WRITTEN QUESTION E-3187/02

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Council

(7 November 2002)

Subject: Heavily fisheries-dependent regions, relative stability and access to fishery resources

In its answers to questions E-0650/02(1), E-2096/02, E-2097/02 and E-2098/02(2), all by the author of the present question, the Commission did not provide concrete responses on the points actually raised, and it is therefore now necessary to raise these subjects again. The intention of those questions was: to obtain information from the Commission on the criteria required for an EU region to be classified as heavily fisheries-dependent for purposes of the allocation of catch possibilities; and to ask the Commission whether it considers, in the light of the Community legal principle of progressive adaptation, that the list of heavily fisheries-dependent regions, which has remained unchanged for 20 years, should be updated, with the addition of new regions in this category in the wake of the successive accessions of new Member States (notably Spain and Portugal).

The Commission did not, however, give a clear reply. It simply stated: The concept of fisheries dependence is defined in Article 4(8) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999(3) dealing with structural aid to the fisheries sector in Objective 2 regions. It does not appear in Council regulations such as those dealing with the allocation of fishing opportunities at Community level and their subdivision into national quotas allocated between Member States.

In its resolution adopted in The Hague on 3 November 1976, the Council made express reference to the importance of taking account of the vital needs of fisheries-dependent communities in the implementation of the CFP. The same philosophy was present in the Council's declaration of 30 May 1980, in which it laid down explicit criteria for the allocation of quotas among Member States: traditional fisheries activities, specific needs of regions with heavily fisheries-dependent communities, and loss of catch possibilities in third-country waters. These criteria constitute the system for allocating fisheries quotas under the relative stability regime. Under these criteria, Greenland, Ireland and the northern part of Great Britain were declared to be heavily fisheries-dependent areas, thereafter benefiting from the so-called principle of relative stability. This mechanism has continued up to the present, with no changes and no inclusion of further areas in the successive basic regulations.

Does the Council not consider that the concept of a heavily fisheries-dependent region is not to be found solely in Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 governing the Structural Funds, but was also earlier implied in the Council's own measures on the allocation of catch possibilities, as reflected today in the recitals of the current regulation, i.e. Council Regulation (EEC) No 3760/92(4)?

Given the criteria employed by the Council in 1980 for the allocation of catch possibilities, does the Council not consider that a region like Galicia which the Commission has, in its answers, recognised to be heavily fisheries-dependent should also be able to benefit from a new allocation of catch possibilities, following the conclusion of the transition periods under the Act of Accession and on the basis of those same criteria, especially in the wake of the disappearance of catch possibilities in third-country waters such as those of Morocco?

(1) OJ C 229 E, 26.9.2002, p. 14.

(2) OJ C 28 E, 6.2.2003, p. 182.

(3) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999. p. 1.

(4) OJ L 389, 31.12.1992, p. 1.

Reply

(20 February 2003)

1. In its resolution of 3 November 1976(1) the Council agreed that, as from 1 January 1977, Member States would extend the limits of their fishing zones in the North Sea and North Atlantic to 200 miles by means of concerted action.

2. In annex VII to the resolution the Council recognised the so-called Hague preferences in order to take account of the needs of certain local communities in the Community particularly dependent upon fisheries.

3. On 25 January 1983 the Council agreed on the allocation of fishing possibilities in Community waters (Council Regulation No 172/83) where fishing possibilities were allocated in accordance with the principle of relative stability. According to the Council's declaration of 30 May 1980(2), this principle is based on traditional fishing activities, on the special needs of the fisheries dependent regions and on the loss of catch potential in third country waters (jurisdictional losses). As it will be seen, the Hague preferences were only one of the parameters determining relative stability. It is disputed within the Council to which extent they can be invoked on top of relative stability.

4. Fishing possibilities for Spain and Portugal were determined in the Act of Accession of 1985 and integrated into the relative stability keys.

5. In recent years (since 1989) the Council has reconciled the conflicting interests and, where relevant, taken into account the interests of local populations dependent on fishing. The Court of Justice has stated that such quota allocations are adopted on the basis of the Council's discretionary powers under Article 8(4) of Council Regulation No 3760/92. They do not depend on whether Annex VII to the Hague resolution was properly adopted (Case C-4/96).

6. The Council is currently examining the question of relative stability as part of the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. At this stage of the negotiations the Council has not agreed to constrain its discretionary power to decide on the allocation keys. Neither has it established a link between the Hague preferences and the principle of equal access for Spain to the Community' fishing zone on 1 January 2003.

(1) OJ C 105, 7.5.1981.

(2) OJ C 158, 27.6.1980.