REPORT on the 2006-2008 Action Plan for simplifying and improving the Common Fisheries Policy
26.6.2006 - (2006/2053(INI))
Committee on Fisheries
Rapporteur: Philippe Morillon
MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
on the 2006-2008 Action Plan for simplifying and improving the Common Fisheries Policy
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the Communication from the Commission to Council and the European Parliament entitled ‘2006-2008 Action Plan for simplifying and improving the Common Fisheries Policy’ (COM(2005)0647),
– having regard to the Commission Communication entitled ‘Perspectives for simplifying and improving the regulatory environment of the Common Fisheries Policy’ (COM(2004)0820) and the Commission staff working document entitled ‘Analysis of the possibilities of simplification and improvement of the regulatory environment of the Common Fisheries Policy and of its implementation’ (SEC(2004)1596),
– having regard to the Commission Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘Implementing the Community Lisbon Programme: a strategy for the simplification of the regulatory environment’ (COM(2005)0535),
– having regard to the Council conclusions of 15 April 2005 concerning the Commission Communication entitled ‘Perspectives for simplifying and improving the regulatory environment of the Common Fisheries Policy’ (8077/2005),
– having regard to the interinstitutional agreement on better law-making which was concluded on 16 December 2003 by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission[1],
– having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A6‑0228/2006),
A. whereas improving and simplifying the legislative environment with a view to making it more efficient and transparent is a priority task for the European Union which will benefit ordinary people and help to increase competitiveness, growth and sustainable development, thereby contributing to the achievement of the Lisbon objectives,
B. whereas administrative bodies in the Member States and those who work in the fisheries sector deplore the dispersal and the juxtaposition of measures, the lack of clarity and accessibility in the case of existing texts and the difficulties stemming from the administrative burden created by a multitude of requirements, some of which are superfluous,
C. whereas the task of simplifying the rules governing the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) calls for the extensive involvement of fishermen and of the other parties concerned,
D. whereas the fishing industry must be consulted within deadlines which will allow its effective participation and upstream involvement in the decision-making process,
E. whereas the effectiveness of the CFP is closely linked to the introduction of a harmonised inspection and monitoring system applicable to all who work in the fisheries sector,
1. Warmly welcomes this sectoral action plan designed to simplify and improve the CFP;
2. Fully supports the objectives established by the Commission, in particular those concerned with making existing texts simpler, clearer and more accessible, reducing the workload and the administrative costs shouldered by the administrative bodies responsible for fisheries, and reducing the burdens and the restrictions imposed on fishermen;
3. Welcomes the methodology proposed by the Commission, in particular the drawing up of a three-year action plan covering the 2006-2008 period;
4. Agrees with the Commission’s view that simplification efforts must focus on conservation policy and the monitoring of fishing activities;
5. Considers that there must genuinely be more extensive pre-legislative consultation of all the parties affected by the measures envisaged and that such consultation should be carried out as far as possible at an early stage, in order to enable the interested parties to make an effective contribution to the preparatory work prior to any legislative proposal;
6. Considers that all legislative proposals must be preceded by impact analyses and that the latter must be based on accurate, objective and comprehensive information and must be made public at the appropriate time;
7. Considers that there must be an adequate period of time between the date of adoption and the date of implementation of any new rules, in order to enable the parties concerned to adapt;
8. Considers that regulatory texts must be drawn up more precisely and in a way that can be understood by stakeholders;
9. Considers that assessments concerning the effectiveness and the implementation of the measures adopted must be carried out systematically on the basis of objective and clearly defined indicators;
10. Insists that the advisory bodies (in particular the Regional Advisory Councils and the Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture) must play an integral role in the process of simplification and of assessing the effectiveness and implementation of existing and new measures; considers that closer consultation with these bodies would undoubtedly result in those involved in the fisheries sector identifying more closely with fisheries legislation;
11. Considers that the legal structure of the provisions relating to technical measures, to fisheries management measures, to monitoring measures and to catch limits must be revised with a particular view to clarifying texts, making them more consistent and easier to read, deleting obsolete provisions and both condensing and consolidating the provisions relating to each aspect of the CFP;
12. Supports the simplification guidelines set out in the action plan for regulating the total allowable catches (TACs)/quotas and the fishing effort, in particular the separate treatment of the various existing components, the targeting of decisions at uniform groups and the development of multiannual approaches;
13. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to reform existing legislation by gradually bringing together technical measures relating to each fishery, whilst at the same time clarifying the provisions in force and ensuring that the rules as a whole are more consistent and better coordinated;
