# C_2012299EN.01013301.xml

| 4.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 299/133 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 299/133

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 and Council Regulation (EC) No 861/2006 and Council Regulation No XXX/2011 on integrated maritime policy)’

COM(2011) 804 final — 2011/0380 (COD)

2012/C 299/24

Rapporteur: Mr Sarró IPARRAGUIRRE

Mr Sarró IPARRAGUIRRE

On 15 December 2011 and 16 January 2012 respectively, the Council and the European Parliament decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 43 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on the

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund [repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 and Council Regulation (EC) No 861/2006 and Council Regulation No XXX/2011 on integrated maritime policy]

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund [repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 and Council Regulation (EC) No 861/2006 and Council Regulation No XXX/2011 on integrated maritime policy]

COM(2011) 804 final — 2011/0380 (COD).

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 26 June 2012.

At its 482nd plenary session, held on 11 and 12 July 2012 (meeting of 11 July), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 150 votes to 1 with 6 abstentions.

1.   Conclusions and recommendations

Conclusions and recommendations

1.1   The Committee welcomes the Commission's proposal and shares its objectives and priorities. Nevertheless, it should be made clear in relation to the first objective that fisheries and aquaculture should be sustainable and competitive from an economic, social and environmental point of view. The EESC also regrets the fact that there is no specific reference in the objectives of the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) to the processing and marketing sector for fisheries and aquaculture products.

1.2   In relation to the definition of small-scale coastal fishing, the EESC reiterates the comments made in its opinion on the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and calls on the Council and the European Parliament to extend the Commission's proposal accordingly.

1.3   The Committee endorses the objective to eliminate overcapacity in the fleet wherever it may exist. This is why the EESC considers that support for the permanent cessation of fishing vessels needs to remain in place, provided that this enables each segment to carry out a genuine adjustment to the existing fishing opportunities.

1.4   The EESC also considers that support for temporary cessation should be kept in place.

1.5   The Committee attaches great importance to support for fostering relations and partnerships between scientists and fishermen, promoting human capital and social dialogue, facilitating diversification and job creation and improving safety on board. It also sees a need to introduce measures aimed at bringing young professionals into the fishing sector, so as to help mitigate the lack of transfer between generations, and to focus more on creating and maintaining jobs.

1.6   The EESC endorses support for the implementation of conservation measures under the CFP; for limiting the impact of fishing on the marine environment; for innovation; for protecting and restoring marine biodiversity and ecosystems; for mitigating climate change; for improving the use of unwanted catches; and for increasing energy efficiency.

1.7   The EESC agrees with the proposed support for inland fishing. Nevertheless, it believes that assistance measures should be introduced to prevent the interaction of freshwater aquaculture and agriculture with freshwater fishing.

1.8   The EESC agrees with measures aimed at the sustainable development of aquaculture and fisheries areas and puts forward in this opinion a number of improvements it considers important.

1.9   The Committee welcomes the measures concerning the processing and marketing of fisheries products. Nevertheless, it believes that support to compensate producer organisations which store fisheries products should be maintained until the end of the EMFF's period of application. Similarly, it believes that it is vital to maintain the compensatory allowances mechanism for tuna for processing. Furthermore, it considers that the specific objectives should include improving the processing industry's competitiveness, public health conditions and the quality of products; reducing negative environmental impacts and increasing energy efficiency; improving the use of little-used species, by-products and litter; developing, producing and marketing new products; using new technologies and innovative production methods; opening and developing new markets and improving working conditions and training for workers.

1.10   The EESC welcomes all the proposals concerning the Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP).

2.   Background

Background

2.1   The reform of the CFP will come into force on 1 January 2013 (1).

1

2.2   The financial basis for the CFP in its current form is Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 on the European Fisheries Fund (EFF), which was due for review before 1 January 2014.

2.3   The IMP was financed in the years 2008-2010 through a series of pilot schemes and preparatory actions. A new financial instrument has been proposed by the Commission for the period between 2012 and 2013.

2.4   The reform of the CFP and the consolidation of the IMP will be supported by the new European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), which will enter into force on 1 January 2014.

