Resolution on international fisheries agreements
Date: 1997-05-15
Institutions: Committee on Fisheries, European Parliament
Subjects: common fisheries policy, fishery management, fishery resources, fishing agreement, fishing regulations













EUR-Lex - 51997IP0149 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51997IP0149

Resolution on international fisheries agreements  


Official Journal C 167 , 02/06/1997 P. 0130 





A4-0149/97Resolution on international fisheries agreementsThe European Parliament,- having regard to Rule 148 of its Rules of Procedure,- having regard to the Commission Communication to the Council and the European Parliament on fisheries agreements, current situation and perspectives (COM(96)0488 - C4-0590/96),- having regard to the fishing possibilities in international areas provided for the EU through the North-West Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO), the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC), the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization, and the International Baltic Sea Fishery Commission (IBSFC),- having regard to the Commission Memorandum on the consequences of the non- conclusion of fisheries agreements by the Community (5 June 1996),- having regard to its resolution of 13 March 1996 embodying (i) Parliament's opinion on the convening of the Intergovernmental Conference, and (ii) an evaluation of the work of the Reflection Group and definition of the political priorities of the European Parliament with a view to the Intergovernmental Conference ((OJ C 96, 1.4.1996, p. 77.)), and in particular paragraph 17 thereof,- having regard to the resolution on fisheries in the context of ACP-EEC cooperation, adopted by the ACP-EEC Joint Assembly on 1 April 1993 in Gaborone ((OJ C 234, 30.8.1993, p. 42.)),- having regard to Article 228 of the EC Treaty, and in particular paragraph 3 thereof,- having regard to the motion for a resolution by Mr Fernández Albor on new ways of facilitating access by Community fishing fleets to third countries' fishery resources (B4-0126/96),- having regard to the Code of Conduct signed by Parliament and the Commission on 31 March 1995 ((OJ C 89, 10.4.1995, p. 69.)), and in particular points 1 and 3.10 thereof,- having regard to the joint declaration to improve the information provided to the budgetary authority concerning fisheries agreements, signed by Parliament, the Commission and the Council on 12 December 1996 ((OJ C 20, 20.1.1997, p. 109.)),- having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on External Economic Relations and the Committee on Development and Cooperation (A4-0149/97),A. whereas international agreements are a fundamental and increasingly important factor in maintaining the fishing activity of the Community fleet, which must be pursued in a rational and responsible manner, taking into account its effects on the marine ecosystem,B. whereas the common fisheries policy must also help achieve one of the European Union's present main objectives, i.e. maintaining existing jobs both at sea and in the processing industries which are mainly located in peripheral regions highly dependent on fisheries activity,C. whereas many of the world's living marine resources are under excessive pressure and to a considerable extent are being overexploited or depleted, whereas rising demand for fisheries products is all but certain to lead to further sharpening of the competition for these resources over the coming years and whereas this situation poses a number of challenges that need to be dealt with by all relevant parties,D. whereas it is important to determine at international level which living marine resources are under excessive pressure and in which areas, so that these species can be given greater protection in the context of fisheries activities,E. whereas a substantial number of the EU's international fisheries agreements are with ACP countries and whereas, although they relate to trade, these agreements have beneficial effects as regards development (employment, food supplies, etc.) and it is therefore necessary to coordinate Community fisheries and development policies,F. whereas the food security of growing world populations is often precarious and can be improved by careful use of their marine resources; whereas coastal regions - especially in poor and less developed countries - consequently need to use marine resources to create employment and to promote economic development,G. whereas the Community is a major player on the global fishing scene and there can be no question of escaping from the responsibilities emanating from this role,H. whereas Article 62 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) stipulates that coastal states are responsible for determining catch capacity within their Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and whereas, when a state does not have the capacity to exploit the total allowable catch, it is required to grant other states access to the surpluses by means of fisheries agreements or other arrangements,I. whereas the Community has signed the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Agreement on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks and is a party to the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries,J. whereas since the distribution of fish stocks frequently includes the EEZs of two or more states, a regional approach needs to be followed in the exploitation of these stocks,K. whereas the ACP states recognize in Article 64 of the Lomé Convention that there is a role for Community Member States' fishing fleets, operating lawfully in waters under ACP jurisdiction, in the economic development of ACP fishery potential, and declare their willingness to negotiate with the Community fishery agreements aimed at guaranteeing mutually satisfactory conditions for fishing activities of vessels flying the flag of Member States of the Community,L. whereas, furthermore, Article 64 of the Lomé Convention also stipulates that, in the conclusion or implementation of such agreements, the ACP states shall not discriminate against the Community or among the Member States,M. whereas Article 68 of the Lomé Convention stipulates that the