Proposal for a Council Decision on a Community financial contribution towards Member States fisheries control programmes
Date: 2003-11-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU aid, common fisheries policy, eligibility criteria, fishing controls, project evaluation

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 20.11.2003
COM(2003) 706 final

2003/0281 (CNS)

Proposal for a

COUNCIL DECISION

on a Community financial contribution towards Member States fisheries control
programmes

(presented by the Commission)

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

The main objective of the Common fisheries policy is to provide for sustainable exploitation
of living aquatic  resources and of aquaculture in the  context of sustainable development.  In
order  to  ensure  the  achievement  of  this  objective,  Community  rules  shall  be  applied,  in  an
effective  and  uniform  manner.  Even  though  it  is  up  to  the  Member  States  to  ensure  the
effective  implementation  of  the  control,  inspection  and  surveillance  of  fisheries  and  related
activities, by establishing administrative and technical structures, it is of Community interest
that  the  Member  States  have  structures  allowing  them  to  meet  the  requirements  of
Community legislation. It is therefore important to ensure that the Member States have human
resources and technical means which are adequate for the control purposes.

In 1990, the Community introduced an aid scheme to provide financial support to the Member
States for the establishment of control structures, and in particular to promote certain forms of
control  which  are  particularly  effective,  such  as  systems  to  monitor  fishing  activities  at  a
distance. To take account of the results of the measure and the needs of the Member States in
this area, these arrangements were amended in 1995 and most recently in 2001 by Decision
2001/431/EC1.

Decision 2001/431/EC is due to expire on 31 December 2003; the Council decided in 2001 to
limit the scheme to that date in order to assess the need which would arise from the reform of
the CFP, which was planned for the end of 2002 and that came into force on 1 January 2003.

Having  taken  into  account  the  results  of  the  existing  measure  and  needs  in  the  light  of  the
outcome  of  the  Reform,  the  Commission  is  proposing  to  extend  the  arrangements  in  an
amended form for two years for the following reasons:
–  Regulation  (EC)  No  2371/20022  stresses  the  need  to  employ  modern  technologies  to
extend  the  system  of  remote  monitoring  to  smaller  fishing  vessels  and  introduce  the
electronic transmission of information from vessels and the remote detection of the vessels
present on fishing grounds;

–  on 1 May 2004 ten new countries will join the Community. The monitoring structures of
some  of  these  countries  need  upgrading  rapidly  if  operators  are  not  to  profit  from
shortcomings in the control system;

–  the Council has decided to step up cooperation among the Member States and coordination
of  their  inspection  activities  by  establishing  a  common  inspection  structure  using  the
structures,  equipment  and  communications  networks  provided  by  the  Member  States.  As
far  as  possible,  therefore,  the  existing  resources  should  be  supplemented  and  adapted
before 2006, at the time when the inspection structure is likely to come into operation;

–  it  has  been  found,  principally  through  the  annual  reports  on  serious  infringement  of  the
CFP  rules,  that  the  Member  States  prosecute  infringements  with  varying  degrees  of
diligence  and  severity.  This  means  that  awareness  of  the  importance  of  penalising
behaviour deleterious to the conservation of fisheries resources should be increased. This
will require promotion of a culture of protection of natural resources and inspection of all
those helping implement the CFP so that effective penalties can be applied.

1

2

OJ L 154, 9.6.2001, p. 22.
OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p.59.

2

                                                
For these  reasons  and for the sake of greater clarity, it is proposed to redefine the measures
eligible for financial support from the Community, most of which are already covered by the
existing rules. The measures proposed as eligible for finance are:

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

purchase of computer equipment and installation of IT networks;

purchase  of  devices  to  locate  fishing  vessels  and  equipment  for  the  electronic
transmission of information;

pilot projects concerning the new technologies for monitoring fisheries activities;

training and exchanges of inspectors;

pilot projects for inspection plans and observers;

cost/benefit analysis of expenditure on inspections;

initiatives  to  raise  awareness  of  the  importance  of  complying  with  fisheries  control
provisions;

(8) 

purchase and modernisation of boats and aircraft for inspections at sea.

The  annual  appropriations  planned  amount  to  €35  million  for  2004  and  2005.  The  normal
Community  contribution  will  be  50%  of  the  expenditure  incurred  by  the  Member  States;  it
could be higher for expenditure under (2), (3) and (7). Projects under (8) may receive no more
than  35%  of  expenditure  and  only  the  new  Member  States  joining  on  1  May  2004  will  be
eligible.

The procedural provisions on applying for aid and payment have been amended to make them
clearer  and  more  precise.  New  provision  specify  the  content  of  the  demand  for  Community
financial  assistance  to  projects.  A  statement  of  expenditure  will  now  on  be  required  to
accompany  any  claim  for  reimbursement.  New  rules  for  decommitment  of  unutilised
appropriations  are  laid  down.  These  provisions  replace  those  existing  under  Decision
2001/431/EC, which is repealed.

3

2003/0281 (CNS)

Proposal for a

COUNCIL DECISION

on a Community financial contribution towards Member States fisheries control
programmes

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community,  and  in  particular
Article 37 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission3,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament4,

Whereas:

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

The  Common  Fisheries  Policy  (CFP)  sets  out  general  rules  on  the  conservation,
management  and  responsible  exploitation,  and  processing  and  marketing  of  living
aquatic resources.

Specific objectives  and rules are set out in particular in Council Regulation (EC) No
2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the  conservation and sustainable  exploitation of
fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy5.

Responsibility  for  ensuring  that  activities  carried  out  within  the  scope  of  the  CFP
comply with those rules lies primarily with Member States.

(4)  Member  States  must  have  the  requisite  human  and  financial  resources  to  discharge
their responsibility for controlling fishing activities and enforcing the CFP rules.

(5) 

Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 stressed the need to further improve control of fishing
activities in order to fight by any means against illegal and undeclared fishing within
and outside Community waters. It identified  remote  control technologies as  a  tool to
better achieve the control objectives under CFP and extended the obligation for remote
monitoring  by  means  of  vessel  monitoring  systems  to  vessels  more  than  15  meters
overall.

(6)  With effect from the date of accession the CFP rules will apply to new Member States
which must be able to comply with all the requirements laid down by Community law,
in particular in the control field. Those new Member States must be given the means to
enable them to carry out their obligations.

3

4

5

OJ C , , p. .
OJ C , , p. .
OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p.59

4

                                                
(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

The Community has been granting financial assistance to Member States since 1990 to
make  controls  more  efficient  and  effective  and  in  particular  to  introduce  and  extend
remote-control  technology  and  information  technology  networks,  to  improve  staff
skills and to equip competent authorities with patrol vessels and surveillance aircraft.

The  current  financial  scheme  under  Council  Decision  2001/431/EC  of  28  May  2001
on a financial  contribution by the Community to  certain  expenditure  incurred  by  the
Member  States  in  implementing  the  control,  inspection  and  surveillance  systems
applicable  to  the  common  fisheries  policy6  will  expire  at  the  end  of  2003.  There  is
evidence, however, that the resources of Member States are still inadequate.

It  is  of  paramount  importance  to  ensure  that  CFP  rules  are  effectively  enforced
throughout  the  Community.  It  appears  that  some  of  those  involved  in  the
administrative or penal procedures  are  not  always  fully  aware of  the  need  to  impose
sanctions which are dissuasive in order to avoid overexploitation of fishing stocks. It is
therefore appropriate to promote actions to focus attention on this issue.

(10)  Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 underlined the need  to enhance  co-operation  and  co-
ordination  among  Member  States  and  with  the  Commission  in  order  to  strengthen
control  and  discourage  behaviour  contrary  to  CFP  rules.  A  structure  designed  to
organise co-operation and co-ordination of control activities and of means dedicated to
control purposes is expected to be operational in 2006.

(11) 

It is therefore  appropriate  to  continue  to  provide  financial  support  to  Member  States
until that time. It is necessary to ensure that Community funds are allocated efficiently
with  a  view  to  reducing  identified  weaknesses.  The  funds  should  be  used  in
accordance with the principle of sound financial management.

