Brussels, 05/12/2007 (Agence Europe) - Catch data are neither complete nor reliable, inspection systems do not provide assurance that infringements are effectively prevented and detected, the deterrent effect of the penalties imposed is limited, and fleet overcapacity is an incitement to non-compliance on quotas. In a special report published on Tuesday 4 December, the Court of Auditors was severe in its criticism of fishing activities' control procedures and sanctions for infringement of the rules of the Common Fisheries policy (CFP).
If political authorities want the CFP (which was reformed five years ago) to achieve its objective of sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources, “the present control, inspection and sanction mechanisms must be strengthened considerably,” the Court said.
The Court report has come at a “critical moment”, according to European Fisheries Commissioner Joe Borg. He pointed out that the Commission planned to bring forward a new regulation on fisheries control in the second half of 2008. Most of the Court's conclusions “coincide closely with our own analysis,” he added. The Commission will now work with member states and all stakeholders, using the Court's conclusions, to build a “well functioning” control framework for the CFP, Borg said.
Between April and November 2006, Court investigators travelled to six member states (Denmark, Spain, France, Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom). These countries account for almost 70% of catch volumes and over 80% of the value of landings. Every year, more than 4.4 million tonnes of fish and shellfish, worth a total of €6.1 billion are landed in Community ports. The fishing industry provides 230,000 jobs in the EU and, in some regions, plays “a major role for which there is no easy substitute,” the Court admits.
Late or incomplete collection of data. In Spain, none of the catches by vessels of less than 10 metres in length was taken into account by quota monitoring, even though such vessels form a substantial part of the national fleet (67% of the total number of vessels). In France, activities in the Mediterranean and the overseas departments were not monitored in any way by the national statistics processing system. The Court noted, too, that in Spain and France, sales notes for frozen produce were not recorded.
The monitoring and warning system put in place by the Commission for every stock for which there is a quota consists of automatically comparing the level of quotas with the catches reported. In 2005, this system did not prevent 26 quotas from being officially exceeded, 11 of which significantly.
Serious traceability problems. In France, for the six species analysed, the totals drawn up by the national authorities showed significant differences with the final figures forwarded to the Commission. In Spain, the 2005 data submitted to the Directorate General for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs (DG Fish) on landings by Spanish vessels were approximately 40% lower than the data recorded in national databases.
The Court of Auditors also noted the “limited” effectiveness of national inspections. It regretted that the Community fisheries control agency (based in Vigo) would have little power. Contrary to what might be suggested by the name, the agency is not empowered to carry out controls itself, the report says.
The Court emphasised, too, that the overcapacity of the Community fleet was an incitement to non-compliance with catch limitations, and also affected the quality of the data submitted. The Community's current approach, based essentially on reducing fishing effort, was “unlikely to resolve the problem of overcapacity,” the Court said, and it provided a long list of recommendations covering three areas: improving the quality of catch data, applying deterrent sanctions and reducing overcapacity.
The report “confirms what we have been saying for years. It is not surprising that there is over-fishing when one sees how member states apply the rules which they themselves voted for,” said Marie-Hélène Aubert (Greens/EFA, France). Aubert, who is the rapporteur on illegal fishing, said that there were not enough inspections of fleets and catches and that, when there were infringements, sanctions were not severe enough to act as a deterrent. In fact, sanctions were “simply included in costs,” she said. She added that current measures to manage the Community's fisheries resources were “very clearly not good enough” to ensure that there was sustainable and legal fishing. (L.C.)