3.   Analysis of the proposal

Analysis of the proposal

3.1   Objectives and priorities

Objectives and priorities

3.1.1   In general terms, the proposal distributes the support granted under the concepts of "shared management" (essentially the CFP) and "direct management" (covering the IMP and complementary measures for both the CFP and the IMP), putting in place EU financial measures for the implementation of:

| a) | the CFP; |
| --- | --- |

a)

the CFP;

| b) | relevant measures relating to the Law of the Sea; |
| --- | --- |

b)

relevant measures relating to the Law of the Sea;

| c) | sustainable development of fisheries areas and inland fishing; |
| --- | --- |

c)

sustainable development of fisheries areas and inland fishing;

| d) | the IMP. |
| --- | --- |

d)

the IMP.

3.1.2   In relation to the definition of "small-scale coastal fisheries", the EESC reiterates the comments made in its opinion on the reform. The Committee believes that the reality of the small-scale fleet in the different Member States is not being taken into account and that a single arbitrary criterion is being set which is likely to lead to discrimination. The EESC therefore advocates criteria in addition to size which could be used to define this highly diversified form of fishing, such as time spent at sea, distance from the coast, type of fishing gear and links to local communities. Trap nets should also be included in the definition of small-scale fishing.

3.1.3   The EESC considers it appropriate to clarify the concepts of self-employed and employed fishermen, in order to determine precisely who are the beneficiaries of the various EMFF measures, since the term "fisherman" is frequently used in relation to different concepts such as vessel owners, self-employed fishermen who are not employees, etc.

3.1.4   The objectives of the EMFF are:

| a) | to promote sustainable and competitive fisheries and aquaculture; |
| --- | --- |

a)

to promote sustainable and competitive fisheries and aquaculture;

| b) | to foster the development and implementation of the IMP in a complementary manner to cohesion policy and the CFP; |
| --- | --- |

b)

to foster the development and implementation of the IMP in a complementary manner to cohesion policy and the CFP;

| c) | to promote balanced and inclusive territorial development of fisheries areas; |
| --- | --- |

c)

to promote balanced and inclusive territorial development of fisheries areas;

| d) | to foster the implementation of the CFP. |
| --- | --- |

d)

to foster the implementation of the CFP.

3.1.5   The EESC considers that it should be made clear in relation to the first objective that fisheries and aquaculture should be sustainable and competitive from an economic, social and environmental point of view.

3.1.6   The EESC also regrets the fact that there is no specific reference in those objectives or in the priorities of the EU to the processing and marketing sector, given that it is among those targeted by the actions set out in the proposal. In this regard, the Committee regrets that the objectives do not include financing investments aimed at ensuring the safety and quality of products, improving working conditions and the business environment, and supporting the development of a strong, innovative and sustainable industrial base that can create jobs and compete on the world market.

3.1.7   Except where the regulation expressly provides otherwise, the geographical scope of the proposal covers operations carried out in the territory of the EU.

3.2   Admissibility of applications and ineligible operations

Admissibility of applications and ineligible operations

3.2.1   Applications submitted by operators that have committed an irregularity under the EFF or the EMFF, that have committed a serious infringement under the regulation on IUU (illegal, unreported and unregulated) fishing, that are included on the IUU vessel list or that are responsible for other instances of non-compliance with the CFP rules which seriously jeopardise the sustainability of the stocks concerned will not be admissible for an identified period of time.

3.2.2   The following operations will not be eligible under the EMFF:

| a) | operations increasing the fishing capacity of the vessel; |
| --- | --- |

a)

operations increasing the fishing capacity of the vessel;

| b) | construction of new fishing vessels, decommissioning or importation of fishing vessels; |
| --- | --- |

b)

construction of new fishing vessels, decommissioning or importation of fishing vessels;

| c) | temporary cessation of fishing activities; |
| --- | --- |

c)

temporary cessation of fishing activities;

| d) | experimental fishing; |
| --- | --- |

d)

experimental fishing;

| e) | transfer of ownership of a business; |
| --- | --- |

e)

transfer of ownership of a business;

| f) | direct restocking, unless explicitly foreseen as a conservation measure by an EU legal act, or in the case of experimental restocking. |
| --- | --- |

f)

direct restocking, unless explicitly foreseen as a conservation measure by an EU legal act, or in the case of experimental restocking.

