Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION on a financial contribution by the Community to certain expenditure incurred by the Member States in implementing the control, inspection and surveillance systems applicable to the common fisheries policy

(presented by the Commission)

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

Policing is an essential element of the common fisheries policy. Progress in this area is unanimously felt to be necessary, as discussion in the Council and Parliament has shown. A comprehensive approach is required. This is set out elsewhere and the attached proposal covers its financial side.

Responsibility for the actual exercise of policing falls to the Member States. Community financial support is needed in order to promote synergies between them, kick-start an innovative dynamic in certain areas, and prevent possible weaknesses in any particular Member State from affecting the efforts of the others, particularly in the case of the very many fisheries where at least two Member States are involved. The high cost of policing, particularly action at sea, must also be taken into account. Recognition of this situation led to two Council Decisions permitting Community support for Member States' expenditure on inspection work: Decision 89/631/EEC covering 1991 to 1995 and Decision 95/527/EEC covering 1996 to 2000. Analysis of these Decisions clearly indicates that the part-financing programme has had a very positive impact on the inspection systems of the Member States. Community assistance is still needed, however. A new Council Decision is therefore needed.

Continuation should not however be mere renewal. The context has changed. Needs and priorities are no longer the same. The previous mechanisms displayed weaknesses in practice that must be remedied. A period of reflection is in progress covering (a) the general development of the CFP, on which the Commission is to report to the Council and Parliament before the end of 2002, and (b) the division of policing work between national authorities and the Community. A basis must therefore be given for continuing Community assistance that does not prejudge the conclusions to be reached at the end of the reflection period and any changes to be made, adjusts assistance to the present context, and improves the mechanism. These are the guiding principles of the present proposal.

1. The proposed period of application is three years and not five as for the earlier Decisions. This will ensure the continuity without which action loses its utility and meet immediate needs while being consistent timewise with the forthcoming discussions.

2. Priorities and amounts are adjusted.

Under the earlier Decisions the major item of expenditure was investment for the purposes of action at sea. This will necessarily continue to be important but less so since there has already been ample opportunity to catch up on any delays. The general approach is now a policy of renewal and addition and no longer one of initial equipment provision. Expenditure will also have to be concentrated on applications that are of particular Community importance and/or make good persistent imbalances.

The Community aid scheme must continue to play a major role in fostering the adoption of new technologies. But a distinction must be drawn. As regards computerised information exchange between national administrations and between them and the Commission, a vigorous impulse must be given so that the possibilities offered by IT networks are exploited as quickly as possible. The other essential technology is satellite monitoring of fishing boats (VMS: vessel monitoring system). Under the previous Decision, a Community aid rate of more than 50% was available for this on a broad front, given the need to secure a fully operational Community system quickly. This has essentially been achieved and a rate of more than 50% should be reserved for any extensions to the VMS.

The aid formerly given for operating expenditure is no longer justified and is discontinued. However, the aid for the training of officials responsible for policing and for personnel exchanges between Member States is retained. Here there are serious gaps and an obvious Community dimension. Strengthening action is therefore required. Aid is also scheduled for expenditure on action in connection with the functions of regional fishery organisations. Assistance of this type has already been given for several years in the case of NAFO. A previous Commission communication on RFOs - Community participation in Regional Fisheries Organisations (COM(1999) 613 of 8 December 1999) - advocated a rule valid for all RFOs whereby only temporary aid, scaled to the difficulties involved, would be given to help Member States put new measures into force. Inclusion in the present Regulation of specific RFO provisions is a move in the direction of clarifying the legal basis without prejudging (given the three-year limit) medium- and long-term solutions. Discussion in depth can take place during that period.

Reduced support under certain headings and increased support under others means adjustment of the budget needed, which for the previous Decision was EUR 41 million a year on average. The annual amount scheduled for 2001 to 2003 is EUR 35 million.

3. Guarantees of consistency, relevance and transparency are increased.

Assessment of the impact of the previous financial Decisions and the expansion of CFP policing confirm a need for better guarantees of the relevance and proper utilisation of the Community aid. Under the new provisions the annual decisions will be set in a multiannual framework in order to give priority to the expenditure most directly linked to the Community's needs (beginning with acquisition of the facilities to be deployed for RFO operations) and to promote a comprehensive approach taking in personnel training. Provisions on transparency will cover the intended use, precise actual use and impact of Community aid.

