11 Financing the implementation of the
Common Fisheries Policy
| (26502)
8142/05
COM(05)117
+ ADD 1
| Draft Council Regulation establishing Community financial measures for the implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy and in areas of the Law of the Sea
Commission Staff Working Paper: Annex to the draft Council Regulation establishing Community financial measures for the implementation of the Common fisheries Policy and in areas of the Law of the Sea — Extended Impact Assessment
|
| Legal base | Article 37EC; consultation; QMV
|
| Department | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letters of 22 May 2006 and 8 June 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 34-i (2005-06), para 12 (4 July 2005) and HC 34-x (2005-06), para 7 (16 November 2005)
|
| Discussed in Council | 22 May 2006
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
11.1 Following the publication in May 2002 of the Commission's
"Roadmap" Communication[39]
and other related documents, the Council agreed at the end of
that year certain reforms of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP).
These were based upon a number of fundamental principles, which
been given legal effect by the Council, most notably in Regulation
(EC) No. 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation
of fisheries resources,[40]
but they also require a number of other measures, many of which
expire at the end of 2006. The Commission therefore put forward
in April 2005 this draft Regulation which is intended both to
provide a legal basis for Community financial assistance during
the period of the new financial perspectives (2007-13),
and to bring this within a single measure, alongside that put
forward in July 2004 for the financing of structural measures
through the European Fisheries Fund.[41]
11.2 In doing so, the Commission noted that, since
the main objectives of the CFP had been established in the course
of the 2002 reforms, their economic, social and environmental
implications had already been assessed, and it suggested that
the crucial objective now was to ensure that any financial contributions
by the Community in these areas was streamlined and effective.
In particular, it proposed setting specific objectives covering
control and enforcement, data collection and improvement of scientific
advice, governance of the CFP, and international co-operation,
and it also set out the more detailed measures in each of these
areas which would be eligible for Community funding. The proposal
also suggested that expenditure of €375 million should be
provided in each of the years from 2007 to 2013, making a total
of €2,625 million over the period in question.
11.3 In our Report of 4 July 2005, we noted that
the Government had welcomed the proposal to bring together all
the various components of the CFP, apart from the European Fisheries
Fund, in a single framework, but had pointed out that the proposed
expenditure of €2.6 billion formed part of the €7.8
billion overall budget for European fisheries, which in turn was
part of a package of measures related to Community spending for
2007-13, for which the Commission had proposed a budget of 1.24%
of Community GNI. This compared with the view taken by the UK
(and others) that the Community's priorities can be funded by
a budget stabilised at 1% of GNI, and the Government had pointed
out that the budgets for agriculture and fisheries would need
to be consistent with this latter figure.
11.4 We said that, for that reason alone, we thought
it right to continue to hold this document under scrutiny, pending
further developments on the overall budgetary ceiling, noting
also that, for certain detailed aspects of the proposal, much
would in any case depend upon decisions yet to be taken. In the
meantime, we also sought further information on two aspects of
the proposal, on which we reported again to the House on 16 November
2005, following a letter we had received from the Minister for
Local Environment, Marine and Animal Welfare at the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Ben Bradshaw).
Minister's letter of 22 May 2006
11.5 We subsequently received a letter of 22 May
2006 from the Minister, in which he said that several discussions
had taken place at official level in Brussels, in the light of
which the Austrian Presidency had produced a final compromise
proposal, which had been scheduled for political agreement as
an A point at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council due to be
held on 22 May. In informing us of this situation, he added that
"it is clearly desirable for this proposal to be adopted
by the Council and unfortunate that [the] scrutiny procedure could
not be completed in time". Since this was one of a number
of matters coming before that Council where we were in effect
being asked to accept an over-ride of the Parliamentary scrutiny
reserve, we decided to ask the Minister for an explanation of
this before reporting the latest situation to the House. We also
asked him to indicate what budgetary provision had been agreed,
this being a point we had highlighted in our Report of 16 November
2005, but which had not been addressed in his latest letter.
Minister's letter of 8 June 2006
11.6 We have now received from him a further letter
of 8 June, in which he says:
"This item was adopted as an A point at
the Council on 22 May. After tabling of a Presidency compromise
in March, agreement in principle to a compromise was reached in
COREPER in April. However, a definitive text was not available
until 16 May and was subsequently revised on 18 May. Any update
provided to you before this date would have been provisional pending
the publication of the text for agreement; I believed it would
be better to wait to provide confirmed information, which I attached
to my letter of 18 May. Further to that letter, it is worth noting
that, unlike the European Fisheries Fund, the final budgetary
provision is not included in the Regulation itself. However, according
to the IIA adopted on 18 May, the relevant budget line "other
fisheries programmes/actions" has a budget of €2.3
billion for the period 2007-2013 in 2004 prices. As under previous
budgetary frameworks, individual decisions on expenditure on elements
covered by the Regulation will need to be taken on the basis of
separate Commission proposals."
Conclusion
11.7 We are pursuing separately with the Minister
the implications of his comments on the need in this instance
to over-ride the Parliamentary scrutiny reserve. However, in the
light of the information he has provided on the substance of this
document, which has in any case now been adopted by the Council,
we are clearing it.
39 (23511) COM (02) 181: see HC 152-xxxv (2001-02),
para 1 (3 July 2002) and HC 152-xxxviii (2001-02), para 2 (16
October 2002). Back
40
OJ No. L358, 31.12.2002, p.59. Back
41
See (25861) 11493/04: HC 42-xxxii (2003-04), para 6 (13 October
2004). Back
|