compensation agreed by the Community under fisheries agreements should correspond to the scale and value of the fishing opportunities provided in the EEZs of the ACP states concerned,N. whereas Article 130v of the EC Treaty commits the Community to take account of its development cooperation objectives 'in the policies that it implements which are likely to affect developing countries¨, and whereas it is inconceivable to reject demands for coherence between different Community policies,O. whereas Article 130b of the Treaty on European Union stipulates that the formulation and implementation of the Community's policies and actions shall take into account the objectives set out in Article 130a as regards reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions and strengthening the economic and social cohesion of the Community as a whole,P. whereas Article J.1 of the EU Treaty states that the common foreign and security policy should promote international cooperation and whereas the Lisbon European Council of June 1992 affirmed the importance of political and economic stability in regions of the world,Q. whereas contributing to the development of local economies is not a fundamental objective of current fisheries agreements with developing countries, a task which is catered for by other Community financial mechanisms within the framework of development policy,R. whereas development policy for its part should focus mainly on aspects of overall development, which means that the important role played by fisheries policy in the sectoral development of many third countries must be recognized,S. whereas in the EEZs of countries in which large-scale fishing is carried out without adequate monitoring and control provisions, the greatest danger is that certain stock levels will be reduced to non-sustainable levels,T. whereas it is vital for countries with which the EU has fisheries agreements to demand that both the Union and third countries take steps to conserve resources in their exclusive economic zones,U. whereas, with regard to EU fleets, in addition to the control measures laid down on an ad hoc basis in the fisheries agreements, Member States are required to comply with the provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 establishing a system of controls for the common fisheries policy ((OJ L 261, 20.10.1993, p. 1.)) which apply to vessels flying the Community flag operating in waters under the sovereignty and jurisdiction of third countries,V. whereas the Community budget allocates ECU 280 million solely to the funding of fishing rights, which is equivalent to 0.31% of the Community budget and 29.99% of total Community resources for the fisheries sector,W. whereas the Community fleet has been significantly reduced in the past decade,X. whereas the item in the common fisheries policy budget earmarked for international fisheries agreements fell from ECU 278.5 m in 1996 to ECU 273.3 m in 1997 and whereas there has been no increase in the allocation for 1998; whereas, similarly, although the Community budget is growing, the common fisheries policy budget has remained virtually unchanged, with the result that its financial weight within the Community budget is declining,Y. whereas the European Union imports a large quantity of fishery products from third countries to supply its markets and whereas the catches made by the Community fleets are much lower than EU consumption,Z. whereas, although they are an important aspect of the common policy and should be fully funded from the Community budget, on average one third of the total cost of agreements concerning 'access to resources in exchange for financial compensation' is met by shipowners, something which does not occur under other agreements, such as those with Greenland or Norway, where no costs have to be borne by shipowners,AA. whereas cooperation in developing the fisheries sector of third countries is not incompatible with Community fisheries activity in the waters of those countries, since the Community fleet is only allowed to fish established surplus stocks and, on the contrary, Community fisheries activities give a clear boost to sectors and infrastructures related to fisheries in these countries, with the result that, as these countries increasingly develop their fisheries sectors, the opportunities for the Community fleet to fish surplus stocks decrease, as the case of Morocco clearly shows,AB. whereas fishing activities in third states' EEZs are not a sufficient solution for solving the problem of surplus capacity of the Community fishing fleet,AC. whereas, however, over-exploitation in the EEZs of third countries is due to some extent to the activities of non-Community fleets; whereas more and better information should be provided about their fishing effort and the steps taken to supervise the types of fishing which they carry out; whereas these matters should accordingly be discussed in such international bodies as might be called upon to act, in order to intensify multilateral contacts with all the parties concerned,AD. whereas access to fish stocks in third countries' waters can only be obtained for limited periods and the possibility of renewing agreements on access will always remain heavily dependent on political, economic and biological developments,AE. whereas, despite the difficulties involved in the conclusion and renewal of agreements with third countries, such agreements are of fundamental economic importance in maintaining employment in the outermost fishing regions of the European Union covered by Objective 1, where no employment alternatives to fishing are available,AF. whereas these supplies are of vital importance for the European processing industry, which is increasingly dependent on raw material from this source, since production from Community waters is insufficient,AG. whereas the Community lacks a defined policy for its international fisheries agreements, and a search for ad hoc solutions does not produce a satisfactory response to the challenge faced,AH. whereas international fisheries agreements are drawn up in negotiations between officials of the Union and the third countries without any preliminary discussion with Parliament of the objectives and