3.2.3   The EESC considers that support for the permanent cessation of fishing vessels needs to remain in place to allow a serious and thorough restructuring of the EU fleet, as long as it makes it possible for each segment to carry out a genuine adjustment to the existing fishing opportunities in the context of economically, socially and environmentally sustainable fishing. Measures should also be included to provide compensation for exit from the profession, such as early retirement or flat-rate compensation, as a result of vessels ceasing to operate.

3.2.4   On the basis of a report from the Court of Auditors which analysed whether the measures adopted contributed to adjusting the capacity of fleets to the existing fishing opportunities, the Commission argues that such support has not succeeded in resolving the problem of overcapacity in the EU fleet and should be removed.

3.2.5   However, the Committee notes that the report does not call the existence of support for permanent cessation into question, but rather sets out a series of recommendations to the Commission and the Member States.

3.2.5.1   To the Commission, it recommends adopting measures that are more suitable for achieving a balance between capacity and fishing opportunities; setting effective limits for fishing fleet capacity; and ensuring that fishing right transfer schemes contribute to reducing overcapacity.

3.2.5.2   To the Member States, it recommends ensuring that measures to aid investments on board do not contribute to increasing capacity; ensuring that decommissioning schemes have a positive impact on the sustainability of the targeted fish stocks; and avoiding the provision of public support for decommissioning inactive vessels.

3.2.6   To solve the overcapacity problem, the Commission proposes a system of transferable concessions. The EESC rejected that system in its opinion on the reform, on the basis that support for permanent cessation should be kept in place in order to reduce possible overcapacity.

3.2.7   On the other hand, the EESC also considers that support for temporary cessation should be kept in place, given its essential role in improving the state of stocks, particularly as regards closed seasons, while at the same time partially compensating fishermen for their loss of income during the period of cessation.

3.2.8   Support for temporary cessation is wholly justified in the case of:

| a) | a drastic reduction of quotas or fishing effort under multiannual fisheries management schemes; |
| --- | --- |

a)

a drastic reduction of quotas or fishing effort under multiannual fisheries management schemes;

| b) | breach or termination of fisheries agreements; |
| --- | --- |

b)

breach or termination of fisheries agreements;

| c) | environmental disasters. |
| --- | --- |

c)

environmental disasters.

3.2.9   The Committee considers that such support is particularly important for maintaining and developing the socioeconomic fabric of regions that are highly dependent on fishing, since it is directed at crew as well as owners and ensures that fishing activity continues.

3.3   Budgetary resources under shared management and direct management

Budgetary resources under shared management and direct management

3.3.1   The budgetary resources for 2014-2020 under shared management will be EUR 5,520 million, allocated among the Member States on the basis of certain objective criteria set out in the proposal. The resources under direct management, including technical assistance, will be EUR 1,047 million.

3.3.2   To access the co-financing provided through the EMFF, each Member State will have to draw up a single operational programme to implement the EU priorities. The Commission will approve the Member States' operational programmes, and any modifications to them, by way of implementing acts.

3.4   Measures financed under shared management

Measures financed under shared management

3.4.1   Sustainable development of fisheries

Sustainable development of fisheries

3.4.1.1   The support provided under this heading will contribute to the achievement of the following EU priorities:

| — | fostering an innovative and competitive sector; |
| --- | --- |

—

fostering an innovative and competitive sector;

| — | promoting sustainable and resource-efficient aquaculture. |
| --- | --- |

—

promoting sustainable and resource-efficient aquaculture.

3.4.1.2   As a general requirement, owners that have benefited from support for the retrofitting of small-scale coastal fishing vessels in order to reassign them for activities outside fishing, or have received support for investments on board to make the best use of unwanted catches of commercial stocks and valorise underused components of fish caught, will not be allowed to transfer such vessels to a third country outside the EU for at least five years following the date of actual payment to the beneficiary.