(12)  A  financial  reference,  within  the  meaning  of  point  34  of  the  Interistitutional
Agreement  of  6  May  1999  between  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the
Commission on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure7, is
inserted  in  this  Decision  for  the  entire  duration  of  the  period  for  which  financial
assistance  is  to  be  provided,  without  thereby  affecting  the  powers  of  the  budgetary
authority as defined by the Treaty.

(13)  Member States must assess their programmes and the impact of their expenditure on
control, inspection and surveillance, each  year and over the whole period covered by
this Decision and Decision 2001/431/EC.

(14)  Decision 2001/431/EC should accordingly  be repealed and replaced  by the measures

provided for in this Decision,

6

7

OJ L 154, 9.6.2001, p. 22.
OJ C 172, 18.6.1999, p. 1.

5

                                                
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1
Subject-matter

This Decision establishes  the  conditions  under  which  the  Community  may  grant  a  financial
contribution to Member States for their fisheries control programmes

Article 2
Definitions

For the purpose of this Decision the following definitions shall apply:

“financial contribution” means a financial contribution paid by the Community to a Member
State under this Decision;

“fisheries  control  programme”  means  a  programme  drawn  up  by  a  Member  State  for
monitoring, control and surveillance in fields covered by the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)
as required by Regulations (EC) No 2371/2002;

“new Member State” means a country which accedes to the Community on 1 May 2004.

Article 3
Annual fisheries control programmes

1.

Member  States  wishing  to  receive  a  financial  contribution  shall  notify  to  the
Commission,  by  31  January  of  each  year,  an  annual  fisheries  control  programme
specifying:

(a) 

the objectives of the programme;

(b) 

the human resources available;

(c) 

the financial resources available;

(d) 

the number of vessels and aircraft available;

(e) 

(f) 

a list of projects for which a financial contribution is sought;

the overall expenditure planned for achieving the projects;

(g) 

a schedule for completion of each project listed in the programme.

2.

3.

For  the  year  2004,  new  Member  States  shall  submit  their  annual  fisheries  control
programme by 1 June 2004.

Detailed rules on the content of the fisheries control programme are set out in Annex
I, part A.

6

Article 4
Actions covered

1.

The projects for which a financial contribution is sought shall relate to one or more
of the following actions:

purchase of, installation and technical assistance for, computer technology and setting

(a)
up of IT networks in order to allow efficient and secure data exchange in connection with
monitoring, control and surveillance of fisheries activities;

(b)

purchase and fitting on board of fishing vessels of:

(i) - electronic localisation devices enabling vessels to be monitored at a distance by
fisheries monitoring centre through a vessel monitoring system (VMS);

(ii) - electronic recording and reporting devices, allowing data transmission from the
vessel;

pilot projects relating to and implementation of new technologies on the control of

(c)
fisheries activities;

training and exchange programmes of civil servants responsible for monitoring,

(d)
control and surveillance tasks in the fisheries area;

(e)

implementation of pilot inspection and observer schemes;

cost/benefit analysis and assessment of overall expenditure incurred by the competent

(f)
authorities in carrying out monitoring, control and surveillance of fisheries activities;

initiatives including seminars and media tools aimed at enhancing awareness among

(g)
fishermen and other players such as inspectors, public prosecutors and judges, as well as
among the general public of the need to fight irresponsible and illegal fishing and on the
implementation of CFP rules.

(h)
purchase and modernisation of vessels and aircraft used for inspection and
surveillance of fisheries activities by the competent authorities of the new Member States.

2.

Detailed rules on the actions covered are set out in Annex I, Part B.

Article 5
Community appropriations

1.

2.

The  financial  reference  for  the  implementation  of  the  actions  for  which  financial
assistance  is  provided  for  the  period  2004  to  2005  shall  be  EUR  70  million.  The
annual appropriations shall be authorised by the budgetary authority within the limits
of the financial perspectives.

In the decision granting a Community financial contribution provided for in Article
6, the Commission shall give priority to the actions which it deems most appropriate
in order to improve efficiency in monitoring, control and surveillance activity, taking
also  into  account  the  performance  of  Member  States  in  implementing  programmes
already approved.

7

Article 6
Decision on financial contribution

1.

On  the  basis  of  the  fisheries  control  programmes  submitted  by  Member  States,  a
decision  shall  be  taken  each  year,  in  accordance  with  the  procedure  referred  to  in
Article 30(2) of Regulation (EC) n° 2371/2002. The decision shall fix:

the global amount of the financial contribution to be granted to each Member State for

a)
the actions referred to in Article 4;

b)

c)

2.

the rate of the financial contribution;

any condition applying to the financial contribution.

The rate of  the  financial  contribution  shall  not exceed  50%  of eligible  expenditure.
However,

for the actions referred to in Article 4(1) (b), the Commission may decide to grant a

a)
lump sum per vessel localisation device or for a device allowing electronic recording and
reporting of data;

for the actions referred to in Article 4(1) (c) and (g), the Commission may decide on a

b)
rate of contribution higher than 50% of the eligible expenditure;

for the actions referred to in Article 4(1) (h) the rate may not exceed 35% of the

c)
eligible expenditure.

Article 7
Advances

At the reasoned request of a Member State, the Commission may grant an advance of up to 50
%  of  the  financial  contribution  for  one  year.  The  amount  of  the  advance  shall  be  deducted
from the amount of the final payment of the financial contribution to that Member State.

If a binding commitment is not made by the competent authority within the period laid down
in Article 8, any advance granted shall be repaid forthwith.

Article 8
Commitment of expenditure

Member State shall enter into legal and budgetary commitments at the latest within 12 months

after the end of the year in which the decision referred to in Article 6 was notified to it.

Article 9
Implementation of project

1.

Projects  shall  be  started  in  accordance  with  the  schedule  laid  down  in  the  annual
fisheries  control  programme  and  in  any  case  within  one  year  as  of  the  date  of  the
commitment.

8

2.

They shall be completed according to that schedule.

Article10
Non-implementation of projects

When  a  Member  State  decides  not  to  implement  all  or  part  of  the  projects  for  which  a
financial contribution has been  granted  it  shall immediately inform the Commission, stating
the implications for its fisheries control programme.

Article 11
Eligible expenditure

1.

a)

b)

In order to be eligible for reimbursement, expenditure must :

be provided for in the fisheries control programme;

relate to the actions referred to in Article 4;

concern projects with a cost exceeding EUR 50 000 except in respect of action

c)
referred to under Article 4(1) (d) and (g);

arise from legal and budgetary commitments entered into by Member States in

d)
accordance with Article 8;

e)

2.

3.

4.

1.

2.

concern projects implemented in accordance with Article 9.

Value added tax (VAT) shall not be eligible for reimbursement.

Expenditure  on  projects  which  benefit  from  other  Community  aid  shall  not  be
eligible.

For  the new Member  States,  expenditures  incurred  from  1  January  2004  is  eligible
for reimbursement subject to compliance with conditions set out in this Decision and
in the decision referred to in Article 6.

Article 12
Claims for reimbursement

Member  States  shall  submit  to  the  Commission  their  claims  for  reimbursement  of
expenditure within 6 month following the date on which it was incurred. Claims shall
be for an amount not less than EUR 25 000. Claims for an amount less than EUR 25
000 shall not be processed, unless duly justified.

Detailed rules on the content of the claims for reimbursement are set out in Annex I,
Part C.

Claims  for  projects  which  were  not  completed  in  accordance  with  the  schedule
referred to in Article 3.1(f) may be accepted only where the delay is duly  justified.
Where  those  claims  are  not  accepted  the  Community  appropriations  may  be
decommitted. In any event, Community appropriations related to this Decision shall
be decommited at the latest by 31 December 2008.

9

3.

4.

