Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Common Fisheries Policy"

(2001/C 139/18)

On 13 July 2000 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 23(2) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an additional opinion on the "Common Fisheries Policy".

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 1 February 2001. The rapporteur was Mr Chagas.

At its 379th plenary session held on 28 February and 1 March 2001 (meeting of 1 March 2001), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion, by 57 votes to five, with one abstention.

1. Introduction

1.1. It is worth reiterating that the success of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) depends on a number of factors: the balance struck between resources and fishing effort; considerable transparency in devising and implementing policies; a certain amount of flexibility in applying measures; more effective monitoring and controls; effective involvement of interested parties; and finding solutions to the social problems associated with restructuring the sector and reducing capacity.

1.2. It must be remembered that the main aim of the CFP is to ensure the sustainability of the sector and boost the incomes of those employed in it; this will only become possible if measures are taken to secure the long-term future of fishing activities.

2. A rational and sustained policy for resource conservation and management

a) Given the current general state of fishery resources, faced with overfishing and the need to protect the most endangered species, the idea of conserving fishery resources in EU Member States' waters is no longer merely an objective; it has become an absolute priority. This priority should therefore be taken on board by all parties - Community institutions, Member States and the whole fisheries sector - as a starting point for stabilising fishing activities and placing them on a permanent footing and for ensuring the survival of an economic activity which is vital to numerous regions in the Community.

b) In referring to the poor state of fishery resources, the Committee would also mention the sizeable sector whose catch is not geared to human consumption: more than one third of worldwide catches (30 million tonnes of fish) is used for fishmeal. This sector is also responsible for the current general depletion of stocks. Although the impact of this activity within the EU varies and is relatively minor, as it is concentrated in one area, it nevertheless raises legitimate questions about its impact on other species in the region concerned. The Commission should give thought to this matter, and seek advice on it from the scientific community.

2.1. The twelve-mile limit

2.1.1. This is a core issue in the reform of the CFP and must be clarified in order to outline the legal framework and parameters which will mark out how the sector develops. As the Committee has pointed out(1), the derogation from free access to the (12-mile) coastal band was introduced in 1972 and has since been extended. It has been widely supported both by the Member States and the sector itself.

2.1.2. Application of the principle of equal access from 2002 would be highly disruptive, and would have unforeseeable consequences not only politically but also from an economic and social standpoint.

2.1.3. Given the disruption which the adoption of such a measure could inflict on the economic and social fabric of the EU's coastal regions, mainly in the regions most dependent on fisheries, the Committee advocates maintaining access restriction to the twelve-mile zone and making the current derogation permanent, as a protection zone for the traditional fishing activities of coastal populations.

2.2. The North Sea

Under the terms of the accession agreements, access restrictions are to be lifted on 31 December 2002. As access to most stocks is regulated, fishing vessels from Spain, Finland, Portugal and Sweden will then have access to the North Sea on an equal footing with the other EU Member States.

2.3. TACs and quotas

2.3.1. Despite its limitations, there is no credible alternative to the current system for managing fishing effort by setting total allowable catches (TACs) which are then distributed between Member States in the form of quotas.

2.3.2. The Committee confirms its stance on maintaining the TACs and quotas system, albeit with improvements, as a way of rounding off the policy for matching fishery capacities with the resources available. Compliance with the established TACs and quotas should be ensured.

2.3.3. In this context, the setting of TACs for several years at a time could provide more stable management of fishing effort, although - as is clear from the Commission's TACs and quota proposals for 2001 - a closer watch should be kept on the state of resources so as to avert the need for sharp cuts in TACs and their ensuing socio-economic consequences.

2.3.4. An accurate picture of the levels and development of stocks fished in Community waters is an essential part of any policy commitment to manage fishery resources.

2.3.5. The opinions of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) and the recommendations of international bodies can certainly benefit from adopting a highly rigorous scientific approach and taking into account the analysis of biological, economic and social aspects, since these constitute the basis for establishing the TACs. Conversely, STECF opinions will always be limited in scope if the Council introduces "improvements and adjustments" or other "considerations" aimed at altering the parameters.

2.3.6. Under these circumstances, the level of TACs will reflect concerns which are more political than scientific in nature.

2.3.7. The Committee disagrees with this way of proceeding. It feels that the resources allocated to research to improve knowledge in this area should be increased in line with the important role which research plays in ensuring the sustainability of Community fisheries.

2.3.8. Proper, rational resource management ought also to provide for measures which anticipate the possibility of fishing effort being redirected to fish species not subject to quotas, by restricting overfishing of such species.

