A Greek Revolutionary Who Delivered Change
Commissioner Damanaki acheived what many people, including me, thought not possible. She pulled off a real reform of Europe’s Common Fisheries Policy. She ignored her critics, whether they were in DG MARE who opposed tooth and nail the discards ban, Commissioner Barnier whose services waterted down DG MARE’s proposal at last minute in Inter-Service Consultation. She bypassed many members of the fisheries committee and outplayed many in industry who opposed the spirit of reform.
What’s Been Agreed
Reading the new Basic Regulation the scale of the reform is remarkable.
Regionalistion
Regionalisation was only dear to the hearts of the Sweden and UK. It was vocally championed by Scotland, and this led many many Member States to see it as a move to re-nationalise fisheries, and so out of principle oppose it.
Only Richard Benyon’s urbane and active negotiation style won over the many doubting Member States to the case for devolved fisheries management. And, I say this as a member of a Political Party different from Mr Benyon.
The key section is in Article 17 that allows:
- Member States to co-operate with each other and other third countries.
- An appeal procedure is established if a Member State does not agree.
- Coordination with scientific bodies is required
What is remarkable is that issue ever sought the light of day. Regionalisation is a legally ingenious provision, one I suspect that the Commission’s own legal service have severe reservations about.
How Many Fish In the Sea
A lot of people get very focused on three letters: MSY.
MSY means ‘Maximum Sustainable Yield’ and many hours were spent discussing this in the Parliament and the Council.
Now, making sure there are plenty of fish in the sea to reproduce at healthy levels makes sense to me. But, then it all gets a bit complicated. Too many people convert in to that strange language ‘ science speak’ and start talking about F MSY, B MSY and other variations, and politicians eyes start to glaze over.
Interestingly, it becomes clear we don’t really know how many fish there are in the sea. It really is not easy to count them. And, often the guestimates from organisations like ICES are well nothing more than well intentioned guestimates, with margins of error that would makes your eyes water.
What Was Agreed on Regionalisation
The Parliament, Council and Commission finally agreed to the following:
‘The Common Fisheries Policy shall apply the precautionary approach to fisheries management, and shall aim to ensure that exploitation of living marine biological resources restores and maintains populations of harvested species above levels which can produce the maximum sustainable yield. This exploitation rate shall be achieved by 2015, where possible, and by 2020 for all stocks at the latest.
In order to reach this objective of progressively restoring and maintaining populations of fish stocks above biomass levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield, the maximum sustainable yield exploitation rate shall be achieved by 2015 where possible and on a progressive, incremental basis at the latest by 2020 for all stocks.’
They even went and provided a definition for MSY:
Art.5(6): Definition: ‘maximum sustainable yield’ means the highest theoretical equilibrium yield that can be continuously taken on average from a stock under existing average environmental conditions without affecting significantly the reproduction process’
Now, experience seems to show that if you follow plans to reach these levels there will be a lot more fish in the sea by 2020. Indeed, if we follow plans to reach these targets, we’ll likely have to start dealing with new problems like too many too big cod in the North Sea.
Discards Ban
Hugh’s Fish Fight brought to the UK public’s attention the tragi-comedy of fish discarding. The issue had been on the fisheries agenda for many years. In practice, nothing much had been done about and discards of cod in the North Sea and elsewhere continued at insanely high amounts.
Channeling the Norwegians
The throwing over board dead fish annoyed the public. It annoyed our Norwegian neighbours who had banned the practice for years and kept asking the EU to copy them. We kept refusing to act. As good Norwegians they kept trying to explain to the EU that discard bans works to restore socks to profitablity and sustainability. Indeed, the final text looks like it has been written by the sons of Odin themselves.
Counting What’s Landed
If you look to Article 15 you will see the shift from a catch quota to a landing quota. It provides for a mandatory landing requirement. It establishes that the fish caught are, in the main, counted against the quota.
Ambitious But Workable Deadlines
The deadlines are:
1st January2015
‘ (a) the latest from 1 January 2015:
– small pelagic fisheries i.e. fisheries for mackerel, herring, horse mackerel, blue whiting, boarfish, anchovy, argentine, sardine, sprat; large pelagic fisheries i.e. fisheries for bluefin tuna, swordfish, albacore tuna, bigeye tuna, blue and white marlin;
– fisheries for industrial purposes i.a. fisheries for capelin, sandeel and Norway pout;
– salmon in the Baltic Sea.
– At the latest from 1 January 2015 for species defining the fisheries and not later than 1 January 2017 for all other species in fisheries in Union waters of the Baltic Sea for species subject to catch limits other than those covered by point (a).
1st January 2016
At the latest from 1 January 2016 for species defining the fisheries and not later than 1 January 2019 for all other species in:
– (i) The North Sea
– fisheries for cod, haddock, whiting, saithe;
– fisheries for Norway lobster;
– fisheries for common sole and plaice;
– fisheries for hake;
– fisheries for Northern prawn;
– (ii) North Western waters
– fisheries for cod, haddock, whiting, saithe;
– fisheries for Norway lobster;
– fisheries for common sole and plaice;
– fisheries for hake;
– (iii) South Western waters
– fisheries for Norway lobster;
– fisheries for common sole and plaice;
– fisheries for hake;
– (iv) other fisheries for species subject to catch limits.
