COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 30.10.1995 
COM(95) 515 final 
95/0142 (CNS) 
Amended proposal for a 
COUNCIL DECISION 
on a Gbmnmnity financial contribution towaids certain expenditures inclined by 
the Member States in implementing the monitoring and control system applicable 
to the common fisheries policy 
(presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 189 a (2) 
of the EC-Treaty) 

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 
In June 1995, the Commission sent the Council a proposal for a Council Decision on a 
Community financial contribution towards certain expenditures incurred by the Member 
States in implementing the monitoring and control system applicable to the common 
fisheries policy1. 
On 13 October 1995, Parliament adopted a resolution delivering a favourable opinion on 
the proposal, with 11 amendments. 
To improve the etfectiveness of the Community's financial contribution, the Commission 
agreed to include the following amendments in its current proposal, which stipulate that: 
the control programme must be based on a risk analysis (amendment 3) 
the Community contribution must be significant (amendment 4) 
a financial commitment statement must be sent to the Commission by the Member 
States subsequent to an application for funding (amendment 8); 
the Commission is to set a time limit on the inquiries carried out by the Member 
States if it feels that the facilities are not being used for the purposes intended 
(amendment 11). 
These amendments clarify the initial proposal. 
The Commission did not agree to the other amendments because they could formally 
harm the content of the proposal. 
Adoption of Parliament's amendments by the Council will show that the political 
authorities unanimously agree on the need for a Community financial contribution to 
implement the monitoring and control system applicable to the common fisheries policy. 
COM(95) 243 final. 
> 
AMENDED PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL DECISION 
on a Community financial contribution towards certain expenditures incurred by 
the Member States in implementing the monitoring and control system applicable 
to the common fisheries policy 
The proposal is amended as follows: 
Recital 4a (new) 
Whereas the control programme must be based on a risk analysis of the areas most likely to be 
the subject of fraudulent or irregular activity; 
Récitai 6 
Whereas, in order to ensure supervision of all the catches and landings required if the common 
fisheries policy is to be really implemented. Member States must, in all maritime waters, monitor 
the activities of Community and third-country vessels, whereas a significant Community 
contribution towards certain inspection and monitoring expenditures incurred by the Member 
States is therefore required. 
Article 5, paragraph 1 
Member States wishing to benefit from a Community financial contribution towards the 
expenditure referred to in Article 2 shall forward to the Commission, on the first occasion 
before 15 November 1995 and subsequently before 31 May of each year, an application for 
funding for the following year containing the information specified in points 1, 2 and 3 of the 
Annex hereto. In order to take account of the constraints of the Member States' budgetary 
procedures, an annex updating the original application including a financial commitment 
statement, should be forwarded to the Commission before 30 September of each year. 
ir_ 
Article 10, third paragraph 
If the Commission considers that the facilities are not being used for the intended purpose or in 
accordance with the conditions set out in this Decision, it shall inform the Member State 
accordingly. The Member State shall then conduct an inquiry in which Commission officials 
sMI participate whenever possible. Within a time limit decided by the Commission, the Member 
State shall inform it of the progress and results of the inquiry and provide the Commission 
without delay with a copy of the report of the inquiry and the principal data used in preparing 
it. 
Ill 
FINANCIAL STATEMENT 
Heading R2-901: financial participation in inspection and monitoring operations 
1. Title of operation 
Financial participation in inspection and monitoring operations. 
2. Budget heading involved 
B2-901. 
3. Legal basis 
Article 43 of the Treaty and Council Decision 89/631/EEC. 
4. Description of operation 
4.1 General objective of operation 
The question of financial assistance for inspection operations carried out by the 
Member States was raised when the CFP was introduced. After a preliminary 
stage, assistance of an initial amount of ECU 22 million per annum was granted 
for the period from 1991 to 1995 on the basis of Decision 89/631/EEC, allowing 
the Commission to contribute up to 50% of expenditure on equipment incurred by 
the Member States. The Council undertook to decide on future provisions before 
30 June 1995 on the basis of a report drawn up by the Commission. In the mean 
time, the Council has taken other decisions which have a bearing on this question. 
When the new control Regulation was adopted, the Council said that the current 
system of inspections would now extend to new areas and required the 
implementation of additional measures not covered by the previous Decision 
(89/631/EEC)1. The range of operations for which a financial contribution could 
be made to the expenditure of the Member States would therefore have to be 
widened: 
OJ No L 364, 14.12.1989, p.64. 
