At the EU ‘Fisheries’ Council in Luxembourg on Monday 29 April, Latvia, supported by several delegations, raised the problems of implementing the rules on the margin of tolerance (the difference between the estimate in the logbook of the volume of catches and the result of the weighing in port). They are based on the new Fisheries Control Regulation (see EUROPE 13324/4, 13191/13).
According to Latvia and Lithuania (https://aeur.eu/f/byj ), the data shows that, in a large number of fishing operations in the Baltic, the margin of tolerance (10%) cannot be respected for catches of small unregulated species. Fishermen fishing for pelagic species (sprat, herring) risk being penalised for serious offences, even though they are unintentional mistakes. “If the problem is not solved, the entire small-scale pelagic fishery could find itself in breach of the law”, said the Latvian minister.
Germany, Finland, Denmark, Italy and Greece supported this request. France mentioned the need for realistic implementation of the regulation in terms of controls. Denmark and Italy have asked for the rules on controls to be simplified.
Spain said that the regulation takes account of the different fisheries and the Spanish representative pointed out that the new rules were very strict for all Member States.
“There are clear limits to what the Commission can do through an implementing act”, warned the Commissioner for Agriculture, Janusz Wojciechowski, on behalf of the European Commission. The legal powers granted to the Commission by the co-legislators have a clearly defined scope. It mainly concerns “landings in ports that meet the conditions for derogating from the standard margin of tolerance of 10% per species”, explained the institution.
“The Control Regulation does not authorise the Commission to derogate from the margin of tolerance set by the co-legislators or to amend the sanctions regime applicable to infringements in the way proposed by Latvia” the Commission also stated. To meet Latvia’s request, the regulation would therefore also have to be amended, which the Commission refuses to do.
It considers that it would be possible to find technical solutions with the Latvian authorities and the other Member States concerned. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)