3.4.1.3   The EESC considers that the provision outlined in point 3.4.1.2 needs to be redrafted so as to state that if such vessels are exported within five years following receipt of the support, it must be repaid pro rata temporis.

pro rata temporis

3.4.1.4   Innovation. The EMFF may support projects aiming at developing or introducing products, processes or management and organisation systems that are new or substantially improved compared to the state of the art.

Innovation.

3.4.1.5   The EESC considers that the "state of the art" concept should be better defined, and notes that there is also a social aspect to innovation.

3.4.1.6   Operations financed in relation to innovation are to be carried out in collaboration with a scientific or technical body recognised by the Member State, which will validate the results of the operations.

3.4.1.7   The EESC does not believe that every innovation action necessarily requires the involvement of a scientific or technical body. Improvement of the economic performance of fishing enterprises as a result of these actions should be a more important requirement.

3.4.1.8   Advisory services. The EMFF may support:

Advisory services.

| — | project feasibility studies; |
| --- | --- |

—

project feasibility studies;

| — | the provision of professional advice on business and marketing strategies. |
| --- | --- |

—

the provision of professional advice on business and marketing strategies.

3.4.1.9   The Commission proposes that feasibility studies and professional advice on business and marketing strategies should be provided by recognised scientific or technical bodies, and that the sum involved should not exceed EUR 3 000.

3.4.1.10   The EESC believes that this should also cover private firms, which can design and advise on strategic business and marketing plans, and that the maximum amount should be increased. In any event, the method used to determine that amount should be set when the criteria for the selection of projects are determined.

3.4.1.11   Partnerships between scientists and fishermen. The EMFF may support:

Partnerships between scientists and fishermen.

| — | the creation of a network composed of independent scientific bodies and fishermen or organisations of fishermen, |
| --- | --- |

—

the creation of a network composed of independent scientific bodies and fishermen or organisations of fishermen,

| — | activities carried out by such a network. |
| --- | --- |

—

activities carried out by such a network.

3.4.1.12   The EESC considers that promoting relationships between scientists and fishermen is of the utmost importance.

3.4.1.13   Promoting human capital and social dialogue. The EMFF may support:

Promoting human capital and social dialogue.

| — | lifelong learning, dissemination of scientific knowledge and innovative practices and acquisition of new professional skills, in particular those linked to the sustainable management of marine ecosystems, activities in the maritime sector, innovation and entrepreneurship; |
| --- | --- |

—

lifelong learning, dissemination of scientific knowledge and innovative practices and acquisition of new professional skills, in particular those linked to the sustainable management of marine ecosystems, activities in the maritime sector, innovation and entrepreneurship;

| — | networking and exchange of experience between stakeholders, including organisations promoting equal opportunities between men and women; |
| --- | --- |

—

networking and exchange of experience between stakeholders, including organisations promoting equal opportunities between men and women;

| — | promoting social dialogue at national, regional or local level involving fishermen and other relevant stakeholders. |
| --- | --- |

—

promoting social dialogue at national, regional or local level involving fishermen and other relevant stakeholders.

3.4.1.14   The EESC acknowledges the Commission's efforts to include actions aimed at promoting human capital and social dialogue, job creation and health and safety on board fishing vessels. However, it considers that there are some aspects that should be clarified or added. First, the EESC wishes to make clear that social dialogue is a process that takes place between the social partners, that is, between employers' and workers' organisations. References to "other relevant stakeholders" in relation to the promotion of social dialogue should therefore be deleted. Secondly, the Committee considers that not only "fishermen", but also other "operators" should be included as beneficiaries of this support, so that other fisheries professionals who perform ancillary work (such as repair of fishing gear and unloading in ports) can also benefit. The EESC also considers it desirable to promote the co-financing of European activities performed by European organisations in the sector, particularly information seminars on the development of the CFP, to allow the social partners to understand the legislation better, promote compliance with the rules and make best use of funds. Finally, the EESC believes that the EMFF should include financial support for the education and training of fishermen, to give them the skills they need to find jobs in other sectors. That financial support should include compensation for loss of income during the education or training period.

3.4.1.15   Facilitating diversification and job creation. The EMFF may support:

Facilitating diversification and job creation.

| — | business start-ups outside fishing; |
| --- | --- |

—

business start-ups outside fishing;

| — | retrofitting of small-scale coastal fishing vessels in order to reassign them to activities outside fishing. |
| --- | --- |

—

retrofitting of small-scale coastal fishing vessels in order to reassign them to activities outside fishing.

3.4.1.16   The EESC considers that the reference to small-scale fishing should be removed, so as to support the retrofitting of any fishing vessel for activities other than fishing.

3.4.1.17   There is a striking lack of support for job creation in the fishing sector itself. The EESC believes that some sort of measure aimed at bringing young professionals into the fishing sector needs to be put in place, so as to help mitigate one of the major problems identified in this sector, namely the transfer between generations.

3.4.1.18   Health and safety on board. The EMFF may support fishermen and owners of fishing vessels, per programming period, per fishing vessel or per beneficiary, for investments on board or in individual equipment, provided that such investments go beyond standards required under national or EU law.

Health and safety on board.

3.4.1.19   The EESC considers that this should not be limited to investments on board vessels, allowing fishermen collecting fish and shellfish in the inter-tidal zone and ancillary workers to benefit as well. The scope of such support should also be extended to cover general improvements of on-board conditions, that is to say prevention of workplace risks, improvement of working conditions and of hygienic conditions etc., as well as feasibility studies for such investments.

3.4.1.20   The limitation that such support may only be provided once per programming period should also be removed.

3.4.1.21   Support for systems of transferable fishing concessions under the CFP. The Commission proposes to provide support for setting up or modifying the systems of transferable fishing concessions provided for in the CFP. The EESC considers it appropriate to provide such support if the system is ultimately set up under the CFP.

3.4.1.22   The EMFF provides for support for the implementation of conservation measures under the CFP, for limiting the impact of fishing on the marine environment, for innovation linked to the conservation of marine biological resources and for protecting and restoring marine biodiversity and ecosystems, in the context of sustainable fisheries activities. The EESC agrees with these points and draws particular attention to the recognition of the important role that fishermen themselves can play in relation to the cleanness and conservation of the marine environment.

3.4.1.23   Mitigation of climate change. To mitigate the effects of climate change, the EMFF may support investments on board aimed at reducing the emission of pollutants or greenhouse gases, as well as energy efficiency audits and programmes. In return, the Commission proposes to end support for the replacement or modernisation of engines.

Mitigation of climate change.

3.4.1.24   The EESC considers that support for the replacement or modernisation of engines should be allowed if it does not increase the capacity of the vessels. Doing otherwise could endanger the safety of vessels and crew, would not lead to energy efficiency improvements and would not help to reduce contamination.

3.4.1.25   Product quality and use of unwanted catches. The EMFF may support investments on board to improve the quality of the fish caught and to improve the use of unwanted catches. Such support cannot be given more than once per programming period, per vessel or per beneficiary. Support can also be granted to fishing ports, landing sites and shelters to improve energy efficiency, contribute to environmental protection or improve safety and working conditions, as well as for the construction or modernisation of shelters to improve the safety of fishermen.

Product quality and use of unwanted catches.

3.4.1.26   The EESC considers that the measures for fishing ports, landing sites and shelters are appropriate, but should be extended to include support for investments for storage and auctioning of fisheries products, refuelling, supplies to vessels (water, ice, electricity, etc.) and computerised management of markets.

3.4.1.27   Inland fishing. The EMFF may support vessels which operate in inland waters, in order to reduce the impact of freshwater fishing on the environment, increase energy efficiency, increase the quality of fisheries, or improve safety or working conditions. It will also support diversification by inland fishermen, as well as their involvement in the management, restoration and monitoring of NATURA 2000 areas. The EESC agrees with the proposed measures although, as it stated in its opinion on the reform of the CFP, the Commission should introduce assistance measures to prevent the interaction of freshwater aquaculture and agriculture with freshwater fishing.

