Vigo, 05/05/2010 (Agence Europe) - Fisheries ministers from the EU member states met in Vigo, Spain, on Tuesday 4 and Wednesday 5 May to discuss reform of the EU's common fisheries policy (CFP). They were unable to agree on the future of fishing quotas and total allowable catches (TACs) but were able to make progress on less controversial issues like governance and social issues under the CFP.
The ministers were able to agree on various areas of reform, explained Spain's environment and countryside minister, Elena Espinosa, whose country currently holds the rotating presidency of the EU Council of Ministers. She said new ways had to be found of stopping the practice of discarding fish at sea and regional fisheries management bodies needed to be given a more proactive role. The social aspect of the CFP should not be ignored, she added, noting that the ministers had agreed that small-scale traditional fishing should be treated differently from industrial-scale trawling, but that agreement had not yet been reached on how the two types of fishing were to be defined.
Maria Damanaki, EU Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Commissioner, said the CFP had to take a U-turn. She criticised problems of overcapacity in the EU's fishing fleet and overfishing, but said the Commission was tackling the problems full-on because the EU needs a viable fishing industry.
Commenting on the controversial idea of introducing individual saleable fishing quotas, Damanaki took a cautious approach, rejecting Spain's idea of an EU market for fishing quotas (which would mean that Spanish fishermen could buy Belgian fishermen's fishing quotas, for example), but not ruling out the idea of saleable fishing quotas within individual countries (so that quotas can only be bought and sold by fishermen from the same country).
She said such a system already exists in Denmark and the Netherlands and was a good way of reducing overcapacity at national level. Damanaki said such a system would need safeguards to avoid fishing quotas becoming over-centralised and to prevent the disappearance of small-scale, family and traditional fishing along the coastline.
Resource management. At the meeting in Vigo, several counties, including France, Italy, Ireland and Germany, rejected the idea of an EU fishing quotas market. Some of these countries, France for instance, back the idea of issuing individual companies' quotas for endangered species like bluefin tuna and cod, but want quotas to remain state property (although they could be put up for sale by fisheries organisations). Even countries that have already introduced their own quota sale system, like Denmark, the Netherlands and Estonia, are reluctant to extend this EU-wide for fear that foreign companies would swallow up their quotas.
Member states are divided over whether the TAC and quota system should be replaced by a days-at-sea system. The Commission seems to be recommending that when a single species is being fished, the TAC and quota system should apply, but when several species of fish are caught, then a days-at-sea system might apply. Countries like France, Ireland, Germany and the Netherlands do not want TACs to be replaced by days-at-sea. France is calling for a regional approach to the different fishing areas with fish management plans combining a number of options (quotas, days-at-sea and technical measures) depending on requirements and the type of fish.
Spain seems rather isolated in its desire for days-at-sea to replace TACs. Spain is the only member state calling for a review of the relative stability system (whereby each EU country's share of the total EU catch should remain the same over the years) introduced in 1983, three years before Spain joined the EU.
Denmark uses catch quotas (as opposed to landing quotas), which means that fishermen have to bring everything they catch back to dry land rather than discarding un-desired fish at sea.
On governance, the ministers made progress on the idea of making the regions responsible for decision-making by setting up regional European committees to this end (comprising EU member states and representatives of fishermen, NGOs and the European Commission) to prepare regulations. Damanaki is reported to have said that she would support such a regionalisation of powers despite the problems of finding innovative solutions that comply with the EU treaties. Germany is very doubtful about the idea.
Damanaki told the ministers there had to be a social aspect to the CFP. This idea was welcomed by France, but challenged by other countries. France wants fishermen to receive training and wants measures to deal with safety problems of fishing at sea and employment issues.
Traditional fishing. The Commission is suggesting that a different system be introduced for small-scale, traditional (often family) fishing on the one hand, and for industrial-scale fishing (mass trawling) on the other, but the member states are highly divided over the issue. They disagree on the need to distinguish between the two types of fishing in the first place (France, Germany and Ireland dislike the idea) and also disagree on what exactly constitutes small-scale fishing. The Commission is recommending that trawlers be excluded from small-scale fishing, but this is being challenged by a number of countries. The EU's fisheries ministers do not agree on why a distinction should be made. Would separating off small-scale fishing lead to greater subsidies being granted to small fishing vessels or would small vessels be granted extra fishing rights? The Commission has not yet given any indications of the answer to the question. (L.C./transl.fl)