Select Committee on European Scrutiny First Report

 

1 Fisheries: catch quotas and effort limitation 2009

(30161) 15578/08 + ADDS 1-3 COM(08) 709

Draft Council Regulation fixing for 2009 the fishing opportunities and associated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of fish vessels, applicable in Community waters and, for Community vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required

Legal base	Article 37 EC; QMV
Document originated	7 November 2008
Deposited in Parliament	17 November 2008
Department	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Basis of consideration	EM of 28 November 2008 and SEM of 4 December 2008
Previous Committee Report	None
Discussed in Council	17- 19 December 2008
Committee's assessment	Politically important
Committee's decision	For debate in European Committee

Background

1.1 The Total Allowable Catches (TACs) for particular fish stocks in the following calendar year are based on advice provided by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) in mid October, and then by the Commission's Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF). In those cases where particular fisheries are jointly managed with third countries, the Community share then has to be negotiated with the countries concerned; and the relevant TACs for the Community as a whole agreed by the Fisheries Council (and allocated between Member States according to a predetermined key) on the basis of a proposal put forward by the Commission.

1.2 Since these proposals have to be agreed before the start of the calendar year to which they apply, they have habitually presented scrutiny difficulties, in that the need to take into account the scientific advice means that official texts are often available too late for them to be considered properly beforehand. As it happens, the current document, proposing the TACs in 2009, was deposited in Parliament rather earlier than usual (on 17 November), but, as it has to be agreed at the meeting of the Council on 17-19 December, it would again not have been possible for it to be debated before then. In view of this, the Government (as it has done in recent years) arranged on its own initiative a debate[1] on fisheries on the Floor of the House on 20 November, in order to enable Members to raise points on the proposals in advance of the Council.

The current proposal

1.3 As in previous years, the main proposal deals with:

• TACs and national quota allocations for fish stocks in Community waters;
• quotas for Community vessels in third country waters, and in international waters regulated by regional fisheries organisations;
• quotas for third country vessels in EU waters;
• the licensing and other conditions (including control and enforcement of catch limits and effort restriction) which apply to the fishing of these opportunities; and
• technical measures, such as closed areas.

TOTAL ALLOWABLE CATCHES (TACS) IN COMMUNITY WATERS

1.4 As usual, the TAC allocations in Community waters form the corner-stone of the opportunities available to Community fishermen in the coming 12 months, and tend to attract the greatest media attention. The table at Annex I shows, for the major stocks of interest to the UK in the North Sea, West of Scotland, Channel and Irish Sea fisheries, the Community TACs proposed for 2009, and the UK's quota. It also sets out, by way of comparison, the equivalent Community figures in 2007 and 2008, and the percentage changes as between 2008 and 2009. However, the proposals do not include a number of stocks crucial to the UK, notably in the North Sea, which are subject to separate agreement with Norway, where negotiations were due to be resumed on 8 December.

1.5 In general, the Commission's aim is to limit changes in the TACs to 15% in either direction, in order to stabilise fishing opportunities, though exceptions are made where the scientific prognosis is so poor as to require more robust action. Increases are proposed in only a few cases. The most significant changes so far as the UK is concerned are:

• 25% cuts for cod in the Irish Sea and West of Scotland;
• a 52% cut in the West of Scotland herring quota, which is significantly more than that envisaged in the corresponding herring management plan;[2]
• reductions in the TACs for nephrops in all areas, despite ICES advice that fishing is sustainable;
• zero TACs for spurdog and porbeagle in recognition of their critical and vulnerable status.

EFFORT RESTRICTIONS

1.6 In the light of ICES advice that TACs have in many cases been ineffective in controlling fishing mortality, effort management in the form of controls over days at sea has been in place for a number of years to protect cod in the North Sea, West of Scotland and Irish Sea. This year, the effort regime in the cod recovery zones will be subject to the new provisions of the revised cod recovery plan,[3] which we considered further on 26 November 2008 (and recommended for debate in European Committee alongside these wider proposals for TACs in 2009). As we noted then, the recovery plan provides for a new mechanism under which Member States are responsible for managing the effort of their respective fleets against an established ceiling based on historic activity, and in relation to each gear group in each sea area, the aim being to reward vessels deploying more cod-friendly gear and to reduce the level of discards.

1.7 The Commission has proposed less restrictive measures for southern hake and nephrops, as well as a roll-over of the current restriction on the North Sea sandeel fishery and the existing technical measures, pending a more detailed appraisal of their value.