14. Rejects the possibility outlined by the Commission of submitting a ‘short’ regulation on technical measures to the Council, which would be followed by detailed Commission regulations, since such vital aspects as the body of technical measures by which the Community fleet is to be governed cannot be removed from debate and approval by the European Parliament and the Council;
15. Takes the view that special attention should be paid to the possibility whereby the Member States may be authorised to adopt certain locally applicable technical measures; considers that, with a view to preventing such arrangements from having an adverse environmental impact, the use thereof should be periodically assessed;
16. Notes that Article 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the common fisheries policy[2] already permits Member States to adopt non-discriminatory measures for the conservation and management of fisheries resources and to minimise the effect of fishing on the conservation of marine eco-systems within 12 nautical miles of their baselines; urges that the Commission proceed cautiously with any extension of this principle, as an authorisation to adopt certain locally applicable technical measures could result in the emergence of discriminatory conditions in the Member States concerned;
17. Approves of the development on a case-by-case basis of targeted approaches for individual regions or individual fisheries, duly based on scientific resource-protection criteria and thorough socio-economic impact analyses, and considers that all the parties concerned should be closely involved in the development of such approaches;
18. Considers that the recovery and management plans proposed by the Commission as part of the CFP need to be made flexible in line with the actual circumstances for fishing in the various Member States;
19. Approves of the increased use of computers, of information technologies and of automation in order to facilitate access to Community legislation and to facilitate and rationalise the collection and the transfer of data intended both for administrators in the Member States and for people who work in the sector;
20. Considers that information on legislation must not be forwarded only through institutional channels but must also reach the interested parties directly, in particular through associations, regional advisory councils, the Internet and the drafting of codes of conduct;
21. Considers that the use of new technologies on board fishing vessels should be increased gradually, with exemptions to be made in the case of the smallest vessels and with sufficiently long transition periods to be established in order to enable the sector to adapt;
22. Considers that Community aid should be granted for the development of the new technologies and for the specific training required;
23. Considers that the provisions concerning all aspects relating to the monitoring and surveillance of fishing activities must be consolidated and recast;
24. Calls upon the Commission to revise the Community provisions relating to minimum sizes with a view to harmonising them;
25. States once again that a harmonised inspection and monitoring system applicable to all who work in the sector and accompanied by a uniform set of interpretation provisions and penalty procedures should be established as a matter of urgency in order to bolster fishermen’s trust in the basic principle of equal treatment; considers that the Community Fisheries Monitoring Agency should contribute to the achievement of this objective;
26. Welcomes the general principle concerning the rationalisation of the reporting requirements imposed on the Member States and on the sector but emphasises the crucial role played by certain Commission reports, in particular those which serve to monitor the implementation of the CFP;
27. Considers that the administration of authorisations outside Community waters (and of catch and effort data relating to such activities) should be clarified, improved and computerised, and welcomes the initiatives which the Commission has already undertaken in this area;
28. Agrees with the Commission that the complex and lengthy procedures applied by the European Union in order to transpose the provisions adopted by RFOs into Community legislation are completely undesirable, but takes the view that most of the complexity in transposition stems from excessive bureaucracy within the Commission itself and therefore categorically rejects the possibility that any simplification process should be carried out at the expense of robbing the European Parliament of its responsibilities as regards intervening in legislative procedures;
29. Calls, furthermore, upon the Commission to finalise a ‘standard agreement’ for the two main categories of fisheries partnership agreement (mixed and tuna) on the basis of which the rights and the obligations of the two parties (Community and third country) will be enshrined;
30. Considers that the process of negotiating and monitoring fisheries partnership agreements should be reworked and simplified as a matter of priority and welcomes the efforts which the Commission has recently made in this area;
31. Is willing to contribute actively to the effort required to implement the simplification process and calls for an on-going interinstitutional dialogue on better law-making in relation to the CFP;
32. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
I - Introduction
The action plan under consideration here is part of a wider process of improving the regulatory environment within the European Union and is one of the many initiatives undertaken by the Commission in this area over the last few years.
As regards the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), simplification forms a natural part of the reform decided upon in 2002 and major efforts have already been made or are currently under way[1].
In December 2004 the Commission published a Communication concerning in particular the perspectives for simplifying and improving the regulatory environment of the Common Fisheries Policy (COM(2004)820 final). This Communication is accompanied by a Commission working document containing a detailed analysis of the scope for simplifying and improving the CFP’s regulatory environment and the implementation thereof (SEC(2004)1596).
