Domestic fisheries Management—Implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy

Written evidence submitted by the New Under Ten Fishermen’s Association Ltd (NUTFA) (FSH 01)

SUPPORTING THE UNDER 10m AND NON-SECTOR FISHING INDUSTRY

I believe that it will be vital to provide the Committee with the opportunity to receive oral evidence in addition to the attached written submission from this organisation on the basis of its requirement to provide only brief written evidence (<1000 words) presented herein cannot possibly adequately supply other than the simplest of overviews.

The summary of main points within the submission, related specifically to the issues identified by the Committee are:

(1): Is the current quota management system fit for purpose and how might it be improved?

· The current system is both unfair and unjust as well as being potentially illegal

· It is predicated upon Defra’s abrogation of their duties with respect to the allocation and management of quota within the UK

· Responsibility for quota management has been effectively gifted by Defra to Fish Producer Organisations that have been recognised as in urgent need of revision, specifically with regard to transparency of operation

· A very significant proportion of the UK quota is held by non active fishing interests and leased back to working fishermen at great expense, an unacceptable use of a public resource

· The quantities of quota allocated do not reflect the significant amount of fish on the ground and that greater use of fishers information should be encouraged.

· That both environmental and social criteria should be considered as one basis for future allocation, that quota should be loaned, not gifted, and to working fishers only, and on a use it or lose it agreement.

(2): Are the current arrangements fair to small scale fisheries?

· The system of quota allocation is based on the reported track record of catches by vessels in excess of 10 metres length during a reference period in the mid 90’s but entirely omitted the catches of all vessels of less than that length, a sector that now makes up 75% of the active English fleet and one that has been almost entirely disenfranchised within the process

· The under ten sector has access to only 4% of the available quota

· Defra’s Rules of Quota Management have been routinely ignored by officials for some years with respect to their ability to reallocate quota that is not utilised by the over ten sector

· Small scale fishers are going bankrupt for lack of quota that is held, but not utilised year on year by the Producer Organisations

· The small scale sector is and has been prevented from ‘owning’ quota and has no dedicated Producer Organisation to acquire, hold and manage quota on its behalf and therefore no opportunity to invest in access.

· Defra have ignored written evidence of track records held by under ten metre fishermen, as well as evidence from their own stratified sampling results at the time that this process was used to allocate quota and subsequently.

· There is no consideration of any alternative allocation method such as the use of environmental and social criteria where the small scale fleet is recognised to have particular benefits over its larger brethren and not least in relation to operation within the forthcoming and extensive Marine Protected Areas within inshore waters

· Small scale fishers do not have the ability to move far from their local waters and the loss of access to fishing opportunities therein unfairly discriminates against them

· That small scale fishers have lacked effective representation for many years and that this has resulted in the current skewed system of quota ‘ownership’.

(3): Is Defra taking all possible steps to reduce the level of discards?

· The aforementioned refusal by officials to reallocate unused quota to small scale fishers results in extensive and unnecessary discarding of marketable fish

· The meagre amount of quota allocated to the small scale sector has the same result and fails to recognise the additional benefits of the extensive use of passive and selective fishing gears used by the majority of the small scale fleet

· It has been the industry rather than Defra who have been responsible for a reduction in discarding

· No – the allocation of fishing opportunities based on impact (environmental, fishery and social) would significantly reduce discards at the same time as increasing local employment within the industry

· The current approach resolutely ignores the fact that many small scale fishers have No discards and thereby fails to reward them with improved access.

Submission

(1): In terms of our summary note referring to the potential illegality of the current method of quota allocation, I respectfully direct readers to Annex 1 of this submission, that is a brief consideration by a senior lecturer in law of the legality or otherwise of the allocation methodology. In turn, the article is based upon a full report compiled by the same author and presented at Annex II for information.

In short, it suggests that there has been an ongoing and unauthorized privatisation by stealth of a public resource, that Defra and its predecessors have knowingly and willingly contributed to this process, that there are legal precedents that illustrate the abrogation of the Government’s legal obligations (mainly to Fish Producer Organisations), including the breach of a United Nations Covenant under international law as well as anti competition regulations at both UK and European levels. The Report strongly suggests that HMG and the Devolved Administrations turn their attention to the issues of illegal delegation, anti competitive practice and unauthorized privatisation without delay.