1st January 2017
– At the latest from 1 January 2017 for species defining the fisheries and not later than 1 January 2019 for all other species in fisheries not covered by paragraph 1(a) in the Mediterranean, in the Black Sea and in all other Union waters and in non-Union waters not subject to third countries’ sovereignty or jurisdiction.’
Member States Can Go Further
Provision is even made to all allow Member States to extend the landing obligation to other species.
When is A Discard Ban A Discard Ban?
The EU is not stopping the discarding of all fish. It is cutting the discarding by a huge amount.
Provision is made for `De-minmis exemptions of up to 5% of total annual catches of all species`. This means that some fish can be discarded but at levels massively lower than the levels thrown overboard today.
Checking It Is Working
The key requirement is:
‘All catches subject to catch limits, and in the Mediterranean also catches subject to minimum landing sizes as defined in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No. 1967/2006, caught during fishing activities in Union waters or by Union fishing vessels outside Union waters in waters not subject to third countries’ sovereignty or jurisdiction, in the fisheries and geographical areas listed below shall be brought and retained on board the fishing vessels, recorded, landed, and counted against the quotas where applicable (Article 15(1)’.
This requires the ‘recording’ of the fish caught. Now, how this recording is to be done is detailed further along in Article 15.
‘Member States shall ensure detailed and accurate documentation of all fishing trips and adequate capacity and means for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the obligation to land all catches, inter alia such means as observers, CCTV and other. In doing so, Member States shall respect the principle of efficiency and proportionality (Article 15(8)’.
This requires Member States to ensure detailed and accurate documented fisheries. It leaves a number of options on how this can be done, via on-board observers, CCTV or some new technology that may come on stream to help ensure the fully documented fisheries is happening.
Now, there are some caveats, and Member States may opt for alternative solutions for the under 12 metre fleet. However, exemptions in EU Law are always interpreted narrowly, and anyone who is looking to use this exempt the over 15 metre fleet will likely find themselves loosing in the European Court.
Non Compliance by Operators
Now, the issue comes up what happens if some parts of the fleet choose to ignore these provisions. Of course, the matters of non-compliance are a matter for the Member State to deal with. But, changes in fisheries rules have in the past seen fishermen show their displeasure by blockading thriving commercial ports.
The Regulations speaks of Member States adopting measures including the “the establishment of effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions” (Article 46 (2a).
There are obvious sanctions that a Member State could deploy if operators break the law. These can include the removal of the of fishing license or fines. And, as in most countries the quota is held by the government, there may be an option to withdraw the quota from operators. So, if fishermen were to choose to blockading commercial ports a government would surely be within their rights to withdraw their quota or other criminal or civil sanctions that exist in that country. And, we should not forget the civil actions commercial shipping operators could bring for losses brought about by blockading commercial ports.
Non-Compliance by Governments
The Regulation also spells out clear the duties on Member States, as well as the consquences for noncompliance (e.g. see Article 50). Until recently, compliance by Member States with the CFP has been variable.
TFCs – A Step Too Far
One element from the reform that was gutted early on was the mandatory use of Transferable Fishing Quotas. This was killed off by an odd alliance of NGOs, the small and large scale fishing fleet, and governments.
Some governments wanted it. Spain was chief among them. The UK government saw how effective the schemes had been in other countries, but did not want them imposed on. Denmark did not fight the issue because they already have ITQs and think they work very well.
There were attempts to kill the use of TFCs off all together, but that fortunately failed.
For countries who use TFCs they will need to:
“establish and maintain a register of transferable fishing concessions” (Article 27).
This won’t be a major problem. If you can read Danish they have the details all on line today.
I need to re-read the text to see if the agreement still allows the antiquated practice in many countries of the ownership of the quota being secret. The ownership if often known only by the government or the industry. The irony seems to be that in some countries, whilst the government hold the legal title to the quota, they are not clear who is using it. The industry do know but won’t tell the government.
Europe Can Change
I think the biggest lesson from the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy is that Europe can adapt and change.
When David Cameroon raised in his speech about Britain’s future in Europe at the start of the year, he raised the issue of fisheries policy. By doing so, he raised fisheries policy up the political agenda in many capitals.
Chancellor Merkel, from a historic fisheries constituency, may well have decided that this is an issue to show the public in the UK and in Europe, that Europe can change for the better. The German governments late burst of supporting reform helped bring about real change. It shows that Europe can change for the better.
Indeed, many countries have taken brave steps on the path of fisheries reform. Simon Coveney proved many wrong when he pushed through a reform during the Irish Presidency. Ireland has traditionally been seen in the camp of France, Spain, Portugal and Italy on fisheries. Simon Coveney shows us that there some politicians in Europe who are prepared to fight for the greater good.
I am sure one day the story about how the reform was reached at 3:30 on a Thursday morning will be written. I know that at the centre of that story will be a brave Greek politican, Maria Damanaki, who had the rare mix of vision, stubbornness and stamina to bring about a real reform to Europe’s fisheries policy.