WRITTEN QUESTION E-2327/02

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

(26 July 2002)

Subject: Regional advisory councils

The Commission's proposals for a reform of the common fisheries policy (CFP) which were adopted by the College of Commissioners on 28 May 2002, include the setting up of regional advisory councils to advise the Commission on fisheries management in respect of certain waters or fishing grounds. The councils would comprise representatives of the fisheries and aquaculture sectors, members of environmental- and consumer-protection organisations and representatives of the national, regional and scientific authorities of all the Member States whose fishing vessels operate in the waters or the fishing grounds concerned. Such councils have no precedents under the CFP or in any other areas of Community responsibility and they constitute an innovation in the procedure for the adoption of Community legislation. At the same time the Commission is planning to set up a scientific, technical and economic committee on fisheries.

What reasons justify setting up these advisory bodies?

Will the Commission provide detailed information regarding the characteristics, the legal basis, the areas of responsibility and the status of the regional advisory councils and the scientific, technical and economic committee, and also regarding the relationships between them and with other, existing advisory committees?

Can the above advisory bodies be described as advisory committees within the meaning of Article 3 of Council Decision 1999/468/EC(1) laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission?

Does the Commission not consider that the setting up of these regional advisory councils may result in a further fragmentation of a policy (the CFP) which is supposed to be common and the adoption of inconsistent measures applicable in adjacent areas?

Will the Commission provide information regarding the reasons for vetoing the presence of representatives of each and every one of the Member States? Does the Commission not think that the management of fisheries within the Community may be of interest to all the Member States, as is illustrated by the fact that representatives of Member States which have no vessels of their own fishing in a given area are nonetheless members of the Community delegation to international fisheries organisations?

Why are the tasks of the regional advisory councils restricted to the management of fisheries resources, with no possibility of any extension to other areas such as processing, aquaculture or marketing?

(1) OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 October 2002)

Stakeholders feel alienated from the Common fisheries policy (CFP) since they have not been sufficiently involved in policy shaping in the past. This lack of involvement undermines support for and compliance with the measures adopted under the CFP.

The Commission believes that the setting-up of regional advisory bodies will ensure greater and more effective involvement of local and regional stakeholders in the fisheries management process which in turn will increase responsibility and commitment to make common measures work. This idea has received wide support from the interested parties during the consultations that followed the adoption of the Green Paper in 2001(1). The Commission's proposal is also in line with its broader objectives to improve the European Governance through greater stakeholder participation in the conception and implementaion of European policies as it was underlined in the Commission's White Paper on European Governance adopted in July 2001(2).

The Commission has provided detailed information about the matters raised in this question in its Communication on the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (Roadmap)(3), and in the explanatory memorandum of its proposal for a Council Regulation on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the CFP(4).

The Committees laid down in Article 3 of Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 are composed only of representatives of Member States and chaired by the Commission.

Where implementing powers have been conferred on the Commission by the Council, these committees shall be consulted by the Commission on certain kind of measures before these measures are to be adopted by the Commission.

Regional Advisory Councils would have a totally different composition and function.

Regional Advisory Councils would be open to all parties having an interest in the CFP in the area covered by these Councils (representatives of the fisheries sector, scientists, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), national and regional administrations ). They would not be chaired by the Commission. They would only have a regional mandate.

There would be no obligation for the Commission and for Member States to consult Regional Advisory Councils. Their main task would be to advise the Commission on matters of fisheries management in respect of certain sea areas or fishing zones.

They could be consulted at the stage of the elaboration by the Commission of proposals for legislative measures when these measures relate specifically to fish stocks in the area covered by the Council concerned; they may also be consulted by the Commission or by the Member States in respect of other measures.

They could submit recommendations or suggestions to the Commission and to a Member State on matters relating to fisheries management for sea areas and fishing zones for which they have a mandate.

Lastly, they could inform the Commission and Member States about problems relating to the implementation of Community rules in the area they cover and submit them recommendations and suggestions addressing such problems.

Regional Advisory Councils can thus not be described as advisory committees within the meaning of Article 3 of the above-mentioned Council Decision of 28 June 1999.

The Commission does not share the view that the setting-up of regional advisory bodies will lead to the fragmentation of the CFP since these bodies will only have advisory functions and not decision-making powers. The Commission, as guardian of the EC Treaty, will safeguard the Community character of the CFP.

The Commission's proposal does not exclude the presence of any interested stakeholders from any Member State in the works of the regional advisory bodies. The Commission's proposal, however, does not make such participation compulsory so as not to overburden the structure of a regional advisory mechanism that should be set-up to look at particular local or regional issues that by definition, will not be of interest to all the stakeholders in the Union.

Although it is true that the central tasks of the regional advisory councils would focus on fisheries management issues, the Commission's proposal does allow them to conduct any other activities necessary to fulfil their functions (Article 32(3) of the draft proposal for a Council Regulation on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the CFP)(5). So if, for example, the members of a regional advisory council are of the opinion that processing, marketing or aquaculture issues

interfere with fisheries management issues and that should therefore be examined, nothing in the proposal impedes them from doing so. The Commission believes that it will be up to each regional advisory council to decide on the precise tasks that they should accomplish. The Commission, however, believes that priority should be given to fisheries management issues because it is for those very issues that the advice of the regional and local actors is mostly needed.

(1) COM(2001) 135 final.

(2) OJ C 287, 12.10.2001.

(3) COM(2002) 181final.

(4) OJ C 203 E, 27.8.2002.

(5) OJ C 203 E, 27.8.2002.