2.4. Relative stability

2.4.1. The principle which ensures rational distribution of the available resources, aimed at securing a balanced exploitation of resources and stability in the fishing activities of each Member State, must be guaranteed.

2.4.2. The Committee reiterates the need to maintain this principle with any adaptations and adjustments which might be warranted in overall terms by changes in the situation since 1983.

2.5. Structural measures

2.5.1. The series of measures which make up structural policy do not seem to have been very successful, judging by the still manifest over-capacity.

2.5.2. Efforts should continue, without losing sight of the need to continue to renew and modernise the Community's fleet. There should be a firm commitment to achieving high-quality conditions for processing the raw material, improving the quality of life on board, and enhancing safety for crews. The concept of capacity should be redefined so that instead of only taking into account total fleet tonnage and engine power, a distinction can be drawn between an active capacity which generates fishing effort and a passive capacity which does not have any impact on this(2). Such a step would do much to improve safety and living conditions on board.

2.6. Multiannual guidance programmes (MAGPs)

2.6.1. Alongside TACs and quotas, MAGPs are part of a series of measures aimed at limiting the impact of overfishing and the risks of depleting the stocks of certain species. Steps to cut back fishing effort do not appear to have been very successful under the current programme, as can be inferred from the Commission's interim report(3). The main reason seems to be that actual capacity reduction under the current (fourth) MAGP has proved insufficient in some Member States. The most suitable ways should be found and an unambiguous reference framework devised for coherent measures which can be applied by everyone, so that the MAGP can become a truly effective management instrument. Provision must be made for the institutionalisation of genuinely deterrent sanctions for non-compliance.

2.6.2. No-one disputes the fact that resources are heavily fished and that this is likely to cause substantial losses for both shipowners and fishermen. Thus, socio-economic support measures are fully warranted in the event of fleet reductions or adjustments.

2.7. Technical measures

2.7.1. Despite regulatory difficulties in this field, there is still scope for progress if there is the political will and support for research geared to improving the selectivity of fishing tackle, for example.

2.7.2. Professionals in the sector, particularly long-standing ones, with in-depth knowledge of the sector and of fishing techniques, can be most helpful here.

2.8. Monitoring

2.8.1. As good as the institutional and legislative framework may be, one eye has to be kept on its practical application. The fact of having legal instruments to deal with fisheries problems will be of no use whatsoever if they are not actually used. The monitoring of regulated activities is the key to securing a suitable resource conservation policy. As long as no solution is found to the inconsistency of a system which has Community rules and a Community legal framework but leaves monitoring in the hands of national authorities, then the CFP will always have its limitations.

2.8.2. Indeed, despite efforts to date, there are still disparities between Member States in terms of both legislation and monitoring. The old problem of differences between Member States remains in relation not only to sanctions but also to their application.

2.8.3. The Commission's monitoring powers are still too limited to make Community rules more effective and to prevent discrimination in their application.

2.8.4. It is difficult to implement the monitoring policy without Community legislation to standardise sanctions and application criteria. The Committee thinks that the Commission should be given the means to remedy this situation.

2.9. Research and development

2.9.1. A resource management policy can only be effective if it is backed up by in-depth knowledge of the levels of and changes to the species fished in Community waters.

2.9.2. The global research and development policy should facilitate a rational, more efficient and more consistent harvesting of the sea's resources.

2.9.3. Resources allocated to research should therefore be increased to match the importance of research for the CFP's future, viability and sustainability.

2.10. Conservation of the marine environment

2.10.1. There is increasing awareness of the fact that the sea is vulnerable and that the quality of the marine environment is fundamental to the stability not only of fishing activities, but also of all other economic activities for which the sea is a key input.

2.10.2. Fisheries depend on biological conditions which are heavily influenced by environmental factors. As far as fishing is concerned, it is nowadays accepted that the quality of the environment has a direct impact on the capacity of living organisms to develop and on their suitability as a foodstuff for human consumption. Dissolved oxygen levels and the nutritive content of the water, the presence of chemical pollutants, high levels of radioactive waste residue and pathogenic micro-organisms, together with a number of practices inconducive to the environmental management of the coastline, all have an enormous influence on the ecosystem and water quality. Regrettably, there are frequent instances of the sea being treated as a dumping ground for rubbish and all kinds of pollutants. Even within the EU, people continue to adopt attitudes and practices which damage the marine environment and the species which live in it. The "polluter pays" principle should also be applied, and compensation should be paid to the injured parties.

2.10.3. Studies and research into the effects of pollution, climate and air quality on the marine environment will have to be more focused and substantial progress must be made towards integrated management of coastal zones, so that ecological and environmental best practice becomes a reality.