The Commission proposes that the Council speedily adopt the attached proposal.

2000/0273 (CNS)

Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION on a financial contribution by the Community to certain expenditure incurred by the Member States in implementing the control, inspection and surveillance systems applicable to the common fisheries policy

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 37 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission [1],

[1] OJ C

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament [2],

[2] OJ C

Whereas:

(1) The common fisheries policy, which guarantees the long-term existence of fishery stocks and their employment in the sector, can achieve its objectives only if its rules are complied with and effectively controlled.

(2) Those objectives and rules are primarily established by Council Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92 of 20 December 1992 establishing a Community system for fisheries and aquaculture [3] and by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy [4].

[3] OJ L 389, 31.12.1992, p. 1; Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1181/98 (OJ L 164, 9.6.1998, p. 1).

[4] OJ L 261, 20.10.1993, p. 1; Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2846/98 (OJ L 358, 31.12.1998, p. 5).

(3) By implementing the control system applicable to the common fisheries policy, the Member States discharge an obligation of Community interest.

(4) For some Member States the scale of the control task is particularly onerous and may be disproportionately burdensome.

(5) The Community should therefore make a financial contribution towards certain control, inspection and surveillance expenditure incurred by some Member States.

(6) Given the positive overall impact of the Community financial contribution under Council Decision 89/631/EEC [5], for 1991 to 1995, and Council Decision 95/527/EC [6], for 1996 to 2000, a follow-on to those Decisions is required, but not a simple renewal. Certain expenditure should therefore be reduced in order to permit more active assistance in other areas.

[5] OJ L 364, 14.12.1989, p. 64; Decision as last amended by Decision 95/52/EC (OJ L 301, 14.12.1995, p. 35).

[6] OJ L 301, 14.12.1995, p. 30.

(7) A period of three years, from 2001 to 2003, allows the Community contribution to be set for a long enough period but without prejudging any modifications of the common policy that may be decided under Article 14 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92.

(8) The corresponding financial resources should be entered as annual appropriations in the general budget of the European Communities.

(9) The financial contribution by the Community should be conditional on the recipient Member State attaining a satisfactory standard of control both at sea and on land.

(10) Recipient Member States should assess the objectives and the impact of their expenditure on control programmes, both annually and in the aggregate at the end of the three-year period (2001-2003),

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

Under the conditions set out in this Decision, the Community may grant a financial contribution to control programmes established by the Member States' for implementation of the control, inspection and surveillance systems applicable to the common fisheries policy laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93.

The control programmes shall specify their objectives and the facilities to be deployed and expenditure envisaged, in particular for the action referred to in Article 2.

Article 2

The financial contribution provided for in Article 1 (hereinafter: "the financial contribution") may be granted in respect of certain expenditure foreseen in the control programmes and intended to contribute to the following actions:

(a) creation of the mechanisms and IT networks necessary for information exchange in connection with control;

(b) experimentation with and implementation of new technologies to improve control of fishery activities;

(c) training of control departments' officials;

(d) implementation of new inspection and observer schedules in the framework of Regional Fishery Organisations (RFOs) to which the European Community is a contracting party;

(e) acquisition and modernisation of inspection and monitoring equipment.

Under points (a), (b), (d) and (e), the financial contribution shall be limited to expenditure of an amount greater than EUR 13 200.

Article 3

The expenditure referred to in Article 2 arising from legal and financial commitments entered into by Member States' competent authorities during the period of application of this Decision in respect of which no other financial aid is received from the Community, shall be regarded as eligible. VAT shall not be regarded as eligible expenditure.

Expenditure shall be eligible to the extent to which it is actually used to implement the control programmes.

Article 4

1. The financial contribution shall relate to eligible expenditure effected by Member States between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2003.

2. The Budgetary Authority shall set the appropriations available for each budget year. The financial contribution shall not exceed the appropriations allocated to this purpose in the general budget of the European Communities.

3. If appropriations available in the general budget of the European Communities do not permit a financial contribution to all eligible expenditure proposed by a Member State, priority shall be given to expenditure on the control measures provided for in the Community rules.

Article 5

1. Financial contributions towards the expenditure referred to in Article 2(a) shall cover eligible expenditure for the creation of systems for recording, managing and transmitting data relating to controls, including IT applications and software.

