WRITTEN QUESTION P-1746/98

by Dominique Souchet (I-EDN) to the Commission

(27 May 1998)

Subject: Driftnets and Special Fishing Permits

In its reply of 21 April 1998 to written questions E-0503/98, E-0505/98, E-0507/98, E-0509/98 and E-0511/98(1), the Commission states that it continues to take the view that it is not desirable to allow oceanic driftnet fishing to continue because of alleged ecological and socio-economic risks.

As regards the ecological aspect, what reliable scientific basis does the Commission have for calling for a general ban on the use of driftnets?

To enable North Atlantic long-finned tuna stocks to be fished optimally, why does not the Commission adopt more widely the system of Special Fishing Permits introduced in France, which makes it possible to limit and adapt to the state of fish stocks the number of vessels using driftnets?

As regards the socio-economic aspect, does not the Commission agree that a general ban on the use of driftnets would result in significant job losses and render fishing zones using the technique more vulnerable (particularly the Island of Yeu)?

As to the acceptability of Community fisheries management measures, does not the Commission consider that a decision taken without a reliable scientific study is liable to be rejected by fishermen and by the fishing industry more generally, and to damage the credibility of the Common Fisheries Policy?

Apart from driftnets, does the Commission intend similarly to call into question the legitimacy of other fishing gear without any sound scientific basis?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(2 July 1998)

The ecological disadvantages of fishing for highly migratory species with oceanic driftnets have been clearly demonstrated by studies validated by the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries. The report(2) of the meeting of the Committee in autumn 1995 is perfectly clear in this respect. The Commission therefore in no way shares the Honourable Member's view regarding the scientific basis for the decision to ban oceanic driftnets.

The introduction of special fishing permits should be seen in the context of the Council decisions taken on the basis of Council Regulation (EC) 1627/94 of 27 June 1994 laying down general provisions concerning special fishing permits(3). The Council has in fact decided to strictly limit the list of fisheries in the Atlantic and neighbouring waters for which special fishing permits would be compulsory (deep-water fisheries, edible crabs, spider crabs, scallops). Pelagic fisheries have been excluded. The French measure is therefore a purely national one. It is different in kind from the decision of principle to authorise or ban certain fishing techniques.

The Commission has always acknowledged the short-term economic disadvantages for the netter fleets and for the areas dependent on these fisheries. However, as the Commission's communication to the Council(4) pointed out, failure to ban driftnets would have had even more serious socio-economic consequences. While the ban is necessary overall, those who will suffer from it must be able to count on collective solidarity. Conversion measures will be required and, in accordance with the undertaking it gave at the March 1998 Council meeting, the Commission has studied this matter very carefully. It will be making appropriate proposals to the Council, in line with the conclusions of the Council meeting of 8 June.

To reiterate, the Commission cannot agree with the Honourable Member when he states that the decision on driftnets was taken without any scientific basis. It refers him again to the Commission communication and to the report of the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee mentioned above. No fishing technique has been or will be called in question without scientific evidence being analysed by the appropriate bodies, starting with the Committee.

(1) OJ C 386, 11.12.1998.

(2) SEC(95) 1960.

(3) OJ L 171, 6.7.1994.

(4) COM(94) 50.