FISHERIES: CONTROL MEASURES IN INTERNATIONAL
WATERS OF THE NORTH-EAST ATLANTIC
(21760)
—
—
|
Draft Council Regulation amending Council Regulation (EC) No. 2791/1999 laying down certain control measures applicable in the area covered by the convention on future multilateral co-operation in the North-East Atlantic Fisheries.
|
| Legal base:
| Article 37 EC; consultation; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Department: |
Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
|
| Basis of consideration:
| EM of 9 November 2000 |
| Previous Committee Report:
| None; but see (20414) 10074/99; HC 34-xxviii (1998-99), paragraph 19 (20 October 1999), HC 23-i (1999-2000), paragraph 10 (24 November 1999), and HC 23-vi (1999-2000), paragraph 9 (26 January 2000).
|
| To be discussed in Council:
| 17 November 2000 |
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Cleared |
Background
44.1 Although most fishing takes place within
waters under national jurisdiction, it has also proved necessary
for organisations such as the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission
(NEAFC) to manage fish stocks in international waters. In July
1999, the European Commission put forward a proposal to implement
two recommendations agreed at the 1998 NEAFC annual meeting. These
introduced a control and enforcement scheme applicable to vessels
flying the flag of Contracting Parties operating within the NEAFC
area, together with a programme to promote compliance by non-Contracting
Party vessels.
44.2 Although this was not in itself contentious,
the proposal did raise the question of the allocation of responsibilities
for enforcement, in that the Commission envisaged inspection vessels
being provided by the Member States, whereas it had done so itself
in other waters, such as those covered by the North-West Atlantic
Fisheries Commission (NAFO). In the event, we noted in our Report
of 26 January 2000 that the Fisheries Council had agreed on 16-17
December 1999 that transitional arrangements were needed, since
there was insufficient time for the Commission to equip itself
for this task in 2000. The Commission and Member States were therefore
to co-operate in order to ensure a Community inspection presence
in NEAFC waters in 2000, and the Commission was to submit by 30
September 2000 proposals, which the Council was to adopt by the
end of this year, for more permanent arrangements to apply from
2001. In the meantime, the Government told us that in practice
Member States were likely to provide the inspection vessels in
2000.
The current proposal
44.3 Although no official text is available,
we have received an Explanatory Memorandum of 9 November 2000
from the Parliamentary Secretary (Commons) at the Ministry of
Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr Elliot Morley) saying that
the Commission has failed to come up with definite proposals for
a definitive regime. Instead, it is proposing a roll-over of the
current arrangements for a further three years, on the basis that
it will submit proposals on future monitoring in NEAFC waters
by 30 September 2003 at the latest.
44.4 The Minister says that the Commission
has argued that this is necessary in order to allow it time to
carry out a thorough evaluation of the effectiveness of the current
arrangements, and the resource implications of enforcement. He
adds that it has also said that a three-year period ties in with
a wider-ranging review it is carrying out on enforcement in other
regional fisheries organisations; with the validity period of
another draft Council Regulation on Community financial assistance
to Member States for expenditure on fisheries enforcement; and
with the completion of the review of the Common Fisheries Policy.
However, the Minister has observed that "it is more likely
that the Commission is aiming instead to establish the arrangements
on a permanent basis and probably hopes to avoid re-opening the
question on whether it should take on responsibility for enforcement
in NEAFC". He also says that the Government's preference
is to press for a shorter roll-over period of one year, for a
review to evaluate the implementation constraints of the current
NEAFC control and monitoring arrangements to be concluded by 30
March 2001, and for Commission proposals for a definitive scheme
by 30 June 2001.
Conclusion
44.5 Although this proposal would essentially
maintain the status quo for a further three years, and has been
justified by the Commission on the grounds that it will enable
a thorough evaluation of the effectiveness of the enforcement
arrangements within the international fisheries organisations,
we note, and share, the Minister's feeling that the Commission's
main aim is to avoid re-opening the question of responsibility
within NEAFC waters, in the hope that the present arrangement,
under which Member States are in practice bearing this burden,
will become established as a matter of course. It is also likely
that, by delaying a proposal until now, the Commission considers
that, following the logic of the agreement last December on a
one-year extension, it can claim there is insufficient time left
at this stage to equip itself for this task in 2001.
44.6 In the circumstances, the Government's
intention to argue for a shorter roll-over period of one year
probably represents the least damaging outcome, and, on that basis,
we are clearing the document. Nevertheless, we think it right
to draw this unsatisfactory state of affairs to the attention
of the House. We also ask the Minister to let us know what
decision the Council takes when it considers this proposal at
its meeting later this week.
|
