Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy` () (98/C 407/38)

On 11 June 1998 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 43 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 24 July 1998. The rapporteur was Mr Chagas.

At its 357th plenary session (meeting of 9 September), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion with 108 votes in favour and four abstentions.

1. Introduction

1.1. Regulation 2847/93 (), establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy, was last amended by Regulation 2635/97 (). The Commission now proposes a further amendment to take account of certain developments in the common fisheries policy (CFP) and to tackle the shortcomings which have emerged in its implementation.

2. General comments

2.1. The Committee approves the proposed regulation subject to the following comments.

2.2. The Commission has decided to amend the regulation in stages. The present proposal therefore only covers some of the aspects which the Commission considers important for improving control policy. Further adjustments to the various strands of the CFP will be submitted later.

2.3. The Committee is aware that, despite the efforts and progress already made, the legal and material provisions on monitoring still vary greatly from one Member State to the next. The Committee would therefore have preferred a more far-reaching proposal providing a general regulatory framework more closely geared to control requirements.

2.3.1. In the present situation, it is difficult to convince the sector that monitoring activities are sound and to guarantee that the rules are being fairly applied throughout the Community.

2.4. In countless opinions, the Committee has stressed the importance of monitoring regulated activities in order to ensure that the various CFP instruments are applied properly. It is therefore vital to improve the situation regarding checks at national level, so as to eliminate - or at least, greatly reduce - disparities in Member States' attitudes to checks and in their implementation of EU legislation.

2.4.1. As soon as possible, the Commission should publish a revised version of Regulation 2847/93 incorporating all the amendments made to date.

2.5. For Member States to improve their monitoring systems, they must also make good use of land and/or sea-based control methods, as these enable them to check the species, quantities and size of the fish caught and the types of nets used. There are still huge disparities between Member States in this area too. Although the difficulties are not of the same order, those relating to the size of the EEZ to be monitored are real and must be taken into account.

2.5.1. For this reason, the Committee has always argued that Member States should be encouraged and supported in their efforts to adjust and reinforce checks, making sustained use of the most advanced information systems and technology. This is the only way of achieving progress and making controls more effective, thereby also helping to create a climate of confidence, greater transparency and fairness within the Community and between the different members of the sector.

2.5.2. The large number of landing points makes checking operations more difficult. Concentrating operations on certain ports, or the obligatory use of certain infrastructure such as wholesale fish markets, may make checking operations substantially more credible.

2.6. The Committee would also stress that monitoring can only be effective if it is based on an overall, integrated approach covering all strands of the CFP.

2.6.1. There are two further prerequisites for a successful control policy that is properly implemented in all Member States: firstly, the powers of Community inspectors must be increased, as must their numbers; and secondly and more importantly, the discrepancies in Member States' sanctions systems must be ironed out. These discrepancies currently create serious problems, as the Commission has confirmed in its communication to the Council and the European Parliament ().

2.6.2. This is a key problem, and greater efforts are needed to harmonize the sanctions system. The Commission put forward practical proposals at one stage, which were supported by the ESC and the European Parliament but rejected by the Council. It has since remained silent on the matter, as is the current proposal.

2.7. The Committee welcomes the proposal's reference to third country vessels. The Committee has always called for closer monitoring, inspections and surveillance of the activities of third country vessels, which in practice and in some ports are less strictly monitored than EU vessels. There is an urgent need to end this anomalous situation which generates unfair competition with EU vessels and, in some less strict ports, allows real distortions of competition.

2.7.1. As the Committee has repeatedly pointed out, it is vital that the Community effort in favour of responsible fishing and marketing should be shared by third countries, especially those whose waters border on those of the Community, through the adoption of measures equivalent to those in force in the EU. This should also be the thrust of the Commission's efforts in bilateral relations with these countries.

2.8. The Committee considers that third country vessels which are authorized to fish in Community waters should at the very least be subject to the same rules as EU vessels. Adequate provision must be made for this in Article 28c.

2.9. The Committee thinks that greater clarity is needed in some language versions of Article 28g(2), regarding the catches which the master of a third country vessel declares have been taken on the high seas. In particular, the rules on this should help to ensure a proper policy for resource conservation on a more general scale, and a more stringent approach to certain predatory practices.

2.10. Under Article 35 of the proposal, Member States are required to send the Commission a report on the application of the regulation by 1 March each year. The regulation previously stipulated 1 June; the Committee wonders whether the relevant authorities in the Member States will find the new date feasible. In view of the fact that the areas to be checked come under a number of different departments and authorities at Member State level, the Commission is asked to propose another date for submission of the report.

3. Specific comments

3.1. Article 28c: This should be reworded in accordance with the above comments.

3.2. Article 28g: This should be reworded in accordance with the above comments.

Brussels, 9 September 1998.

The President of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS

() OJ C 201, 27.6.1998, p. 14.

() OJ L 261, 20.10.1993, p. 1.

() OJ L 356, 21.12.1997.

() COM(1998) 92 final.