2. The annual financial contribution per Member State shall be, at most, 75% of eligible expenditure.

Article 6

1. Financial contributions towards the expenditure referred to in Article 2(b) shall cover eligible expenditure for experimentation with and the introduction of new technologies to improve controls on fishing and related activities.

2. The annual financial contribution per Member State shall be, at most, 50% of eligible expenditure.

3. The Commission may decide on a rate of contribution higher than that provided for in paragraph 2 to enable financial contributions towards eligible expenditure, where necessary, extending the VMS provided for in Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 to include vessels other than those referred to in Article 3(2) thereof, and towards recording information other than vessel position and installing electronic logbooks.

Article 7

1. Financial contributions towards the expenditure referred to in Article 2(c) shall cover, in accordance with the rules in Annex I, eligible expenditure on the training of national officials involved in conrol activities, including training in Member States other than the one in which they work, arising from the organisation of seminars or training courses of at least one day and from exchanges of national officials.

2. The annual financial contribution per Member State shall be, at most, 50% of eligible expenditure.

Article 8

1. Financial contributions towards the expenditure referred to in Article 2(d) shall cover eligible expenditure on the introduction of new inspection and observer schedules adopted in the framework of RFOs to which the Community is a contracting party, including operating expenditure.

2. The annual financial contribution per Member State shall be, at most, 50% of eligible expenditure.

Article 9

1. Financial contributions towards the expenditure referred to in Article 2(e) shall cover investment in the acquisition or modernisation of vessels and aircraft used for control, inspection and surveillance of fishery activities.

2. The annual financial contribution per Member State shall be, at most, 30% of eligible expenditure.

3. The Commission may decide on a rate of contribution higher than that provided for in paragraph 2, of up to 50% of eligible expenditure, in the following cases:

(a) to Member States which have an Extensive Exclusive Economic Zone or Continental shelf to control and prove that resources available for that purpose do not permit sufficiently effective control;

(b) to Member States which assign control resources each year, during the period 2001-2003, to the regulatory zone of an RFO to which the European Community is a contracting party, in which vessels flying their flag operate.

Detailed rules for the application of point (b) of the first subparagraph shall be adopted by the Commission in consultation with the Member State(s) concerned.

Article 10

A special financial contribution of up to 50% of eligible expenditure per Member State per year may be granted for implementing a system to assess expenditure incurred in controlling the common fisheries policy. This contribution shall be granted towards eligible expenditure on introducing and operating the system, including developing analytical accounting procedures permitting calculation of the cost of various control measures carried out by the competent authorities of the Member States.

Article 11

The annual budget allocation for action towards which a financial contribution of more than 50% is paid shall be restricted to 20% of the budget envelope.

Article 12

1. Member States wishing to receive a financial contribution shall send the Commission, by 31 March 2001 at the latest, a forecast programme of their annual expenditure for 2001, 2002 and 2003 for which they are seeking a financial contribution, accompanied by a three-year programme describing the controls they intend to carry out during the three-year period.

The control programme must describe the objectives of the control and inspection measures scheduled, the actual operational plan envisaged and the results anticipated, and must cover the full range of fishery control work relevant to the Member State.

Programmes received after 31 March 2001 shall be considered only in exceptional circumstances, justified by the Member States concerned.

2. The programmes shall include the details specified in Part A of Annex II, points 1 and 2.

Article 13

On the basis of the information provided by Member States, and with due regard to the criteria in point 3 of Part A of Annex II, the Commission shall decide before 30 June each year in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 18 of Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92 on:

(a) the eligibility of the expenditure scheduled for the current budget year;

(b) the rate of the financial contribution;

(c) any conditions applying to the financial contribution.

Article 14

1. At the reasoned request of a Member State the Commission may grant advances of up to 50% of the annual financial contribution. These shall be deducted from the final amount of the financial contribution towards the eligible expenditure actually incurred.

2. Member States' expenditure shall be committed both legally and financially within one year of the date of notification of the decision referred to in Article 13. Member States shall implement their scheduled expenditure within one year of this legal and financial commitment. If the legal and financial commitment is not made within the time specified, any advance granted shall be repaid forthwith.

