FOREWORD—What this
report is about
The Common Fisheries Policy has one of the most dismal
reputations of any European Union policy. On several counts, that
reputation is warranted: the regulatory regime governing fisheries
in EU waters is intricate and extensive relative to the size of
the fishing industry, and yet around 88 per cent of fish stocks
in Community waters are over-fished, compared with a global average
of 25 per cent. Meanwhile many segments of EU fishing fleets experience
poor profitability, rendering them vulnerable to increases in
operating costs—fishermen's recent protests over the rising
cost of marine diesel illustrate the predicament.
In this report, we conduct a mid-term review of the
2002 reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, and examine ongoing
challenges facing fisheries managers. We seek to draw lessons
for current and imminent legislative proposals affecting fisheries,
and identify what we regard as the most promising avenues for
future reform of the CFP.
We conclude that on most indicators, the 2002 reform
of the Common Fisheries Policy has failed: overcapacity in the
fishing fleets of the Member States, poor compliance, uneven enforcement,
and a stiflingly prescriptive legislative process all persist,
while fish stocks remain depleted.
Our analysis suggests that the root cause of poor
performance on biological and economic indicators has been Member
States' reluctance to bring the size of their fishing fleets into
line with the available fishing opportunities—or even to
allow market forces to do so. We therefore urge Member States
to resist calls for subsidies to offset fishing vessels' rising
operating costs, and we oppose any relaxation of the state aid
regime for this purpose. Public aid should in our view be channelled
into attractive decommissioning schemes and the economic diversification
of fisheries-dependent coastal communities instead.
We observe that the current, over-centralised and
top-down legislative process has served to alienate stakeholders
and stretched the Commission's resources to the limit, and therefore
advocate a change in emphasis in management style. We favour a
division of labour in which strategic decisions continue to be
taken centrally in Brussels, but decisions relating to delivery
and implementation are delegated to regional bodies, subject to
central auditing of outcomes.
The establishment of Regional Advisory Councils is
a welcome step in this direction, and the most promising development
to arise out of the 2002 reform of the CFP. It has delivered notable
improvements in stakeholders' engagement in the policy-making
progress, which we regard as essential to improving both the quality
of the regulatory regime, and compliance with its provisions.
We dismiss the prospect of withdrawing from the CFP
as a credible policy option. Unilateral withdrawal from the CFP
would be incompatible with membership of the EU, while negotiated
withdrawal would require unanimous agreement to a treaty amendment
by all Member States. Attention should instead be directed at
improving and reforming the policy that exists, and that is the
focus of our report.
| 
