WRITTEN QUESTION E-1745/02 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Participation by ship owners' and fishermen's organisations in the debate on the reform of the common fisheries policy.
Date: 2002-06-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common fisheries policy, fishing industry, professional association, social dialogue (EU)

C 309 E/158

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2002)

The argument that structural funds allocations cannot be changed during the financing period (2000-
2006) is incorrect in view of Article 14, paragraph 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June
1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (1). This article specifies that reprogramming
can take place either at the initiative of a Member State or of the Commission in agreement with this
Member State, at the mid-term review or in the event of significant changes in the socio-economic
situation and the labour market.

Furthermore, Article 3, paragraph 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 of 17 December 1999
laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries
sector (2) provides that ‘for the remainder of the programming period not yet covered by a multi-annual
guidance programme (MAGP) approved by the Commission, the programming information shall be purely
indicative’. Thus after the end of MAGP IV at the end of year 2002, any money earmarked by one Member
State for fleet renewal and modernisation under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG), will
be available for reprogramming to other areas by this same Member State.

The Commission is fully aware that bringing fishing effort down to a sustainable level, that is one which
would not threaten fish stocks over the long term, implies social costs in the short term. To alleviate these
costs, and to help fishermen who wish to re-train or to invest in new activities outside of the sector, the
Commission proposes that EUR 460 million be re-allocated to social measures from support to vessels
construction or modernisation, instead of the EUR 103 million currently programmed by Member States
under the FIFG for 2000 to 2006.

Social measures are necessary to help the fishing sector bridge the gap between the consequences of the
necessary reductions in fishing effort on threatened stocks, whether through limitations of fishing days or
through temporary closures of fishing zones, and the longer term gains in productivity and profitability of
the vessels remaining in the fleet. This in turn will mean better job security for fishermen wishing to
remain in the fishing sector, instead of the steady annual fall of close to 8 000 fisherman that we have seen
for the past ten years.

Ignoring now the hard fact that fish stocks in Community waters cannot sustain the size of the fishing
fleets we have today, would bring much more severe job losses from stock and fisheries collapses later.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
(2) OJ L 337, 30.12.1999.

(2002/C 309 E/186)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1745/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(19 June 2002)

Subject: Participation by ship owners’ and fishermen’s organisations in the debate on the reform of the

common fisheries policy

How will the Commission ensure the participation of these organisations in the reform of the CFP, in
order to enable then to express their views on both the state of fishery resources and the social and
economic problems caused by the reform and its definitive provisions?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 July 2002)

The Commission launched a large consultation process prior to the adoption of the common fisheries
policy (CFP) reform proposals in which the shipowners and fishermen organisations participated actively.

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/159

for the Commission when preparing its
The input received from the stakeholders was very useful
proposals for the CFP reform. The Commission is now highly interested in ensuring the participation of
stakeholders in the debate through the Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture and through the
Committee on Social Dialogue. Both Committees have been created by the Commission, the first to be
consulted on all questions concerning the common fisheries policy and the second to enable the dialogue
the Commission has undertaken a
between the social partners at European level. Furthermore,
communication action to explain the reform and discuss with the sector in each Member State.

This initiative was launched immediately after the adoption of the first package of reform proposals by the
Commission and includes visits to the Member States by both the Commissioner in charge of Agriculture
and Fisheries and the so-called ‘Blue Team’ which consists of Commission officials (mainly directors and
heads of unit) from Directorate-General Fisheries. The idea behind this communication initiative is to allow
for a presentation of the Commission proposals in face-to-face meetings with sector representatives, to
discuss the various elements of the proposals and to listen to the concerns of the industry about the
reform.

The Commissioner in charge of Agriculture and Fisheries has already visited three Member States and he
will go to a number of other Member States during the second half of 2002. The ‘Blue Team’ participates
in meetings organised by the sector and it has so far attended a dozen events in the Member States while
several other events have been scheduled. Furthermore, a considerable number of other meetings of the
‘Blue Team’ will be staged in the months to come with a view to covering many of the fisheries dependent
areas of the Member States and to explaining the next reform proposals that will be presented by the
Commission in the second half of 2002 and 2003.

In addition to this,
the establishment of Regional Advisory Councils as a mean to better involve
stakeholders in the management of the resources at regional and local level is one of the issues at stake in
the debate.

(2002/C 309 E/187)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1771/02

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 June 2002)

Subject: Minutes of Mr Pascal Lamy’s hearing before the Commission’s anti-fraud unit

In his answer to my Written Question E-0645/02 (1), Mr Prodi, President of the Commission, confirmed
that, while still a member of the Board of Directors of Crédit Lyonnais, Mr Pascal Lamy met officials of
UCLAF (the unit for the coordination of fraud prevention) on 20 November 1997 in Paris.

During his hearing before the European Parliament in the summer of 1999 prior to his appointment as
Commissioner, Mr Lamy failed to disclose that meeting. It is alleged that the subject of that meeting was
the contract with Group 4-Securitas. When that contract was concluded in 1992, and in subsequent years,
serious irregularities occurred (2)
in which senior officials in the Commission’s security services were
involved (manipulation of the procedure for awarding the contract for the benefit of Group 4-Securitas,
recruitment of ‘ghost’ employees, nepotism and covert surveillance of other Commission departments).

The answer to my Written Question E-0645/02 notes laconically that the European Anti-Fraud Office
(OLAF) does not have minutes of [the] meeting [in question].

Has the Commission actually asked Commissioner Lamy and the Commission officials involved

1.
whether or not minutes were taken at the meeting of 20 November 1997?

Is it true that, in this instance, as in the Fléchard case, minutes were, apparently, actually taken but

2.
have since disappeared without trace?