/1999). The owners of these vessels are now looking for alternatives, which could include being scrapped, being included in another fisheries agreement or else being transferred to the Angolan flag to continue fishing in Angolan waters.
Under the normal provisions of the FIFG, these aids would have to be reimbursed under certain conditions. For instance, if a vessel is transferred to the Angolan registry, its owner would normally have to pay back part of the aid received for the vessel's construction. Some of the compensation for temporary cessation of fishing activities would also have to be paid back. The Commission is proposing to grant a derogation for those vessels that are exported to Angola.
The amount of money involved is not known yet for, at the time of writing (March 2006), all ship-owners have not declared their intentions; the Commission anticipates that between 8 and 14 vessels will switch flags.
While the desire of the ship-owners not to repay the subsidies they have received is understandable, it is not clear that this is a precedent that should be welcomed. The ship-owners received Community aid to build vessels specifically to fish in Angolan waters. Then, when the agreement fell apart, they wish to transfer their vessels to Angola under joint ventures and keep the money - essentially, this amounts to EU subsidies for the development of a fleet owned and operated largely by EU companies but flying the flag of a third country, Angola.
This raises the question of what kind of assurances the EU has been given that these vessels will fish responsibly under their new flag? If there is no bilateral agreement, how can the EU be certain that they will not be exploiting depleted fish stocks, that their activities will be properly monitored, etc.? Has the Commission ensured that there is a proper and functioning institutional framework in Angola to absorb up to 14 relatively new fishing vessels without leading to over-exploitation and IUU fishing? The FAO International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity would appear to be relevant here. The Commission has also established criteria to prevent the transfer of vessels to flags of convenience that must be respected.
Subject to the answers the Commission provides to these questions, your rapporteur recommends that the proposal be adopted as received.
PROCEDURE
Title |
Proposal for a Council regulation denouncing the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola on fisheries off Angola and derogating from Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 | |||||
References |
COM(2005)0677 – C6‑0035/2006 – 2005/0262(CNS) | |||||
Committee responsible |
PECH | |||||
Opinion by |
BUDG | |||||
Enhanced cooperation – date announced in plenary |
0.0.0000 | |||||
Draftswoman |
Helga Trüpel 20.9.2004 | |||||
Previous draftswoman |
| |||||
Discussed in committee |
23.3.2006 |
|
|
|
| |
Date adopted |
23.3.2006 | |||||
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
30 | ||||
Members present for the final vote |
Laima Liucija Andrikienė, Herbert Bösch, Simon Busuttil, Paulo Casaca, Gérard Deprez, Valdis Dombrovskis, Brigitte Douay, James Elles, Hynek Fajmon, Szabolcs Fazakas, Ingeborg Gräßle, Louis Grech, Catherine Guy-Quint, Jutta D. Haug, Ville Itälä, Anne E. Jensen, Wiesław Stefan Kuc, Alain Lamassoure, Janusz Lewandowski, Vladimír Maňka, Mario Mauro, Giovanni Pittella, Nina Škottová, Helga Trüpel, Kyösti Virrankoski, Ralf Walter | |||||
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Constanze Angela Krehl, Hans-Peter Martin, Peter Šťastný, Tomáš Zatloukal | |||||
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote |
| |||||
Comments (available in one language only) |
. | |||||
22.3.2006
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT ()
for the Committee on Fisheries
on the proposal for a Council regulation denouncing the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola on fisheries off Angola and derogating from Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999
(COM(2005)0677 – C6‑0035/2006 – 2005/0262(CNS))
Draftsman: José Ribeiro e Castro
SHORT JUSTIFICATION
The EU presence in distant fishing grounds is a legitimate objective, and must not forget that the interest of Union's fisheries ought to be protected alongside the interest in developing the nations with whom agreements are signed.
The European Economic Community signed an agreement on fisheries with the People's Republic of Angola that came to an end in August 2004.
In successive rounds of negotiations the two parties have not been able to agree on the main principles of the new Protocol.
The new legislative framework adopted by Angola in October 2004 stipulates that the fishing activities subject to an Agreement between the Community and Angola shall be carried out in conformity with Angola's laws and regulations concerning fisheries.
In accordance with the new Angolan national legislation, foreign vessels operating in Angolan waters must operate by an Angolan joint venture and the catch will be of Angolan origin. To this end, all foreign vessels operating in Angolan waters would have to fly the Angolan flag. In the case of tuna, the catches would be registered under ICCAT rules as Angolan catches.