Furthermore, on 26 April 2005 the Council adopted conclusions accepting the guidelines proposed by the Commission and it expressed its agreement regarding the three objectives established for the simplification of the CFP (8077/05):
– to make existing texts clearer, simpler and more accessible;
– to reduce the workload and the administrative costs borne by administrative bodies;
– to reduce the administrative burden and the restrictions imposed on those who work in the sector.
Pursuing these objectives would enable the Common Fisheries Policy not only to be simplified but also to be made more effective.
II - The 2006-2008 Action Plan
In its Communication the Commission sets out the simplification initiatives which it plans to implement in the fisheries sector during the 2006-2008 period. It proposes a specific methodology and indicates the provisions which will be simplified and improved as a matter of priority. In each case the Commission specifies the simplification initiatives to be undertaken.
The Commission indicates three categories of legislative instrument which are to be simplified:
- legislative instruments which are already under review and for which certain simplifying principles have been implemented;
- new legislation to be drawn up in the coming years for which the objectives set regarding simplification will be systematically observed;
- certain legislative instruments now in force which must, however, be simplified as a matter of priority, i.e. those on which the Commission considers simplifying efforts need to be concentrated as quickly as possible.
The Commission action plan focuses in particular on this third category of legislative instrument.
In the period 2006-2008, the Commission considers that the simplification of the CFP must cover, as a matter of priority, certain regulatory provisions concerning the measures for the management and control of fishing activities.
To that end and on a case-by-case basis, the Commission considers it essential, with due regard for the principle of proportionality, to:
– revise the body of Community law (acquis), on the basis of the methodology contained in the communication of October 2005 (COM(2005)535);
– promote clearer legislative texts and access to information by developing instruments tailored to the needs of fishermen and the administrators concerned;
– reduce the workload and restrictions on fishermen and on all the administrations concerned, including the costs imposed by legislation.
With regard to the policy for conserving fish stocks, the Commission proposes that priority be given to simplifying legislation concerning:
– the management and conservation of certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, in the case of Community vessels, in waters subject to catch limitations (Sheet 1: TACs/Quotas, fishing effort);
– measures for the conservation of fish stocks through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms (Sheet 2);
– the collection and management of data needed for implementing the common fisheries policy (Sheet 3).
As regards monitoring, the Commission considers that the simplification of control measures should focus on four areas in order to:
– adjust all the legal provisions concerning the monitoring of fishing activities (Sheet 4);
– computerise, where possible, and develop appropriate systems for improving the application of measures for the management and conservation of fish stocks (Sheet 5);
– reduce the reporting obligations both of fishermen and of the administrations concerned (Sheet 6);
– improve the management of fishing authorisations (Sheet 7).
III - Rapporteur’s comments
The rapporteur welcomes this Commission initiative.
He fully endorses the objectives laid down and he approves of the Commission’s proposed methodology, in particular the establishment of a three-year action plan covering the 2006-2008 period in which the priority areas (conservation policy and the monitoring of fishing activities) and an outline of the initiatives to be undertaken are stated.
He can only applaud the fact that the Commission is to consult the interested parties in order to secure their support for all the proposed initiatives.
In his view the aspects of greatest relevance to all the simplification objectives are: more extensive prior consultation at an early stage, the contribution made by the sector’s advisory bodies (in particular the Regional Advisory Councils and the Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture), the more frequent use of impact analysis, systematic use of assessment relating to the effectiveness and the implementation of the measures adopted on the basis of objective, clearly defined indicators, and revision of the legal structure of existing provisions with a view to making texts clearer, more consistent and easier to read, deleting obsolete provisions and reworking and consolidating the rules relating to each aspect of the CFP. However, the rapporteur considers that more time should be allowed between the dates upon which decisions are taken and the dates upon which they are implemented, in order to enable the sector to adapt to any new initiative.
The increased use of computers, information technologies and automation is welcome in so far as such techniques will facilitate access to Community legislation and both facilitate and rationalise the collection and the transfer of data intended both for administrators in the Member States and for people who work in the sector.
Such techniques must, however, be introduced gradually, taking into account aspects relating to the technical difficulties and to the costs involved and making special arrangements for small vessels. Community aid must be granted in this area.
The rapporteur considers that where the declaration and reporting requirements imposed on the Member States and on the sector are redundant and pointless, they should be rationalised - although this should not undermine management and monitoring activities. Certain Commission reports to Parliament and the Council (such as the reports on serious infringements and on the CFP compliance scoreboard) are highly useful but they could nonetheless be merged or rationalised.
Above and beyond the priority areas identified by the Commission, the rapporteur emphasises the need for further progress to be made in the simplification procedure as regards fisheries partnership agreements (finalisation of a standard agreement and improvements to the negotiating and monitoring procedures).