The Government's view

1.8 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 28 November 2008, the Minister for the Natural and Marine Environment, Wildlife and Rural Affairs at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr Huw Irranca-Davies) says that the proposed Regulation reflects the serious state of many fish stocks, with recovery plans continued for cod, and management plans for hake, western Channel sole and North Sea flatfish, and he points out that the Commission is also proposing cuts in many associated stocks or in those which otherwise show a declining trend.

1.9 However, he says that, although there is a need for TACs to take into account appropriate scientific advice in order to ensure the sustainability of the fish stocks, it is at the same time important to maximise the fishing opportunities which can be taken, and to allow associated stocks to be exploited when it can be ensured that the impact on recovery stocks will be minimised. He adds that this is necessary in order to protect the viability of vulnerable sectors of the UK fleet and the interests of communities dependent on fisheries. He also suggests that measures must have a clear objective, be well balanced between Member States and different sectors of the UK fleet, and be capable of quick implementation.

1.10 Against this background, the Minister says that the UK is likely in the majority of cases to be able to accept the proposed TACs, but that it has identified a number of priorities to address in the negotiations. He also expresses concern at the Commission's attempt to reduce quotas for stocks where the uptake in 2008 was less than 100%, since he considered that there are many reasons for such a shortfall, and that a policy which encourages a race to ensure that quota is not subsequently lost sends all the wrong conservation and sustainability signals.

1.11 More generally, the Minister suggests that for all stocks account needs ultimately to be taken of the possible impact of management measures on fishermen's behaviour. In particular, where stock abundance is significantly out of line with the TAC, this leads, not to conservation, but to increased discarding or misreporting, which in turn produces poor data leading to increased uncertainty in future assessments. He therefore believes that, where fishermen's experience is corroborated by other means, such as scientific data on discards, this should be built into the relevant assessments, and appropriate alternative measures put in place to protect stocks.

1.12 The Government also considers that stakeholder collaboration in management decisions is an essential element in achieving sensible, effective measures, and will in many cases increase compliance, so that account should be taken of active cooperation between the fishing industry and fisheries managers, scientists and other stakeholders to gather data and draw up proposals for improved management. It has therefore been in close touch with fishermen's representatives, with the Commission and with other Member States, with the aim of developing effective arguments and measures, in order to maximise fishing opportunities within the scientific context, and will ultimately seek solutions which ensure stock recovery, whilst preserving a viable degree of activity for the industry and those communities dependent on it.

1.13 The Minister has also attempted in an Impact Assessment attached to his supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 4 December to quantify the effect of the proposals for stocks other than those in the North Sea managed jointly with Norway. He suggests that, if the Commission's proposals were to be adopted as they stand, there would be a net increase of about £12.6 million in UK landings (an increase of £34 million on mackerel being offset by a decrease of £21.4 million on other stocks). If, however, the Government were to be successful in achieving the detailed negotiating aims it has set itself, particularly as regards nephrops, anglerfish and megrim, the net benefit could increase to £33.2 million.[4]

Conclusion

1.14 Although the Commission's proposals were on this occasion deposited in the House rather earlier than has been the case in recent years, it is nevertheless clearly unrealistic at this stage to expect them to be debated before decisions have to be taken at the Council on 17-19 December. We were therefore pleased that the Government was able to arrange a recent debate on the Floor of the House.

1.15 Having said that, we are conscious that the proposals are in one significant extent incomplete, in that they do not take account of the outcome of the Commission's negotiations with Norway on the number of stocks, notably in the North Sea, which are of crucial importance to UK fishermen. In view of this, we think it would be right for the proposals to be debated in European Committee in due course alongside the revised cod recovery plan, but that it would be sensible for any such debate to be held in the New Year when the outcome of the Council is known. We propose to report further to the House at that stage, and we would therefore be glad if the Minister could write to us as soon as possible after Christmas to let us know what was eventually agreed.

