WRITTEN QUESTION E-2743/02 by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Fishing industry earnings.
Date: 2002-09-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common fisheries policy, economic consequence, fishery management, fishing net, fishing regulations, job cuts, redevelopment aid, social impact

8.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110 E/99

(2003/C 110 E/101)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2742/02

by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Absence of Greek from Inforegio website

(30 September 2002)

The Inforegio website offers visitors a very interesting opportunity to read about the achievements of
regional policy in each Member State. The page on Greece, however, (http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/
regional_policy/projects/stories/search.cfm) offers no Greek language option, which means that Greek
readers have to resort to another language to obtain information about their own country.

Can the Commission state the reasons for such a serious omission? Will the Commission in future also
provide such information in Greek?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(4 November 2002)

The Inforegio website devoted to the Union’s regional policy was run by a private firm until last February
but has now been transferred to the Europa server of the Commission, which is endeavouring subject to
resource availability and technical constraints to increase the number of documents put on line in all the
Union’s official
languages. The good practice examples presented on the Inforegio site to which the
Honourable Member refers will be published in Greek within the next few months and a further set of
examples will be published directly in Greek in spring 2003. The Commission will mark Greece’s six-
month presidency of the Council by publishing these examples in a brochure on Structural Fund action in
Greece.

(2003/C 110 E/102)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2743/02

by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(30 September 2002)

Subject: Fishing industry earnings

Can the Commission provide assurances that it has fully assessed the socio-economic impact of its
proposed reform of the common fisheries policy and its proposal in relation to the regulation of deep-sea
fisheries? Is the Commission fully aware of the economic hardship faced by fishermen and the fishing
industry in general and that the introduction by the Commission of measures which are not based on
verifiable up-to-date scientific information, as has recently been witnessed in the regulation of deep-sea
fisheries and the proposals for open access in the North Sea, will lead only to a total loss of confidence in
the EU fisheries management regime by the very people responsible for its implementation?

Is the Commission aware that Scottish fishermen’s earnings have plunged in three years to less than one
third of the 1998 estimate for the worst hit industry sector? Over that period, vessel earnings fell 25 %,
with a slight increase in prices being overwhelmed by a major loss of landings. The average fall in net
profits was estimated at 75 %, with net profits falling as a percentage of income from 18 to 10 %.

The loss of earnings has led to crewing problems for two thirds of vessels which experienced difficulties
recruiting experienced hands. The lack of confidence in the future of fishing has also meant an ageing
workforce, with only 37 per cent of fishermen being below 30, with a resulting impact on safety and
threatening the very future of fisheries-dependent communities.

Can the Commission ensure that the socio-economic consequences of its policies are fully assessed prior to
their implementation?

C 110 E/100

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.5.2003

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 October 2002)

In response to the Honourable Member’s questions concerning the socio-economic aspects of the reform of
the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) it should be noted that the decrease in earnings of fishermen and the
difficulties in recruiting crews are a consequence and result of overfishing and a decline in fish stocks.
A growing number of fish stocks are on the verge of collapse due to too much fishing by a fleet that is far
too large for the available fish. The proposed reform of the CFP sets out to address these problems. It
should deliver biological, economic and social sustainability.

The Commission is well aware that restructuring of the sector may have a cost in terms of jobs. Funding to
help fishermen take early retirement or train to enable them to work outside the fishing industry is already
eligible for grant aid from the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance.

As part of the ‘road map’ towards reform of the CFP, the Commission has made a commitment to publish,
before the end of 2002, an Action Plan to counter the social, economic and regional consequences of
restructuring of the Community fishing fleet. It has indicated that this plan would be based on bilateral
consultations with Member States to assess the likely socio-economic impacts of fishing effort limitation
schemes.

A round of bilateral meetings has already taken place and the Action Plan is likely to be presented to the
Council and Parliament around the end of October 2002.

Also, concerning the Proposal for a Regulation (1) on deep sea fisheries referred to by the Honourable
Member, the Commission took account of the historical data before preparing it and as a consequence
reflects the previous earnings of fishermen.

(1) OJ C 151 E, 25.6.2002.

(2003/C 110 E/103)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2765/02

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(1 October 2002)

Subject: Proposal for a directive on environmental liability (cid:1) Written Question P-2156/02 (cid:1) inadequate

reply (cid:1) violation of Article 197 of the EC Treaty

the no-fault

liability system. However,

In Written Question P-2156/02 (1), the Commission was asked to give a complete and specific list of
1.
cases in which, under the proposal for a directive on environmental liability, a no-fault liability system
would apply. It was rightly stated that this is strictly necessary in order to make it possible to determine
the Commission’s reply contains only general
the scope of
statements, which are not sufficient to determine its scope, and therefore does not comply with Article 197
of the EC Treaty or with the principle of the requisite transparency and public access to the work of the
European institutions. Consequently, the Commission is again asked to provide a full list of the specific
cases in which a no-fault liability system would apply under the proposal and to state its opinion on the
following assertion: the proposal for a directive gives the impression of instituting a system in which no-
fault liability would be the general rule, but a thorough study reveals that in fact the application of this
system would be not the rule but the exception.

Can the Commission give the reasons why it decided to include in its proposal for a directive the
2.
ground for exemption provided for in Article 9(1)(c) even though firstly this ground for exemption was
rejected in its white paper and secondly the other international environmental liability systems, including
that provided for by the Council of Europe’s Lugano Convention of 1993, do not include this ground?

(1) OJ C 301 E, 5.12.2002, p. 262.