Inland fishing.

3.4.1.28   In the northernmost regions of the EU, winter fishing under the ice cover takes place in lakes as well as coastal areas over a season that can last as long as six months. Snowmobiles and specific equipment for winter fishing should be eligible for support from the EMFF.

3.4.2   Sustainable development of aquaculture

Sustainable development of aquaculture

3.4.2.1   The support provided under this heading will contribute to the achievement of the following EU priorities:

| — | fostering innovative, competitive and knowledge-based aquaculture; |
| --- | --- |

—

fostering innovative, competitive and knowledge-based aquaculture;

| — | promoting sustainable and resource-efficient aquaculture. |
| --- | --- |

—

promoting sustainable and resource-efficient aquaculture.

3.4.2.2   The EESC considers that granting support to aquaculture enterprises is appropriate regardless of their size (whether micro enterprises, SMEs or large enterprises), but it believes that the reduction for large aquaculture enterprises in Annex I is unwarranted.

3.4.2.3   The proposal provides for support for innovation; for investments in offshore and non-food aquaculture, in order to foster forms of aquaculture with high growth potential; to carry out the processing, marketing and direct sale of production; to set up management, relief and advisory services for aquaculture farms; and to promote human capital and networking.

3.4.2.4   The EESC supports these proposals. However, in relation to the last of these points and in order to improve the activities carried out by the workforce of aquaculture enterprises, the EESC proposes creating a specific support measure to improve health and safety conditions for workers on aquaculture farms, whether at sea or in the form of jobs on board ancillary aquaculture vessels, and including farms on land.

3.4.2.5   The EESC proposes that the limitation on support to large enterprises for lifelong learning, dissemination of knowledge and innovative practices etc. should be removed, since the importance of all of these activities justifies the absence of restrictions based on the size of the enterprise. However, it considers that priority should be given to small and medium-sized enterprises.

3.4.2.6   To increase the potential of aquaculture sites, the EMFF may grant aid to identify and map the most suitable areas, to improve infrastructure and to prevent serious damage to aquaculture.

3.4.2.7   The EESC considers that it is necessary to grant support to investments aimed at improving infrastructure at the base ports for marine agriculture and at landing sites, as well as for investments in facilities for waste and litter collection.

3.4.2.8   Encouraging new aquaculture enterprises. The EMFF may grant support for the setting up of aquaculture micro-enterprises by new aquaculture farmers, provided that they enter the sector with adequate skills and competence, that they are setting up an aquaculture micro-enterprise for the first time as the head of that enterprise and that they submit a business plan concerning the development of their aquaculture activities.

3.4.2.9   The EESC proposes that this type of support should be linked to net job creation by any aquaculture enterprise, regardless of whether or not it is newly created.

3.4.2.10   In order to promote aquaculture with a high level of environmental protection, the EMFF may grant support to cover certain investments. The EESC believes that, as with fisheries, it is necessary to include support for investments to reduce emissions of pollutants or greenhouse gases, as well as for energy efficiency audits and programmes.

3.4.2.11   Support can also be granted for conversion to eco-management and audit schemes and organic aquaculture, for the provision of environmental services by the aquaculture sector and for public health, animal health and animal welfare measures.

3.4.2.12   The EESC believes that animal health is critical for the sustainability of the aquaculture sector and therefore considers it necessary to increase EMFF support in this area. It therefore proposes setting up and developing health protection groups in aquaculture, on the same lines as has been successfully done in terrestrial livestock farming.

3.4.2.13   The proposal provides for the possibility of granting support for stock insurance, covering certain losses. The EESC considers that this should include losses arising from the collection and destruction of animals which have died on the farm from natural causes, accidents etc., as well as for slaughter and burial on the farm itself for animal health reasons, subject to prior administrative authorisation.

