WRITTEN QUESTION E-2123/02 by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. CFP reform and potential legal challenge.
Date: 2002-07-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: authorised catch, common fisheries policy, conservation of fish stocks, fishery management, fishing regulations

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/189

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 July 2002)

The Commission has made it clear in Section 3.3 of its Communication on the reform of the Common
Fisheries Policy (1) that it wishes to maintain relative stability and within this concept to ‘take account of
Hague Preferences, thereby removing any uncertainty about how relative stability is to be applied’.

(1) COM(2002) 181 final.

(2003/C 28 E/214)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2123/02

by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: CFP reform and potential legal challenge

(17 July 2002)

The principle of relative stability was laid down in Article 4(1) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 170/83 (1)
of 25 January 1983, the substance of which is restated in Article 8(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No
3760/92 (2) of 20 December 1992, and was further recognised by virtue of the Spanish and Portuguese
Acts of Accession. The principle has since been elaborated and reinforced by the Court of Justice (for
example but not limited to, Joined Cases C-418/00 and C-419/00, Case C-120/99, Joined Cases C-61/96,
C-132/97, C-45/98, C-27/99, C-81/00 and C-22/01, Case T-196/99 and Case C-4/96).

The acquis communautaire has
relative stability as
fundamental to the common fisheries policy. How can the Commission therefore justify any weakening
of a fundamental principle, as outlined in its recently published reform package, without opening up the
whole reform to legal challenge?

therefore firmly entrenched the principle of

(1) OJ L 24, 27.1.1983, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 389, 31.12.1992, p. 1.

(2003/C 28 E/215)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2124/02

by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Future of fisheries-dependent communities

(17 July 2002)

The European Court of Justice has clearly reinforced the principle of relative stability based on the original
text of Council Regulation (EEC) No 170/83 (1) as a principle which is intended to ensure for each Member
State a share of the Community’s TACs, determined essentially on the basis of the catches from which
traditional fishing activities and the local inhabitants dependent on fisheries and related industries of that
Member State benefited before the quota system was established (see, for example, Case C-4/96).

Adjusting the principle of relative stability, as proposed by the European Commission in its CFP reform
proposals, to a principle under which allocations should be based on an average share of catches over the
preceding 5 or 10 years and eventually eliminating the principle of relative stability, would be contrary to
the very essence of the principle and why it was established and has been consistently reaffirmed.
Adjusting and/or eliminating the principle would jeopardise the future of fisheries-dependent communities
which depend on their historical fishing rights being protected. Can the Commission therefore provide a
clear explanation as to how it will bear responsibility for destroying fragile communities where there is
often no alternative employment and, in so doing, undermining or eliminating what is a firmly established
fundamental Community principle?

(1) OJ L 24, 27.1.1983, p. 1.