- . Support for investment expenditure must continue to be a priority for 
financial assistance. The acquisition of heavy equipment is particularly 
difficult to finance from national budgets. Moreover, the investments made 
during the period 1989 to 1995 have not fully covered needs as shown by 
the assessments made by the Member States for the period 1996 to 2000. 
The working life of the equipment concerned ranges from several decades 
(seagoing equipment) to several years (motor vehicles, computer 
equipment, technical inspection equipment), airborne inspection equipment 
coming somewhere in between. The equipment with a short working life 
will have to be replaced within the next five years. Even amongst the 
seagoing equipment there will have to be additions, replacements and 
renewals. A greater priority will furthermore have to be given to 
investments in modern technology. Investment will have to cover not only 
the acquisition of equipment but also other types of expenditure, in 
particular on software. 
If rapid progress is to be made, integrated projects may need to be set up, 
the financing of which, like that of the satellite pilot projects, may require 
expenditure over and above the cost of investments. The setting-up of 
information networks depends on such integrated projects. The agreement 
reached in the Council in December 1994 on fisheries inspection west of 
longitude 4°W requires very rapid implementation and specific financial 
arrangements. 
The serious problem of training needs to be stressed. Support must be 
permitted for the Member States' initiatives in this area. Priority must also 
be given to assistance for exchanges between Member States and between 
Member States and the Commission, both for the initial training of 
officials responsible for control and subsequently to promote temporary 
detachments and exchanges. 
4.2 Duration of operation and provisions for renewal 
The operation forms part of a measure planned to cover the period 1996 to 2000. 
Any subsequent action will have to be decided upon before the end of the period. 
5. Classification of expenditure or revenue 
5.1 Non-compulsory expenditure. 
5.2 Differentiated appropriations. 
5.3 No revenue. 
6. Type of expenditure or revenue 
Subsidy for joint financing with other sources in the public and/or private sector 
Subsidy in the form of a reimbursement. Possibility of paying advances. 
7. Financial impact 
7.1 Method of calculating the total cost of the scheme 
The financial.contribution to investment expenditure is, inter alia, for the 
acquisition or modernization of: 
vessels, aircraft, and land vehicles employed in the monitoring and 
supervision of fishing activities; 
systems for the detection and recording of fishing activities (including 
equipment installed on fishing vessels); 
systems for recording, managing and transmitting inspection data, 
including computer applications and software. 
The contribution should be limited to 35%, as against 50% under the previous 
Decision. 
The financial contribution to expenditure intended to improve the application of 
the common fisheries policy as part of specific measures and projects not 
exceeding two years is limited to 50%. 
The same limit applies for expenditure on the training of national officials 
involved in inspection work, in particular in a Member State other than that in 
which they are employed. 
The Commission may, however, decide on higher rates, in particular: 
to permit the implementation of a coordinated measure by Member States 
and the Commission to overcome difficulties with inspection in an area of 
Community interest; 
to permit experimentation with and the introduction of new technology to 
improve the control of fishing and related activities; 
to permit an additional Community financial contribution not necessarily 
limited to expenditure on investments in favour of Ireland for the 
improvement of inspection work. 
7.2 Breakdown by type of measure 
Commitment appropriations in ECU million 
(at 1996 prices) 
Type of measure Total budget over five years 
1. Investment in equipment 140 
2. Operating expenditure (Ireland) 10 
3. Information networks 50 
4. Training and exchanges 5 
Total 205 
A more detailed breakdown of expenditure is not possible since it is up to the Member States to 
submit applications. Priority should nevertheless be given to new technology and to seagoing 
inspection equipment for those Member States which are still underequipped. 
7.3 Operating expenditure on studies, meetings of experts, etc. included in Part B 
The nature of this heading excludes operating expenditure of this type. 
7.4 Schedule to be completed for multiannual operations whose basic instrument contains 
"an amount deemed necessary" 
- period: 1996 to 2000 
Commitment appropriations / payment appropriations in ECU million 
(at 1996 prices) 
CA 
PA Indicative plan 
1996 
30 
10 1997 
45 
40 1998 
45 
40 1999 
45 
40 2000 
40 
40 2001 
35 Total 
205 
205 
8. Fraud-prevention measures; results of measures taken 
Under the scheme, the Commission must take a decision every year on the Community 
contribution to expenditure incurred by the Member States. A prior appraisal is made of 
the proposals submitted by the Member States and the Commission decides on the 
eligibility of applications on the basis of the documentation submitted. Each year, after 
an interdepartmental consultation, the selected proposals are examined by the 
Management Committee for Fisheries and Aquaculture. The Commission then decides on 
the eligibility of the applications and the size of the Community contribution. 
