Brussels, 19/12/2012 (Agence Europe) - On Tuesday 18 December, the European Parliament's fisheries committee voted for an early ban on the practice of discarding fish into the sea (between 2014 and 2017) and an ambitious approach towards restoring fish stocks. It also rejected the idea of granting transferable fishing concessions (a kind of fish quota privatisation) proposed by the European Commission as a means of reducing the size of the fishing fleet. The report by Ulrike Rodust (S&D, Germany) on the basic reform regulation to the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) was adopted by a small majority at the committee: 13 voting in favour, 10 votes against, with two abstentions. It is expected that the debate will become more heated in the lead up to the planned plenary vote in February 2013.
At the end of a marathon three hours, the Parliamentary committee voted on the 3,000 amendments submitted on the basic CFP reform regulation.
Ban on discards. By adopting the compromise amendment submitted by the S&D, ALDE, Greens/EFA, ECR and EFD groups, MEPs introduced the obligation of unloading and registering all catches of fish used and regulated. This approach will involve a ban on fish discards at sea for an exact time frame that will begin at the beginning of 2014 at the latest (for mackerel, herring, horse mackerel, blue whiting, anchovies, sardines, sprats, bluefin tuna, swordfish, albacore, sand eels, Baltic Sea Salmon etc.); at the beginning of 2016 (for cod, haddock, whiting, lobster, sole, hake etc.) and at the beginning of 2017 (for other species). The following species are exempt from the loading requirement: live bait, species for which available scientific data is examining the high survival rate after being caught. Alain Cadec (EPP, France) indicated to EUROPE that he believed that the end to discards was obviously a very magnanimous idea but impossible to implement. He explained that, “I do not see how we can compel boats as they are currently constructed to deliver everything that they catch. They haven't been built for this”. He believes that such a measure would create safety problems because seafarers would be leaving fish all over the place on boats, which would become “dangerous”. He also wanted to know what would be done with the discards once they had been unloaded. Provisions in the compromise amendments explain that the catches of juvenile fish (whose size is less than the minimum unloading size) are only used for purposes other than human consumption (fish flour, fish oil, animal feed or bait). This is done as a means of avoiding any market in small fish developing.
MSY. MEPs are also calling for the conservation stock level to be above the Maximum Sustainable Yields (MSY) and for this level to be reached by 2020. Cadec said that, “this decision has no sense because reaching the MSY level is enough to build up stocks”. Isabelle Thomas (S&D, France) said that, “unfortunately, the definition of the threshold has not been clearly established and does not allow for either a scientific or rational approach” to be adopted
The Parliament is keen for fish stocks to be restored by 2020 at the latest and beyond the levels needed to attain MSY. It will be necessary to maintain all reconstituted stocks at these levels. MSY essentially means the maximum level of catches possible that guarantee restocking.
No to transferable fishing quotas. By adopting Amendment 1619 submitted by Cadec, MEPs rejected the idea of transferable fishing concessions, as proposed by the Commission and supported by German socialist, Ulrike Rodust. Cadec was delighted and said that “the adoption of this amendment is a victory for European fishing. This is the day that we refused to sacrifice our fishing model on the altar of ultra-liberalism” (our translation throughout). All of paragraph 4 on transferable fishing concessions was removed and the current situation on this issue is maintained. In June, the Council kept this rule on a voluntary basis.
MEPs also spoke in favour of a global introduction of long-term fish stock management plans, according to the co-decision procedure, as well as speaking in favour of greater regionalisation in management decisions. These decisions will need to be taken at regional level by those who know local conditions best. (LC/transl.fl)