3. Economic sustainability

3.1. Economic and social cohesion

3.1.1. New approaches for boosting productivity, improving fishermen's living conditions and addressing other fisheries-related aspects will only succeed if steps are taken to redress the current imbalance between fishing capacity and resources.

3.1.2. For the regions concerned, the importance of fisheries and all ancillary activities, both upstream and downstream, extends far beyond their contribution to GDP.

3.1.3. Fishing constitutes a hub around which a whole series of communities revolve, and these play a key role in maintaining social balance and ensuring regional management; this role is difficult to quantify in economic terms.

3.1.4. Any revisions or proposed adjustments to the CFP should be based on detailed studies and analyses that take account of the impact on the sector in each Member State, and especially in those regions which are particularly dependent on fisheries. The worst affected regions should be helped to create new job opportunities or to restructure the sector.

3.1.5. The CFP must play a full part in the drive for economic and social cohesion, by preparing for the adjustments necessary to safeguard these cradles of employment, boost local production and living standards and guarantee supplies.

3.1.6. Coastal fishing, which is after all a more clearly community-oriented type of fishing guaranteeing the development of local economies and coastal areas and binding them together, should be given more support from the CFP.

3.2. Social policy

3.2.1. There should be an active social policy to back up the restructuring which is going to be necessary and the sacrifices which will have to be agreed to in all Member States in order to cut back fishing fleets in line with current levels of fishery resources.

3.2.2. Socio-economic measures will be needed to cushion the effects of withdrawing boats from service and fishermen leaving the sector, but steps will also have to be taken to prepare for new, younger fishermen who can replace those who have taken early retirement.

3.2.3. The Pesca programme was not a great practical success. Nonetheless, the Committee thinks it important to continue to have a specific instrument for social policy in the sector.

3.3. Health and safety

3.3.1. Working conditions

3.3.1.1. Only a small proportion of Community legislation on working conditions and the working environment applies to the fisheries sector, despite the fact that this is one of the most dangerous occupations in Europe.

3.3.1.2. The Committee thinks that minimum standards must be laid down for working and living conditions on fishing vessels. These standards should cover such factors as noise, vibrations, accommodation facilities and proper handling of fishing gear and equipment.

3.3.2. Construction and equipment of fishing vessels

The introduction of basic safety standards for all fishing vessels, and of minimum standards for safety equipment, will do much to reduce the number of accidents in the fishing industry. The Committee calls on all Member States to ratify the 1997 Torremolinos Protocol. The protocol should also be used as a basis for Community legislation applying to all vessels irrespective of their size.

3.3.3. Training and certification

3.3.3.1. The large number of accidents is partly due to the absence of minimum safety training standards for all fishing crew. Accidents could be avoided if crew were better trained in safety methods and procedures.

3.3.3.2. The Committee considers that safety training should be introduced in the EU as a matter of urgency. Ratification and implementation, by all Member States, of the 1995 STCW-F Convention(4) on minimum training standards should be a priority.

3.3.4. Recruitment and employment

3.3.4.1. In many regions which depend on fisheries and have a long tradition in the sector, it is becoming increasingly difficult to recruit young fishermen. The Committee considers that, aside from the question of pay, the sector would attract more young people if it was able to invest more in safety and compliance with international standards, and offer better living and working conditions on board. Support and incentives for modernising the fleet should help here.

3.3.4.2. The recent crisis sparked by the sharp increase in fuel prices also highlighted the need to rethink some of the remuneration systems in the fisheries sector, as these too can deter new entrants. In some widely used remuneration systems, increases in fuel costs are directly factored into pay, and this seriously affects the income of many fishermen.

3.3.4.3. The Committee calls on the social partners, especially at national level, to explore ways of resolving this problem and improving income stability. This would also make the sector more attractive to new entrants.

3.4. Common market organisation

3.4.1. The common market organisation is an instrument of the CFP and has to evolve in a way which is consistent with developments in other aspects of the policy, with a view to the integrated development of the whole sector.

3.4.2. As the Committee has repeatedly pointed out, this sector is fundamental to the economy and dynamism of a number of regions and local populations. For the sector to be viable, fisheries production must remain competitive and in good shape, bearing in mind that the nutritional qualities of fish are increasingly recommended for a balanced, healthy diet.

3.4.3. Greater attention should be paid to making market mechanisms more dynamic, and to investing in a quality-based policy and in factors which could create real value added for fisheries products.

3.4.4. The best conditions must be secured for supplies entering the Community market to plug the deficit in fisheries products, otherwise consumers and a major part of the fishing industry could seriously suffer.