aims of these agreements,AI. whereas Parliament is always consulted too late, under time pressure and without the necessary information for assessing an agreement and whereas a proper regime for follow-up of the agreements would improve transparency and democracy and also promote sound management and efficiency,AJ. whereas there are various types of international fishery agreements to which the EU is currently a party and whereas this variety is a product both of the different needs of the Community fleets and industries and the different economic, social and political characteristics of the third countries concerned, as well as the biological diversity of their waters, the varying degrees of development of the countries, the difference in their interests as regards the compensation the EU may offer and, in some cases, their ability properly to absorb and manage the compensation which is invariably a part of some of these agreements,AK. whereas it is in the best interest of the EU to promote fair and mutually beneficial fisheries agreements,AL. whereas international and multilateral agreements are an important component of the common fisheries policy,1. Points to the socio-economic importance of the fisheries sector in the EU and insists, therefore, that the ability of Community fishermen to obtain access to stocks must be maintained, strengthened, and diversified, since this is essential in order to help remedy the trade deficit and protect direct and indirect employment in fisheries and the related industries;2. Affirms that the EU must balance its own immediate interests and the future survival of its fleet while acknowledging that long-term sustainability is essential, both for the EU and third country coastal states,3. Supports the Community's fishing fleet and demands that it maintain its activity and employment both at sea and ashore, and stresses that international fisheries agreements are vital for that purpose;4. Welcomes the abovementioned Commission Communication 'Fisheries Agreements, Current Situation and Perspectives' as a positive beginning to reviewing its approach and urges the Commission to formulate proposals for the Community's fisheries agreements;5. Emphasizes, however, that fisheries agreements must fully conform to the Community's international obligations and overarching objectives and reflect the enlightened self-interest of the Community as a whole;6. Believes that the influence of the EU as a major player on the global fishing scene can be put to positive use to influence the development of world fisheries;7. Urges the Commission to initiate talks with other nations with large distant- water fleets to ensure that all nations negotiating fisheries agreements with developing countries respect obligations committed to in multilateral agreements;8. Believes that the Community should set examples of sound principles and good practices which would serve to promote the Community's international standing and become valuable assets in the pursuit of rational use of the world's living marine resources, as well as in conflict prevention;9. Asks the Commission and the Member States to bear in mind their undertaking, as parties to the FAO Code of Conduct for responsible fisheries, to collaborate with all other relevant actors in the fulfilment and implementation of the objectives and principles contained in that Code;10. Believes that while access to third countries' EEZs remains difficult, access arrangements could be extended in the short term by negotiating second- and so-called third-generation types of agreements and calls on the Commission to explore the options for these types of agreements to replace the financial compensation agreements, when such a replacement is possible;11. Believes that, given the scale of competing circumstances and without prejudice to the EU's undertaking to cooperate in the development of third countries, it is necessary to maintain a wide range of agreements to enable the genuine potential of both parties to be fruitfully and progressively exploited;12. Points out that it is the coastal states which have full responsibility for determining catch capacity in their waters, and that as a result the Community fleet only has access to surplus resources in all cases;13. Stresses in this connection that most ACP countries with which the Community has fisheries agreements do not have industrial fleets, with the result that the Community fleet catches perishable resources which would otherwise remain unfished, be caught illegally by other fleets or, at best, ceded to countries whose fisheries legislation as regards the control, management and conservation of resources may fall well short of the standards that the Community's regulations require of its fishermen and whose commitment to assisting development may be non- existent, which would not benefit the ACP or other developing countries in the slightest;14. Underlines that as the Community reduces the over-capacity in its fishing fleet, in the areas where it still has not done so, it must simultaneously further strengthen its regional aid to especially affected regions and direct its measures to the promotion of lasting conditions for economic well-being;15. Considers also that the social and economic interests of vessel owners and fishermen should be properly safeguarded in the event of unforeseen infringements of existing agreements;PRINCIPLES16. Calls on the Commission to draw up a proposal for a regulation providing a framework for the Community's international fisheries agreements, laying down the principles of:(i) sustainable use of the living marine resources and the prevention of depletion of target and non-target species and damage to the marine habitat,(ii) ensuring access to resources for the Community fleet,(iii) cooperation between all relevant actors on, inter alia, stock assessment; scientific research; conservation measures; monitoring and control; cohabitation between industrial and artisanal fisheries; creation and functioning of regional measures,(iv) full coherence between the fisheries agreements and Union policy in other sectors, not least as regards the impact on employment in areas dependent on fisheries;17. Notes the references to the precautionary approach contained in Article 130r of the EC Treaty, Article 7.5 of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and Article 6 of the UN Agreement on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks and calls on the Commission to follow the provisions contained in those texts, in particular with respect to the precautionary approach;18. Calls on the Commission to take note of the effects of international fisheries agreements on compliance with Articles 130a and 130b of the EC Treaty;19. Believes that greater importance should be placed on technical aspects of conservation in agreements with third countries and calls on the Commission to take account of them in negotiating all fisheries agreements and to advocate their explicit recognition;20. Calls on the Commission to pursue a policy of regular information, monitoring and control with regard to agreements with third countries and to take steps to improve them by providing the possibility, where circumstances so permit, for extending to other agreements the procedures laid down for countries such as Morocco and Mauritania;21. Calls on the Community to ensure that fisheries agreements are fully consistent with international law and codes of conduct relating to fishing activity;22. Emphasizes that given the severe lack of resources for adequate fisheries management prevailing in many of the countries with which the Community concludes fisheries agreements, there is often no chance at all for the recognised objectives to be realised unless the principle of cooperation is unequivocally adhered to and practised;23. Calls on the Commission to develop an integrated strategy in the Community's relations with developing countries in the fisheries field;GUIDELINES24. Calls on the Commission to draw up a set of guidelines to enable a uniform procedure when evaluating the implementation of expiring protocols on fishing opportunities or preparing for negotiations on new protocols or agreements. The guidelines should include:(i) acquisition of the fullest possible information on the status of stocks before an agreement is signed and, as far as possible, a regular evaluation of stock levels while the agreement is in force,(ii) evaluation of resources for scientific research, monitoring and control and training available in the third country and assessment of its needs for assistance,(iii) consultation of representatives of local fishing communities and consideration of their legitimate interests,(iv) coordination with other Community activities influencing the fishing industry in the area concerned,(v) a cost-benefit analysis of the agreement including not just financial, but all criteria,(vi) inclusion, where relevant, of provisions which are designed to ensure that local landing of fishery products does not undermine the functioning of local fish markets but contributes in a positive way to local economic development,(vii) a mechanism for the third country to report back to the EU the results on the research, education and training programmes funded by the Community,(viii) attainment of profitability for the Community fleet, as far as possible, and provision of sufficient supplies of the appropriate quality for the Community market which is in deficit,(ix) establishment of a public register of companies and enterprises benefitting under the agreements and publication of the criteria governing access to third country waters covered by each of the agreements concerned;BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS25. Draws attention to the importance of the correct implementation of the joint statement by the three institutions, Parliament, Council and Commission, on improving the provision of information to the budgetary authority on fisheries agreements, signed on 12 December 1996 and attached to the EP resolution of the same date on the draft general budget for 1997 as modified by the Council ((()OJ C 20, 20.1.1997, p. 101.));26. Reaffirms that in that statement the three institutions recognize the criteria set out by Parliament on entering, where necessary, the appropriations relating to international fisheries agreements (B7-800) in the reserve (B0-40), and that the agreement makes it possible to avoid systematic recourse by the Council and the Commission to the practice of provisionally implementing fisheries agreements and their financial protocols;27. Insists that Article B7-800 of the budget must also cover non-compulsory expenditure by virtue of the margin of discretion left to the Commission on the management of such expenditure and of the financial character of certain of the protocols annexed to fisheries agreements;28. Points out that it will be for the Budgetary Authority to decide under the annual budget procedure and in accordance with the financial perspectives in force (98/99) on the budgetary allocation for international fisheries agreements. Points out that, consequently, any multiannual financial statement can constitute no more than an estimate of expenditure and that no payment or commitment can be entered into on the basis thereof;ROLE OF PARLIAMENT29. Requests the Commission to supply Parliament's Committee on Fisheries, as a matter of routine, in a timely manner, with reports on the degree of implementation and functioning of the various agreements so as to respect the Commission's accountability to Parliament and guarantee a high quality for the basis of Parliament's opinions;30. Confirms its criteria for defining the concept of 'important budgetary implications' within the meaning of Article 228(3), second paragraph of the EC Treaty in the expectation that the outcome of the IGC will ensure that Parliament will in future be consulted on all fisheries agreements and their financial protocols under the assent procedure;31. Urges the Commission to consult Parliament on the negotiating mandate which the Council gives to the Commission;32. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission, the Co-Presidents of the ACP-EU Joint Assembly, the governments of all the states with which the EU has concluded fisheries agreements, the parliaments and governments of Member States and national fisheries organizations of the Member States.