Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a Community Fisheries Control Agency and amending Regulation (EC) No. 2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the Common Fisheries Policy’(COM(2004) 289 final — 2003/0108 (CNS))
Date: 2004-12-15
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU office or agency, application of EU law, fisheries policy, fishery management, fishing controls, operation of the Institutions

28.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 157/61

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Regu-
lation establishing a Community Fisheries Control Agency and amending Regulation (EC) No.
2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the Common Fisheries Policy’

(COM(2004) 289 final — 2003/0108 (CNS))

(2005/C 157/09)

On 14 May 2004, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 37 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 16 November 2004. The rapporteur was Mr
Sarró Iparraguirre.

At its 413th plenary session of 15 and 16 December 2004 (meeting of 15 December 2004), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 138 votes to three, with seven absten-
tions.

1. Introduction

1.1
On 1 January 2003, the reform of the Common Fish-
eries Policy (CFP), the main aim of which is the conservation
and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources, entered into
force. To this end, a set of mandatory rules was established for
both the Community fisheries sector and the Member States.

Chapter V of Regulation 2371/2002 (1) which governs
1.2
the Community fisheries control and inspection system, clearly
sets out the responsibilities of the Member States and of the
European Commission and lays down the mechanisms for
cooperation and coordination that must exist between Member
States and between these and the Commission in order to
ensure compliance with CFP rules.

The European Commission believes that enforcing the
1.3
rules of the CFP by Member States requires a sound operational
control and inspection structure at Community level, sufficient
means of control and inspection and an appropriate strategy
for the co-ordinated deployment of these means.

By means of this new proposal for a Regulation, (2) the
1.4
European Commission wishes to create a Community Fisheries
Control Agency (hereafter the Agency) as the Community's
specialised technical body for ensuring the uniform and effec-
tive application of the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy by
Member
coordination
between Member States regarding fisheries monitoring and
inspection and for promoting cooperation between them.

for organising operational

States,

1.5
The European Commission therefore proposes that the
Agency should coordinate control and inspection by Member
States relating to Community control and inspection obliga-
tions; coordinate the deployment of the national means of
control and inspection pooled by the Member States; assist

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No. 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on
the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources
under the Common Fisheries Policy (OJ L 358 of 31.12.2002)

(2) COM(2004) 289 final of 28.04.04

Member States in reporting information on fishing activities
and control and inspection activities to the Commission and
third parties; and assist Member States in fulfilling their tasks
and obligations under the rules of
the Common Fisheries
Policy.

1.6
The Commission also proposes that the Agency may
provide contractual services to Member States at their request
and at their expense, assist them in the training of inspectors,
undertake the joint procurement of goods and services relating
to control and inspection activities and coordinate the imple-
mentation by Member States of joint pilot projects.

The proposal for a Regulation stipulates that the Agency
1.7
will be a public body of the Community having legal person-
ality. The Commission proposes that
the Agency have an
Administrative Board composed of one representative from
each Member State whose vessels are engaged in fishing activ-
ities relating to marine living resources and four representatives
of the Commission as well as of four representatives of the
fishing industry nominated by the Commission The Agency
will also have an Executive Director.

1.8
The Commission intends the Agency to be funded by
means of a contribution from the Community, charges for
services provided by the Agency to Member States and charges
for publications, training and/or any other services provided by
the Agency.

1.9
Lastly, the Commission envisages that the Agency will
start its work in 2006, with a budget of EUR 4.9 million and a
total staff of 38 in the first year, rising to EUR 5.2 million and
49 staff members in 2007. The seat of the Agency will be in
Spain.

C 157/62

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.6.2005

2. General comments

2.1
The Commission Communication to the Council and to
the European Parliament Towards a uniform and effective imple-
mentation of the Common Fisheries Policy (1) provided for a feasi-
bility study to be drawn up in coordination with the Member
States prior to the creation of a Community Fisheries Control
Agency (the Agency). The Commission has presented the
proposed Regulation without having undertaken this feasibility
study beforehand. The EESC deplores this fact.

throughout

The EESC welcomes

the European Commission's
2.2
proposal to create the Agency and shares its aims of achieving
the effective implementation of the CFP and uniform inspection
and enforcement
the Community. The EESC is
aware of the need for uniform and effective compliance with
the rules of the CFP but considers that for this to happen, these
rules must be accepted and understood by the sector. If this is
to be possible, the sector must be involved from the outset in
the decision-making process, starting with collaborating on
drafting the scientific advice on which the strategies and
measures for the conservation of fisheries resources are based.
The EESC therefore believes that the Agency should also focus
on examining how to improve scientific advice and encoura-
ging the sector's involvement in drafting this advice. This last
point should be included in the Agency's mission as detailed in
Article 4 of the proposal for a Regulation.

