REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 for the conservation of fishery through technical measures in the Baltic Sea, the Belts and the Sound

15.7.2013 - (COM(2012)0591 – C7‑0332/2012 – 2012/0285(COD)) - ***I

Committee on Fisheries
Rapporteur: Marek Józef Gróbarczyk

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 for the conservation of fishery through technical measures in the Baltic Sea, the Belts and the Sound

(COM(2012)0591 – C7‑0332/2012 – 2012/0285(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2012)0591),

–   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 (C7‑0332/2012),

–   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 11 July 2012[1],

–   having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A7-0259/2013),

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 Article 1 – point 1 Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 Article 26 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5. If the Commission concludes that the measures do not comply with the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 it shall adopt an implementing decision requiring the Member State to withdraw or modify the measures. 5. If the Commission concludes that the measures do not comply with the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 it shall adopt an implementing act requiring the Member State to withdraw or modify the measures.

Justification

The relevant measure in the TFEU is implementing acts.

Amendment  2 Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 4 Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 Article 29a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2. The delegation of power referred to in Article 29 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 29 shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of three years from …*. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the three-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such an extension not later than three months before the end of each period.   ____________________   * OJ please insert the date of entry into force of this Regulation

Justification

The empowerment of the Commission should be limited in time.

Amendment  3 Proposal for a regulation Article 1 – point 4 a (new) Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 Article 31 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (4a) The following Article is inserted:   "Article 31a   Overall assessment and review   By ...*, the Commission shall review the effectiveness of the measures laid down in this Regulation, and, where appropriate, submit a legislative proposal to the European Parliament and to the Council for the amendment of this Regulation in order to ensure that it is compatible with Regulation (EU) No .../2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of ... on the Common Fisheries Policy1.   _______________   * OJ: Please insert date: One year after the entry into force of Regulation (EU) No .../2013 [on the Common Fisheries Policy].   1 OJ L ..."

• [1]           OJ C 44, 15.2.2013, p. 157.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The Commission proposal

The Treaty of Lisbon introduced a new hierarchy of norms in three tiers. The first tier comprises legislative acts - the directives and the regulations - that set out in further detail the policies falling within the internal competence of the European Union. The second tier consists of delegated acts (defined in Article 290 (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - TFEU) which are non-legislative acts of general application to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of the legislative act. Forming the third tier are the so-called implementing acts (see Article 291 of the TFEU) which may be used to set out uniform conditions for implementing the two aforementioned types of Union acts.

Legislative acts are adopted by the European Parliament and the Council as equal co-legislators in the ordinary legislative procedure (see Article 294 of the TFEU), or by the Council alone in case a special legislative procedure apply to the adoption of the act. Both delegated acts and implementing acts are adopted by the Commission after it has been given the power to do so in a legislative act.

The choice of which type of act to use is not always clear cut. Delegated acts and implementing acts, compared to legislative acts, have the advantage of providing the possibility for the Union to react swiftly to a new situation, but, of course, at the price of a less thorough legislative procedure. It is imperative that they are not used in situations other than those envisaged by the Treaty as it may deprive the citizens of the Union the quality of legislation that they have the right to expect.

The Commission has proposed that the Regulation be aligned to the new legislative framework by replacing the current Council decisions by implementing decisions.

The rapporteur’s view

The rapporteur notes that there are numerous controversies surrounding the implementation of this regulation, such as the issue of discards of undersized fish or the specifications of fishing gear. However, the rapporteur takes the view that going beyond the ordinary procedure of adapting the regulation to the changes pushed through by the Lisbon Treaty (new comitology) would be unwise at this stage, in view of the ongoing negotiations between the Commission, Parliament and the Council on the future shape of the common fisheries policy. The adoption of the new regulation of the Parliament and of the Council on the common fisheries policy (a so‑called basic regulation) will have a direct impact on the use of technical measures in the Baltic Sea, the Belts and the Sound, and it will make significant changes to the regulation under discussion here necessary. Proposing such modifications at the current stage carries the risk that these modifications will not be in compliance with the provisions of the basic regulation.

However, the rapporteur takes the view that the Commission ought to propose a new, thoroughly modified draft regulation on the use of technical measures in the Baltic Sea, the Belts and the Sound immediately following publication of the basic regulation text in the Official Journal of the European Union. In order to ensure that this occurs, the rapporteur is introducing a provision concerning the need for the Commission to propose a new draft regulation on this subject, at the latest one year after publication of the basic regulation text in the Official Journal of the European Union.

PROCEDURE

Title	Amendment of Council Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 for the conservation of fishery through technical measures in the Baltic Sea, the Belts and the Sound
References	COM(2012)0591 – C7-0332/2012 – 2012/0285(COD)
Date submitted to Parliament	17.10.2012
Committee responsible        Date announced in plenary	PECH 22.10.2012
Rapporteur(s)        Date appointed	Marek Józef Gróbarczyk 6.11.2012
Discussed in committee	22.1.2013	20.3.2013	29.5.2013
Date adopted	10.7.2013
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	17 3 0
Members present for the final vote	John Stuart Agnew, Antonello Antinoro, Kriton Arsenis, Alain Cadec, Chris Davies, Carmen Fraga Estévez, Dolores García-Hierro Caraballo, Marek Józef Gróbarczyk, Ian Hudghton, Iliana Malinova Iotova, Werner Kuhn, Isabella Lövin, Gabriel Mato Adrover, Guido Milana, Maria do Céu Patrão Neves, Crescenzio Rivellini, Ulrike Rodust, Raül Romeva i Rueda, Struan Stevenson, Isabelle Thomas, Nils Torvalds
Date tabled	15.7.2013