14 Fisheries agreement between the Community
and Morocco
| (27163)
5152/06
COM(05) 692
| Draft Council Regulation on the conclusion of the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Morocco
|
| Legal base | Articles 37, 300(2) and (3); consultation; QMV
|
| Department | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letters of 18 May 2006 and 8 June 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 34-xxvii (2005-06), para 1 (3 May 2006)
|
| Discussed in Council | 22 May 2006
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
14.1 Until 1999, a fisheries agreement was in force between the
Community and Morocco, but was not renewed at that time. However,
following more recent negotiations, a new agreement has now been
reached, the terms of which are set out in this document. The
Agreement, which would run for four years, follows the familiar
pattern whereby certain catching opportunities are provided to
Community fishermen in exchange for a financial contribution by
the Community, and the main point of interest has arisen on the
geographical scope of the Agreement and any possible implication
this might have for the dispute over the status of the Western
Sahara.
14.2 As we noted in our Report of 3 May 2006, the
UK regards the sovereignty of the Western Sahara as undetermined
pending United Nations efforts to find a solution, and the Commission
has recently advised that there is nothing in the draft agreement
which is inconsistent with international law governing the status
of the Western Sahara. However, we were also told that the Fisheries
Council was due to explore this further on 25 April, that the
UK was considering the Commission's advice in discussion with
other Member States, and that it would not support an agreement
if it felt that this would prejudice the status of the Western
Sahara.
14.3 We therefore said that, although we saw no reason
for the House to consider further the purely fisheries aspects
of this proposal, we would be interested to know the outcome of
the discussions in the Council, and for that reason, we would
continue in the meantime to hold the document under scrutiny.
Minister's letter of 18 May 2006
14.4 We subsequently received from the Minister for
Local Environment, Marine and Animal Welfare at the Department
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Ben Bradshaw) a letter
of 18 May, in which he says:
"The United Nations (UN) defines
Western Sahara as a non-self governing territory. Morocco is the
de facto administering power. As such, it is obliged under international
law to ensure that economic activities under its administration
do not adversely affect the interests of the people of the territory.
The Fishing Agreement, under Article 10, envisages the establishment
of a Joint Committee to monitor the implementation of the terms
of the Agreement, including the impact it has on the local population.
"The Government has considered its position
on this Agreement carefully, and our conclusion is that there
is nothing in the Agreement which makes it inconsistent with international
law in relation to Western Sahara, and that the Agreement does
not constitute recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western
Sahara. I can assure you that the UK Government would not support
an agreement if we felt it would prejudice the status of the Western
Sahara. The UK Government's position remains that the status of
the Western Sahara should be dealt with under the UN process which
we fully support to assist the parties to achieve a political
solution to the question of the Western Sahara."
Minister's letter of 8 June 2006
14.5 The
Minister also told us that the Agreement was due to be approved
as an "A" point at the Fisheries Council on 22 May,
and that the Government had concluded that it would vote in favour.
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.
14.6 We have now received from him a letter of 8
June, in which he says:
"This was a particularly sensitive dossier.
I followed this carefully, along with the North Africa Minister
Kim Howells. As you know, I took part in an Adjournment Debate
on the proposal on 17 March. Consideration of the matter at Council
was, first, postponed from April to May. COREPER re-considered
the question on 10 May, at which time it was agreed the item could
be sent forward as an A point subject to the view of the European
Parliament. The European Parliament adopted its Opinion on 16
May, clearing the path for agreement on 22 May. The Regulation
was adopted by the Council on 22 May."
Conclusion
14.7 Despite the Minister's explanation, we see
no good reason why we should not have been informed of the position
on this proposal in time for us to consider it before it was adopted
by the Council on 22 May. However, in the light of the information
provided on the substance of the proposal in the Minister's letter
of 18 May, we are now clearing the document.
|