Article 15

Where a Member State decides not to implement all or part of the eligible expenditure for which a financial contribution has been granted it shall immediately inform the Commission, stating the implications for its control programme.

Article 16

1. Member States shall submit their applications for reimbursement of expenditure by 31 May of the year following the year in which it was incurred at the latest.

2. When submitting applications for reimbursement Member States shall verify and certify that the expenditure has been incurred in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Decision and the Directives concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works, supply and service contracts, and in accordance with the detailed rules in point 4 of Part A of Annex II.

3. If it appears from the application that the conditions referred to in pararaph 2 have not been met, the Commission shall examine the situation thoroughly, requesting the Member State to submit its observations. If the examination confirms non-compliance, the Commission shall set a time-limit for the Member State to comply. If by the expiry of that time-limit the Member State has not acted in accordance with the recommendations, the Commission may reduce, suspend or cancel the financial contribution in the area concerned. All undue payments shall be reimbursed to the Commission with interest for the period in question.

4. Member States shall keep all supporting documentation for a period of three years from the date of the Commission's reimbursement of the expenditure.

Article 17

Member States shall submit their expenditure programmes and applications for reimbursement of expenditure and payment of advances in euro. Expenditure programmes not made out in euro shall not be admissible.

Member States not participating in the third stage of economic and monetary union shall specify the conversion rate used.

Article 18

Member States shall provide the Commission with any information it may request with a view to performing the tasks attributed to it by this Decision.

Member States shall provide the Commission with all information permitting it to verify the use made of the control, inspection and surveillance resources for which a financial contribution has been made under this Decision. They shall keep this information available to the Commission for at least three years from the date of the Commission's reimbursement of expenditure.

If the Commission considers that these resources are not being used for their proper purpose or in accordance with the conditions laid down in this Decision, it shall inform the Member State concerned, which shall conduct an administrative inquiry in which Commission officials may take part. The Member State shall inform the Commission of its progress and of the findings of that inquiry and send it without delay a copy of the report drawn up following the inquiry, notifying the main elements on which it is based. The Commission may decide to reclaim any sum unduly paid, with interest for the period in question.

Article 19

The Commission may make any checks it deems necessary to ensure that Member States comply with the conditions and execute the tasks specified in this Decision. Member States shall assist officials assigned to these checks by the Commission.

The first paragraph shall apply without prejudice to Article 29 of Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93.

Article 20

1. Member States shall send the Commission, before 30 April each year, an intermediate assessment report, with contents as specified in Annex III, covering the previous year's eligible expenditure, detailing the extent to which the anticipated progress has been made and the impact of the expenditure on the control programmes and reporting any need to adjust those programmes.

2. Member States shall send the Commission, by 31 May 2004 at the latest, a final assessment report, with contents as specified in Annex III, covering the impact of the financial contribution on the three-year control programme as a whole.

3. The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 must enable the Commission to monitor properly the use made of the financial contribution.

Article 21

On the basis of the information provided by the Member States under Article 20(1), the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council, by 31 December 2003 at the latest, a report on application of this Decision and make any appropriate proposals for further action.

Article 22

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels,

For the Council

The President

ANNEX I

RULES APPLYING TO EXPENDITURE ON TRAINING OFFICIALS ENGAGED IN INSPECTION WORK

1. Expenditure on organising courses and seminars should in particular cover the hire of a room, purchase or hire of teaching materials and equipment, payment of the fees of trainers who are not officials of a national or Community administration, and travel and subsistence costs of the participating national officials and the trainers.

2. Expenditure on exchanges of national officials should cover their travel and subsistence costs.

3. Travel costs should be those for a return journey between an official's home and the destination by public transport.

4. Subsistence costs should be those for accommodation, meals and local transport.

5. Travel and subsistence costs are to be determined according to national reimbursement rules.

ANNEX II

PART A

1. The programme of annual expenditure referred to in Article 12 should state the expenditure scheduled for the years 2001, 2002 and 2003, specifying in particular:

- the expenditure timetable;

- the nature, cost and inspection objectives of the new technologies and IT networks;

- the nature, duration, number of participants, cost and purposes of the training for inspection officials;

- for inspection and monitoring equipment: technical characteristics, cost, planned mode of payment, inspection objectives and planned utilisation, including date of entry into service.

