The PECH Committee will meet tomorrow with the Commission to discuss IUU fishing, Article 17 and Coastal States fisheries negotiations
The European Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries (PECH) will meet tomorrow to discuss issues witht the Commission to dicuss a number of topics including an update onfisheries negotiations with Norway and other Coastal States.
The PECH Committee will examine the current situaion with illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing and the protection of animals during transporttion in an exchane of views with the attending Commission representatives.
Also, on the agenda for the exchange of view with the Commission represenatatives is: Implementing Article 17 of the Common Fisheries Policy: state of play of the fishing opportunities allocation and possible ways forward
Rapporteur and Chair of the PECH Committee, PIerre Karleskind with also bring forward a consideration of the working documents: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) 2016/1139, (EU) 2018/973 and (EU) 2019/472 as regards the targets for fixing fishing opportunities. The Proposal is summarised as follows:
Proposed Regulation to Amend Fishing Opportunities: A Comprehensive Overview
The European Parliament and the Council are proposing a regulation to amend Regulations (EU) 2016/1139, (EU) 2018/973, and (EU) 2019/472 concerning the targets for fixing fishing opportunities. This proposal aims to ensure the internal consistency of the rules governing the fixing of yearly fishing opportunities by the Council.
The Proposal in Context
The proposed regulation seeks to amend the Multiannual Plans (MAPs) for certain stocks fished in the Baltic Sea, the North Sea, and the Western Waters. These MAPs, established under Regulations (EU) 2016/1139, (EU) 2018/973, and (EU) 2019/472, are key instruments in achieving the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP).
The MAPs set out targets and measures for the long-term management of certain stocks and fisheries at the sea basin level, including safeguards and remedial actions where needed. They also provide flexibility by allowing the fixing of fishing opportunities within the ‘range of FMSY’.
The 5% Rule and Its Implications
The MAPs contain a provision, known as the ‘5% rule’, which stipulates that fishing opportunities must be fixed in such a way as to ensure less than a 5% probability of the spawning stock biomass falling below Blim. However, the application of this rule may, under certain circumstances, result in inconsistencies with other rules of the MAPs and have potentially severe socioeconomic implications.
For instance, the 5% rule may mean that fishing opportunities cannot be set and the targeted fishery must be suspended. Conversely, the safeguard provisions in the MAPs require the adoption of remedial measures to bring the stock above Btrigger, based on a case-by-case assessment of the appropriateness of such measures.
Proposed Changes
Given these considerations, the proposal suggests deleting the 5% rule in the MAPs. This change is expected to ensure the internal consistency of the rules of the MAPs governing the fixing of yearly fishing opportunities by the Council.
Legal Basis and Consistency with Union Policies
The proposal amends the MAPs and is therefore based on the same legal basis, namely Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It falls under the Union’s exclusive competence as referred to in Article 3(1)(d) TFEU.
The proposal is consistent with the CFP Regulation and other Union policies, particularly those in the field of the environment.
Proportionality and Choice of Instrument
The objective of this proposal is to ensure the internal consistency of the rules of the MAPs governing the fixing of yearly fishing opportunities by the Council. The proposed modification is deemed necessary and the most suitable measure to achieve this objective. Given that the proposal amends existing regulations, the most appropriate legal instrument is a regulation.
The results of ex-post evaluations, stakeholder consultations, and impact assessments are yet to be discussed.