Brussels, 20/03/2012 (Agence Europe) - Differences were apparent on Monday 19 March among EU fisheries ministers over the labelling and market measures sections in the proposal for a regulation on the common organisation (CMO) of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products. The so-called “liberal” countries called for a speedy end to storage aid for fisheries products and several delegations criticised the proposed new measures for labelling and consumer information. A number of countries called for the same environmental and health requirements to be applied to imported goods as to European products. The proposal to enhance the role of producers' organisations received virtually unanimous support.
The proposal, which forms part of the package reforming the common fisheries policy (CFP), aims to give producers' organisations greater responsibility and to give fishermen a better income from the fish caught.
Estonia said it agreed with the Commission proposal which “is going in the right direction”. It called for a closer link between CMO rules and those of the CFP. Estonia was of the opinion, too, that producers' organisations (POs) have to be given greater power and that these POs have to be able to take members from different EU member states. It said that POs had to play a larger role in planning and in marketing plans. POs can provide stability in times of crisis, and aid for storage is the only measure that the Commission will authorise in the next financial framework (2014-2020). The Commission is proposing to retain storage aid from 2014, though this will decrease before being ended in 2019. Estonia called for this aid to be “adequately funded”. With regard to labelling, consumers have the right to know whether a product is fresh or has been frozen, Estonia argued. The market has to be made more transparent, it said.
Poland argued that market measures have to be improved. POs had to have new tools (with support from European funds) and new POs had to receive aid to produce financing and marketing plans. Poland welcomed the proposal to set up a “price observatory” which will provide invaluable information on market trends. According to Warsaw, consumer awareness on protecting fish resources has to be raised. At the same time, the labelling system must not be allowed to become too complicated. In order better to tackle illegal fishing, Poland backs improving the control and catch certification systems.
Lithuania said that POs have to be given a greater role and be granted additional responsibilities, especially as they will have more work as a result of the policy to reduce discards at sea. Appropriate funding has to be provided for the new port infrastructure required to deal with fish that would previously have been discarded. Aid for operational programmes must not be restricted to the first five years after a PO is set up, Vilnius argued. It was somewhat wary over the need to tighten labelling arrangements as this could involve increased costs.
The United Kingdom argued for fundamental reform of the rules, called for an end to storage aid and said it was against any measure that presented a barrier to trade. The UK delegation warned of the confusion and inconsistencies that could arise from too complex a labelling system.
Italy said that “everything must be done to empower producers' organisations” and, thereby, ensure proper marketing of products. It said that, in several EU countries, the market is not working correctly; in particular, the remuneration for fishermen is too low compared with the prices paid by consumers. POs should, then, “operate more effectively and work on the marketing of products, and they have to be helped in this”, the Italian delegation added. Rome, then, called for traceability to be tightened up so that it can be known where products come from. If a fish is caught in the region where the consumer lives, he/she will be prepared to pay more for it. “Any additional information that can be given to consumers is useful”, Italy suggested.
The Czech Republic welcomed the proposed regulation, taking the view that the EU had to be more competitive against third countries.
Ireland said that funding is need for POs, the roles of which have to be enhanced, and the Commission proposal “provides the means to achieve this”. Ireland called for aid to be paid to help fishermen and POs reduce discards and for aid for storage to be retained. It regretted that the Commission had proposed phasing out this aid by 2019. It argued that where fish is caught should be mentioned on the label and called for a label for products from sustainable, responsible fishing, a measure that would allow small-scale fishermen to obtain higher prices.
Malta said that small-scale fishermen who do not belong to a PO must not be penalised. It called for aid to be made available for fishermen's cooperatives.
France said it was “very keen” on empowering POs and retaining a market regulation instrument. Production and marketing plans must provide a flexible framework for intervention giving POs the opportunity to become involved in managing access to the resource. POs, then, should have access to European funding in order to be able to undertake structuring initiatives in resource management and on markets, the French delegation said. It argued that a common European framework for eco-labelling fisheries products “would increase the value of European production”. The various European traceability rules for fisheries produce have to be improved. France argued that a storage mechanism has to be in place throughout the budget planning period (2014-2020) to respond to recurring market fluctuations. Similarly, Paris called for a “safeguard clause” with a private storage mechanism for aquaculture. France said that the regulation must re-state the need for balanced competition between European and imported products. This competition should be based on compliance with rules requiring a certain minimum level of environmental and social protection - a call that the European Parliament has also made. France regretted that the proposal makes no provision for specific intervention on behalf of the outermost regions and called for a policy plan that takes specific account of the particular nature of these regions.
Belgium is happy with the proposed strengthening of POs, which must ensure that supply is in line with demand. POs have to be given a wider range of tasks. The Belgian delegation said it was concerned by the plethora of regulations on labelling and suggested that new provisions could make things even more complex. It was, however, in favour of a European eco-labelling framework. It came out against any reduction in storage aid.
Sweden took the view that PO rules should be voluntary, not compulsory. Labelling rules should likewise be voluntary. The Swedish delegation said that aid for storage should be ended immediately, with no need to wait until 2019.
Portugal backed the aims of the Commission's proposals. It opposed the phasing out of storage aid by 2019 and supported adding the date the fish was caught or the farmed fish was slaughtered to the label. It must also be ensured, Portugal argued, that “imported products meet the same requirements as EU products”.
The Netherlands expressed the view that POs have an important role to play in managing sustainable fishing and in managing fisheries quotas. POs will have additional tasks to promote discard reduction. The Netherlands was critical, however, of the new labelling rules. It was also against storage aid, except in the event of a crisis, when a temporary mechanism might prove necessary.
Cyprus supported enhancing the role of POs. Labelling should indicate whether a product is fresh or has been frozen, and should state where the fish was caught, it added.
Spain stated that POs have an important role to play, particularly with regard to the sustainable management of stocks. For that reason, POs had to have greater powers and increased responsibilities. In terms of this reform, market information appears decisive in planning supply and adapting to requirements and demand with regard to amounts and quality, the Spanish delegation went on to argue. POs must continue to be able to access the necessary Community funding so that it can be ensured that they achieve their objectives. Consumers must be provided with full and understandable information, Spain said. Labelling must allow traceability of both fresh and frozen products. However, the labelling system must not work to the disadvantage of those who spend more than four hours at sea. “Fresh products must have a little added value but this must not be to the detriment of other activities”, such as distant-water fishing, Spain argued.
Germany was concerned at the lack of measures in the regulation for the fisheries products processing industry. It was happy to see the role of POs strengthened, and stated that overly restrictive labelling rules should be avoided.
European Fisheries Commissioner Maria Damanaki said that the Commission wanted compulsory certain information (such as day of catch) on labels. However, this should be restricted to essential information. Inclusion of some complementary information will be optional. The commissioner said that it was not possible to create a European eco-label because of the legal complexity of such an approach. The goal remained, however, to provide consumers with comprehensive information. She argued for the retention of storage aid, given that fishermen's landings will be greater because of the ban on discards. (LC/transl.rt)