Aaron McLoughlin

CFP Reform’s First Hurdle

The Environment Committee this morning considered 550 amendments concerning the Commission’s proposals for Common Fisheries Policy reform.

MEPs voted 50 – 0 (with 8 abstentions) in favour of an Opinion that supports the Commission’s key proposals and called for the measures listed below.

Summary

MEPs endorsed the Commission’s main proposals for reform of the Common Fisheries Policy – without any votes against – and called for:

- setting a target of achieving above maximum sustainable yield in all fisheries by 2015 (no overfishing)

- long term management plans to be agreed for all fisheries, based on best scientific evidence or the precautionary principle

- restrictions on the degree to which Fisheries Ministers can set quotas that ignore scientific evidence

- requiring all fish caught to be landed and ending discards, to promote the use of more selective fishing gear

- transferable fishing concessions to be established only on a voluntary basis by Member States

- an assessment of overcapacity in the fishing fleet (too many boats chasing too few fish), and measures to reduce it

- full transparency regarding the allocation of fishing rights
- a fairer allocation of fishing rights to benefit small-scale fishermen
- the establishment of fisheries reserves
- ambitious long-term goals to restore stocks to levels that can produce the maximum economic yield for fishermen
- support for regionalised decision-making by encouraging MS to cooperate together when they are part of the same sea-basin
- strict sanctions against Member States that fail to comply with the requirements of the Regulation

Where Next
Attention now turns to the Fisheries Committee.

Mrs Rodust, the German Social Democrat, has tabled a pragmatic report.

It remains in doubt if the MEPs on the fishing committee will vote in the interests of the few or the many. The last time the fisheries committee ignored the views of the majority, the full parliament voted against the fisheries committee.

Unsustainable Confusion

The reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) brings up some very strange debates. One getting a lot of people excited is about fish eco labels.  There are a lot of them and not many people seem to know what they mean.

There are a lot of labels around that say that fish is sustainable and fine to eat.

Here is a link to some of them.

NGOs also have their own ranking. The MCS, WWF Sweden, and Greenpeace.   A long list is here.

And, often they disagree with the designation by the companies doing the labeling. Greenpeace recently raised their concerns about the MSC.

This is all likely to confuse fish processors, fishermen, and retailers. And, for sure, it will confuse the majority of consumers.

How Could We Solve the Confusion?

Now, there is a very simple way to get around this problem. People want to know that their fish is sustainable to eat. Often this is because there is so little good and local stuff to eat. This is especially the case in Europe were fishermen have caught so many of them that today we now import over 60% of the fish we eat.

Big fish buyers are finding a hard time to buy sustainably caught fish. They are entering into long term contracts to corner the market for the remaining few stocks, which are well managed. The demand is there, the supply is not.

Designed in the Baltic 

The answer is amazingly simple. We just to have to look to the Baltic. A few years ago, Baltic cod was in perilous state. After years of mismanagement, fishing ministers decided to do their job properly. It is rarer than you’d hope. They listened to the scientists (and not fishing industry lobbyists) and followed the scientific advice on how much cod should be caught. They followed that rule for one year and then another. After following the best advice for a few years the stocks are in a very healthy way. And, if they keep going stocks will continue to grow.

Deep Simplicity

There is an easy way to get rid of all the eco labels and any confusion.  It’s so simple I am not sure why no-one has tried it before. Fishermen and fishing ministers can make sure that fish stocks are in a very healthy place. They can continue following some amazingly simple rules, like not harvesting more from the sea, than the sea can manage, year on year, and keeping doing that.

If they choose to follow the Baltic example, fish stocks and fish profits will prosper. If we did it in all of Europe, we’d have all the fish we’d want to eat. And, it would all be sustainable.  We would not need lots of competing labels to tell us a fish was sustainably sourced because they’d all be.

It’s such a simple idea, perhaps it will catch on.