6 European Fisheries Fund
| (25861)
11493/04
COM(04) 497
| Draft Council Regulation establishing a European Fisheries Fund
|
| Legal base | Article 37EC; consultation; QMV
|
| Document originated | 14 July 2004
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 28 July 2004
|
| Department | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 31 August 2004
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | 18-19 October 2004
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information awaited
|
Background
6.1 The Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) has long contained alongside
its core conservation function a structural policy aimed at modernising
the fisheries sector, and in particular adjusting catching capacity
within the Community to the available fisheries resources. The
main elements of that policy are currently contained in the range
of measures set out in Council Regulations (EC) No. 1263/1999[15]
and 2792/1999[16] and
financed under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance
(FIFG). The latter runs until the end of 2006, and, according
to the Commission, the Community instruments in question need
to adapt to the changing economic, social, environmental and political
conditions. It has therefore proposed in this document the establishment
of a new European Fisheries Fund (EFF) to run from 2007 to 2013.
The current proposal
6.2 Within these general objectives, the Commission has identified
the following priority areas for Community funding:
- measures to adjust the Community fleet so as to reduce
fishing pressure and afford better protection to the marine environment,
notably aid for the temporary cessation of fishing, the decommissioning
of vessels, switching to more selective gear, and retraining or
early retirement;
- support for the sustainable development of
aquaculture and for the processing and marketing of fisheries
and aquaculture products, including aid for diversification towards
new species, the implementation of public and animal health measures,
and production methods to help protect the environment;
- measures which promote the collective benefit
of the industry, by contributing to the sustainable management
or conservation of resources, strengthening marketing, and promoting
partnership between scientists and other players in the sector:
such aid could also be given for improving port facilities, the
promotion or development of new markets, pilot projects and testing
new technology;
- encouraging the sustainable development of
coastal fishing areas, by addressing their specific needs
with a view to maintaining their economic and social prosperity
through aid for diversification, tourism, environmental protection,
trans-national cooperation, and skills improvement; and
- technical assistance
towards implementation of the proposed Regulation, for example
in connection with inspection, monitoring and evaluation.
6.3 Thus, although the Commission sees the EFF playing
a more direct role than its predecessor in maintaining the economic
and social fabric of coastal areas dependent on fishing, the measures
envisaged replicate in many respects those already in place; and,
according to the Commission, they will continue to be based on
the same principles as other structural funds, such as multi-annual
programming and monitoring, partnership, part-financing and subsidiarity,
with each Member State drawing up a national plan setting out
its specific goals and priorities in the light of the strategic
guidelines for the CFP to be adopted by the Council for the period
in question. It is also proposed that the administration and financial
management of the Fund should be simpler than at present in a
number of respects.
6.4 However, the Commission points out that the Fund
is not designed to cover all the coastal areas of the Community,
and that it will be necessary to restrict the areas eligible for
assistance. In particular, it proposes that, in allocating the
available funds between the Member States, regard should be paid
first to the "Convergence" objective used by the Berlin
Council in 1999, intended to be fair to regions affected by the
"statistical effect" of enlargement, and that the resources
allocated to other regions would be on the basis of the size of
the fisheries sector in the Member State concerned, the scale
of adjustment needed to the fishing effort, and the level of employment
in the fisheries sector. The Commission proposes an overall draft
budget of €4,963 million for the period 2007-2013, and says
that, after making allowance for the recent accession and the
projected accession of Romania and Bulgaria in 2007, this figure
is roughly in line with the allocation under the FIFG. It also
envisages that the Fund would contribute up to 75% of public expenditure
in regions eligible under the Convergence objective, and 50% of
such expenditure in other regions (rising to 85% and 65% respectively
where the assistance is given to enable an adjustment of fishing
effort needed in response to stock recovery plans adopted by the
Council), but it gives no details of allocations to individual
Member States
The Government's view
6.5 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 31 August 2004,
the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Farming, Foods and
Sustainable Energy) at the Department for Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty) says that the UK favours the restructuring
of the fisheries sector to a more sustainable basis economically,
socially and environmentally. He adds that the measures proposed
—
including the somewhat greater scope for measures, such as tourism,
aimed at the regeneration of fishing communities —
are compatible with the support given in the recent report by
the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit to the provision of grant aid
to the industry for transition support, diversification and industry
development, though the UK will want to consider how they relate
to the proposals for rural regeneration in the suggested Rural
Development Fund.[17]
The Minister also notes that the range of grants which Member
States would be able to make in future with Community co-financing
follows broadly those eligible under the current FIFG scheme,
and says that, given the over-capacity in the Community fleet,
the UK welcomes the suggestion that the present ban on grants
for the construction of vessels, and for modernisation which increases
fishing power, should continue.
6.6 The Minister highlights the fact that this proposal
is part of a package of measures relating to Community spending
for 2007-2013, for which the Commission is proposing an overall
budget equal to 1.24% of Community gross national income. He points
out that, along with five other Member States, the UK believes
that the Community's policies can be funded by a budget stabilised
at 1%, and that the budget agreed for the Fisheries Fund will
need to be consistent with this.
Conclusion
6.7 We note that the range of grants which would
be available under the proposed Fund is broadly similar to that
currently available under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries
Guidance, and that the measures proposed are also compatible with
the broad thrust of the recent report by the Prime Minister's
Strategy Unit. On that basis, therefore, we would not have seen
any particular need for this document to be considered further.
However, we also note that, as with a number of other proposals
currently before the House —
notably those dealing with the European Regional Development Fund,
the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural
Guarantee Fund, and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development
—
the level of funds available for co-financing (and hence also
the priorities within the various funds) does depend upon the
outcome of the discussions on the future overall budgetary ceiling
for the Community. For that reason, we think it right to continue
to hold this document under scrutiny, pending further developments
on this last point.
15 OJ No. L.161, 26.6.99, p.54 Back
16
OJ No. L.337, 30.12.99, p.10. Back
17
(25841) 11495/04; see para 1 above. Back
|