3.4.3   Sustainable development of fisheries areas

Sustainable development of fisheries areas

3.4.3.1   The support provided under this heading will contribute to achieving the EU priority of fostering balanced and inclusive territorial development of fisheries areas, thus promoting an increase in employment and territorial cohesion. This support can be granted to fisheries areas at below NUTS 3 level (2).

2

3.4.3.2   The EESC considers it discriminatory that this support is ruled out for coastal municipalities with more than 100 000 inhabitants, since fleets are based in fishing ports regardless of the population of those municipalities.

3.4.3.3   The Commission proposes that fisheries local action groups (FLAGs) should be updated and strengthened, reflecting the socioeconomic composition of their areas with balanced representation of the private sector, public sector and civil society, to propose integrated local development strategies.

3.4.3.4   The EESC considers that if the outcome of the work done so far by these groups – whose goal is to reinvigorate coastal areas – is to be objectively evaluated, it is vital for the Commission to carry out such evaluations before the relevant support can be integrated into the new funds.

3.4.4   Marketing and processing

Marketing and processing

3.4.4.1   The Commission proposes certain measures connected to marketing and processing, particularly for the preparation and implementation of production and marketing plans by producer organisations.

3.4.4.2   Although the EESC supports this measure, which will help with the sustainability of stocks and the competitiveness of businesses, it also believes that it is necessary to add some sort of flexibility mechanism to the plans, since in our globalised market the conditions of supply and demand can change at any time.

3.4.4.3   The proposal provides for granting support to compensate producer organisations which store fisheries products listed in Annex II of the COM (common organisation of markets) regulation. This support will be progressively reduced and will end completely in 2019.

3.4.4.4   The EESC does not agree that such support should be progressively reduced and eliminated altogether in 2019, given its particularly important contribution to stabilising markets. The Committee therefore considers that it should be kept in place until 2020.

3.4.4.5   The Committee has noted that the compensatory allowances mechanism for tuna for processing, which has so far been provided for under the COM, has disappeared.

3.4.4.6   That mechanism was established in return for the complete and permanent suspension of Common Customs Tariff duties on whole tuna for processing from third countries. The Committee considers that the removal of the mechanism would leave EU production at a clear disadvantage, since it would have to compete with certain products whose hygiene and health requirements fall below those of the EU. The EESC therefore calls for the compensatory allowances mechanism to be maintained.

3.4.4.7   The EESC considers that the support for private storage that is envisaged by the proposal will not compensate tuna producers, nor ensure them a fair income, in the face of a fall in tuna prices in the EU market (which is what the system of compensatory allowances was set up to do).

3.4.4.8   The proposal provides that certain support can be granted for marketing measures.

3.4.4.9   The EESC considers that such support must be extended to the design and launch of communication campaigns aimed at improving the image of fishing and aquaculture. The EESC also proposes that new sections should be added, for example on organisation and participation in fairs and commercial events in the sector, activities to improve enterprises' access to innovation, and training on state of the art techniques and new or improved processes or organisation systems.

3.4.4.10   In view of the important role that inter-branch organisations play in promoting and improving the marketing of products, the Committee considers that support should be given not only for setting up such organisations but also to contribute to their operation, so that they can carry out the duties entrusted to them.

3.4.4.11   The EMFF may also support certain investments in the processing of products. The Committee considers that the following specific objectives should be added: improving the competitiveness of the processing industry; raising public health requirements and product quality; reducing the negative impact on the environment and improving energy efficiency; making better use of little-used species, by-products and waste; development, production and marketing of new products and use of new technologies and innovative production methods; opening up and developing markets; and improving the working conditions and training of workers.

3.4.5   Outermost areas

Outermost areas

3.4.5.1   The proposal provides for compensation for the additional costs faced by fisheries and aquaculture products from the outermost regions of the Azores, Madeira, the Canary Islands, French Guiana and Réunion. The Committee considers that the Commission should provide a detailed explanation of the calculations behind the breakdown of the budget for each of the outermost regions and that it should also explain why the budget for the Canary Islands has been reduced while that for the other regions has been increased.

3.4.6   Accompanying measures for the CFP

Accompanying measures for the CFP

3.4.6.1   The EMFF may grant support for the implementation of an EU control, inspection and enforcement system and for the collection, management and use of primary biological, technical, environmental and socioeconomic data in accordance with the CFP Regulation. The EESC considers that such support is essential to ensure control and the collection of data in the whole EU, including data relating to labour inspections.

3.4.6.2   The proposal provides that many of the measures mentioned above may only be granted once per programming period and per fishing vessel. This restriction should be removed.

3.4.6.3   The EESC considers that a "crisis fund" should be set up. Such a fund would make it possible to respond to one-off requirements in the sector, enabling flexible emergency measures to be launched in certain exceptional circumstances, such as, for example, reassignment of fleets due to the suspension or non-renewal of fisheries agreements, sudden increases in operating costs, natural disasters etc.

3.5   Measures financed under direct management

Measures financed under direct management

3.5.1   Integrated Maritime Policy

Integrated Maritime Policy

3.5.1.1   The proposal provides for a series of support measures to contribute to the development and implementation of the EU's IMP, in order to foster integrated governance of maritime and coastal affairs, contribute to the development of cross-sectoral initiatives that are mutually beneficial to different maritime sectors and sectoral policies, support sustainable economic growth, employment, innovation and new technologies within emerging and prospective maritime sectors in coastal regions, and promote the protection of the marine environment, in particular its biodiversity and marine protected areas, as well as sustainable exploitation of marine and coastal stocks. The Committee welcomes the proposed measures.

3.5.1.2   A series of support measures are also provided to facilitate the implementation of the CFP and the IMP, particularly in relation to scientific advice under the CFP, specific control and enforcement measures under the CFP, voluntary contributions to international organisations, Advisory Councils, market intelligence and communication activities. The Committee considers that this support is appropriate.

3.5.1.3   The Committee recognises the important role played by Regional Advisory Councils as bodies which can advise the Commission in relation to various issues connected with the CFP and in which all relevant stakeholders participate. The Committee therefore considers that this support needs to be sufficient to ensure that they function properly, in such a way as to ensure the participation of all members, including scientists.

3.5.1.4   The EESC believes that the EMFF should fund the future Sector Council on Employment and Skills, which is in line with the objectives of the CFP reform, the Europe 2020 strategy and the communication on "New skills for new jobs" (3). It should also continue to finance the EU Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture; in the event that this committee should eventually be abolished, the EESC calls for a consultative committee on the industry, the market and general affairs to be set up.

3

3.5.1.5   As far as market intelligence is considered, the Committee considers any aid for the dissemination and development of market intelligence on the markets for fisheries and aquaculture products to be a good thing.

3.5.2   Technical assistance

Technical assistance

3.5.2.1   The proposal provides that aid can be granted, at the initiative of the Commission, for the implementation of sustainable fisheries agreements and for EU participation in regional fisheries management organisations, and for setting up a European network of FLAGs. The Committee considers such support to be essential.

3.6   Implementation

Implementation

3.6.1   Lastly, the proposal goes into a great deal of detail on the implementation of the support schemes under both shared and direct management, providing for implementation mechanisms, Member States and Commission management and control systems, and monitoring, evaluation, information and communication.

3.6.2   The EESC approves of the implementation systems under both shared and direct management, since they reflect the Commission's experience with all the formalities necessary for the launch, implementation, monitoring and conclusion of the support programmes provided for under the CFP and the IMP.

Brussels, 11 July 2012.

The President of the European Economic and Social Committee

Staffan NILSSON

---

(1)  Opinion CESE (OJ C 181, 21.6.2012, pp. 183-195).

1

(2)  See Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 on the establishment of a common classification of territorial units for statistics (NUTS) (OJ L 154, 21.6.2003, p. 1).

2

(3)  See the EESC opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: New Skills for New Jobs –Anticipating and matching labour market and skills needs, COM(2008) 868 final (OJ C 128, 18.5.2010, p. 74).

3

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: New Skills for New Jobs –Anticipating and matching labour market and skills needs

---