No C 84/12 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 8. 4. 78 
simulate  conditions  by means  of track  tests,  mainly 
because  of the influence  of climatic  conditions.  It will 
therefore  be necessary  to take  a fresh  look  at the 
testing  methods,  particularly  those  used  for 
non-standard  tractors. 4. The  Committee  draws  the  Commission's 
attention  to comments  of a technical  nature  on the 
Annexes  to the proposal  for a Directive  which  are to 
be found  in the Report  of the  Section  for Industry, 
Commerce,  Crafts  and Services. 
Done  at Brussels,  1 February  1978. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Basil  de FERRANTI 
Opinion  on the  proposal  for  a Council  Directive  on certain  immediate  measures  to 
adjust  capacity  in the fisheries  sector 
The text  referred  to the  Committee  has  been  published  in Official  Journal  of the 
European  Communities  No  C 278 of 18 November  1977,  page  15. 
On 16 November  1977,  the  Council  referred  the  abovementioned  proposal  to the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  in accordance  with  Articles  43 and  47 of the Treaty 
establishing  the European  Economic  Community. 
B. OPINION  OF  THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
The Economic  and  Social  Committee  prepared  its opinion  on the above  matter  at its 
155th  plenary  session  held  in Brussels  on 1 and 2 February  1978. 
The full  text  of the opinion  is as follows: A. LEGAL  BASIS  FOR  THE  OPINION 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, Having  regard  to the  oral  report  made  by  the 
rapporteur,  Mr Wick, 
Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the 
European  Economic  Community,  and  in particular 
Articles  43 and  47 thereof, Having  regard  to the opinion  issued  by the Section 
for Agriculture  at its meeting  on 19 January  1978, 
Having  regard  to the request  made  by the Council  of 
the European  Communities  on 16 November  1977  for 
an opinion, Having  regard  to the discussions  at its 155th  plenary 
session  held  on 1 and  2 February  1978  (meeting  of 
2 February  1978), 
Having  regard  to the decision  taken  by its Bureau  on 
22 November  1977  instructing  the Section  for Agricul-
ture to draw  up an opinion  on the matter, HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION 
Having  regard  to the urgency  procedure  provided  for 
in Articles  46 and  47 of the Rules  of Procedure, with  no votes  against  and  four  abstentions: 
8. 4.78 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 84/13 
The Committee  approves  the proposal  subject  to the 
comments  set out below. 
1. Preliminary  observations 
1.1. The  Committee  regrets  that  the  Council  of 
Ministers  has  been  unable  to adopt  a number  of 
important  and  necessary  measures  in the  fisheries 
sector.  In particular  no action  has  been  taken  so far 
by the Community  authorities  on the Regulation  on 
small-scale  fishing  operations  and  the Regulation  on 
the terms  under  which  national  aid is to be granted 
as part  of the  common  structural  policy  for  the 
maritime  fishing  industry. 
2. General  comments 
2.1. The  Commission  proposes  that  a Directive  be 
adopted  providing  for financial  aid for the purpose  of 
adapting  production  capacity  to the new  catch  quotas 
and adapting  the  processing  sector  engaged  in 
production  for  purposes  other  than  human 
consumption  to the  new  supply  situation.  The 
Directive  also  makes  provision  for action  to develop 
markets  for  species  that  are  little  known  to the 
consumer. 
The proposed  Directive  is not intended  to establish  a 
complete  structural  policy  in the fisheries  sector. 
The proposed  measures  should,  however,  enable  a 
start  to be  made  in the  near  future  with  the 
adjustment  of production  and  processing  capacity  to 
the new  situation  created  by the extension  of fishing 
zones  to 200  miles. 
2.2. The  Committee  welcomes  the  Commission's 
proposal,  despite  its imperfections  and  despite  the 
fact that  changes  are called  for,  some  of which  are 
mentioned  below.  A Directive  of this  kind  has 
become  absolutely  necessary. 
The Community's  fisheries  regime  must  include 
arrangements  for  the  rational  management  of fish 
stocks  and  this  must  inevitably  imply  a general 
reduction  in the level  of fishing. 
2.3. Provided  some  changes  are  made,  the  docu-
ment  can be said  to be well  balanced,  in that  it would 
enable  the various  Member  States  to take  whatever 
action  is most  in keeping  with  their  socio-economic 
situation  and  the structure  of their  fishing  fleets.  The 
proposal  does  not give  priority  to any  one  particular 
kind  of action. 2.4. As  the proposal  takes  the form  of a Directive 
rather  than  a Regulation,  it will  be necessary  to make 
sure that  the  desired  aims  are  achieved  in all the 
Member  States.  Special  attention  will  have  to be paid 
to ensuring  that  those  Member  States  which  are 
prompt  in implementing  the proposed  measures  do 
not suffer  as a result  of any  tardiness  of the part  of 
other  Member  States. 
2.5. The  Commission's  proposed  measures 
concerning  quotas  in Community  waters  and  the 
establishment  of fishing  zones  off non-EEC  countries 
will directly  affect  self-employed  fishermen  and 
workers. 
As has been  pointed  out  previously,  the measures  to 
adjust  capacity  in the fisheries  sector  will  have  serious 
repercussions  on employment  in this  sector.  The 
Committee  attaches  the  greatest  importance  to the 
way in which  this  problem  is solved. 
The Committee  notes^that,  unlike  the  measures  to 
adjust  production  capacity  set out  in Article  1, the 
measures  to aid  workers  in the fisheries  sector  will 
not be mandatory. 
2.6. The  Committee  would  draw  the attention  of 
the Commission  and  the  Council  to the  fact  that  a 
sizeable  proportion  of the  Member  States'  fishing 
fleets  is dependent  for its livelihood  on the possibility 
of operating  in the fishing  grounds  of a large  number 
of non-EEC  countries.  The  Committee  urges  the 
Commission  to conclude  adequate  Fishing  Agreements 
with  these  countries  as soon  as possible. 
The draft  Directive  concerns  not  only  the  fishing 
industry  but  also  the  fish-processing  industry.  The 
Commission,  however,  only  takes  into  account  the 
need  for assistance  to be granted  to the fish-processing 
industry  whose  products  are not intended  for human 
consumption.  The  Committee  would  draw  attention 
to the fact  that  plants  which  process  fish  for human 
consumption  will  also  be confronted  with  problems 
of adjustment,  as regards  both  the new  species  of fish 
and the  more  seasonal  nature  of fishing  within  the 
200 mile  limit.  It will  be necessary  to develop  new 
products  and  new  systems  of purchasing  storage  and 
processing. 
The Committee  considers  that  these  plants  should  be 
covered  by the  immediate  measures  set out  in the 
proposal. 
2.7. The  Committee  would  point  out  that  in 
earlier  opinions  on  the  fisheries  sector  it drew 
attention  to the  advisability  of developing  fish 
farming  in the Community. 
No C 84/14 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities 8. 4. 78 
In addition  to the  economic  advantages  of this  new 
form  of fish  production,  particularly  as regards  the 
more  sought-after  species  of fish,  fish  farming  could 
also help,  to some  extent,  to maintain  employment  in 
certain  areas  of the  Community  which  are  almost 
wholly  dependent  upon  fishing. 
3. Specific  comments 
Article  1 
The Committee  would  once  again  draw  attention  to 
the problem  of the  fish-processing  industry  which 
produces  food  for  human  consumption.  This  point 
has already  been  raised  in 2.6. 
Article  2 
The Commission  proposes  that  the  financial  aid 
specified  in Article  1 should  be restricted  to vessels 
'of a length  between  perpendiculars  greater  than  24 
metres'.  The  Commission  feels  that  smaller  vessels  (in 
particular  those  between  12 and  24 metres  in length) 
will not  normally  have  to reduce  their  fishing 
activity. 
The Commission  even  believes  that  the  proposed 
curtailment  of the operations  of vessels  over  24 metres 
long  may  benefit  smaller  craft,  since  the  temporary 
withdrawal  of larger  vessels  would  give  smaller  craft 
an opportunity  to expand  their  fishing  activity. 
Under  the  Commission's  proposal  the  sole  criterion 
for entitlement  to aid is to be the length  of the vessel 
concerned.  The  Committee  would  point  out  that  this 
could  lead  to different  interpretations,  as  some 
Member  States  still  classify  vessels  according  to 
tonnage  rather  than  length.  The  relationship  between 
a vessel's  length  and  its gross  registered  tonnage  can 
also vary  very  considerably,  given  the different  types 
of vessel  in use in the various  Member  States. 
The Committee  notes  that  the  Commission  is aware 
of this  problem  and  intends  to amend  the  relevant 
clause  and  to draw  up  a comparative  table  of 
length/gross  register  tonnage  ratios  for the individual 
Member  States. 