Furthermore, all EC vessels would have to be fitted with satellite tracking devices directly linked to the Angolan fishing vessel monitoring centre (tracking by coastal state instead of flag state).
In these circumstances, the Commission has informed Angola in June that the negotiations have broken down, and it is considered necessary to formally denounce the Fisheries Agreement in accordance with the procedure set out in its Article 14.
The Community should give notice of the denouncement to Angola by 31 October 2007, in order that denunciation takes effect on 1 February 2008.
Measures are being taken to help the vessels that are affected by the denunciation through an aid scheme.
And vessels intending to stay in Angola are allowed to do it when switching flags, but having to pay back support received from the Community, with exception of the construction and tie-up aids.
The Development committee would have liked for the sake of Angolan development, but also to assure sustainable fisheries in the area, that an agreement could be reached.
But we can't accept that we can't fish in Angolan waters under our Union Member's flags.
Therefore we propose to agree with the European Commission proposal.
And further propose that contacts with Angolan authorities should be regularly kept, so that a new agreement can be negotiated at the earliest possible opportunity.
*******
The Committee on Development calls on the Committee on Fisheries, as the committee responsible, to propose approval of the Commission proposal.
PROCEDURE
Title |
Proposal for a Council regulation denouncing the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola on fisheries off Angola and derogating from Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 | |||||
References |
COM(2005)0677 – C6‑0035/2006 – 2005/0262(CNS) | |||||
Committee responsible |
PECH | |||||
Opinion by |
DEVE | |||||
Enhanced cooperation – date announced in plenary |
| |||||
Draftsman |
José Ribeiro e Castro | |||||
Previous drafts(wo)man |
| |||||
Discussed in committee |
13.3.2006 |
21.3.2006 |
|
|
| |
Date adopted |
21.3.2006 | |||||
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
25 0 0 | ||||
Members present for the final vote |
Margrietus van den Berg, Danutė Budreikaitė, Marie-Arlette Carlotti, Thierry Cornillet, Nirj Deva, Fernando Fernández Martín, Michael Gahler, Hélène Goudin, Filip Andrzej Kaczmarek, Glenys Kinnock, Ģirts Valdis Kristovskis, Maria Martens, Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez, Gay Mitchell, Luisa Morgantini, Horst Posdorf, José Ribeiro e Castro, Toomas Savi, Pierre Schapira, Frithjof Schmidt, Jürgen Schröder, Mauro Zani | |||||
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Manolis Mavrommatis, Anne Van Lancker, Gabriele Zimmer | |||||
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote |
| |||||
Comments (available in one language only) |
| |||||
PROCEDURE
Title |
Proposal for a Council regulation denouncing the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the People’s Republic of Angola on fisheries off Angola and derogating from Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 | |||||
References |
COM(2005)0677 - C6‑0035/2006 - 2005/0262(CNS) | |||||
Date of consulting Parliament |
30.1.2006 | |||||
Committee responsible |
PECH | |||||
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s) |
BUDG |
DEVE |
|
|
| |
Not delivering opinion(s) |
|
|
|
|
| |
Enhanced cooperation |
|
|
|
|
| |
Rapporteur(s) |
Pedro Guerreiro |
| ||||
Previous rapporteur(s) |
|
| ||||
Simplified procedure – date of decision Date of decision |
| |||||
Legal basis disputed |
|
|
| |||
Financial endowment amended |
|
|
| |||
Parliament to consult European Economic and Social Committee |
| |||||
Parliament to consult Committee of the Regions – date decided in plenary |
| |||||
Discussed in committee |
23.2.2006 |
20.3.2006 |
|
|
| |
Date adopted |
19.4.2006 | |||||
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
24 0 4 | ||||
Members present for the final vote |
James Hugh Allister, Stavros Arnaoutakis, Elspeth Attwooll, Marie-Hélène Aubert, Iles Braghetto, Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos, David Casa, Paulo Casaca, Zdzisław Kazimierz Chmielewski, Carmen Fraga Estévez, Ioannis Gklavakis, Alfred Gomolka, Ian Hudghton, Heinz Kindermann, Henrik Dam Kristensen, Albert Jan Maat, Willy Meyer Pleite, Rosa Miguélez Ramos, Philippe Morillon, Seán Ó Neachtain, Bernard Poignant, Struan Stevenson, Margie Sudre | |||||
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Chris Davies, Duarte Freitas | |||||
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote |
Carlos Carnero González, Salvador Garriga Polledo, Eugenijus Gentvilas, Antonio Masip Hidalgo | |||||
Date tabled |
20.4.2006 |
| ||||
Comments (available in one language only) |
... | |||||