8 Infringement of the Common Fisheries
Policy in 2003
| (26608)
9539/05
COM(05) 207
| Commission Communication: Behaviour which seriously infringed the rules of the Common Fisheries Policy in 2003
|
| Legal base | — |
| Document originated | 30 May 2005
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 7 June 2005
|
| Department | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 22 June 2005
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | See para 8.5 below
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
8.1 The Regulation establishing the control systems for the Common
Fisheries Policy (CFP) has since 1993 required the Commission
to report from time to time on the way in which the various measures
have been applied by the Member States. It was amended in 1999
to oblige Member States to report annually on types of behaviour
which seriously infringe the rules of the CFP, and for which proportional,
effective and dissuasive penalties should be imposed. This Communication
from the Commission —
the fourth in the present series —
summarises the information relating to proceedings initiated in
2003.
The current document current document
8.2 The Communication contains a short description
of the information provided by each Member State. Subject to
the caveat that the accuracy of the data varies greatly, and
that the figures should therefore be treated with caution, it
points out that:
· the
overall number of cases reported by Member States was 9,502, compared
with 6,756 in 2002, 8,139 in 2001 and 7,298 in 2000;
· 88%
of these infringements occurred in five Member States (Greece,
France, Spain, Italy and Portugal), the last three of these having
reported most cases (3,158, 2,659 and 1,316 respectively);
· as in
previous years, a significant proportion of infringements concerned
unlawful fishing, either without the necessary authorisation or
in prohibited areas: other infringements mainly concerned the
use of prohibited fishing methods and falsifying the data required
in control documents, as well as failure to meet marketing standards
(which showed a threefold increase on 2002);
· although
Member States use different procedures, criminal or administrative,
to sanction infringements, the majority of cases were subject
to administrative proceedings;
· a penalty
was imposed in 84% of cases, but there were significant differences
between Member States;
· likewise,
there were significant differences in the levels of fines, and,
although the average level of 4,664 was much higher than in previous
years, it is not clear to what extent the figures provided included
seizures of gear or catches; and
· although
the Commission believes that the suspension of fishing licences
would be an effective way of increasing compliance, it notes that
there was a marked reluctance to punish offences in this way.
The Commission says that it intends to address problems
over the consistency and accuracy of this information with the
Member States, and that it does not at this stage rule out taking
action against some of them.
The Governments view Governments view
8.3 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 22 June 2005,
the Minister for Nature Conservation and Fisheries at the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Ben Bradshaw) says
that the UK welcomes publication of the Communication, which he
believes makes a valuable contribution to ensuring greater transparency
of fisheries enforcement across the Community, and to future discussions
on control and enforcement within the framework of the reformed
CFP.
8.4 He also notes that, in the UK, fisheries infringements
are subject to criminal proceedings, and that, for the majority
of serious offences, the Courts may impose a fine of up to £50,000,
order the seizure of fishing gear, impose an additional fine up
to the value of the fish involved, and, in certain circumstances,
suspend or revoke a fishing vessel licence. He notes that the
majority of the 91 infringements reported by the UK were associated
with the falsification of catch data recorded in logbooks and
other documents, and that (unlike other Member States) there were
very few infringements linked to fishing without a licence, unauthorised
fishing or using prohibited fishing methods. He also points out
that the average fine in the UK was €77,922, which reflects
a number of cases where substantial fines were imposed; it was
towards the top of the range, and well in excess of the Community
average.
8.5 The Minister says that the document has been
submitted for information, and that the Council is expected to
note its contents at one of its forthcoming meetings.
Conclusion
8.6 This Communication does not itself contain
any proposals for legislation, but it nevertheless deals with
an important aspect of the Common Fisheries Policy. For that
reason, although we are clearing it, we think it right to draw
it to the attention of the House, not least because of the clear
evidence of shortcomings in the data provided by the various Member
States, and the marked differences between the level of penalties
imposed where infringements have occurred. In particular, we note
that the average fine in the UK —
far from being simply "towards the top of the range"
—
was nearly ten times that in the Member State with the next highest
level.[31]
31 Italy, where the average was €8,304. Back
|
