Brussels, 14/06/2002 (Agence Europe) - With the adoption on Thursday (386 to 26 with 56 abstentions) of the report by Catherine Stihler, British Labour member, on the reconstitution of cod and hake stocks, the European Parliament mainly amended the social provisions accompanying measures for reducing fishing activities. The rapporteur managed to convince the Chamber (258 in favour to 173 against and 28 abstentions) to reintegrate hake in the proposal, contrary to the position of the majority of members of the fisheries committee.
The Parliament fixed at 30% the maximum increase of the premium for the destruction of ships (the Commission proposes 20%). The other changes on structural measures are: - indemnities to fishermen and shipowners for any temporary cessation of activity, which may benefit from Community cofinancing during three years (instead of one year); - attribution of economic compensations, financed by the Community budget, in periods of forced cessation of activity; - and annual assessment of the socio-economic consequences for possibly finding means to attenuate the negative effects of the plans for reconstituting stocks. The EP also introduced a certain amount of flexibility in the regulation, in the fishermens' interests: instead of having systematically to decide a drastic reduction of TAC for these two species, the Council may adopt technical measures (temporary cession of activities for given periods, temporary bans on fishing in areas where there are juveniles, and minimum mesh sizes). In addition, the EP increased from 5 to 10% the percentage of reduction of fishing activity that fishing vessels must make when they practice industrial fishing of sandeel or Norwegian pout. The Parliament did not change the main aim of the proposal, namely that of allowing an annual 30% increase in cod stocks and 15% rise in hake stocks. To ensure greater security for fishermen, it did, however, amend the provisions on the rates of variation of total allowable catches (TAC) from one year to the next (maximum reduction of TAC 30%, as opposed to the 50% proposed by the Commission). Furthermore, it corrected a small error in the proposal by reestablishing the exact designation of the "Kattegat" zone (IIIa and not IIa).
During the debate, Ms Stihler welcomed the Commission's approach (target values for recovery of stocks, fixing TAC at a level allowing annual increase in stocks of 30% for cod and 15% for hake), considering that the success of stock recovery should be a priority. "We must at all costs avoid a Canadian-style disappearance of cod and hake from these northern waters", she insisted, recalling that, in 1992, Canada had introduced a moratorium on cod fishing and that 30,000 people had lost their jobs (ten years later, stocks have still not recovered, she pointed out). Recalling that the references to hake had been suppressed at the vote in the Committee on Fisheries, she called (successfully) on her colleagues to reintroduce these provisions, considering that the Commission does sufficiently take into account, in its proposal, the different situation of the two species. This opinion is not at all shared by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (EPP-ED, Spain), who believes hake should be the subject of conservation measures (TAC, technical measures, biological rest periods …) outside this proposal, until the scientific reports are confirmed. "We want to protect resources but not at any price or with any measures", he said. Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PES, Spain) intervened along the same lines, saying it would be better to make a clear distinction between the situation of the two species. Patricia McKenna (Greens/EFA, Ireland) described as "unacceptable" the amendment in question that would run counter to the precautionary principle on the management of fisheries. He was approved in this by the Chairman of the Committee on Fisheries, Struan Stevenson (Conservative, UK). Speaking on behalf of the Commission, Fritz Bolkenstein regretted the amendment aimed at dealing with the case of hake separately, and all the amendments aimed at amending provisions on accompany structural measures. He mainly stressed that the 20% rise in premiums for the destruction of fishing vessels represented much more than what was foreseen in the previous programmes (such as structural measures for the Spanish and Portuguese fleets affected by the non-renewal of the fisheries agreement with Morocco).