The Committee  is, however,  concerned  about  the fact 
that the Commission  has  failed  to propose  immediate 
specific  measures  in respect  of fishing  vessels  under 
24 metres.  It does  not share  the Commission's  point  of 
view  as regards  the  beneficial  effect  of the  Directive 
on smaller  vessels. 
The Committee  is not  convinced  that  only  vessels 
over  24 metres  will  be affected  by the proposed  catch 
quotas  for  1978.  It would  therefore  recommend  that vessels  between  12 and  24 metres  should  qualify  for 
aid on the  lines  of that  proposed  in respect  of larger 
vessels. 
Article  3 (a) 
The Committee  would  stress  that  the  redeployment 
of fishing  operations  must  be  directed  mainly 
towards  opening  up new  possibilities  in the  fishing 
sector,  as this  should  make  it possible  to maintain 
employment  in the industry. 
Article  3 (c) 
If successful  information  campaigns  are  to  be 
mounted  to  encourage  the  consumption  of 
lesser-known  species  of fish,  it may  well  be necessary, 
first of all,  to carry  out  development  work  on the 
processing  of these  species  and  the  creation  of new 
products.  Such  development  work  should  also  qualify 
for aid. 
Article  4 
It is clear  from  the  proposals  that  the  search  for 
non-exploited  species  of fish  and  for  new  fishing 
grounds  means  that  fishing  operations  will  be 
transferred  to the  so far  little-exploited  waters  of 
certain  non-EEC  countries  and  Antarctic. 
Article  5 
The Committee  fears  that  the  Iaying-up  premium  of 
8 % of the  construction  cost  of the  vessel  will  in all 
probability  prove  to be insufficient  to enable  the 
proposed  aim  to  be  achieved.  In  addition  to 
depreciation,  the  premium  should  also  cover  the 
continued  payment  of the crew's  wages. 
The time  limit  of 1 January  1969  specified  in Article  5 
(5) will  have  to be dropped  if the  measure  is to be 
successful.  The  Commission  should  either  set a time 
limit  of 10 years  or propose  a flexible  system. 
The 90 day  limit  will  pose  considerable  problems  of 
application  in the case  of small  fishing  companies  and 
individual  fishermen. 
Article  7 
The term  'assignment'  used  in Article  7 (1) (b) will 
have  to be made  more  explicit  by indicating  that  it 
can cover  not  only  sale  of the  vessel,  but  also  letting 
on charter  and  use  by the owner. 
The Committee  wonders  whether  it is fair  to offer 
the same  premium  (300  units  of account  per  gross 
register  ton)  in the  case  of vessels  sold  for  breaking 
and vessels  sold  to non-EEC  countries. 
8.4.78 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities No C 84/15 
Article  8 
Once  again  the  Committee  urges  that  account  be 
taken  of the  needs  of the  fish-processing  industry 
which  produces  food  for human  consumption. 
Article  11 
The Committee  is strongly  in favour  of the proposed 
publicity  measures,  particularly  as  regards 
lesser-known  species  of fish  and  species  which  are 
unknown  to consumers. 
Article  13 
The measures  provided  for  under  this  Article  are 
vital. 
In the  Committee's  view,  however,  the  proposed 
measures  should  not  be designed  exclusively  to aid 
fishermen  aged  over  50  years  affected  by  the 
scrapping  of fishing  vessels,  but should  cover  also  the 
retraining  of fishermen  under  50 years  of age. 
Done  at Brussels,  2 February  1978. As has already  been  pointed  out  in the Committee's 
general  comments,  the  measures  designed  to 
safeguard  employment  should  be of an obligatory 
nature. 
Article  17 (4) 
The Committee  wonders  whether  it would  not  be 
appropriate  to make  aid  available  also  for  parties 
whose  vessels  are  almost  complete  and  who  are 
financially  committed  in respect  of such  vessels,  even 
though  launching  did not take  place  before  1 January 
1978. 
Article  17 (S) 
The Committee  would  recommend  that,  when  the 
Council  adopts  the general  conditions  for a financial 
contribution  by  the  Community,  it should  take 
socio-economic  conditions  into  account  in 
determining  the  level  of Community  aid,  following 
the practice  applied  in certain  cases  in the granting  of 
aid from  the Social  Fund  and  the EAGGF. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Basil  de FERRANTI 
ANNEX 
to the opinion  of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
The following  text  from  the  Section's  opinion  was  rejected  following  the  adoption  of an 
amendment  during  the discussions. 
Paragraph  2.2,  last  line 
'... and  this  must  inevitably  imply  a reduction  in the level  of fishing.' 
Voting 
For: large  majority,  against:  4, abstentions:  7.