When submitting claims for reimbursement,  Member  States  shall  verify  and  certify
that the expenditure has been incurred in compliance with the conditions laid down
in this Decision, in the Decision provided for in Article 6 and with the rules on the
award  of  public  contracts.  The  claim  shall  include  a  statement  concerning  the
accuracy  and  veracity  of  the  transmitted  accounts,  in  accordance  with  the  form  set
out in Annex II.

If  the  Commission  considers  that  the  claim  does  not  comply  with  the  conditions
referred  to  in  paragraph  3,  it  shall  request  the  Member  State  to  submit  its
observations  on  the  matter.  If  the  examination  confirms  non-compliance,  the
Commission  shall  refuse  to  reimburse  all  or  part  of  the  expenditure  at  issue  and,
where applicable, request reimbursement of advance payments.

Article 13
Currency

All  fisheries  control  programmes,  claims  for  reimbursement  of  expenditure  and  claims  for
payment of advances shall be expressed in Euro.

Member  States  not  participating  in  the  third  stage  of  economic  and  monetary  union  shall
specify the exchange rate used.

Reimbursement will be made in Euro at the rate for the month in which the claim is received
by the Commission.

Article 14
Information

Member States shall provide the Commission and the Court of Auditors with any information
it may request as regards the implementation of this Decision and the Decision provided for in
Article 6.

They shall keep supporting documents available to the Commission and the Court of Auditors
for at least five years from the date of reimbursement.

Article 15
Checks

1.

Without  prejudice  to  checks  carried  out  by  the  Member  States  in  accordance  with
national laws, regulations and administrative provisions, officials of the Commission
and of the Court of Auditors may carry out on-the-spot checks on projects benefiting
from a financial contribution.

The Commission may also require the Member State concerned to carry out on-the-spot
checks on projects benefiting from a financial contribution. Officials of the Commission and
of the Court of Auditors may take part in such checks.

2.

If  the  Commission  considers  that  Community  resources  have  not  been  used  in
accordance with the conditions laid down in this Decision or in the decision provided
for in Article 6, it shall inform the Member State concerned. If those considerations

10

are not refuted, the Commission shall reduce or cancel the financial contribution to
the  projects  at  issue.  Any  amount  unduly  paid  shall  be  repaid  to  the  Commission,
together with interest.

Article 16
Reports from the Member States

Member States shall send the Commission information enabling it to verify the use made of
the  financial  contribution  and  to  assess  the  impact  of  the  measures  provided  for  in  this
Decision on control, inspection and surveillance activity.

To that end, they shall submit to the Commission :

before 30 March each year, an intermediate assessment report on their fisheries control

(a)
programme for the previous year covering the following :

(i)

projects completed,

(ii)

the cost of projects,

the  impact  on  the  fisheries  control  programmes  by  applying  appropriate

(iii)
indicators,

(iv)

any adjustment to the original programme.

(b)

by 31 December 2006 at the latest, a final assessment report covering the following :

(i)

projects completed,

(ii)

the cost of projects,

the  impact  on  the  fisheries  control  programmes  by  applying  appropriate

(iii)
indicators,

(iv)

any adjustment to the original programme,

the impact of the financial contribution on fisheries  control  programmes over

(v)
the whole period from 2001 to 2005.

Article 17
Report to the European Parliament and the Council

On  the  basis  of  the  information  provided  by  the  Member  States  under  Article  16,  the
Commission shall, by 30 June 2007 at the latest, submit to the European Parliament and to the
Council a report on the application of this Decision and Decision 2001/431/EC.

Article 18
Implementing measures

When appropriate, detailed rules for the implementation of this Decision shall be adopted in
accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 30(2) of Regulation (EC) n°2371/2002.

11

Article 19
Transitional provisions

This Decision shall not affect the continuation or modification, including the total or

1.
partial cancellation, of financial contribution approved on the basis of Decision 2001/431/EC.

As of 1 January 2004, claims for reimbursement relating to financial contribution

2.
referred to in paragraph 1, shall be submitted in conformity with Article 12, Annex I, Part C
and Annex II of this Decision.

Article 20
Repeal

Decision 2001/431/EC is repealed as from 1 January 2004.

This Decision shall apply from 1 January 2004.

Article 21
Application

Article 22
Addressees

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels,

For the Council
The President

12

ANNEX I

Part A

Minimum information requirements for the annual fisheries control programmes as referred to
in Article 3

(1) For each project the annual fisheries control programme must specify one of the  actions
referred  to  in  Article  4,  and  the  aim,  the  description,  the  owner,  the  location,  the  estimated
cost, the administrative procedure to be followed and the timetable for its achievement.

(2) As regards the vessels, aircraft and helicopters as referred to in Article 4(1) (h), the annual
fisheries control programme must also specify :

(a)  to  what  extent  they  will  be  used  by  the  competent  authorities  for  control  purposes  as  a
percentage of their use over a year’s total activity;

(b) how many hours or days over a year they will be used for fishery control purposes;

(c) in the case of modernisation, their life expectancy.

(3)  Whenever  possible,  there  must  be  publicity  as  regards  the  financial  support  from  the
Community.

Part B

Detailed rules on eligible actions set out in Article 4

Vessel localisation devices referred to in Article 4(1)(b)(i) must be in conformity with

(1)
the provisions laid down by the relevant Community rules.

Expenditure incurred for the action foreseen in Article 4(1)(d) will be reimbursed to

(2)
the extent that it is eligible for reimbursement in conformity with relevant national rules.

Expenditure incurred for purchase of equipment referred to in Article 4(1)(h), may be

(3)
reimbursed to the extent that it is used for control of fishing activity, as declared by the
Member State concerned.

Part C

Rules on claims for reimbursement as referred to in Article 12

Claims for reimbursement shall include the following :

a reference to the Decision referred to in Article 6 and the table annexed thereto

1)
specifying the aid granted;

2)

3)

a list of all the supporting documents sorted by project;

the amounts claimed without VAT, sorted by projects;

13

a brief description of each project for which a reimbursement is claimed on what has

4)
been achieved, accompanied by an assessment of the impact of the investment on monitoring,
control and surveillance activity and a forecast of its use.

14

ANNEX II

STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURE

PUBLIC EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN CARRYING OUT THE NATIONAL
PROGRAMME FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CONTROL, INSPECTION AND
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS ON FISHERIES ACTIVITIES
 as provided for in Article 12 of Council Decision 2003/…/EC

Commission Decision of / No

________________________________________

National reference (if any)

________________________________________

I,  the  undersigned  _____________________________________  representing  the  authority
_____________________________________________ responsible for the relevant financial
and  control  procedures,  hereby  certify,  after  verification,  that  all  amounts  shown  below
represent the total cost, paid in 200_ ,  in  accordance with relevant  national legislation, with
regard to projects approved and referring to actions set out in Article 4(1) of Council Decision
2003/…/EC :

- a) computer technology and IT networks

__________

technology  (vessel
- b) remote  control 
localisation  devices  and  recording  and
reporting devices)

__________

- c) pilot projects on new technologies

__________

- d) training and exchange programmes of
control department officials

__________

- e) inspection and observer pilot schemes __________

- f) assessment  of  public  expenditure  in
the control area

__________

- g) seminars and media

-  h)  acquisition  and  modernisation  of
control, 
surveillance
equipment

inspection 

and 

__________

__________

EUR8

EUR

EUR

EUR

EUR

EUR

EUR

EUR

I  also  certify  that  the  statement  of  expenditure  is  accurate  and  the  application  for  payment
takes account of any recoveries made.

===========

EUR

8

Exact amount to two decimal places.

15

                                                
The operations were carried out in accordance  with the objectives  laid  down  in  the  Council
Decision  2003/…/EC),  and  with  the  provisions  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  2371/2002,  in
particular as regards:

- compliance with the conditions laid down in this Decision and the Directives concerning the
co-ordination of procedures for the award of public works, supply and service contracts, and
in accordance with the detailed rules in Part C of Annex I;

- application of management and control procedures, in particular to verify the delivery of the
products and services co-financed and the reality of expenditure claimed and to prevent,
detect and correct irregularities, pursue fraud, and recover unduly paid amounts.