3.4.5. Nevertheless, guaranteeing supplies by recourse to external sources and imports must not mean contravening Community legislation or international rules and good practices in this sector.

3.4.6. Products from third countries competing on the Community market do not always comply with legal provisions. The Committee reiterates the need for stricter monitoring throughout the Union of the application of these legal provisions regarding imports and fish landed from third country vessels or vessels flying flags of convenience.

3.4.7. The official introduction of labelling for fisheries products, indicative of good practice in fisheries and compliance with health and hygiene legislation, could offer consumers a valuable guarantee that a product is wholesome and was fished in keeping with the rules.

4. The international dimension

4.1. Fishing agreements with third countries

4.1.1. These agreements enable the EU to reduce its chronic deficit in marine products, whilst preserving the traditional fishing activities of Community fleets.

4.1.2. It has thus been generally possible to secure a balance in the single market and, to a certain extent, to obtain vital stability in fishermen's incomes.

4.1.3. This issue should nevertheless be carefully reviewed in the light of recent developments in renewing the agreements. Existing agreements, such as the one with Morocco, should be renewed, and new agreements should be concluded to flesh out the existing arrangements.

4.1.4. In any case, in terms of both employment and supplying the Community market, priority should be given wherever possible to the "first generation" agreements.

4.1.5. Moreover, the EU should ensure that agreements with third countries, particularly the "second generation" agreements, are favourable to the economic and social development of the fishermen and general population in these countries. The ILO Convention on basic trade union rights should form an integral part of all new agreements.

4.2. Illegal, unregulated and undeclared fishing

4.2.1. Several international organisations have been turning their attention to illegal, unregulated and undeclared fishing activities. This work has led to the approval of a number of international agreements and codes by the United Nations and the FAO.

4.2.2. The Committee considers that implementation of these agreements is a fundamental step towards proper management of fishery resources. It calls on the Commission to promote their adoption at all levels.

4.2.3. The Committee also thinks that inspection activity should extend to all aspects of safety and training as defined in the 1999 Torremolinos Protocol and the STWC-F Convention. Inspections should also cover compliance with Community legislation on resource management, and with international agreements and codes.

4.3. EU representation in regional fisheries organisations

4.3.1. The Commission should be given a greater role and more resources in this sphere.

4.3.2. Fishing sector professionals and the socio-economic partners could be allowed greater involvement in such representation, particularly by involving them in the preparations for these meetings.

4.4. EU enlargement

4.4.1. It is vitally important that the social partners be involved in the various aspects of negotiations, watching over the impact on all strands of the CFP and on resource exploitation and the labour market in particular.

4.4.2. In this sector, as in others, it is essential that the new Member States have fully adopted the Community acquis by the time of accession, guaranteeing the safety and quality standards of the EU.

5. Making the CFP more dynamic

Two further steps seem to be crucial for making all strands of the CFP more dynamic. The first is to boost the role and powers of the Commission, since it is best placed to promote the Union's interest. The second, as part of moves to enhance the role of local fishing communities, is to facilitate more decentralised and/or regionalised management of some aspects of the CFP.

6. Conclusions

6.1. A study of the CFP inevitably leads us to take stock of this policy, possibly to criticise its shortcomings and limitations and above all to trace out guidelines that will prepare it for the challenges it will have to face over the next few years.

6.2. In order to meet these challenges and remedy these shortcomings as effectively as possible, it will be necessary for everyone concerned - fisheries professionals, socio-economic partners, Member States and Community institutions - to use their powers of imagination and adaptability to find the best solutions for the problems which arise.

6.3. At all events, more information is needed about the situation in the sector, and the role of professionals and their organisations must be bolstered, since the success of any fisheries policy depends on shipowners' and fishermen's support for its objectives.

6.4. The prospects of success will be all the greater if the CFP helps full use to be made of Community resources by turning these to best advantage, making businesses viable and securing fair pay and up-to-date social conditions.

6.5. The Committee eagerly awaits the Commission's promised green paper containing ideas and suggestions for reforming the CFP. As in the past, the Committee will keep a close watch on this important debate for the sector's future, and will be sure to give its views on the subject.

Brussels, 1 March 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke Frerichs

(1) OJ C 268, 19.9.2000, pp. 39-41.

(2) An increase in the tonnage of a vessel does not necessarily mean an increase in its fishing capacity. Increases in tonnage which merely improve work and safety conditions, without affecting fishing capacity, should not be penalised.

(3) COM(2000) 272 final.

(4) International convention on standards of training, certification and watchkeeping for fishing vessel personnel (STCW-F), 1995.