2. Member States must send the Commission all relevant information on the following:

- the objectives pursued by the proposed expenditure;

- the results expected from this expenditure;

- in connection with the purchase and modernisation of vessels and aircraft, an estimate of the period of time for which these will be used for fishery inspection and surveillance work;

- the Member State's use over previous years of the contribution granted under Decision 95/527/EC;

- the improvement in the effectiveness of the controls at sea and on land carried out by the Member State during the period preceding the application and the improvement that should result from the proposed expenditure.

Member States shall also complete and send to the Commission the forms, of which models are given in Part B.

3. Criteria to be considered when deciding on a financial contribution:

- the scale and efficiency of the human and physical resources actually devoted to inspection work;

- the degree of cooperation with other Member States and the Commission in policing fisheries;

- the Member State's contribution to inspection work and its compliance with obligations under inspection and observer schedules established by regional fishery organisations to which the Community is a contracting party;

- the extent of its controls on fishing by its own vessels on the high seas;

- the diversity of fishing activities in the Member State's fishery zone;

- the reliability of the catch figures notified to the Commission and the Member State's ability to prevent overrun of its quotas;

- the state of execution of the eligible expenditure for which a Community contribution has been approved under Council Decision 95/527/EC or under this Decision;

- the extent of prevention and detection of infringements of the common fisheries policy and the action taken to penalise them;

- the existence in national legislation and application in practice of penalties proportionate to the gravity of infringements that actually deter from further infringements of the same type;

- compliance with the requirement to notify the Commission of detected cases of behaviour seriously infringing common fishery policy rules, as required by Council Regulation (EC) No 1447/1999.

4. The completed questionnaires on public contracts must refer to the public tender notices published in the Official Journal of the European Communities. If notices have not been published in the Official Journal, the beneficiary must certify that the Community legislation on public contracts has been respected.

The Commission may call for any information it considers necessary to decide whether or not Community legislation on public contracts has been respected.

Reimbursement shall be conditional on submission of supporting documents (two copies) comprising at least the main elements of the agreement between the Member State and the supplier and the proof of payment. To be reimbursed, the individual items of expenditure must be listed in a summary statement clearly indicating for each its nature, link with the proposed programme and amount before VAT.

PART B

1. Vehicle inventory

>TABLE POSITION>

Notes

name/description - the vehicle name should be recorded, if applicable. If the vehicle does not have a name a brief description should be given e.g. the make and model. If the authority has more than one vehicle of the same make and model, the vehicle should be assigned a number. Whichever method is used to describe the vehicle, that method should be used in all records or correspondance relating to the vehicle.

a. - the name of the enforcement/government authority that operates the vehicle

b. - the age of the vehicle in years

c. - the operational life expectancy of the vehicle from new in years

d. - the remaining operational life of the vehicle in years (c - b)

e. - the percentage of operating time the vehicle spends engaged in enforcement activity

f. - total number of < 10m vessels or land vehicles operated by each enforcement authority

g. - FTE (Full Time Equivalent) (percentage of operating time spent on enforcement x 1) FTE should be less than 1

total - the sum of all FTE giving the total effective number of vehicles engaged in enforcement activity. The total should not exceed the number of vehicles used in MCS

< 10m vessels - number of < 10m vessels operated by each enforcement authority

land vehicles - number of land vehicles operated by each enforcement authority

2. Staff inventory

>TABLE POSITION>

Notes

a. - the name of the enforcement/government authority

b. - the type of duty carried out by enforcement staff

c. - the FTE (Full Time Equivalent) number of people employed by each enforcement authority as sea and air based inspectors, land based inspectors and other land based staff

d. - percentage of total time sea and air based inspectors, land based inspectors and other land based staff spend on enforcement duties

e. - the FTE (Full Time Equivalent) number of enforcement staff (d x c). Should not exceed the FTE number of people employed (c).

3. Vehicle Activity

>TABLE POSITION>

Notes

a. - the name of the enforcement/government authority

b. - type of vehicle used for enforcement duties (< 10m vessel, > 10m vessel, plane, helicopter)

c. - total number of craft used for enforcement duties (from vehicles spreadsheet)

d. - FTE (Full Time Equivalent) number of vehicles used for enforcement duties (from vehicles spreadsheet)

e. - total number of days at sea all vessels spent on enforcement duties

f. - number of days spent at sea on enforcement duties per vessel (c / b)

g. - total number of hours at sea all planes and helicopters spent on enforcement duties

h. - number of hours spent at sea on enforcement duties per craft (e / b)

4. Budget

>TABLE POSITION>

Notes

a. - the name of the enforcement/government authority with fisheries enforcement obligations

b. - total budget for each authority with fisheries enforcement duties

c. - budget spent on fisheries enforcement activity by each authority with enforcement duties.

c < or = b

5. Inspections*

>TABLE POSITION>

Notes

a. - number of inspections carried out by air, by sea and from land

a1. - number of visual inspections carried out.

a2. - number of other inspections carried out e.g. boarding vessel, checking logbook, etc.

b. - number of infringements detected

Inspection type - number of inspections carried out at sea, from the air and in port

Nationality of vessel inspected - number of inspections of own State vessels, other Member State vessels and Third Country vessels

ICES Area inspected (by sea) - number of inspections carried out in each ICES Area by enforcement vessels

ICES Area inspected (aerial) - number of inspections carried out in each ICES Area by enforcement planes/helicopters

6. Effort/physical characteristics

MEMBER STATE: // DATE:

// Number

length of coast (KM) //

size of EEZ (KM2) //

Number of landing ports //

Fleet size //

< 10m vessels //

> 10m vessels //

Total //

Landings by Nationality of vessel // Tonnes

Own state vessels //

Other Member State vessels //

Third country vessels //

Total //

Landings by ICES Area (own State vessels) // Tonnes

II //

III //

Iva //

Ivb //

V //

Via //

Vib //

VIIa //

VIIb-k //

VIII //

IX //

X //

Med //

Other //

Total //

Notes

Fleet size - number of own State vessels of each size (< 10m and > 10m)

Landings by Nationality of vessel - landings into own State by own State vessels, other Member State vessels and Third Country vessels, in tonnes

Landings by ICES Area (own State vessels) - landings into own State by own State vessels by Area of capture

ANNEX III

CONTENT OF ASSESSMENT REPORT

- programme objectives

- resources deployed

- actual expenditure

- programme results

- programme impact

- cost-effectiveness of the expenditure

- impact of the Community contribution

FINANCIAL STATEMENT

1. TITLE OF MEASURE

Proposal for a Council Decision on a financial contribution by the Community to certain expenditure incurred by the Member States in implementing the control, inspection and surveillance systems applicable to the common fisheries policy

2. BUDGET HEADING(S)

B2-901

3. LEGAL BASIS

Article 37 of the EC Treaty

4. DESCRIPTION

4.1 General objectives

Since initiation of the CFP there has been a need for financial support for the Member States' fisheries inspection work. Decision 89/631/EEC covering 1991 to 1995 allotted EUR 110 million to this and Decision 95/527/EC covering 1996 to 2000 EUR 205 million.

Given the overall very positive impact of these Decisions a follow-on to Decision 95/527/EC is required.

It should not simply be rolled over, however. Some expenditure should be cut to permit more support in other areas. Thus it is proposed that support be reduced for major inspection resources (vessels, aircraft), replacing the basic equipment phase with one of renewal and modernisation. With this reduction bigger appropriations could be allotted to other areas such as:

- IT networks;

- other new technologies;

- training of inspection officials;

- inspection in the context of regional fishery organisations.

4.2 Period covered by measure and provisions for its renewal

A reduction in the period covered compared with the previous programmes is justified by the need not to prejudge the content of the general report on progress of the CFP that the Commission is to send the Council and Parliament before the end of 2002. A three-year period is therefore proposed (2001-2003).

5. CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENDITURE/REVENUE

5.1 Non-compulsory expenditure

5.2 Differentiated appropriations

5.3 No revenue

6. TYPE OF EXPENDITURE/REVENUE

- financial subsidy (part-financing along with other public/private sector sources)

Subsidisation by reimbursement. Possibility of advances.

7. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

7.1 Calculation of total cost of measure (link between individual costs and total cost)

The contributions to the Member States' expenditure are to cover:

- installation of the equipment and IT networks needed for information exchange for inspection purposes. Maximum contribution 75%;

- experimentation with and introduction of new technologies to improve controls on fishing activities. Contribution restricted to 50% (up to now maximum has been higher) since the bulk of expenditure on introduction of a VMS system has been covered by Decision 95/527/EC. There should however be a higher rate for possible extension of satellite surveillance to shorter vessels (at present the threshold is 24 metres overall) and to include other parameters (vessel speed), as well as electronic logbooks;

- training of national officials involved in inspection work (maximum contribution 50%), and training in other Member States is included;

- implementation of new inspection and observer schedules in the context of regional fishery organisations; the maximum contribution can be restricted to 50%;

- purchase/modernisation of inspection and monitoring equipment. The maximum contribution will be 30% (under Decision 95/527/EC the rate was 35% to 50%).

- Since the Community made the principal contribution during 1996-2000 to acquisition of resources for controls at sea, the Member States' requirements for these big items of equipment have largely been met. Some extra funding must however be provided to Member States which are particularly burdened given the size of the zone they have to patrol or which for some part of the year carry out policing in the regulatory zone of a regional fisheries organisation with which they are involved and to which the Community is a contracting party.

A special financial contribution of 50% is also scheduled for Member States' introduction of an assessment system for expenditure on inspection work.

7.2 Breakdown of measure

CA (EUR million) (current prices)

>TABLE POSITION>

The breakdown cannot be more precisely anticipated since application for funding is at the discretion of Member States. It would however be desirable to give priority to IT networks and other new technologies.

7.3 Operating expenditure on studies, experts etc., included in Part B of budget

By its nature this heading excludes operating expenditure of this type.

7.4 Timetable for commitment/payment appropriations

CA (EUR million)

>TABLE POSITION>

8. ANTI-FRAUD PROVISIONS

The Commission is to decide each year on its contributions towards expenditure approved by the Member States. The first step is an initial assessment of the Member States' proposals. The Commission will determine the eligibility of the applications on the basis of Member States' forward programmes covering their entire expenditure for the years 2001 to 2003. The proposals accepted will be considered each year, following an interdepartmental consultation, at a meeting of the Management Committee for Fisheries and Aquaculture. The Commission will then decide on eligibility and the size of the Community contribution.

The contribution payments will be made on presentation of validly receipted invoices covering the eligible expenditure actually approved and on presentation of a completed "public contracts questionnaire".

So that the best use is made of aid under the Community budget Member States must both guarantee the overall efficiency of their inspection and penalisation systems and ensure complete transparency.

A significant contribution is made by Commission officials' visits to Member States. These permit verification of the conformity of physical resources with the administrative documents that must be sent to the Commission by the national administrations and also that all the expenditure part-financed by the Community has actually been made. During the period covered by the measure visits will be made to several Member States.

The combination of these actions will enable the Commission to assess the actual application of the Decision following on from Decision 95/527/EC.

9. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS

9.1 Specific quantifiable objectives, target population

- Specific objectives: links with general objective

- installation of the equipment and IT networks required for information exchange for inspection purposes;

- promoting other new technologies;

- promoting training of inspection officials;

- facilitating the introduction of new inspection and observer schedules in the context of regional fisheries organisations;

- providing inspection services with efficient modern equipment.

- Target group: if necessary distinguishing by objective, specify the final recipients of the Community aid and the intermediaries used.

The direct targets are the national administrations responsible for fishery inspection work. But it is the entire industry (fishing and related activities), much of which is located in regions where other economic possibilities are restricted, that will benefit from efficient policing. There are also wider implications. The ecological impact of poor policing concerns the entire Union, as does the negative diplomatic impact of obviously inadequate policing in international waters or waters of third countries.

9.2 Justification of measure

- Need for Community assistance, in particular given the principle of subsidiarity:

Closing the gaps in policing requires political, regulatory and financial action by the Community. None of these interlinked strands can be omitted. Progress has been achieved in the matter of regulatory provisions, essentially on the Commission's initiative. The corresponding political decisions have financial implications that the Community cannot shirk.

The policing of fisheries is in essence a Community problem, given the existence of a common policy and the fact that fish migrations make the fisheries of the various Member States interdependent. Cost-benefit analysis of policing cannot be confined to the individual Member State. Financial solidarity at Community level is therefore necessary and the budget heading permitting support for planned expenditure by the Member States is its instrument.

- Selection of forms of assistance:

* advantages over alternative measures (comparative advantages),

* analysis of any similar actions at Community or national level,

* derived and multiplier effects expected.

