Brussels, 30/05/2005 (Agence Europe) - On Monday the European Commission adopted a report on action that seriously infringed the Common Fisheries Rules (CFP) rules in 2003. The report shows the number of serious breaches went up from 6,756 in 2002 to 9,502 in 2003. 5 Member States detected 88% of reported infringements: Spain 3158 (with a fleet of 14397), 2569 in Italy (15639 boats); 1316 in Portugal with (10313 boats), 766 breaches in Greece (18979 boats) and 596 in France (8047). The Commission believes that an administrative sanction, such as the suspension of a fishing licence, may be an effective way to encourage compliance as it could quickly applied. It also regrets that the majority of Member States do not use this tool often.
According to the Commission data, non-authorised fishing represents 22% of cases while fishing without a licence amounts to 17% and the stocking, processing, marketing and transporting of fisheries products accounts for 12% (three times a many in 2002). Other breaches frequently occurring are the use of banned fishing methods and the falsification of registered data (10% each). A very limited number of cases also involve the alteration of VMS system data.
The report also shows that 84% of infringement procedures resulted in sanctions. In Greece and Germany 100% of breaches were sanctions, as opposed to 90% in Spain and the United Kingdom. Only 24% of breaches were sanctioned in Sweden. The comparison of fines imposed on fishermen demonstrates that there are “still blatant differences between Member States of the kinds of breaches committed”. For example, the average fine for use or possession of banned fishing gear in Portugal was EUR 451 and EUR 9000 in the Netherlands; for non-authorised fishing, the average fine was EUR 375 in Belgium and EUR 19,255 in the United Kingdom; for the direct fishing of banned species, the average fine was EUR 20 in Denmark and EUR 8,379 in Spain; for the falsification of data in inspection documents, the average fine was EUR 98 in Germany and EUR 132,056 in the United Kingdom.
In general, the average fine applied in Finland was EUR 282 and EUR 77,922 in the United Kingdom. The Commission points out that certain fines include the value of confiscations and others do don't, which makes comparisons between the different Member States problematic. The Commission believes that the value of on-board catches should be taken into account by the authority in the calculation of the sanction and that this rule is used across the whole Community. The average fine imposed on procedures resulting in a sanction rose to EUR 4,664, much more than during previous years (EUR 1,757).
In 4,720, the confiscation of captures or fishing gear was ordered. Belgium, Greece, Spain and Italy were the Member States which said that they used this measure in a significant number of cases. On the other hand, Germany, Finland indicated that they had not ordered any seizures of catches or fishing gear. The Commission considers that an administrative sanction such as the suspension of authorisation in exercising a professional activity could be the most efficient way of increasing respect for CFP rules. “It is therefore regrettable that the majority of Member States do not use this often enough”.
The Commission concluded that, “it appears that Member States have not always taken useful measures for fighting against behaviour that was contrary to CFP rules”. It points out that the small number of breaches detected involving the falsification of VMS system data illustrated the problem of existing national rules. The Commission said that it was becoming obvious that the rate of sanctions applied by the Community was not proving to be a deterrent. Although statistics demonstrated that more than 10% of boats had been sanctioned, the amount paid by the fishing sector resulting from sanctions imposed in 2003 was the apparently derisory figure of EUR 28.7 million: this only represents four thousandth of the overall value of landings in the EU (EUR 6.1 bn according to Eurostat figures for 2002). Joe Borg the Commissioner for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs explained that “Better compliance with the rules is at the heart of sustainable fisheries. Far from being a harmless practice, infringing the CFP rules has a biological, economic and social cost. This is why all those truly committed to sustainable fisheries have to do their best to apply CFP rules and to have them applied by others”.