WRITTEN QUESTION E-3907/03 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Commission proposal to reduce fishery catches in 2004, in Galician waters and those of the Iberian peninsula in general.
Date: 2003-12-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU waters, Galicia, Spain, authorised catch, fishery management, fishing industry, fishing regulations

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/263

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2004)

The mission of the Eurostat Task Force (TFES) was set by the Commission on 23 July 2003. The TFES was
required to report to the Commission on the financial circuits applying in Eurostat, the authorisation
procedures, the day-to-day arrangements for dealing with outside contractors and the remedial instructions
given by management and the action taken on these instructions.

The TFES reported to the Commission on 24 September 2003 and this report was made available to the
members of the Committee on Budgetary Control
to the
confidentiality arrangements laid down in accordance with Annex III of the framework agreement of 5 July
2000 on relations between Parliament and the Commission (1).

(Cocobu) on 24 September 2003 subject

The Commission accordingly decided on 8 October 2003 to terminate the secondment of the Head of the
Task Force and to temporarily suspend the secondment of the other members.

It should be added that by decision of the Director of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) of 18 July
2003 a Eurostat Task Force was set up within OLAF for the anti-fraud investigations which were within
the jurisdiction of the independent office. The two Task Forces worked in parallel and jointly, each
pursuing its specific objectives and with due respect for their autonomy.

OLAF considers that an administrative inquiry on top of the current judicial investigations and OLAF’s
own investigations is not necessary at the present time.

The TFES worked satisfactorily and the Commission transmitted its findings to Parliament (Committee on
Budgetary Control) as agreed by the Presidents of Parliament and the Commission.

In response to the request made by the Commission on 21 May 2003 to coordinate the various aspects of
the case, the Secretary-General set up an interdepartmental coordination group, made up of representatives
of the principal departments and cabinets concerned by the ESTAT affair.

This group met regularly from June to September 2003. The Director of OLAF was able to inform the
group of the problems encountered by his departments. OLAF was then provided with support from the
administration to install the resources required (staff and offices).

It should be noted that the Commission has considered the difficulties encountered by OLAF with utmost
attention, in particular in the allocation of resources exercises. This is done in the light of the resources
provided by the budgetary authority.

(1) When President Prodi attended the Conference of Presidents, enlarged to include the members of Cocobu, on
25 September 2003, the report of the TFES and the 2nd interim report of the IAS were made available to the
members of Cocobu subject
the meeting on
25 September were individually given an envelope containing the summaries of these reports and an information
note from OLAF providing a summary of the Eurostat affairs currently closed.

to the above condtions of confidentiality;

those present at

(2004/C 84 E/0311)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3907/03

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

(17 December 2003)

Subject: Commission proposal to reduce fishery catches in 2004,

in Galician waters and those of the

Iberian peninsula in general

A few weeks from the beginning of the new year, the Commission, as it does every year, displaying
behaviour which in any other economic sector would be absurd and unacceptable in equal measure,
has just announced its proposed reduction of fishery catches in Community waters for 2004.

The Commission proposal is unacceptable for three reasons. Firstly, the massive cutback in catches and
fishing effort which it proposes (cid:1) which could lay up three hundred vessels and throw 3 500 fishermen
out of work in Galicia (cid:1) cannot be implemented by the industry without running the risk of full scale

C 84 E/264

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

dismantling of the sector; as usual, it reflects the erratic, improvised and threatening form that Commission
decisions on the fishing industry habitually take. Secondly, these proposals have been put forward without
the requisite agreement or consensus being reached with the fishing industry itself, which is kept on the
fringes of decision-making; the Commission actually fosters the pernicious gap between the fishermen and
the scientists it maintains in positions of lofty bureaucratic arrogance. Thirdly, because the proposed cuts
are being put forward at a time when fishing companies, like any other, have already planned their 2004
work schedule, it is impossible for them to amend their projections, while at the same time, they are being
asked to slash catches by as much as 71 % in the case of certain species.

Furthermore, Commissioner Fischler’s proposals reveal discriminatory treatment of different
fleets,
particularly with regard to the favourable treatment of the North Sea cod resources exploited by Denmark
and the UK, and the negative treatment of species whose catches are of particular interest to the Galician
fleet. What are the reasons behind the Commission’s submission of this proposal? What reason is there for
presenting, for the first time, a proposal for such massive cuts in the waters off Galicia and the Iberian
peninsula? What are the fresh scientific reports apparently claiming to justify these measures? Why was no
attempt made to find a package of measures which had the support of the fishing industry? Why is the
Commission yet again, instead of making strict multiannual forecasts, insisting on irresponsibly putting
forward its proposals for the following year in the month of December, thus wrecking all the projections
made by those working in the industry? Is Commissioner Fischler, despite the firm opposition of the
fishing industry, going to insist on implementing these negative measures?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2004)

There is a firm scientific basis for the need to reduce total allowable catch (TACs). The biological situation
for many demersal stocks in Community waters is very alarming and the International Council for the
Exploration of the Seas (ICES) in its advice from October 2003 advised no fishing or very low quotas for a
number of stocks including most of the cod and hake stocks, Norway lobster around the Iberian peninsula
and sole in the Bay of Biscay and the western English Channel. This scientific advice is published as the
ICES Cooperative Research Report, No 262 of December 2003.

When making its proposals for TACs and quotas for 2004, the Commission departed significantly from
scientific advice in many cases, and proposed lower reductions in TAC than ICES had recommended.
The Commission took account of the need of fishing industries to continue their fishing activities, and the
proposal was constructed to balance those needs against the conservation requirements of the fisheries
resources.

Representatives of the fishing industry were invited to discuss the scientific advice, the need to adapt TACs
and the recovery plans for threatened stocks at regional workshops that were held in Brussels on
28/29 October 2003. The Commission took due account of the views expressed at that meeting when
preparing its proposals.

The Commission proposes TACs on the basis of conservation needs while taking account of social and
economic consequences but does not discriminate by geographic region. For 2003, fisheries ministers
already agreed a number of very large reductions in TACs for stocks in the North Sea and adjacent waters
for conservation reasons linked to the protection of cod. Consequently, generally smaller adaptations in
TACs were required for these TACs for 2004 in the northern area than in the southern area. Nevertheless,
some further large reductions (such as for cod to the west of Scotland) were still needed in northern areas.

The Commission views the Council’s agreements concerning the recovery plans for cod and for hake as
very positive for the stocks and for the fishing industries concerned. It also looks forward to the early
adoption of recovery plans for southern hake, Bay of Biscay and Western Channel sole and Iberian
Nephrops, which will also afford long-term benefits to the fishermen exploiting these stocks. Such long-
term planning will reduce the need for changes at short notice within the fishing industry.