The budgets needed for effective policing are small given the relative economic importance of fisheries and by comparison with the losses engendered by fraud. They are also low by comparison with expenditure in this field by other countries.

The Community budget's contribution to expenditure on policing must remain low compared with the sums expended by Member States but Community assistance is the keystone of progress.

The total cost of policing fisheries in the Community is estimated at EUR 300 million/year, about one third for investment and two thirds for operation. The Community assistance needed for creating an effective policing system is low given the economic importance of fisheries and also by comparison with expenditure in this field by other countries. During the period 1996-2000 the Member States' applications for aid substantially exceeded the available appropriations.

However, given the relatively low take-up in practice of the Community contribution by Member States during 1996-2000, the appropriations should be reduced from EUR 41 million to EUR 35 million on average per year in the hope of achieving a better take-up rate than in the past.

It is also evident that the Member States will need to adjust to technological progress and modernise and invest in inspection resources. There are also increased needs on the service side, notably improvement of the various types of training and of the mechanisms for cooperation between Member States.

- Main uncertainties over specific impact of measure

The first risk is the difficulties Member States may find in honouring their commitments on part-financing and adopting other provisions (organisation, personnel, penalties, etc.).

The issue of budgeting for operations, personnel, administrative organisation and penalties falls with certain exceptions in the responsibility of the Member States. If they do not adopt the necessary provisions, the Community assistance will not yield the results sought. Well-equipped national services will continue to be insufficiently effective.

9.3 Monitoring and assessment of measure

- Performance indicators:

* output indicators (measurement of activity),

* impact indicators according to objectives pursued.

The main difficulty lies in the fact that departments involved in policing fishery activities often have multiple assignments. Costs therefore have to be distributed. The clearest example is provided by operations at sea. If these involve the armed forces, the primary purpose may be fishery policing but other functions may be envisaged (assistance at sea, visibility of national presence).

Whatever the difficulties the amount of expenditure needed for effective policing is such that accounting arrangements for quantifying it are necessary.

The first possible indicators are activity measurements: number of days at sea by inspection vessels or number of aircraft flight hours, number of inspections at sea or on land. These figures measure activity but not efficiency.

A second analytical level is the number of infringements detected and the penalties imposed to punish them. This data, in conjunction with the other indicators mentioned, is indispensable for assessing the rigour of policing and penalties.

Effective policing of the resource conservation side of the CAP must focus on the two essentials: restricting exploitation rates and protecting juvenile fish. For each fish stock it is necessary to compare actual and authorised catches and quantify the volume of undersized fish taken. Paradoxically this task is technically simpler than securing legally enforceable proof of individual infringements. But for policing purposes the possibility of quantifying fraud not only immediately provides composite indicators of efficiency but also allows policing effort to be targeted on the most important problems. It becomes possible to rationalise the deployment of inspection forces so that the resources devoted to preventive and deterrent work and collection of the evidence required for imposing penalties are concentrated on the most serious problems. Such rationalisation would not only directly improve the efficiency of policing but do much for its credibility in the eyes of fishermen, who are often well-informed about large-scale and recurrent fraud.

- Assessment procedures and frequency

Increased guarantees of efficiency and transparency must be obtained from recipient Member States. The proposals here are:

- instead of annual programmes, submission to the Commission by each Member State of a single programme covering all planned expenditure for 2001, 2002 and 2003;

- prior, interim and retrospective assessment by Member States of the objectives of their expenditure and of its impact on their inspection programme; possibility of financial support for creation of an assessment system;

- Member States' to carry out their programmes within a maximum of one year from legal and financial commitment of the expenditure, itself to be undertaken within one year at most of publication of the annual decision in the OJ;

- the Commission will be able to recover funds incorrectly used by Member States.

10. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS (PART A OF SECTION III OF GENERAL BUDGET)

The actual mobilisation of the necessary administrative resources will follow the Commission's annual decision on resource allocation, which will reflect the Budgetary Authority's provision of additional staff and funding.

10.1 Impact on number of posts

>TABLE POSITION>

10.2 Human resources: overall financial implications

(EUR)

>TABLE POSITION>

Amounts are total costs of the posts for the full duration of the measure.

10.3 Other operating expenditure, including meetings of committees and expert groups

(EUR)

>TABLE POSITION>