Date .. / .. / ….

Name capitals, stamp, position
and signature of competent authority

16

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT

Policy area(s): FISHERIES

Activit(y/ies): 11.07. Fisheries conservation, control and enforcement

TITLE  OF  ACTION:  COMMUNITY  FINANCIAL  CONTRIBUTION  TOWARDS  MEMBER  STATES

FISHERIES CONTROL PROGRAMMES

1.

BUDGET LINE(S) + HEADING(S)

B2-901 (11.07.02)

Financial contribution to the Member States
for expenditure in the field of control

2.

OVERALL FIGURES

2.1.

Total allocation for action (Part B): € million for commitment

70 m €

2.2.

Period of application:

2004 and 2005

2.3.

Overall multiannual estimate of expenditure:

(a)

Schedule  of  commitment  appropriations/payment  appropriations 
intervention) (see point 6.1.1)

(financial

€ million (to three decimal places)

Year
2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Commitments

Payments

35

5

35

20

15

15

15

[n+5
and
subs.
Years]

Total

70

70

(b)

Technical and administrative assistance and support expenditure(see point 6.1.2)

Commitments

Payments

Subtotal a+b

Commitments

Payments

35

15

35

20

15

10

10

70

17

(c)

Overall  financial  impact  of  human  resources  and  other  administrative  expenditure
(see points 7.2 and 7.3)

Commitments/
payments

0,440

0,440

TOTAL a+b+c

Commitments

35,440

35,440

Payments

15,440

20,440

15

10

10

70,880

70,880

2.4.

Compatibility with financial programming and financial perspective

[X] Proposal is compatible with existing financial programming.

Proposal  will  entail  reprogramming  of  the  relevant  heading  in  the  financial
perspective.

Proposal  may  require  application  of  the  provisions  of  the  Interinstitutional
Agreement.

2.5.

Financial impact on revenue:9

[X] Proposal  has  no  financial  implications  (involves  technical  aspects  regarding

implementation of a measure)

OR

Proposal has financial impact – the effect on revenue is as follows:

(NB All details and observations relating to the method of calculating the effect on
revenue should be shown in a separate annex.)

Budget line

Revenue

(€ million to one decimal place)

Prior to
action
[Year
n-1]

[Yea
r n]

Situation following action

[n+1] [n+2] [n+3

[n+4] [n+5]

]

a) Revenue in absolute terms

b) Change in revenue

 (cid:1)

(Please specify each budget line involved, adding the appropriate number of rows
to the table if there is an effect on more than one budget line.)

9

For further information, see separate explanatory note.

18

                                                
3.

BUDGET CHARACTERISTICS

Type of expenditure

New

EFTA
contribution

Contributions
from applicant
countries

Heading in
financial
perspective

Non-comp

Diff

NO

NO

NO

3

4.

LEGAL BASIS

Article 37 TCE

5.

1.

DESCRIPTION AND GROUNDS

Problem analysis and needs assessment

The  objective  of  the  Common  Fisheries  policy  is  to  provide  for  sustainable  exploitation  of
living aquatic resources and of aquaculture in the context of sustainable development. In order
to ensure the effective implementation of the CFP, the Community control  and enforcement
system  for  fisheries  should  be  reinforced  and  co-operation  and  co-ordination  between  all
relevant authorities should be strengthened. This goal can be achieved mainly through on-the-
spot checks and inspections of fishing vessels, collecting and disseminating in real time data
on fishing activities, upgrading of communication and information technology tools, securing
interconnections  within  Fisheries  monitoring  centres,  extending  the  utilisation  of  remote
monitoring  systems  (like  satellite  monitoring  system  and  vessel  detection  systems)  and
improving  inspection  skills  (see  Council  Regulation  n°  2371/2002  on  the  conservation  and
sustainable  exploitation  of  fisheries  resources  under  the  CFP,  esp.  recitals  19  et  25,  and
Chapter V10).

To ensure effective control, inspection and enforcement of  the  rules  of the  CFP falls within
the  responsibility  of  Member  States.  It  is  however  of  a  Community  interest  that  control
activities  are  carried  out  in  an  effective  way  and  in  a  uniform  manner  throughout  the
Community. For these reasons, the Community has granted since 1990 financial assistance to
Member  States  on  the  basis  of  national  programmes  of  expenditure  for  fisheries  control
purposes.

Through  this  financial  scheme,  provided  for  subsequently  by  Decision  89/63111,  Decision
95/52712 and Decision 2001/43113, Member States have undoubtedly reinforced their control
structures and their inspectors’ skills, as  it  is  stated  in the  conclusions  of  the  Commission’s
Reports  on  the  monitoring  of  the  implementation  of  the  CFP  Rules  by  the  Member  States,
essential  source  of  valuable  information  which  provides  an  evaluation  on  control  structures
and  performance  of  each  Member  State  in  fulfilling  its  control  duties.  The  most  recent,
relating  to  years  1996/1999,  indicates  (at  page  7)  that  “the  previous  deficit  of  means  of
inspection  and  surveillance  at  sea  in  Community  waters  has  been  reduced…  Community
financial contributions have greatly facilitated the acquisition and modernisation of inspection
and control equipment…(However) in spite of undeniable progress, certain deficiencies still

10

11

12

13

JO L 358, 31.12.2002.
JO L 364, 14.12.1989.
JO L 301, 14.12.1995.
JO L154, 9.6.2001.

19

                                                
remain : this is generally  due to the  fact  that the  means  available  to  the  national  authorities
and the measures taken by them do not adequately match the requirements of establishing a
comprehensive control systems ”14.

A similar evaluation, stressing the positive effects but also the needs for further improvement,
can be read in the Report of the Commission to the Council and European Parliament related
to the Decision 89/63115 and in the Report of May 2000 prepared by a private consultant for
the Commission  on the  evaluation  of  the  Community  financial  contribution  towards  control
and surveillance operations of Member States, which analyses in particular Decision 95/527.
In  the  latter  it  is  recommended  that,  although  certain  goals  have  been  achieved,  “given  the
responsibility  imposed  on  Member  States  in  the  Common  fisheries  policy,  it  remains
appropriate that Community assistance should be continued to ensure the adequate policing of
Community fisheries resources” (page 53).

It is presently available, even though only as a draft final  report  for  the  time  being, an  “ex-
post”  evaluation  of  the  implementation  of  Decision  2001/43116,  conducted  by  a  private
consultant,  closely  linked  with  an  analysis  (also  in  a  draft  form)  of  the  information  on  the
inventory  and  utilisation  of  control  means  forwarded  by  the  Member  States  in  relation  to
Decision 2001/43117, made by the  same consultant.  Most  of  the  elements  of  analysis  of  the
present note are extracted from these documents.

Lastly, the Commission adopted in June 2003 a Communication on the compliance with the
rules of the  CFP and  set up  a  Compliance  scoreboard,  made  available  to  the  general  public
through the Commission's web-site18. This document highlights Member States’ shortcomings
in  their  obligation  to  ensure  effective,  equitable  and  uniform  application  of  the  rules  of  the
CFP.  This  document  restates,  in  its  conclusions,  that  poor  implementation  of  the  CFP  rules
undermines effectiveness  of  conservation  measures,  which  are  an  essential  part  of  the  CFP.
Furthermore, it stresses that a lack of uniformity in procedures and sanctions entail no level
playing field in the control and enforcement which consequently may encourage behaviours
contrary  to  Community  interest.  Thus  there  is  no  doubt  that  without  further  investments  in
equipment and training, the control system of Member States does not correspond yet to the
standards required by Community law.

In  addition,  it  is  also  essential  to  recall  the  fact  that  new  Member  States  will  join  the
Community as of 1st May 2004. Seven of these States have, at a different degree, interests in
fishing activities. According to the information available19, these States will face difficulties
to satisfy immediately the control standards required by the Community rules. A financial aid
will therefore be more than welcome in order to facilitate and to speed up the attainment of
these standards.

