The only chance. Would the reader like a good example of the "Community Method " in action that goes beyond legal explanations and theory? There's one right before our eyes: reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. The European Commission has presented its plan, despite the very keen opposition of certain governments. Franz Fischler defended it personally before Parliament and he will do the same at the Council. The EP and Council will discuss it and Franz Fischler hopes that there will be a decision before the end of the year (the Danish Presidency of the Council has made plans for a political debate on 14 October and that it will be adopted on 18 November).
The characteristics of the "Community Method" are all here. The Commission has acted with total autonomy in following what it regards to be European interests, after having widely consulted the different players involved (those in the industry, environmentalists, consumer representatives). Its plan is now out in public but nothing has yet been decided; the Commission proposes but it is the Ministers of Member States (who meet at the Council) who decide, and MEPs who first make their opinions known. The Council can reject the draft with a minority blocking it but it needs unanimity in order to amend the draft if it is to contest the Commission's opinion. This is the essential point: the draft has been elaborated by an institution that is responsible for defending European interests, the procedure is democratic and transparent, the prerogatives of countries and their responsibility in decision-making, safeguarded. The method works despite the numerous complications that have occurred in this specific case (referral of the Commission's ruling, attempts by some governments to influence decisions, the imminent replacement of the Director General of Fisheries, polemic at the Parliament etc.). President Prodi declared that, "Over recent weeks I have followed with increasing astonishment the debate on the subject in the media. The adopted proposals prove once again that the Commission has acted in the European interest. We are going to participate in the same spirit by attentively listening to the different opinions".
Avoiding catastrophe. At the root of the problem, it is difficult to not share the opinions that are the basis for the Commission's draft and objectives. The last Fisheries Commissioner, Emma Bonino also came to similar conclusions. Now almost the entire Commission agrees. In his press conference, Franz Fischler was eloquent but avoided rhetoric. "The situation is serious because fishing resources are diminishing and for certain species it is disastrous. There are two options: the easy way consists in doing nothing but this will lead to certain disaster, for without fish there will be no more fishing activities and the disaster will also be ecological, for the living species in the sea, for the sea itself and for sea-birds and those who live from these natural resources".
The global diagnosis is not opposed but scientific opinions on the real situation of certain stocks diverge. The actual conflict results form the remedies. The Commission's draft will result in the scrapping of 8,600 fishing boats (a 40% reduction in current over-capacity) and a reduction of between 30%-60%, according to the species, of the quotas of authorised catches (this will involve a loss of around 28,000 jobs). But there are numerous accompanying measures. EU budgetary resources will no longer be used for modernising fishing fleets to increase their productivity but for helping those fishermen (pensions and subsidies) who take voluntary redundancy. Mechanisms of the Common Policy will be amended by setting up joint inspections of fishing activities (in order to establish confidence between Member States that has been currently undermined).
This plan has been sharply criticised not only by several ministers (Spain, France and Portugal) but also by the Vice President of the Commission, Loyola de Palacio, who believes that it is "brutal" and ignores the life and working conditions of fishermen by undermining traditional fishing practices which will lead to industrial fishing techniques. Obviously the plan must be discussed in more detail; the Parliament and the Council are there for that. But we've spoken a little too hastily of a common front of six countries (the three mentioned plus Italy, Greece and Ireland) who will block the project. Ms de Palacio is calling for a more Community based system that will facilitate fishermen's access to all the waters of Member States by creating an "internal fishing market" instead of reproducing the traditions systems of access. This would suit Spain but can we be sure that France and Ireland would agree? Portugal is opposed to the suppression of aid for modernisation but this is a mere detail. I think that negotiations at the Council will not take the form of a nine-country opposition arguing "for" and six countries saying "no". the "Community Method" represents the only chance to ensure that fishing remains viable economically, socially and ecologically. (F.R.)