Divisions among the MEPs on the European Parliament fisheries committee were apparent on Thursday 21 June over the International Council for Exploration of the Sea (ICES) study which contends that pulse trawling has a lesser effect on ecosystems than using beam trawls (see EUROPE 12043)
This sensitive issue is preventing the representatives of the EU institutions from coming to an agreement on fisheries technical measures.
Trialogue negotiations are expected to resume “after the summer break”, said Werner Kuhn (EPP, Germany), who chaired the Parliament’s fisheries committee meeting. He stressed how important it is to find common ground (5% of fishing gear can use innovative techniques, which include electrical pulse fishing).
In substance, he said that innovation must not be swept aside. He was backed by Ricardo Serrão Santos (S&D, Portugal) and by Peter van Dalen (ECR) and Annie Schreijer-Pierik (EPP), both of the Netherlands.
The Netherlands had called on ICES to conduct a comparative study. Clara Eugenia Aguilera García (S&D, Spain) said that innovation must not be held back but felt that the ICES study was partial. She pointed out that Parliament opposed pulse fishing. “We need to wait for conclusive studies and that is certainly not a conclusive study”, she stated.
French MEPs wound up. Yannick Jadot (Greens/EFA, France) slammed ICES, claiming that it had responded to a biased question from the Dutch government. “You have crossed a red line and that’s not worthy of your institution”, he said.
Isabelle Thomas (S&D, France) said that this was not a positive opinion on pulse fishing but a comparative opinion containing “many unknowns”. She suggested it was short on information on the survival of young fish.
John Flack (ECR, UK) said that electrical pulse fishing could leave deserts in its wake.
Schreijer-Pierik stated that the Netherlands was trying to foster innovation and environmental protection. The European Commission also supports this kind of fishing, she noted, before stressing the need for the problem to be resolved in the technical measures negotiations. The ICES expert gave assurances that the study had been based on robust scientific evidence and that there had been broad consensus among experts on the opinion. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)