European Standing Committee A
Wednesday 20 May 1998
[Mrs. Marion Roe in the Chair]
Fisheries Monitoring under the Common Fisheries Policy
[Relevant Documents: European Community Document No. 6123/98. European Community Document COM (98) 303 on a proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No. 2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy (the subject of the unnumbered Explanatory Memorandum submitted by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on 11th May 1998).]
10.30 am
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Mr. Elliot Morley): It is nice to see you in the Chair, Mrs. Roe.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss the Commission's communication on fisheries monitoring under the common fisheries policy and the subsequent proposals amending Council regulation 2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy. We wanted to progress the issue under the UK presidency and we are glad that the Commission has brought forward these proposals, which will be welcomed by all hon. Members.
When we came to office we made it clear that we were determined to put fisheries enforcement at the top of the political agenda. There is a growing realisation, domestically and across Europe, that effective enforcement is essential to the success of the common fisheries policy and the conservation of fish stocks and to ensuring the long-term viability of the fishing industry.
If the rules are to be respected by all fishermen, it is vital that they are applied consistently and with equal rigour throughout the Community. Failure to achieve that objective undermines the whole basis of our own enforcement efforts and those of other member states. We therefore welcome the action that is now being taken to address these important issues. It follows an undertaking secured by the Prime Minister at the Amsterdam summit from the President of the Commission that it would examine the need for improvements in Community enforcement.
The Committee might find it helpful if I briefly give some background to the documents that we are discussing. The Commission communication was published on 19 February. It is a comprehensive and detailed document which reviews the operation of fisheries monitoring since the last assessment was made by the Commission in 1992, and it takes account of the progress that has been achieved since 1994 when Council regulation 2847/93 came into force. It analyses the major weaknesses that remain in control and monitoring activities and recommends a plan of action to improve enforcement over the next two to three years.
The communication does not contain specific proposals but considers that amendments to the control regulation are needed to correct shortcomings that have become apparent in existing control arrangements. It highlights three main areas where priority action is needed. The objectives are: first, improving compliance with existing control measures; second, promoting greater transparency of the resources deployed and the enforcement activities carried out by member states; and third, encouraging greater co-operation between member states on enforcement activity. The Government strongly support those objectives.
At the March Fisheries Council it was clear that there was widespread support for the Commission's communication. Member states agreed that effective monitoring and enforcement were essential to the successful operation of the common fisheries policy. They also welcomed the Commission's intention rapidly to produce a detailed action plan for improving the effectiveness of fisheries control.
As part of that plan, the Commission has now presented proposals to amend the Communities' control regulation Council regulation 2847/93. These proposals are set out in the document that has been tagged to the motion for debate. They entail more than 30 amendments to the existing control regulation. I will not use up the Committee's valuable time now to detail all the measures in the Commission's proposals, but the main elements fall into three categories: First, to improve transparency and co-operation among member states; secondly, to improve controls after the point of landing; and, thirdly, to provide for more effective monitoring of third-country vessels fishing in EU waters. In addition, some amendments that are aimed at strengthening controls take account of the experience gained and the deficiencies that have been identified since the control regulation came into force in 1994.
I regret that today we are unable to consider the Commission's 1996 annual report on monitoring under the common fisheries policy, which has not yet been published. That report, however, is unlikely to add substantially to the current debate on future enforcement arrangements in the Community.
I had hoped that we might have the opportunity to consider today the Commission's detailed action plan for the next three years, but work on that is not yet complete. However, I understand that the plan will draw heavily on the material set out in the Commission's communication on fisheries monitoring and that it will provide a coherent strategy for improving control, involving closer co-operation and co-ordination between member states and the Commission. I will ensure that a copy of the action plan is made available to the Scrutiny Committee as soon as it is available.
The Commission proposes that amendments to the control regulation will be in place by 1 January 1999. Although there is much work to be done, I am confident that that can be achieved. The Fisheries Council will have an initial debate on the proposals at its meeting on 8 June, with detailed consideration by experts to follow, paving the way for adoption later this year.
I assure the Committee that the Government will do their utmost during the remainder of our presidency to ensure that we make as much progress as possible so[Mr. Elliot Morley]
that the council can adopt measures that will lead to a fairer and more efficient enforcement regime as soon as practicable. I certainly hope that the Government will have the support of all parties on this matter. The fishing industry wants equality of enforcement across all EU member states, and we share that objective.
10.36 am
The Chairman: We have until 11.30 am for questions to the Minister. I remind hon. Members that questions should be brief and asked one at a time. There is likely to be ample opportunity for all members of the Committee to ask several questions.
Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde): Page 2 of Commission document 6123/98 refers to
"sizeable gains in terms of effectiveness".
How does that stack up against the statement in paragraph 3 on page 5, which deals with controls of landing and which states that there is no
"commonly agreed definition of what is meant by a basic inspection"?
What is the Minister doing to rectify that fundamental failing of the Community's enforcement regime?
Mr. Morley: I take encouragement from the fact that the failing there is no denying that it is a failing has been recognised by the Commission and has been flagged up in the document. It makes it clear that there is no commonly agreed definition, and the Commission's amendments to the regulations want to create one. We strongly support that objective.
Mr. Jack: That is a somewhat complacent answer. We heard all that when the original regulations were introduced. There has been a track record of failure to report on time and no action plan is before us, but the Minister takes comfort from that. What in the remaining month and a half will he practically do to get the Commission up to speed on this matter?
Mr. Morley: I outlined in my opening statement what the Commission is doing and how it is bringing forward the proposals. The deadline is 1 January 1999. I repeat that the Commission recognises that the system has failings, but before one can bring about change, there must first be an acknowledgement of those failings. They have been acknowledged and we have been pressing the Commission to recognise them for many years. That has been done. Obviously work has to be done, but I am confident that we can resolve the issues before the 1999 deadline.
Mr. Jack: Will the Minister turn to paragraph 5 on page 9 of the document and tell me how everything will be achieved given what the first line of that paragraph states?
Mr. Morley: I cannot give a short answer to that question. However, the right hon. Gentleman will see recommendations in the document on the monitoring of fishing fleets, controls at sea, controls on landing, dealing with resource infringements and penalties, identifying six priority areas for action in 1998 including action forcefully under existing regulations, examination of how existing regulations can be combined to make controls more effective, pilot schemes for co-ordinating control operations and joint consideration of horizontal problems, amendments to the control regulation and its implementation and, if necessary, other regulations on fisheries monitoring. The document also recommends the first phase of satellite monitoring, the inclusion of the Mediterranean in the general rules, better information on resources in member states and the establishment of methods to ensure proper comparison and controls and the effectiveness of penalties applied. That is a decent action plan.
Mr. John Swinney (North Tayside: The Minister's comments on the document and the Commission's acceptance and acknowledgement of the problem show that the application of the monitoring regime in all member states is fundamental. That will strike a chord with the concerns of fisheries organisations throughout the United Kingdom and in other parts of Europe.
The Minister said that recognition of the problem of monitoring was the first step in the process and that taking action to solve it was the next step. In which member states does he think that the greatest amount of work needs to be done to enforce a level playing field for all fisheries in Europe?
| 