Annex 1: Comparative Tables of Community TACs 2007, 2008 and 2009 (tonnes)

	2007	2008	2009	% ch 2009/081	UK share	UK quota
Herring
IVa, b	204,638	116,210	p.m	p.m
Vb, VIaN, VIb	33,340	26,540	13,853	-52.2	60%	7,665
VIa (Clyde)	800	800	680	-15	100%	680
VIIa	4,800	4,800	4,400	-8.3	74%	3,225
VIIe,f	1,000	1,000	1,000	0	50%	500
Cod
IIa, IV	16,563	18,306	p.m	p.m	47%
Vb, VI, XII, XIV	490	402	302	-25	60%	182
VIIa	1,462	1,199	899	-25	29%	259
VIIb-k, VIII, IX, X	4,743	4,316	5,404	+25.2	8%
Megrim
IIa, IV	1,479	1,597	1,357	-15	96%	1,305
Vb, VI, XII, XIV	2,880	2,592	2.203	-15	31%	691
VII	18,300	18,300	15,555	-15	14%	2,230
Anglerfish
IIa, IV	11,345	11,345	11,345	0	81%	9,223
Vb, VI, XII, XIV	5,155	5,155	5,155	0	31%	1,586
VII	28,080	28,080	25,740	-8.3	18%	4,629
Haddock
IIa, IV	46,983	37,626	p.m	p.m
Vb, VIa,	7,200	6,120	4,590	-25	78%	3,574
VIb, XII, XIV	4,615	6,916	5,879	-15	80%	4,738
VII, VIII, IX, X	11,520	11,579	8,790	-24	10%	879
Whiting
IIa, IV	21,420	15,012	p.m	p.m
Vb, VI, XII, XIV	1,020	765	574	-25	57%	329
VIIa	371	278	209	-24.8	38%	81
VIIb-k	19,940	19,940	16,949	-15	11%	1,788
Hake
IIa, IV	1,850	1,896	1,808	-4.7	18%	325
Vb, VI, VII, XII, XIV	29,541	30,281	28,879	-4.7	18%	5,190
Blue whiting
I-XIV	279,058	175,466	p.m	p.m
Lemon sole
IIa, IV	6,175	6,793	6,114	-10	61%	3,735
Nephrops
IIa, IV	26,144	26,144	23,609	-9.7	87%	20,449
Vb, VI	19,885	19,885	16,902	-15	98%	16,503
VII	25,153	25,153	21,380	-15	33%	7,013
Northern prawn
IIa, IV	3,984	3,984	p.m	p.m
Plaice
IIa, IV	49,143	47,875	p.m	p.m
Vb, VI, XII, XIV	786	786	668	-15	61%	406
VIIa	1,849	1,849	1,430	-22.7	30%	432
VIId,e	5,050	5,050	4,421	-12.5	29%	1,286
VIIf,g	417	491	922	-14.1	15%	56
VIIh-k	337	303	258	-15	13%	32
Pollack
Vb, VI, XII, XIV	450	450	383	-14.9	37%	140
VII	15,300	15,300	13,005	-15	17%	2,268
Saithe
IIa, IIIb-d, IV	59,160	65,232	p.m	p.m
Vb, VI, XII, XIV	12,787	14,100	14,100	0	26%
VII, VIII, IX, X	3,790	3,790	3,222	-15	15%	494
Mackerel
IIa, IIIa-d, IV	19,677	18,149	23,209	+28.4	3.7%	865
IIa, Vb, VI, VII, VIIIa,b,d,e,, XII, XIV	256,363	234,082	308,988	+32	58%	180,316
Sole
II, IV	14,920	12,710	p.m	p.m
Vb, VI, XII, XIV	68	68	58	-14.7	20%	12
VIIa	816	669	502	-25	22%	107
VIId	6,220	6,593	5,274	-20	19%	1,014
VIIe	900	765	650	-15	59%	382
VIIfg	893	964	940	-2.5	28%	264
VIIh,j,k	650	650	553	-14.9	17%	92
Sprat
IIa, IV	147,028	175,777	p.m	p.m
VIId,e	6,144	6,144	6,144	0	53%	3,226

¹ The figure shown is that adopted by the Council. Where this differs from that proposed by the Commission, the latter is shown in brackets.

TACs are defined in terms of areas designated by ICES. Those of most immediate relevance to the UK correspond roughly to the following geographical regions:

Area II	North Sea N of 62
Area IV	North Sea S of 62
Area Vb	Faroes
Area VI	West of Scotland
Area VIIa	Irish Sea
Area VIIb,c,h,j,k	Western approaches
Area VII d, e	English Channel
Area VIIfg	Celtic Sea

---

1   Official Report, 20 November 2008, Cols 392-459. Back

2   (29678) 9342/08: see chapter 8 of this Report. Back

3   (29591) 7676/08: see HC 16-xxi (2007-08), chapter 2 (14 May 2008) and HC 16-xxxvi (2007-08), chapter 2 (26 November 2008). Back

4   These figures compare with the total value of landings from UK vessels (including those from the North Sea) of £654 million in 2007. Back


 

---

 

Prepared 18 December 2008