NUTFA’s own work underpins these assertions and supports the report conclusions, not least in light of Defra’s current aspirations to introduce a full individual transferable rights regime with respect to the future allocation of UK fish quota.

In addition to the above, a very significant, yet unknown proportion of the UK quota is held by other than working fishermen. We assert that this is an unacceptable use of a public resource, especially one that is the lifeblood of the commercial fishing industry and vulnerable fishing communities and that the costs of leasing, amounting in many instances to in excess of 30% of a vessels grossings is not only iniquitous but forces vessels to sea in extreme conditions as well as increasing discards in order to maximize the value of the catch.

Additionally, the current system of speculative quota trading provides no benefits to coastal communities or crews and has the potential to drive small scale, low impact fishing activities out of business in favour of less environmentally acceptable and larger operations. (see Annex III for Danish example of the impact of the introduction of ITQ’s to the inshore fleet)

The current system is underpinned by a fisheries science process in urgent need of support and much improved industry / science cooperation. The EU Fisheries Commissioner has chosen to rely almost entirely on fisheries science for management purposes and it is vital that real and meaningful improvements are made (some are already working) so that the information available from fishermen can be utilized within the decision making process of setting TAC’s and quotas.

I conclude this section by suggesting that work is undertaken to consider alternative criteria to the current methodology for allocation specifically including the use of environmental and social elements. (please see Annex IV & V for information on this approach) In addition, resources should only be allocated (loaned) to working fishermen and on a use it or lose it basis.

(2): The small scale (under ten metre) sector makes up 75% of the active fleet in England yet has access to only 4% of the available quota. In addition, the sector is prevented from purchasing, holding or trading in quota and this has disenfranchised the sector in light of the current value of quota that is outwith the ability of small scale operators to afford. (i.e. when quota was first introduced, Cod quota was circa £30 per ton, it now costs £1600).

Despite the existence, both then and now, of an extensive and provable ‘sales’ track record by many under ten metre fishers, together with the Departments own and extensive stratified sampling of these catches, Defra’s predecessors blatantly ignored the true level of catches of this sector and awarded almost all quota entitlements to the over ten sector. Whilst it may be convenient for the current Administration to ignore these unpalatable facts, it beholds them to give due consideration to a revision of historic allocations, especially in light of comments made at (1).

In recent times and despite under ten metre fishers going bust for want of quota, Defra officials have year on year ignored their own Rules of Quota Management that state, at Section 16: (note: my underlining)

16. REALLOCATION

16.1 Administrations recognise that the primary means of maximising uptake of UK quota is the facility for the swapping of quota between groups. However, Administrations reserve the right, after consultation with those concerned, to take quantities of individual stocks from any group which appears to them unlikely to be able to catch its allocation in full, and to reallocate this amongst those groups most likely to make use of it.

16.2 In considering any requests from groups for reallocation Administrations will have regard to whether those making the request have made genuine efforts to acquire additional quota through realistic swaps with those groups holding surplus quota.

There are a number of examples where Producer Organisations have resolutely held onto very significant amounts of quota that they have never utilized year on year but that would have meant the difference to small scale fishers between surviving or going to the wall. Despite the quotation from Defra’s own Rules above, no reallocation has ever been made in this respect.

The Committee should be aware that small scale fishers do not have the ability to pursue fishing opportunities outwith their local area due to the size of their vessels. The lack of access to fishing opportunities in their locality acts as a double whammy for them in this respect.

Finally within this section, we do not believe it to be coincidental that the historic lack of representation of the small scale sector is reflected in the way that quota allocation and management has evolved for the benefit of the large scale sector.

(3): In light of the Committee’s requirement for written submissions to be restricted to less than 1000 words, I will rely on comments made within our Summary paper to provide responses to the question on Discards.

Jeremy Percy

Chief Executive

27 February 2011