Payment of the Commission contribution is made on presentation of duly receipted 
invoices relating to eligible expenditure actually incurred and on presentation of the duly 
completed "public contract questionnaire". 
To enable the best use to be made of assistance granted from the Community budget, the 
Member States must ensure the effectiveness of all their arrangements for controls and 
penalties and complete transparency of all procedures. 
The importance of inspection missions carried out by officials on behalf of the 
Commission in the Member States should be stressed. They enable verification of the 
conformity of equipment with the administrative documents which the authorities of the 
Member States are obliged to submit to the Commission and the effective use of all the 
control facilities part-financed by the Community. Joint missions by the Authorizing 
Office and Financial Control are planned in the beneficiary Member States. 
The above provisions will enable the Commission to evaluate the actual application of the 
Decision which will succeed Decision 89/631/EEC. 
9. Elements of cost-effectiveness analysis 
Expenditure on fisheries enforcement must be set against the value of fish stocks and the 
damage caused by non-declaration (estimated at 10% of the value of the catches landed) 
and poor management (resulting in the loss of an estimated potential annual revenue of 
ECU 3 000 million). 
9.1 Specific and quantifiable objectives; target population 
Specific objectives: links with general objective 
To provide inspection authorities with efficient, modern equipment. 
To set up the mechanisms and computer networks necessary for the exchange 
of information relating to enforcement operations. 
To promote the training of those involved in enforcement operations. 
Target population: distinguish as applicable for each objective; indicate the end-
beneficiaies of the Community's financial contribution and the intermediaries 
involved. 
The direct targets are the national fisheries inspection authorities, but it is all those 
involved in fishing and related activities, often in regions where other economic 
activities are limited, who will benefit from efficient fisheries enforcement. It is 
not only the fisheries sector which is concerned - the ecological impact of poorly 
controlled fishing activities affects the whole of the Union as do the diplomatic 
consequences when there are inadequate controls in international or third country 
waters. 
9.2 Grounds for the operation 
Need for Community financial assistance 
If the inadequacies in fisheries inspection are to be overcome, the 
Commission must take political, regulatory and budgetary action. None of 
these areas can be neglected; they are in any case linked. Progress has 
been made on regulatory provisions, essentially at the initiative of the 
Commission. The corresponding political decisions have financial 
consequences which the Commission cannot ignore. 
The existence of the common fisheries policy and the interdependence of 
the fisheries sectors in the different Member States resulting from the 
movement of fish stocks makes fisheries control a Community problem. 
Cost-benefit analyses of fisheries control cannot be carried out at Member-
State level. Community financial solidarity is therefore essential and the 
budget heading permitting assistance towards expenditure incurred by the 
Member States is the expression and the instrument of that solidarity. 
Furthermore, the growth of that heading is the result of decisions already 
taken. 
Choice of ways and means 
* advantages over alternative measures (comparative advantages), 
* analysis of any simila" measures implemented at Community or 
national level. 
The budget required for effective control is small when set against the 
economic importance of fisheries, the losses from fraud and the waste 
arising from the current ineffectiveness of the CFP. It is also small 
compared with the amounts spent in this area by other countries. 
The Community budget for control will remain small compared with the 
expenditure of Member States, but that budget is the key to any progress. 
Reference has been made to the obligations arising from the decisions 
taken since 1991, particularly those taken by the Council. Assistance with 
the expenditure incurred by the Member States is essential. 
Community financial assistance accounts for 2.7% of the 1995 Community 
budget for fisheries and is less than 10% of the almost ECU 230 million 
per year spent by the Member States on inspection and monitoring. Of that 
amount, ECU 54 million is for investment, the rest to cover operating 
costs. That expenditure can be compared with the expenditure on controls 
by certain third countries. The annual estimated cost of enforcement 
operations carried out by Norway is NOK 500 million (ECU 60 million) 
and Canada spends CAD 85 million (ECU 58 million). The 1995 budget 
of the US Coast Guard for policing fishing activities is USD 500 million 
(ECU 390 million). Ihe Community budget for fisheries control is 
therefore modest when measured against a range of criteria. 
Main factors of uncertainty which could affect the specific results of the 
operation 
The most serious risk is that Member States will be unable to meet their 
commitments as regards part-financing and their other obligations 
(organization, personnel, penalties, etc.). 
In order for equipment towards which financial assistance has been granted 
to be used effectively, it must be used in a suitable context. Operating 
budgets, staffing, administrative organization and penalties are, without 
exception, the responsibility of the Member States. If the Member States 
do not adopt the appropriate measures, Community assistance will not 
produce the desired results. National authorities, although well-equipped, 
will not be fully effective. 