2.3
Given that the Agency will be the first agency dedicated
exclusively to fisheries-related issues, the Committee considers
that the draft Regulation should provide for the possibility of
the Agency's competences being extended in future.

To this end, the EESC believes that the Agency could
2.4
provide Member States and the Commission with technical and
scientific advice on the effective enforcement of the rules of the
CFP, in particular on the effectiveness of the inspection and
control measures proposed. It could, therefore, be given the
task of promoting the training of inspectors and staff specia-
lised in control activities and creating a special training centre.
Lastly, the Agency could contribute to the effort necessary to
harmonise sanctions in the different Member States.

2.5
The proposed Council Regulation states that operational
coordination by the Agency shall cover the inspection and
control of fishing activities, up to the first point of sale of
fishery products, which are carried out on the territory of
Member States or in Community waters or, outside Community
waters, by Community fishing vessels. The EESC considers that
the Agency's operational coordination must have a broader
scope. Firstly, it should cover inspection and control not only

(1) COM(2003) 130 final of 21.03.03

up to the first point of sale of fishery products, but of the
entire food chain, in other words, from the moment the fish is
caught until it reaches the end consumer. Secondly, one of its
duties should be to coordinate the control of fisheries products
from fishing vessels flying the flag of a third country, in par-
ticular those that practise illegal, unreported and unregulated
fishing.

2.6
The EESC considers it to be highly appropriate that the
Agency should assist both the Community and the Member
States in their relations with third countries and with regional
fisheries organisations, and with the latter directly, because this
will help to conserve and use fisheries resources from the
waters of these third countries and from international waters in
a sustainable fashion. The EESC therefore believes that the
budget must provide the Agency with sufficient
financial
means to fulfil this task, thus benefiting sustainable fisheries
development.

2.7
The EESC shares the idea expressed in Article 6 of the
proposed Regulation of establishing a Community Fisheries
Monitoring Centre for the organisation of operational coordina-
tion of joint control and inspection activities. Nevertheless, it
believes that the Regulation should spell out the duties of this
in order to avoid duplicating Member State compe-
Centre,
tences. The Committee believes that, once the Agency becomes
operational, it must comply with the rules on confidentiality
referred to in Article 33 of the Council proposal.

2.8
The EESC considers the form of the joint deployment
plans referred to in Chapter III of the Commission proposal to
be crucial to the effective, uniform and balanced enforcement
of control policy by the various Member States. The EESC is
satisfied with the content of these joint deployment plans and
the procedures for their adoption, implementation and assess-
ment and believes that the Member States should work closely
with the Agency in order to see these through.

2.9
The Committee believes that the annual assessment of
the effectiveness of each deployment plan provided for in the
proposed Regulation is crucial
to determining whether the
various fleets are complying properly with existing conserva-
tion and control rules.

The EESC agrees with the proposal to create a network
2.10
for exchanging information between the Commission,
the
Agency and the competent Member State authorities, but
believes that the Agency and the Commission itself should be
particularly vigilant about ensuring that confidentiality is main-
tained on the data obtained and shared, as Member States are
required to do under Article 17(2) of the proposed Regulation.

28.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 157/63

for a Regulation stipulates that

As regards the Agency's internal structure and func-
2.11
tioning,
the
the proposal
Agency shall be a public body of the Community having legal
personality. The EESC wishes to express its full agreement with
this statement, because the Agency must be a body that serves
the entire Community, which acts in a completely transparent
way, and which cannot influenced by the particular interests of
the Commission or of the Member States. The Committee is
therefore concerned at the lack of clarity as regards the way in
which the Agency will appoint its officials, whether they are
assigned or seconded by the Commission or Member States on
a temporary basis by the Commission or the Member States.

also have a reason for wanting the Administrative Board to
meet.

2.16
Article 27(4) of the draft Regulation states that when
there is a matter of confidentiality or conflict of interest, the
Administrative Board may decide to examine specific items of
its agenda without the presence of the members nominated by
the Commission as representatives of the fishing industry. The
EESC proposes that this paragraph should be removed because
this would in practice constitute a significant restriction on the
involvement of representatives of the fisheries sector in Admin-
istrative Board meetings.

2.12
Applying the Staff Regulations of officials of the Euro-
pean Communities, the Conditions of employment of other
servants of the European Communities and the rules adopted
jointly by the institutions of the European Communities to the
Agency's staff is to be welcomed, as is the clear definition of
the contractual and non-contractual
liabilities of the Agency
and its staff in the performance of their duties. Furthermore,
the Committee accepts that the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities should have jurisdiction in disputes relating
to compensation for any damage arising from the contractual
liability of the Agency.

2.17
One of the duties that the proposed Regulation confers
on the Administrative Board is the duty to produce a general
report on the Agency's activities for the previous year and on
its work programme for the following year, which will be
forwarded to the European Parliament,
the
Commission, the Court of Auditors and the Member States. In
the interests of greater transparency and the closer involvement
of the fisheries sector, the EESC considers that there should
also be an obligation to forward these reports to the European
Union's Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture.

the Council,

2.13
The cornerstone of the Agency's structure as presented
by the Commission in Article 25 is, as in any undertaking, be
it public or private, the Administrative Board. The EESC is
concerned to note the excessive dependence of this Administra-
tive Board on the Commission, which has ten votes against the
single vote held by each Member State whose vessels are
engaged in fishing activities relating to marine living resources.
jointly have a maximum of twenty
The Member States will
votes, which means that the Commission will easily be able to
impose its decisions. The EESC believes that,
like the other
representatives, those from the Commission should each have a
single vote.

2.18
Article 29 of the proposal for a Regulation requires
representatives of the fishing industry on the Administrative
Board to make a declaration of interests indicating either the
absence of any interests which might be prejudicial to their
independence or any direct or indirect interests which might be
considered prejudicial to their independence. The EESC believes
this declaration of interests to be inappropriate and unneces-
sary given that any representative of the sector who is active in
the field and who could be selected will have a direct interest
in fisheries that could prejudice his or her independence. If
declarations of interest are to be made, then the other members
of the Administrative Board should also be required to make
them.

the number of representatives of

2.14
The Commission proposes, furthermore, to nominate
four representatives from the fisheries sector to form part of
the Administrative Board, without voting rights. The EESC
believes that
the sector
proposed by the Commission is extremely low and should be
increased to at least eight, stating specifically that these should
be nominated by European employers' and workers' organisa-
they should have voting rights. The EESC
tions and that
believes that the proposed Regulation should set the minimum
criteria to be fulfilled by the representatives of the sector in
order
to gain a place on the Administrative Board. The
proposed Regulation should also state that the representatives
of the sector also have the right to nominate alternates on the
Administrative Board.

2.15
The Commission proposes that the meetings of the
Administrative Board be convened by its Chairperson and that
the Board hold an ordinary meeting once a year or on the
initiative of the Chairperson or at the request of the Commis-
sion or of one-third of the Member States represented on the
Administrative Board. The EESC believes that
the proposal
should say ‘one-third of the Members of the Agency's Adminis-
trative Board’, because the representatives of the sector might

2.19
The EESC is also concerned at the excessive decision-
making power that the Commission will have in the selection,
appointment and working practices of the Executive Director
and in the removal of that individual from his or her post.
Article 31 of the proposed Regulation should therefore state
that the removal of the Executive Director from his or her post
like his or her appointment, require a two-thirds
should,
majority of the members of the Executive Board. The EESC
considers that the list of possible candidates for the post of
Executive Director should be forwarded to the ACFA in
advance so that this body can deliver a non-binding opinion on
the candidates.

2.20
The Agency's budget, at least for the first few years
following its establishment, must be provided mainly from the
Community contribution entered in the general budget of the
European Union, because the two other sources of income —
charges for services provided by the Agency to Member States
and charges for publication or training — can only come into
play once a certain amount of time has passed. The Committee
believes that for the first three years of the Agency's operation,
the budget should be reasonably flexible, because the Commis-
sion proposal appears to be somewhat too restrictive.

C 157/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.6.2005

2.21
The EESC wishes to express its support for the system
for the implementation and control of the budget set out in the
draft Regulation, in particular for the provisional inspection of
the Agency's annual accounts by the Court of Auditors and for
the provisions of Regulation (EC) No. 1073/1999 (1) to combat
fraud, corruption and other unlawful activities to apply without
restriction to the Agency. It is crucial that the Agency accedes
to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 25 May 1999 concerning
investigations by the European Anti-Fraud Office
internal
(OLAF).

2.22
The proposal for a Regulation amends Regulation (EC)
No 2847/93 (2) establishing a control system applicable to the
Common Fisheries Policy, replacing Article 34(c), which stated
that the control and inspection programmes for fisheries laid
down by the Commission could not last longer than two years
and that responsibility for adopting the appropriate measures,
in terms of both human and material resources, fell to the
Member States. The amendment set out in the proposal extends
the time limit to three years or any period laid down for this
purpose in an appropriate recovery plan and it lays down that
the Member States shall
implement the programmes on the
joint deployment plans. The EESC approves this
basis of
amendment.

2.23
In order to meet the deadlines set and in accordance
with Article 40 on the start of the Agency's activities, the EESC
believes that this proposal for a Regulation should enter into
force on 1 January 2005 to ensure that the Agency is able to
start its activities on 1 January 2006.

3. Conclusion

3.1
The EESC congratulates the Commission on its proposal
to create the Agency and urges it to give the Agency a suffi-
cient budget to meet its objectives, suggests that it provides for
the possibility of extending its competences and asks it to meet
the deadlines set in the proposal for a Regulation.

3.2
The EESC thus calls on the European Commission to
take account of the recommendations made in this opinion, in
particular the following:

3.2.1
the Agency's competences being extended in future.

The Regulation should provide for the possibility of

— The Agency should also focus on examining how to
improve scientific advice and encouraging the sector's
involvement in drafting this advice.

Brussels, 15 December 2004.

— The Agency could provide Member States and the Commis-
sion with technical and scientific advice on the effective
enforcement of the rules of the CFP, in particular on the
inspection and control measures
effectiveness of
proposed. The Agency could be given the
task of
promoting the training of inspectors and staff specialised in
control activities and creating a special training centre.

the

— The Agency could be instrumental in the necessary drive to

harmonise sanctions in the different Member States.

3.3
The Agency's operational coordination must have a
broader scope. Firstly, it should cover inspection and control
not only up to the first point of sale of fishery products, but of
the entire agri-food chain, in other words, from the moment
the fish is caught until it reaches the end consumer. Secondly,
one of its duties should be to coordinate the control of fisheries
products from fishing vessels flying the flag of a third country,
in particular those that practise illegal, unreported and unregu-
lated fishing.

3.4
The Agency must be a body that serves the entire Com-
munity, which acts in a completely transparent way, and which
cannot be influenced by the particular interests of the Commis-
sion or of the Member States.

There must be balance in the representation on the
the European

3.5
Executive Board between the Member States,
Commission and representatives of the sector.

The number of representatives of

3.6
the sector on the
Executive Board proposed by the Commission is extremely low,
and should therefore be increased to at least eight and it should
they are to be nominated by European
be specified that
employers' and workers' organisations and that they will have
voting rights.

3.7
The Agency must comply strictly with the rules on
confidentiality set out in Article 33 of the proposed Regulation.

Article 27(4) of the proposal for a Regulation should be

3.8
deleted.

The declaration of sector representatives'

interests set
3.9
out in Article 29 is inconsistent and unnecessary. Alternatively,
it should be required of all members of the Executive Board.

3.10
the tasks of the Community fisheries control centre.

Lastly, the Regulation should provide greater detail on

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

(1) OJ L 136 of 31.05.99
(2) OJ L 261 of 20.10.93