14

15

16

17

18

19

COM(2001)526.
COM(1995)268.
Assessment of the Community financial contribution for the implementation of the control, inspection
and surveillance systems applicable to the CFP (FISH/2002/12). The final version will be available in
autumn.
FISH/2002/10.
COM(2003)344.
Screening missions are still ongoing. But a first overview can be obtained by mission reports (see notes
DG/FISH n° 24178 (Poland), n° 24134 (Estonia), n° 24034 (Chypre).

20

                                                
It is also worth noting that Community legislation20 requires that, as of 1.1.2005, every fishing
vessel longer than 15 meters overall, flying the flag of a current or of a Member State to-be,
shall be equipped with devices enabling Fisheries monitoring centres to track them down. So
far,  these  devices  have  been  installed  on  board  of  each  Community  vessel  larger  than  24
meters21 within the framework of a large financial assistance from the Community. Fishermen
would have been undoubtedly very reluctant to accept it without an aid. Therefore, an aid also
has to be foreseen in favour of smaller vessels if the Community deems that this device is an
essential tool for control. Figures are detailed in the Chapter relating to appropriations.

2.

Setting objectives

The  main  conclusions  arisen  from  the  reports  and  analyses  mentioned  above  can  be
summarised as follows:

(a) as regards to acquisition and modernisation of aircraft and patrol vessels, which represents
by  far  the  most  important  expenditure22,  given  in  particular  the  cost  of  each  unit,  Member
States have significantly increased their capacity and, with few exceptions, they now seem to
have  at  their  disposal  a  sufficient  number  of  units  compared  with  the  number  of  fishing
vessels and their characteristics, their EEZ and the quantity of catches landed23.

Furthermore,  the  utilisation  of  the  remote  control  systems,  like  the  VMS,  and  its  foreseen
extension  to  another  6.000  vessels  (acceding  countries  not  included),  reduces  the  need  to
patrol large areas of fishing grounds since aircraft and patrol vessels can be instantly directed
to the targets by the fisheries control centres.

However, the situation is not similar in some acceding countries, where the screening of the
administrative  capacity  has  identified  the  need  to  acquire  equipment  like  aircraft/vessels,
although their number or specifications can be determined only when we will be notified of
their control programmes.

(b)  the  purchase  of  and  fitting  on  board  of  fishing  vessels  of  vessel  localisation  devices
(VLD), enabling fisheries monitoring centres to monitor vessels at a distance through Vessel
Monitoring Systems (VMS), has been a very successful action and every Community fishing
vessel  longer  than  24  meters,  save  the  exemptions  provided24,  have  been  equipped  as  of
1.1.2000. This has  been  made  possible  thanks  to  the  Community  financial  assistance  which
granted  an  aid  for  each  unit  installed  with  a  rate  on  average  higher  than  50%  of  costs  (the
amount reimbursed by the Community has been between 4000 and 2900 € per unit, depending
on the allocations available on each budgetary year).

Council  Regulation  n°2371/2002  lays  down  the  obligation  to  equip  with  VLD  every  vessel
longer than 15 meters as of 1.1.2005. This entails that some 6000 vessels (acceding countries

20

21

22

23

24

Art.22 of R.2371/2002.
Save the vessels exempted under Art.3(3) R. 2847/93.
It equates to 74% of total Community financial contribution during the period 1995/2000 (see Nautilus
report,  page  27).  This  percentage  is  reduced  at  less  than  60%  (provisional  figure)  under  the  current
scheme.
« Member  States  and  the  Community  spent  about  half  of  the  total  budget  on  equipment.  This  would
seem to be appropriate, considering the expense of these items. Although there are still imbalances in
the  Member  States  capacity  indicators  (suggesting  that  more  money  should  be  provided)  these
imbalances are to only a few Member States .» (Report FISH/2002/12, page 103).
See Art.3(3) R.2847/93. However also these vessels shall now be equipped since the exemptions are no
longer valid.

21

                                                
not  included)  shall  be  equipped25.  According  to  our  best  estimation,  acceding  countries
vessels still to be equipped are in a number of about 1000.

The  VMS  proved  to  be  very  cost  effective  since  naval  and  aerial  surveillance  can  be
managed26  more  efficiently.  It  also  represents  a  valid  and  cost  effective  incitement  to
fishermen  to  comply  with  the  CFP  rules  due  to  the  fact  that  the  position  of  the  vessel  is
reported in almost real time and can be recorded for administrative purposes27.

(c) the Member States have largely taken advantage of the financial assistance in order to set
up  and  upgrade  information  technology  and  to  create  IT  networks28.  This  has  allowed  the
collection, processing, recording and retrieval of data relating to fishing activities in a quicker
and  much  more  efficient  way.  Secured  networks  have  enabled  decentralised  centres  to
communicate with the headquarters. The Community services dealing  with the management
of quotas and fishing effort have also benefited from the improvement of the quality of data
and its availability. The data is in fact now received in due time and in the correct format and
it has thus been possible for instance, to state in 2003 the final figures relating to catches of
the previous year 8 months earlier than in the past.

Experience shows that in general, the Member States have now the capacity to deal efficiently
with  the  administrative  tasks.  A  smaller  amount  of  money  should  therefore  be  spent  by  the
Community for this action (since costs relating to the renewal of IT equipment shall be borne
by the Member States). However, there are three important exceptions :

–  the extension of VMS to a significant number of vessels (and the doubling of the messages
as proposed by the Commission) entails that fisheries monitoring centres’ equipment shall
be adapted in order to be able to process, record and retrieve properly all the data;

–  the introduction in  2004,  at  the  end  of  the  experimental  phase,  of  electronic  reporting  of
fishing  activities  (like  catches  or  fishing  effort  declarations)  and  the  Vessel  detection
systems,  which  will  require  new  IT  tools,  on  board  of  each  vessel  concerned  (electronic
reporting devices and electronic logbook software) and at the fisheries monitoring centres
(for both the electronic reporting and the VDS);

–  acceding countries’ fisheries monitoring centres shall be in a position to operate with the
same standards as the other centres, in order to avoid any loophole in the Community-wide
control system. Investments for IT equipment and IT networks will be necessary;

(d) modern control technologies are in constant development. In order to assess them and to
facilitate  their  introduction,  the  Community  budget  has  financed  pilot  projects  relating  to
fishing activities at a rate higher than 50% of the cost incurred. It is worth noting that VMS
has been firstly introduced on the basis of pilot projects. It would be advisable to foresee this
action  for  the  years  to  come,  given  that  other  modern  technologies  in  the  area  of  fisheries
control  would  probably  be  conceived  (e.g.,  in  order  to  detect  when  a  vessel  is  fishing  or
weighing catches on board).

25

26

27

28

A Community aid has been provided in 2003 in order to install VLD on board of about 4000 vessels.
« It  would  seem  that  at  least  for  some  Member  States  detection  of  infringements  has  been  markedly
encouraged  by  the  collaborative  working  of  the  VMS  and  surveillance  systems  and  development  of
integrated systems based on VMS should be further encouraged » (Report FISH/2002/12 page 103).
The  cost  of  each  data  transmission  varies  according  to  the  provider,  but  it  is  less  than  1€  and  will
certainly decrease.
The  percentage  of  Community  financial  contribution  has  been  of  19%  during  1995/2000  period
(Nautilus report, page 27). Similar figures apply to the current scheme.

22

                                                
(e) all the analyses and reports mentioned above, stress the essential role of the training and
exchange  programmes  of  civil  servants  responsible  for  monitoring,  control  and  surveillance
tasks in the fisheries area29. This in fact proved to be extremely cost effective with regard to
the improvement of the quality of control, as shown inter alia, by the increase of the number
of  infringements  ended  with  sanctions  inflicted  by  the  Courts30.  What  is  also  of  a  great
importance is the establishing of favourable working relationships within officials of different
Member States which  also lead to co-ordinated  control  campaigns  which posed the basis of
more  developed  and  complex  control  actions  at  sea  teamed  by  inspectors  of  different
nationalities.

The Commission has stated its intention to actively support these initiatives which it considers
as an embryo of the joint fisheries inspection structure referred to the Communication on the
reform of the CFP (“roadmap”)31. This action constitutes therefore a priority also for the new
period  of  validity  of  this  regime.  Although  the  Member  States  have  made  use  of  the
possibility  to  claim  reimbursement  for  expenditure  on  training,  it  has  not  been  used  to  the
extent the Commission would have liked and therefore the Member States will be encouraged
to  have  a  massive  recourse  to  aid  for  training  of  new  officials,  periodic  retraining  and
exchange schemes for inspectors. It is worth noting that the introduction of new technologies
and  the  interconnection  of  different  data  bases  will  require  specific  skills  that  can  only  be
acquired  by  specific  training.  It  is  also  obvious  that  training  programmes  will  be  of  a
particular importance for acceding countries’ officials.

(f)  cost/benefit  analysis  and  assessment  of  overall  expenditure  incurred  by  competent
authorities in carrying out monitoring, control and surveillance of fisheries activities as a tool
to identify the most cost effective means of  control and  gauge the financial effort supported
by  each  Member  State  in  fulfilling  its  duties  arising  from  the  Community  rules.
Unfortunately, only few Member States decided to launch this analysis. The Commission will
seek  to  convince  both  present  and  future  Member  States  to  apply  for  this  action,  which
attracts Community funding, since the results are of a common interest.

(g) no money has been spent on the action relating to the implementation of pilot inspection
and observer schemes. This occurred because expenditure was eligible only for experimental
schemes  adopted  by  regional  fisheries  organisation  and  none  has  been  programmed  so  far.
The Commission intends to maintain this action, but it will no longer be linked to inspection
or observer schemes adopted  by RFO.  In fact, deployment of  observers on  board  of  fishing
vessels,  for  recording  and  reporting  the  activities  of  the  vessels,  is  foreseen  by  the
Commission  as  a  means  to  improve  compliance  with  the  rules,  when  other  systems  are
considered to be inadequate (for example, respect of a discard ban, reduction of by-catch or
catch of non-target species or use of illegal gears)32. Observers could also be employed in the
framework  of  recovery  plans  for  stocks  which  are  outside  safe  biological  limits33.  For  the
same purposes, inspection schemes may be used alike.

29

30

31

32

33

« A 50% contribution in training appears sensible, and if the Italian experience is anything to go by it
can be extremely cost effective. We would suggest it continues. » (Report FISH/2002/12, page 103).
The Scottish experience is an example of good results yielded by specific training of inspectors on legal
skills.
COM(2002)181. See also the "Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European
Parliament  Towards  uniform  and  effective  implementation  of  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy"
(COM(2003)130, esp. Action point 9.
See COM(2002) 181.
See Art.5 R. n° 2371/2002.

23

                                                
In  both  cases,  financial  assistance  shall  be  confined  to  pilot  projects.  When  a  scheme  is  no
longer running on a trial, the Members States shall bear their costs.

(h) experience shows that fishermen and other players in the control activities, like inspectors,
public prosecutors and judges, and on a larger scale the general public, are not fully aware of
the  need  to  respect  conservation  measures  in  order  to  ensure  rational  and  sustainable
exploitation  of  natural  resources34.  With  a  view  to  enhance  awareness  on  this  fundamental
aspect,  the  Commission  proposes  to  finance  initiatives  such  as  seminars  and  media  tools
dealing with this topic. The Member States will be invited by the Commission to set up these
initiatives,  possibly  in  co-operation  with  the  fisheries  industries  and  the  enforcement
authorities.  Consumer  organisations  can  play  an  important  role  in  ensuring  that  only  fish
caught  in  a  sustainable  way  are  bought  by  the  final  consumer.  They  should  therefore  be
involved in these initiatives, wherever possible.

3.

Options

Since the inception of this scheme in 1990, the Community has supported investment on the
fisheries control area by a reimbursement to the Member States of the expenditure incurred.
The rate of the reimbursement varies between 35% to 100% of the real, eligible costs.

This  way  of  intervention  has  been  deemed  the  most  appropriate  since  most  of  the  Member
States  are  not  keen  to  devote  financial  means  to  this  sector  which  is  indeed  of  a  negligible
importance compared to other  national  economic  sectors.  In  fact, with some exceptions, the
contribution to the fisheries to the GNP is such that public spending would not be justified in
bare  economic  terms.  However,  as  we  have  seen,  there  is  a  common  interest  to  monitor
fishing activities within and outside European EEZ since different flag State vessels actually
operate  on  the  same  fishing  grounds  and  the  Community  has  a  duty  to  ensure  sustainable
exploitation of marine resources.

By submitting their application for financial assistance, the Member States are  compelled to
foresee  on  the  national  budget  the  appropriations  needed  to  match  the  Community
contribution.  Since  the  control  programme  lies  with  the  responsibility  of  the  national
authorities, they shall be the only recipients of the aid. Obviously, the authorities which could
benefit from the aid must only be those responsible for the fisheries control.

It is also worth noting that the structural Funds cannot intervene in this area, except for costs
involved in the installation of vessel localisation devices on board of fishing vessels35 . In the
previous  schemes,  including  the  present  one,  there  have  been  different  rates  of  Community
participation. It is now foreseen to simplify the matter by setting a general rate of a maximum
of 50% of real costs, with 2 exceptions:

–  for  pilot  projects  and  initiatives  to  increase  awareness  on  the  conservation  goals,
reimbursement  can  go  as  far  as  100%,  because  strong  initiatives  are  needed  in  order  to
attain the objectives as soon as possible;

–  for VLD, the reimbursement per unit can be more than 50%, but possibly less than 100%

in order to seek to put a pressure on costs;

–  for aircraft and vessels reimbursement cannot exceed 35% of the costs and this investment
will be eligible only for the new Member States as of 1.1.2004. Hence, even if the costs are

34

35

See conclusions on the Commission reports on serious infringements (COM(2001)650 and (2002)687).
So far this possibility has not been used by any Member State.

24

                                                
very  high,  it  is  important  to  consider  the  fact  that  according  to  recent  findings  present
Member States seem to be sufficiently equipped.

4.

Impact and possible indicators

The overall  aim of the control regime  is  to  flank  the  conservation  policy  carried  out  by  the
Commission in co-operation with the Member States within the framework of the CFP. Only
when  provisions  are  complied  with  by  the  large  majority  of  the  economic  operators,
conservation  measures  can  achieve  the  expected  results.  It  is  not  surprising  that  without  an
efficient  and  watertight  control  system  across  the  Community  it  is  simply  not  possible  to
compel  fishermen  and  other  operators  to  respect  the  rules,  in  particular  given  the  structural
situation  of  this  economic  sector  and  by  taking  into  account  the  fact  that  fishermen  are
competitors on the same fishing grounds.

It is therefore of paramount importance that Member States allocate adequate resources to the
control activity. The Community shall alleviate the financial burden of the Member States to a
certain extent and promote the setting up of control tools its deems more appropriate.

Furthermore,  when  a  control  system  is  considered  efficient  by  the  fishermen  and  other
operators concerned, it has a deterrent effect on the intention to breach the rules. In an ideal
world, a lack of infringements will then be an indicator that the system works perfectly well.
But reality shows that the number of infringements detected by national authorities is a good
indicator of the efficiency of control. Therefore the number of infringements detected over a
period  may  be  used  as  an  indicator  of  the  impact  of  the  scheme.  A  high  number  of
infringements  can  be  construed  as  a  sign  of  efficient  control.  Thus,  few  infringements
detected over a period, especially in a country where the fisheries industry is important, shows
poor enforcement. The annual report on the serious infringements detected gives a picture of
the situation.

The rate of procedures ended compared with the procedures opened, also is an indicator of the
efficiency  of  the  administration.  A  comparison  of  figures  relating  to  subsequent  years,  is  a
tool to evaluate an increase or decrease of efficiency, once that the deterrent effect mentioned
above is duly taken into account.

Also, the number of inspections at sea or at ports, or the number of sightings recorded by the
aerial  surveillance  can  be  used  as  indicators,  in  comparison  both  with  the  number  of
inspectors available and the number of hours of vessel patrolling or flights and the number of
infringements detected. These indicators combined together can be used to gauge essentially
the impact of investments on equipment, remote monitoring and training.

Marine resources are managed through allocation of fishing quotas among the Member States.
Quotas  are  correctly  managed  when  no  overrun  of  fish  quota  is  recorded.  To  reach  this
objective,  the Member  States shall have at  its  disposal  IT  systems  able  to  collect  data  from
landing points scattered over their coastline and elaborate, convert and send them in a rapid
and secure manner to recipients, like the Commission’ services.

25

The variation on the number of overfishing may be used as an indicator to evaluate the impact
of investments on IT equipment and networks, observer schemes and training. Feasibility will
be an indicator in case of pilot projects, while cost/benefit analyses projects will be evaluated
from the results yielded.

A  general  indicator  will  be  the  variation  of  the  status  of  the  stocks  submitted  to  special
management rules.

5.

Risk assessment and monitoring systems

The Member States submit each year to the Commission their fisheries control plan indicating
for what actions a grant from the Community is sought. The Commission’s services examine
the  request  against  the  background  of  the  objectives  set  up  and  the  rules  on  eligibility  of
actions. A Commission decision, for which the opinion of the management Committee will be
sought, shall fix the amount of the maximum contribution granted. The Member States, when
submitting  claims  for  reimbursement,  shall  verify  and  certify  (a  specific  statement  to  be
signed is foreseen) that the expenditure has been incurred in compliance both with the general
condition  specified  in  the  Council  Decision  and  the  specific  conditions  which  may  be
provided for by the Commission decision fixing the amount granted.

Furthermore,  the  Member  States  are  required  to  forward  regularly  to  the  Commission
information as regards the use made of the financial contribution. The Commission can also
require the Member States to carry out on-the-spot checks on projects or may decide to carry
them out with its officials.

In  the  event  any  amount  has  been  unduly  paid,  it  shall  be  repaid  to  the  Commission,  with
interest. It is worth noting that the Commission reimburses the Member States only invoices
that 
irregularities  concerning
reimbursements have occurred.

the  national  administrations  have  paid.  So  far,  no 

The  Member  States  shall  report  yearly  to  the  Commission  how  their  programmes  are
implemented, any variation they had to introduce on their programmes and assess the impact
of the expenditure on control, inspection and surveillance activities. A final assessment on the
whole 2001-2005 programme shall be forwarded in 2006.

The Commission will draw a report on the outcome of the scheme to be sent in 2007 to the
European Parliament and the Council. In this report indicators mentioned above will be used
to gauge the impact of this scheme.

6.

Added value of Community involvement

As it is clearly stated36, Member States shall control the activities carried out within the scope
of  the  CFP  on  their  territory  or  in  waters  subject  to  their  sovereignty  or  jurisdiction.  They
shall  also  control  access  to  waters  and  resources  and  fishing  activities  outside  Community
waters by Community fishing vessels flying their flag and, without prejudice of the primary
responsibility  of  the  flag  State,  of  their  nationals.  They  shall  be  responsible  for  placing
observers  on  board  fishing  vessels  and  for  taking  appropriate  decisions,  including  the
prohibition of fishing activities.

36

See Art.23(2) of R.n°2371/2002.

26

                                                
However,  without  constant  pressure  and  monitoring  by  the  Commission,  it  is  likely  that
Member  States  will  not  fulfil  their  duties  in  accordance  with  the  standards  required  by
Community law. Furthermore, improvements towards an efficient control system throughout
the  Community  will  be  difficult  to  achieve  without  incentives,  in  particular  when  new
technologies shall be tested and introduced where appropriate.

According  to  the  experience  and  the  recommendations  drawn  up  in  the  reports  above
mentioned, it would seem proved that only a persistent auditing by the Commission's services
of  the  national  control  systems  coupled  with  financial  assistance  in  order  to  secure
investments which are deemed necessary, is the most effective mean to achieve the goal of a
sustainable exploitation on the marine resources.

7.

Lessons learned from past experiences and perspectives

Because  of  the  interest  of  the  Community  for  an  improvement  in  the  control  of  fishery
activities,  the  Commission  has  implemented  since  1978  a  series  of  provisions  for  financial
contribution towards Member States expenditure. The first Council Decision was approved in
1978 and concerned measures aimed at assisting the activities of Denmark and Ireland. This
was  superseded  in  1987  by  a  new  Decision  to  grant  financial  contribution  to  all  Member
States  to  further  develop  MCS  capacity  and  capability  within  specific  areas  of  control  and
surveillance. There are no available evaluations for these schemes.

Council  Decision  89/631  thereafter  established  a  framework  for  Community  financial
assistance  toward  expenditure  incurred  by  the  Member  States,  with  a  total  envelope  of  110
M€ to be dispersed over five year period from 1991 to 1995.

Subsequently, a second five year programme from 1996 to 2000 was adopted by virtue of the
Council Decision 95/527. It made 205 M€ available under a similar framework.

Lastly,  the  Council  adopted  Decision  2001/431  which  will  expire  at  the  end  of  2003  and
which set up a three year programme (2001-2003) worth 105 M€.

On the basis of the experience  gained and  in conformity with the conclusions drawn by  the
ex-post evaluation report it can be said that, in general, funding has been  directed in such a
way as to address the most deficient (in term of EU average37) means for each Member State.
Whilst  this  has  addressed  the  imbalance  in  Member  States  capacity,  it  has  not  completely
solved it and there is a certain further scope for additional expenditure38.

Although assessment is very much dependant on specific monitoring, control and surveillance
strategies adopted by  each Member States, which are  in turn a consequence of  the different
features  of  the  fleet,  the  size  of  fishing  grounds,  quantity  and  value  of  catches  landed,  it
appears that as regards:

–  patrol vessels and aircraft, the Member States are on equivalent footing (with the exception
of UK and Spain). However, it does not seem necessary to assist these States by increasing
their equipment since this shortcoming  can be easily set off by virtue of the extension of
the coverage of the vessels controlled at a distance;

37

38

The consultant derived an EU average from the data submitted by the Member States in accordance to
Dec 2001/431. Of course the average so determined has only a relative value.
FISH/2002/12 pages 101-102.

27

                                                
–  all Member States have  greatly  improved their  information  technology  systems  and  their
network. The  remaining  needs  concern the  upgrading  of  the  systems  in  order  to  face  the
significant increase of the quantity of data (due to the doubling both of the number of the
vessels  and  the  messages)  and  of  the  number  of  linkage  with  peripheral  offices,  patrol
vessels and aircraft, the other Member States and the Commission’s services. Furthermore,
the  introduction  of  an  electronic  reporting  is  recommended  as  this  would  enable  quality
checks to  be  applied to  data as it  is submitted by Member  States, allowing  fishermen  no
option  but  to  correct  any  mistake  in  a  near  real  time,  and  prior  to  submission.  As  a
consequence, associated Commission administration costs may be reduced;

–  VMS is in operation in each Member State, but it shall be extended to vessels larger than

15 meters as of 1.1.2005. Acceding States shall comply as of 1.5.2004;

–  training  has  been  extremely  cost-effective  and  shall  be  supported,  especially  in  the
Member States which did not take  full advantage of this possibility.  Periodical  retraining
and  improvement  of  legal  skills  shall  be  foreseen  by  each  Member  State.  Acceding
countries  shall  set  up  specific  courses  aimed  at  deepening  the  knowledge  of  the
Community rules;

–  in order to keep pace with innovation in the field of control technologies, the Community
shall continue to assist pilot projects. It is worth remembering that VMS was first tested in
the nineties as a pilot project;

–  cost/benefit analysis  of  expenditure  in  the  control  activity  has  not  yielded  any  result  yet,
but  it  is  an  important  tool  of  evaluation  and  Member  States  shall  be  required  to  set  up
specific projects.

8.

Duration

It was decided to extend Decision 2001/431 only for three years, until 31.12.2003, in order to
allow the Council to decide the future of the financial assistance taking into account the CFP
reform.

Bearing in mind the content of the reform, and taking into account the needs of the acceding
countries,  some  of  which  have  interest  in  the  fisheries  sector,  it  was  deemed  appropriate  to
further extend this financial regime.

With  regard  to  the  duration  of  the  extended  scheme,  the  fact  that  the  Commission  has
proposed  to  set  up  a  joint  inspection  structure  which  will  be  in  charge  of  pooling  national
means of inspection and surveillance in order to carry out co-ordinated deployment of means
available to Member States or, where appropriate, contract further means39, must be taken into
consideration.  Since  this  structure  shall  deal  with  a  large  series  of  activities  relating  to
monitoring, control and surveillance and it is foreseen to be in operation as of 2006, it seems
advisable not to extend the financial scheme beyond 31.12.2005, i.e. for two years only.

39

See COM(2003) 130

28

                                                
9.

Planned Evaluations

The  Member  States  shall  transmit  each  year  an  intermediate  report  which  will  enable  the
Commission to evaluate the implementation of the control programmes and intervene in order
to redirect investments planned, where necessary.

A final report has to be drawn up by the Member States before 31.12.2006. This will allow a
thorough ex post evaluation of the scheme which will be presented the following year by the
Commission to the European Parliament and the Council.

In the matter of control, it is not easy to quantify the results, especially in the short term. The
overall  goal  of  this  initiative  is  to  enhance  a  control  culture  among  the  stakeholders  in  the
fisheries  sector  which  will  allow  an  unreserved  compliance  with  the  CFP  rules.  Without
effective control, conservation rules are useless; without adherence to rules, control activities
will never be successful.

10.

Appropriations

In addition to adjust the rate of financial contribution in order to take on board the experience
gained  and  the  recommendations  listed  in  the  ex-post  evaluation,  the  breakdown  of  the
planned expenditure among the different actions mirrors the order of the priorities set up by
the  Commission.  Therefore,  a  relative  high  share  compared  to  the  costs,  is  allocated  to  the
actions relating to computer technology and IT networks, VLD and training.

5.1.

Methods of implementation

Direct management by the Commission using regular staff.

29

6.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

6.1.

Total financial impact on Part B - (over the entire programming period)

(The method of calculating the total amounts set out in the table below must be explained by
the breakdown in Table 6.2. )

6.1.1.

Financial intervention

Commitments (in € million to three decimal places)

Breakdown

2004

2005

[n+2]

[n+3]

[n+4]

Total

[n+5
and
subs.
Years]

a)  computer  technology  and

7.000

7.000

IT networks

b) remote control technology

12.000

8.000

c)  pilot  projects  on  new

1.500

1.500

technologies

d) training and exchange

3.000

4.000

programmes of control

department officials

e) inspection and observer

2.000

3.000

pilot schemes

f) assessment of public

1.000

1.000

expenditure in the control

area

g) seminars and media

1.500

1.500

h) acquisition and

7.000

9.000

modernisation of control.

inspection and surveillance

equipment

TOTAL

35.000

35.000

30

14.000

20.000

3.000

7.000

5.000

2.000

3.000

16.000

70.000

6.1.2.

Technical  and  administrative  assistance,  support  expenditure  and  IT  expenditure
(commitment appropriations)

[Year
n]

[n+1]

[n+2]

[n+3]

[n+4]

Total

[n+5
and
subs.
years]

1) 
administrative assistance

Technical 

and

Technical 

a) 
offices

assistance

b)  Other 
administrative assistance:

technical 

and

- intra muros:

- extra muros:

of  which  for  construction
of
maintenance 
and 
computerised  management
systems

Subtotal 1

2) Support expenditure

a) Studies

b) Meetings of experts

c) Information and
publications

Subtotal 2

TOTAL

31

6.2.

Calculation  of  costs  by  measure  envisaged  in  Part  B  (over  the  entire
programming period)40

Commitments (in € million to three decimal places)

Breakdown

Type
of outputs
(projects, files )

Number of
outputs

Average unit
cost

Total cost

(total for years 2)

(total for years
2)

a)  computer  technology  and  IT
networks

b) remote control technology

pilot 

c) 
technologies

projects 

on 

new

training 

d) 
exchange
programmes  of  control  department
officials

and 

e)  inspection  and  observer  pilot
schemes

f) assessment of public expenditure
in the control area

g) seminars and media

h) acquisition and modernisation of
control, inspection and surveillance
equipment

TOTAL COST

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2.000

3

7.000

10.000

1.500

3.500

2.500

1.000

1.500

8.000

4=(2X3)

14.000

20.000

3.000

7.000

5.000

2.000

3.000

16.000

35.000

70.000

7.

IMPACT ON STAFF AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE

The needs for human and administrative resources shall be covered within the allocation
granted to the managing DG in the framework of the annual allocation procedure.

40

For further information, see separate explanatory note.

32

                                                
7.1.

Impact on human resources

Types of post

Staff to be assigned to management of the
action using existing and/or additional
resources

Number of
permanent posts

Number of
temporary posts

Officials 
temporary staff

or

A

B

C

1

2

1/12

Other human resources

Total

7.2.

3 1/12

Overall financial impact of human resources

Description of tasks deriving from the
action

If necessary, a fuller description of the
tasks may be annexed.

Total

1

2

1/12

Type of human resources

Amount (€)

Method of calculation *

Officials

Temporary staff

Other human resources

333.000

1 x 108.000 + 2 x 90.000

+ 1/12 60.000

(specify budget line)

Total

333.000

The amounts are total expenditure for twelve months.

7.3.

Other administrative expenditure deriving from the action

Budget line : B2-901 (11.07.02)

(number and heading)

Overall allocation (Title A7)

A0701 – Missions

A07030 – Meetings

A07031 – Compulsory committees 1

A07032 – Non-compulsory committees 1

A07040 – Conferences

A0705 – Studies and consultations

Other expenditure (specify)

Information systems (A-5001/A-4300)

Other expenditure - Part A (specify)

Amount €

Method of calculation

20.000

4000 x 5 missions

10.000

1 meeting

25.000

1 meeting experts

100.000

ex-post evaluation

Total

155.000

The amounts are total expenditure for twelve months.

1 Specify the type of committee and the group to which it belongs.

33

I.

II.

III.

8.

Annual total (7.2 + 7.3)

Duration of action

Total cost of action (I x II)

488.000 €

2 years

976.000 €

FOLLOW-UP AND EVALUATION

8.1.

Follow-up arrangements

As described above under point 5, specific indicators have been identified

8.2.

Arrangements and schedule for the planned evaluation

As  largely  described  above  under  point  5,  the  Member  States  shall  provide  interim  reports
each year and a final report before 31.12.2006. The Commission shall draw up a report to the
European Parliament and to the Council in 2007.

9.

ANTI-FRAUD MEASURES

The  Member  States  shall  verify  and  certify  that  expenditure  for  which  a  reimbursement  is
claimed,  has  been  incurred  in  compliance  with  the  rules  laid  down  by  the  Decision.  If  the
Commission considers that the claim does not comply with the conditions laid down, it shall
refuse to reimburse all or part of the expenditure at issue.

The Members States shall provide the Commission with any information it may request and
they must keep supporting documents available to the Commission for at least 5  years  from
the date of reimbursement.

Commission officials may carry out or take part on ex-post control.

In  the  event  of  irregularity,  any  amount  unduly  paid  shall  be  repaid  to  the  Commission,
together with interest.

34