Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Council Regulation aiming to promote the conversion of vessels and of fishermen that were, up to 1999, dependent on the fishing agreement with Morocco"

(2002/C 36/08)

On 7 September 2001 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 36 and 37 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Economic and Social Committee decided to appoint Mr Muñiz Guardado as rapporteur-general for its opinion.

At its 385th plenary session of 17 and 18 October 2001 (meeting of 18 October), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 49 votes to one with two abstentions.

The Committee endorses the Commission proposal subject to the following comments.

1. General comments

1.1. The document's explanatory memorandum sets out the reasons for the proposed regulation, but there is a lack of detailed discussion in the following areas:

- non-renewal of the agreement between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco, the EU's most important fisheries agreement, which entails the loss of "historic" fishing grounds for the Community fleet, with social as well as economic repercussions;

- it is considered vital for the draft regulation to include specific action on diversification in all the relevant regions. Although only three Spanish regions are mentioned as being specifically affected, others are affected indirectly: in Portugal, the Alentejo region (port of Sesimbra) and the Algarve region (port of Olhão) and in Spain, the autonomous region of Valencia and the city of Ceuta are also affected by the conversion in question;

- the Committee feels that specific intervention for the regions affected ought to have been included in a reconversion process on such a large scale and with such major consequences for both fishermen and vessel owners, as well as for all the sectors directly and indirectly affected (processors, shipyards etc.);

- the memorandum acknowledges that a significant number of fishermen will be unable to find places on other vessels; however, the aid earmarked for them under Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 (Article 12) has not been increased. This is discriminatory, since an increase has been proposed for vessel owners, which is not mentioned in the memorandum but is set out in the text of the draft regulation (Article 2);

- the special measures under consideration for the conversion of vessels and fishermen should serve as a model for other situations which may arise in the future in connection with EU fisheries agreements.

2. Specific comments

2.1. Introduction

2.1.1. The reasoning set out in the preamble is correct, putting the proposed regulation on a proper basis; however, in recital (8), the appropriations for early retirement or retraining for fishermen should have been increased given the special features of this conversion.

2.1.2. Similarly, recital (11) should have introduced a specific intervention for diversification in the coastal areas most affected by the non-renewal of the agreement.

2.1.3. The Economic and Social Committee urges the Commission to bear in mind the comments made on this question in the opinion under preparation on consultations regarding reform of the Common Fisheries Policy.

2.2. Title I - General

2.2.1. Article 1

Paragraph 1 lays down that a nine-month temporary cessation of activity is required to qualify for exceptional measures, but does not explain the reasons for setting this period. The Committee considers that the period discriminates against fishermen and vessel owners who re-start their activity (often on a temporary basis, and in a way which saves the EU and the Member States concerned money, since they have received no aid), when their situation may be no different from other fishermen and owners.

2.3. Title II - Derogation measures

2.3.1. Article 2

2.3.1.1. Article 2(1)(a)(i) establishes that the scales referred to in Article 7(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 are increased by 20 %. An increase of 30 or 40 % more would have been preferable, given the special circumstances of the conversion, and the fact that in paragraph 1(c)(ii) provision is made for a 30 % increase.

2.3.1.2. Paragraph 1(b)(iii) reduces the minimum age of the vessels referred to in Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 to five years, from the original 10 years. The reduction is a step in the right direction, but derogations could have been allowed to eliminate or further reduce the age period.

2.3.1.3. It must be borne in mind that vessels have been built recently for fishing in Moroccan waters, whereas these fishing grounds are now closed. Each Member State affected will have to relocate these units if no easy export outlet is found.

2.3.1.4. The second page of the proposal's explanatory memorandum contains a section under the heading "Derogation measures", the second paragraph of which states that it is necessary to facilitate permanent cessation in the form of transfers to third countries "whatever the age of the vessel"; at the end of the section of the memorandum entitled "Specific action", a percentage distribution of funds for each measure is proposed (not more than 28 % for the export of vessels).

2.3.1.5. This distribution must be flexible enough to enable the special case of exports of new vessels to be covered by the regulation; besides, as acknowledged in the explanatory memorandum, the age of the vessel is not an essential criterion of eligibility for the specific action.

2.3.1.6. Paragraph 1(c) provides that fishing gear may be replaced in the event of conversion to another fishing activity; this can be the subject of public aid, on increased scales, and without the requirement of a minimum period following modernisation work. This is to be welcomed.

2.4. Title III - Specific measure

2.4.1. Article 3

2.4.1.1. No increases for measures of a socio-economic nature are included in paragraph 2(b)(iii).

2.4.1.2. Paragraph 3 gives an approximate breakdown of 40 % for scrapping or permanent reassignment of vessels, 28 % for permanent transfer or modernisation of vessels, and 32 % for socio-economic measures.

2.4.1.3. Within the limits of what is currently possible, it must be ensured that the largest budget appropriation is directed to maintaining activity through vessel modernisation: for this purpose, it is important that the EU conclude new fishery agreements, seek new fishing-grounds etc.

2.4.2. Article 4

2.4.2.1. Paragraph 1(d) indicates that the provisions of Regulation 2792/1999 apply unchanged with regard to the maximum amount of the premium for a fisherman or a given vessel. However, fishermen should be entitled to an increase in the aid scales, in line with the increases granted to enterprises in Article 2(1)(a)(i) and (b)(i).

2.4.2.2. Paragraph 2 lays down that in the case of the granting of a premium for the creation of a joint enterprise, the applicant must provide proof that a bank guarantee for an amount equal to 40 % of the premium has been lodged. This does nothing to facilitate the creation of such enterprises since, quite apart from the financial cost involved in lodging a bank guarantee, it is not the most appropriate requirement for exceptional cases of this kind.

2.4.2.3. Paragraph 3 establishes that aid for modernisation is to remain subject to the provisions of Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999. The version of Article 9 contained in the draft regulation to amend Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 - on which the Committee is also drafting an opinion(1) - proposes that vessels of any segment in a Member State in which a single fleet segment fails to comply with the objectives should not receive aid.

2.4.2.4. Although unlikely, the possible failure of another segment to comply with the CFP objectives in the countries affected by the agreement with Morocco should have no impact on this specific Morocco-related measure.

2.4.2.5. The aid for fishermen under paragraph 3 is not granted on equal terms, when compared with the increases planned for vessel owners.

2.4.3. Article 5

2.4.3.1. It ought to be ensured in this article that the regulation governing the procedure for the payment of aid is flexible, and that the dates are brought forward as far as possible, since the vast majority of vessels are at present not working and the aid they currently receive will end on 31 December 2001. Special procedures to ensure there is no delay in payments are therefore vital.

Brussels, 18 October 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke Frerichs

(1) OJ C 311, 7.11.2001, p. 3.