9.3 Monitoring and evaluation of the operation 
Evaluation of costs 
The major difficulty is that the authorities involved in fisheries enforcement are 
often also carrying out other duties. Costs have therefore to be allocated. The most 
obvious example is operations at sea. Where these involve the armed forces, and 
even where an operation is mainly concerned with fisheries enforcement, they 
could possibly include other activities (sea rescue, demonstrating a security 
presence). 
Whatever the difficulties, the expenditure required for effective controls is such 
that appropriate accounting measures must be taken to permit an effective 
breakdown of costs. 
Assessment of the results 
The initial indicators are a measure of the means employed: the number of days 
at sea of inspection vessels or flying hours of airplanes and helicopters, the area 
covered, the number of inspections carried out on land and at sea. These are 
indicators of activity and not a measure of effectiveness. They must nevertheless 
be part of any system for monitoring progress in enforcing the CFP. 
The second set of indicators is the number of suspected infringements detected 
and the penalties imposed. This information, together with the activity indicators 
referred to above, are vital for any appraisal of the thoroughness of inspections 
and penalties. They do not, however, give a complete picture, since the number 
of suspected infringements depends on both the effectiveness of inspections and 
the actual number of infringements. 
As regards resource-conservation policy, the actual effectiveness of the 
enforcement of the CFP should be assessed in the light of two criteria: limits on 
the rate of exploitation and protection of the smallest fish (juveniles). This means 
making a comparison between actual catches and authorized catches for each 
stock and calculating the proportion of undersized fish taken. Paradoxically, this 
is technically easier than proving individual infringements on a legally accepted 
basis. Procedures can be worked out for carrying out checks to verify the catches 
of a group of vessels. However statistically lax the procedures, it will be possible 
to assess the reliability of such estimates and to improve that reliability as 
required by adjusting the size of the samples taken. It will often be more difficult 
to acquire legally acceptable proof against a probable fraudster. On the one hand, 
the so-called "law of large numbers" facilitates the estimation of overall quantities, 
and, on the other, the burden of proof placed on the prosecution makes the 
penalization of individual infringements difficult. This duality must be an element 
in any consideration of the effectiveness of controls. It shows that it is easier than 
it is sometimes thought to measure the actual overall result of infringements. 
Scientists have regularly done this by comparing the official statistics with 
estimates based on research work. The unreliability of certain official statistics 
forces research institutes to devote a considerable part of their limited resources 
to non-scientific work. However, in terms of enforcement, the possibility of 
quantifying fraud permits us not only to have immediate composite indicators of 
efficiency but also to target inspections in the most important areas. It therefore 
becomes possible to rationalize inspections so that the means devoted to 
prevention and dissuasion and to the gathering of evidence necessary for the 
imposition of penalties are concentrated on the most serious problems. Such 
rationalization would not only permit a direct improvement in the effectiveness of 
controls but would also increase the credibility of controls with those working in 
the sector, who are often well-informed about large and recurrent cases of fraud. 
On an operational level, it would be useful if each Member State were able to 
verify certain catches on the basis of random checks. DG XTV should use the 
assessments made by international scientific bodies. 
(Items for internal information purposes) 
9.4 Consistency with financial programming 
Is the operation incorporated in the DG's financial programming for the 
relevant years? 
The operation is to be implemented under a Council Decision covering the 
period 1996 to 2000. 
To which broader objective defined in the DG's financial programming does 
the objective of the proposed operation correspond? 
The question of enforcement concerns the whole of the CFP. 
10 Administrative expenditure (paît A of the budget) 
This section of the financial statement must be sent to DGs XIX and IX; DG IX will 
then forward it to DG XIX with its opinion. 
10.1 Will the proposed operation involve an increase in the number of Commission 
staff? If so, how many? 
An increase is necessary to intensify anti-fraud controls, monitoring and 
assessment. The estimated increase is 0.5 A and 1 B grade staff. 
10.2 Indicate the amount of staff and administrative expenditure involved in the 
proposed operation. Explain the method of calculation. 
Mission expenses: ECU 15 000 
Staffing - 75% of the time of an A grade official 
- 150% of the time of a B grade official 
- 150% of the time of a C grade official 
- translation work (correspondence, proposed programmes, 
Commission Decision) 
In the medium term, after the transitional phase, the additional resources might 
no longer be required. 
10 
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(95) 515 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 03 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-95-549-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-94891-4 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg