Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament "The Future for the Market in Fisheries Products in the European Union: Responsibility, Partnership and Competitiveness"'
Date: 1998-05-27
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU market, common organisation of markets, competition law, fishery product, fishing industry

C 235/56

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.7.98

States, and also in the event of failure to reach a decision.
This basic democratic right of citizens is reflected in the
general principles of Community law.

3.7. Articles 7 to 21

The Committee has deliberately not commented on the
specific changes to the sectoral directives. It considers
that its priority should be to comment, in as concerted
a form as possible, on the changes of principle proposed
by the Commission, and for this reason it feels that it

should refrain from discussion of essentially uncontro-
versial adjustments.

4. Final comments

The Committee in principle endorses the Commission
proposal as it considers this to be an important instru-
ment for simplification of the law and greater trans-
parency.

The proposed measures for simplification of work
will, apart from making for an improved cost/benefit
relationship, accelerate work processes and thus
strengthen citizens’ confidence in Europe.

Brussels, 27 May 1998.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission
to the Council and the European Parliament “The Future for the Market in Fisheries Products
in the European Union: Responsibility, Partnership and Competitiveness”’

(98/C 235/12)

On 22 December 1997 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee,
under Articles 43 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the
above-mentioned communication.

The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s
work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 12 May 1998. The rapporteur was Mr Chagas.

At its 355th plenary session (meeting of 27 May 1998), the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 103 votes with six abstentions.

1.

Introduction

The aim of the communication from the Com-
1.1.
mission is to lay the foundations for a debate on the
amendments to be made to the common organization
of the market (COM), in order to improve market
functioning and bring this aspect of the Common
Fisheries Policy (CFP) into line with changes on the
fisheries products markets.

The Commission is to submit proposals for

1.2.
improving the operation of the COM at a later stage.

2. General comments

will submit the document to a broad institutional debate
and wide-ranging consultation with the principal actors
in the fisheries sector (vessel owners, workers, industry,
consumers).

2.2.
The Committee recalls that the COM was set up
under Regulation (EEC) No 2142/70 (1), which outlined
the general principles governing this aspect of the
Common Fisheries Policy, and which has been adjusted
over the years when necessary. The most recent adjust-
ment was made by the basic regulation which came into
force on 1 January 1993 (2).

The Committee welcomes the Commission’s
2.1.
communication, and in particular its statement that it

(1) OJ L 236, 27.10.1970, p. 5.
(2) OJ L 388, 31.12.1992, p. 1.

27.7.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235/57

2.3.
The COM has many parallels with the Common
Agricultural Policy (CAP) — on which it is largely
modelled — and shares certain of its objectives, such
as market stabilization, guarantee of supplies and
reasonable prices. The COM also complies with the
same principles: market unity, financial solidarity and
Community preference.

the COM are fully consistent with identical measures,
already taken or to be adopted, in connection with
the other aspects of the Common Fisheries Policy,
particularly concerning structures, resources and moni-
toring.

2.4.
Unlike the CAP, the COM has been affected by
the binding in GATT of the entire customs tariff for
fishery products. This was a political choice, decided at
the Dillon Round of GATT negotiations in the 1960s,
and the difficulties it has caused are well known; it has
also made it impossible for the Commission to increase
tariff protection. Further concessions were made in
subsequent rounds.

As the common customs tariff is bound in GATT,
2.5.
the COM for fishery products operates under market
economy conditions, making it impossible to restrict
imports from third countries or adjust production aid,
with the exception of the safeguard measures under
GATT rules. This does not mean that the principle of
Community preference is not fully implemented, or that
the customs tariff for fishery products is not carefully
applied: whenever protection of Community production
is reduced, it is counterbalanced by concessions by third
countries which are of direct benefit to the fisheries
sector.

The COM alone cannot solve the range of

2.6.
problems affecting the sector.

It should be borne in mind that

2.7.
the main
imbalances in the sector spring mostly from overcapacity
in relation to available resources, which in turn do
not match demand, excessive debt, high levels of
exploitation, low productivity and, to some extent,
inadequacies in marketing channels. These internal,
structural factors, considerable in themselves, are aggra-
vated by external factors such as market globalization,
the lowering of tariff barriers and/or the dismantling of
obstacles to trade, competition from other products,
and lower transport costs which bring European markets
within range of the sector’s main competitors.

2.8.
For EU fisheries to survive on a viable basis,
resources must be exploited rationally and integrated
measures must be adopted covering all aspects of the
Common Fisheries Policy.

2.10.
The Committee would also point out that as
part of the broad-based approach mentioned above,
future adjustments to the COM in fishery products must
be matched by socio-economic support measures to
facilitate their adoption by the sector. In this respect, it
is also important for producers’ organizations to be
present and active in all Member States involved in the
fisheries sector.

2.11.
The aim of the COM for fishery products is to
regulate market competition, preventing unfair compe-
tition by third countries while respecting the Union’s
international commitments.

The European Union and the Member States
2.12.
must use the instruments available to them more
rigorously to prevent fishery resources being marketed
within the Community with total disregard to the
established rules, in unfair competition with our oper-
ators. This situation is unacceptable, as both the fisheries
sector and the ESC have argued on several occasions.
There are many shortcomings in the checks on the
application of the current rules, which are in part
responsible for the unsettled conditions in the sector.

2.12.1.
Application of current provisions governing
imports must be checked more strictly, particularly with
regard to hygiene and health requirements, labelling and
minimum fish size (immatures).

As for other products in similar circumstances,
2.13.
matching offer and demand is the decisive factor in
determining producer income. Producers must draw the
appropriate conclusions, and the COM intervention
mechanisms should be in a position to fulfil this
regulatory role, especially since catches are by nature
unpredictable.

The Committee notes that EU per capita fish
2.14.
consumption has risen continuously, but very modestly,
over the last few years of the 1990s, and that consumption
patterns vary widely, particularly for fresh fish.

The Committee assumes that the Commission
2.9.
will ensure that the measures currently proposed under

2.15.
Positive steps can be taken to encourage the
European public to eat more fish, which would also
contribute to healthier eating patterns: promotion of
fishery products is an aspect which COM reform

C 235/58

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.7.98

must under no circumstances overlook. Producers’
organizations should make more frequent use of existing
Community incentives to support campaigns promoting
fish consumption and publicity campaigns for the
consumption of new species.

2.15.1.
meeting this objective on a lasting basis.

The price factor could also play a key role in

2.16.
Producers’ organizations and the entire com-
mercial sector downstream of them must also take steps
to improve market transparency and recognize the
strategic importance of consumer information.

2.16.1.
The Committee agrees that optimization of
production and greater transparency in commercial
relations depend on the adoption of measures concerning
the trade name of species, their origin, production
method and degree of freshness.

2.16.2.
The Committee hopes that the proposals on
the vertical integration of the sector will be put forward
as soon as possible.

2.17.
responsible fishing and trading.

The Committee fully supports the principle of

2.17.1.
The Committee considers that the promotion
of good practice, in both sea catches and aquaculture
and marketing, could help to raise standards generally,
and more specifically could help Community production
to compete with third countries.

2.18.
Concentrating supply, by encouraging fisher-
men to land their catches in ports equipped for control
operations, could act as a powerful deterrent to illicit
practices.

2.19.
The Committee expresses some reservations
concerning the wording of point III.A.4(b) on fishery
products which comply with the rules of ‘environmental
protection’. It believes that this concept needs proper
clarification, as it could be misused to sanction practices
which distort competition.

Brussels, 27 May 1998.

2.20.
If the growing and increasingly fierce compe-
tition from non-EU producers, and from EU fish
farm produce (which is booming, even for high-value
products), is to be met successfully, the sector must
make a real commitment to a quality-based policy
capable of satisfying consumer demands.

The Committee agrees that support should be
2.21.
given to actions smoothing the flow of supplies — in
good condition and of good quality — from Community
production to the processing industry, given the com-
plementary nature of the two sectors. The use of supply
contracts would appear to offer an appropriate solution
here.

2.21.1.
The aim is to avoid distortions of competition
given tariff concessions granted to third countries
to gain access to the Community market, and the
advantages they enjoy in terms of lower production
factor and raw material costs.

In a context of scarce resources, the Committee
2.22.
agrees that in broad terms the sector should begin
to give serious thought to abolishing incentives for
withdrawal-destruction, so as to encourage producers
to make more systematic use of withdrawal-carryover,
as has been the case for some farm produce. Innovation
in the creation of new products and more sophisticated
processing methods should be strongly supported.

3. Specific comments

3.1.
It is pointed out, in connection with chapter III
A(3), on private storage aid, that in some Member States
producers’ organizations do not always own their stocks.
It must therefore be made clearer to whom storage aid
is granted.

3.2.
Turning to the trade arrangements with third
countries and the adoption of good practice in both the
catch and marketing sectors, the Committee considers
that the comments on fish caught in international waters
should also mention vessels flying flags of convenience.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS