3.2.1

In response to the discussion points set out in the Green Paper aimed at further improving the management of EU fisheries, the EESC would like to make the following general points: 3.2.1.1 With a view to making best use of resources, the EESC supports the idea of bringing the management of fisheries resources into line with the MSY objective by 2015, but thereafter using a more conservative management objective that would ensure less risk of stock collapse and more profitable fisheries. This also applies to mixed fisheries, with more flexible measures that would avoid any untoward economic or social effects. The Committee also supports the ongoing process of eliminating discards completely. 3.2.1.2 The EESC would caution against any hasty revision of the TAC and quota system for managing resources. Despite its imperfections, this system would not be easy to replace. Neither of the alternatives, i.e. giving priority to management based either on monitoring the fishing effort or on introducing fishing rights, could be brought in without a rigorous prior socio-economic impact study, demonstrating the grounds for any changes to the fundamental structure of resource management. 3.2.1.3 In addition, the Committee wishes to point out that, were the reduction in fishing effort to lead to the introduction of restrictions on the number of fishing days allowed, this would have unacceptable drawbacks, in so far as it would expose workers to occasional periods of overwork likely to lead to exhaustion and thereby increase the risk of accidents. 3.2.1.4 On the other hand, the EESC would be reticent about the allocation of fishing rights, in case commercial use was made of them, since fishing resources belong to society as a whole. The transfer of fishing rights, on a yearly or multiannual basis, could be an option, provided that the principle of quota management by the public authorities was not in question. The system would be tailored to local circumstances, so that access to resources could be decided using environmental and social criteria. The transfer of individual or collective fishing rights could not be permanent or traded speculatively, however. 3.2.1.5 Catches that exceed the quotas could be deducted from the following year's quotas, and the proceeds from selling these products should go to fishermen willing to give up a proportion of their quotas to ensure that the excess fish is accounted for. 3.2.1.6 The EESC believes that relative stability should remain one of the cornerstones of the CFP. However, the Committee notes that this principle needs to be reviewed to take account of developments since it was first established in 1983. Any changes to the system should be negotiated between Member States. Preferential access could be awarded to regional and local communities, based on social and environmental criteria. 3.2.1.7 The process of integrating the CFP into the Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP) should be encouraged. The EESC suggests that the catching and aquaculture sectors should have a legal right to be consulted in the planning process for marine areas, and that the future CFP should establish mechanisms for compensating fishing businesses and their employees in danger of missing out on fishing opportunities. In particular, this would mean taking proactive steps to promote vocational training – even the creation of integrated training pathways – and a holistic approach to learning about the marine environment, with a view to creating sustainable jobs and encouraging retraining for other occupations in maritime clusters. 3.2.1.8 More funds should be earmarked for research to improve knowledge of the marine environment; fishermen's knowledge should be valued and recognised more. 3.2.1.9 The EESC notes that CFP objectives have not been reached in terms of financial support. Economic sustainability should continue to be an objective, provided that there is a thorough review of the way the market is organised. There is also a need to use public funds to support the transition of the EU fishing and processing industries towards sustainable fisheries, including dealing with the socio-economic consequences of the restructuring processes. Finally, the EESC agrees with the idea of establishing a link between access to Community funding and Member States meeting strategic objectives.