However, he considers that the practical applications of some of the intentions stated in the action plan need to be carefully examined on a case-by-case basis. This applies in particular to the possibility of authorising the Member States to adopt certain locally applicable measures, in so far as such authorisation could result in the emergence of discriminatory conditions in the Member States concerned.
The rapporteur takes a cautious view of the intention to separate the general guidelines from the purely technical aspects - the latter being covered by more detailed Commission regulations which are ‘easier to update’. Although this is in accordance with the principles designed to bring about better law-making, the implementing measures cannot be allowed to challenge the limits and the objectives laid down by the Community legislator.
The rapporteur takes the view that the simplification methods and initiatives must not under any circumstances replace or undermine the decision-making process, the balance between the Community institutions and - in particular - the European Parliament’s role and political responsibility.
The rapporteur is aware that the CFP simplification process is part of a broader canvas, in which connection he recalls Parliament’s earlier resolutions concerning matters relating to improving the quality of Community legislation[2], the interinstitutional agreements adopted[3], the importance of the current interinstitutional consultations (with a particular view to devising a method and a Community procedure for the performance of impact analysis and reforming the current system for the delegation of the legislative process - i.e. the ‘comitology’ system) and in-house discussion with a view to improving and speeding up parliamentary procedures for considering proposals for the simplification of current legislation.
Better law-making is a shared responsibility involving the Community institutions, the advisory bodies, the Member States and the parties concerned.
The rapporteur agrees that simplification of the CFP is not an objective in itself and that the process must produce results which are suited to the needs of the parties involved, in particular fishermen and the administrators responsible for managing and monitoring the Common Fisheries Policy.
- [1] For example, the proposal for a regulation establishing the new European Fisheries Fund which will replace or amend the provisions laid down in the 4 existing regulations, and the proposal for a regulation on Community financial measures relating to the implementation of the CFP, which is intended to replace a number of legal provisions with a view to establishing a more consistent legislative framework.
- [2] In particular its resolutions of 26 October 2000 on the Commission reports entitled 'Better law-making 1998: a shared responsibility' and 'Better law-making 1999', of 29 November 2001 on the Commission White paper on European Governance, of 8 April 2003 on the Commission reports on 'Better law-making 2000' and 'Better law-making 2001', of 26 February 2004 on the Commission report on 'Better law-making 2002', of 9 March 2004 on the Commission communication on simplifying and improving the Community's regulatory activity, and of 20 April 2004 on the assessment of the impact of Community legislation and the consultation procedures.
- [3] In particular the interinstitutional agreement on better law-making which was concluded on 16 December 2003 by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission (OJ C 321, 31.12.2003, p. 1) and the interinstitutional agreements concluded by the three institutions on 20 December 1994 (on a faster working method for the official codification of legislative texts - OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2), on 22 December 1998 (concerning common guidelines for the quality of the drafting of Community legislation - OJ C 73, 17.3.1999, p. 1) and on 28 November 2001 (concerning a more structured use of the recasting technique for legal acts - OJ C 77, 28.3.2002, p. 1).
PROCEDURE
|
Title |
2006-2008 Action Plan for simplifying and improving the Common Fisheries Policy | ||||||||||
|
Procedure number |
|||||||||||
|
Committee responsible |
PECH | ||||||||||
|
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s) |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
Not delivering opinion(s) |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
Enhanced cooperation |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
Rapporteur(s) |
Philippe Morillon |
| |||||||||
|
Previous rapporteur(s) |
|
| |||||||||
|
Discussed in committee |
18.4.2006 |
2.5.2006 |
|
|
| ||||||
|
Date adopted |
21.6.2006 | ||||||||||
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
23 0 0 | |||||||||
|
Members present for the final vote |
James Hugh Allister, Stavros Arnaoutakis, Elspeth Attwooll, Iles Braghetto, Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos, David Casa, Zdzisław Kazimierz Chmielewski, Carmen Fraga Estévez, Ioannis Gklavakis, Alfred Gomolka, Pedro Guerreiro, Ian Hudghton, Heinz Kindermann, Rosa Miguélez Ramos, Philippe Morillon, Seán Ó Neachtain, Bernard Poignant, Dirk Sterckx, Struan Stevenson, Margie Sudre | ||||||||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Duarte Freitas, James Nicholson | ||||||||||
|
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote |
Danutė Budreikaitė | ||||||||||
|
Date tabled |
26.6.2006 | ||||||||||
|
Comments (available in one language only) |
... | ||||||||||