MEETING OF THE CPMR S FISHERIES INTERCOM GROUP 17 MAY 2010, 14 RP SCHUMAN, BRUSSELS MINUTES

Transcription

1 CRPMPRV A0 CONFERENCE DES REGIONS PERIPHERIQUES MARITIMES D EUROPE CONFERENCE OF PERIPHERAL MARITIME REGIONS OF EUROPE 6, rue Saint-Martin RENNES - F Tel. : + 33 (0) Fax : + 33 (0) e.mail : secretariat@crpm.org web : Present: MEETING OF THE CPMR S FISHERIES INTERCOM GROUP 17 MAY 2010, 14 RP SCHUMAN, BRUSSELS MINUTES Mr. Josie SIMPSON Shetland Islands council (Chairman) Mr. François DESRENTES CPMR Director Mr. Giuseppe SCIACCA CPMR Policy Officer Mr. Kjell NYBACKA West Finland Alliance Mr. Michael COOK South of Scotland Mrs. Samantha SMITH - South of Scotland Mr. Matteo VITALI Marche Region Mrs. Aude KÖRFER Brittany Region Mr. Javier GARCIA Murcia Region Mr. Carlos DE LA PAZ Junta de Andalucia Mr. François DESRENTES on behalf of the chairman welcomed everyone and introductions were given. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE: Apologies were received from: Agnes TRARIEUX, Rolf GYDEMO, Ann BELL, Anders CARLBERG, and Sally SPENCE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA: 1. State of play of the CPMR s activities on fisheries; 2. Preparing the brainstorming Session with M. Jean-Claude CUEFF DG MARE Head of Unit A/2 Common Fisheries policy and aquaculture; 3. Briefing/Brainstorming session FIG-DG MARE 4. Next Steps 1. STATE OF PLAY OF THE CPMR S ACTIVITIES ON FISHERIES Mr. François DESRENTES gave the floor to Mr. Giuseppe SCIACCA, who will be in charge of fisheries issues at the CPMR from 1 st January Mr. SCIACCA briefly presented CPMR activities on fisheries making a distinction between: Activities of lobbying & Participation in European events; Collaboration with the EC in the framework of the Fisheries areas Networks Activities; Exploring possibilities for collaboration with RACs With regards lobbying activities, Mr. SCIACCA reminded members that CPMR was keeping track of the main results provided by the Public consultation on the Green Paper, and participated in some events whose results are expected to boost the public debate on the future of the CFP. Specifically he mentioned the CPMR s participation in the seminar organized by DG Mare in Brussels (April 2010) on the the next generation of EFF, also highlighting the main issues that arose during the meeting:

2 Recovering from economic crisis: what future for the EFF budget? How EU 2020 strategy (towards a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth) is expected to influence the eligibility criteria and priority axes of the next EFF; How environment issues will affect EFF priorities; As for collaboration with the EC (DG MARE) in the framework of the Fisheries Areas Networks Initiative (FARNET), he recalled that CPMR had been working with the FARNET support Unit to organize international seminars with the aim of supporting European FLAGs in the implementation of AXIS 4 (technical assistance; exchange of best practises; cooperation building; etc ). He mentioned the seminars already organized with the CPMR s contribution (Warsaw in November 2009 and Gijon in March 2010). He then provided some information about the state of play of the selection process of the FLAGs at European level, mainly focusing on the big differences, about the amount of financial envelopes dedicated to Axis 4 and the number of FLAGs expected to be selected (see chart below), which exist between the old Europe and the new Member States. He also recalled that CPMR has been working to enlarge the collaboration with the FARNET support Unit to participate in and contribute to the technical debate on the future of the Axis 4 in the next CFP. This is expected to be achieved by the participation of a member of the CPMR General Secretariat in the FARNET ADVISORY GROUP. Last but not least, with regard to collaboration with RACs, Mr. SCIACCA recalled that a first concrete collaboration with RAC WEST has been developed in the framework of the FARNET initiative (exchange of information on projects developed at local level and funded by AXIS 4). This gave the opportunity to the CPMR General Secretariat to explore the possibility of new collaboration between the RACs and the FIG. In the end there is a common understanding on the diverse nature and objectives between RACs and FIG. However this does not mean that in the future some exchanges could not be developed on specific themes in order to understand the respective political positions and find out, where appropriate, common points or main differences. He concluded by stressing that the same approach could be enlarged to the other RACs (e.g. RAC North Sea; Baltic and Mediterranean). 2. PREPARING THE BRAINSTORMING SESSION WITH DG MARE M. François DESRENTES notified that the brainstorming session with M. CUEFF was expected to provide information on:

3 The results of the La Coruna conference; Guidelines from the last Council of Fisheries Ministries held in May Finally he gave the floor to Josie SIMPSON, who highlighted that the main goal of the preparatory session was to establish a list of main questions/issues which CPMR member regions would like to deal with. Then M. SIMPSON called for participants to start the debate. The list below provides a general idea of the issues covered during the debate: a) Future of Axis 4; b) Regionalisation of the CFP (e.g. RACs s role in the implementation of the CFP; Regions representation in the RAC s; c) Funding schemes for interregional cooperation projects covering fisheries issues; d) Towards a differentiated approach for aquaculture and small scale fisheries; e) IMP: which financial instruments? f) What is the impact of the Lisbon treaty on CFP? g) Regionalisation and technical measures; h) Discards; i) Social dimension of CFP; j) Aid for decommissioning/construction of vessels. As for points h, i, j for which there is not a broad consensus between the CPMR s member regions, participating Regions decided to avoid raising questions on these specific subjects focusing only on their general state of play. The majority of subjects mentioned above were covered by the brainstorming session. 3. BRIEFING/BRAINSTORMING SESSION FIG - DG MARE For DG MARE, Mr. Jean-Claude CUEFF - Head of Unit, A/2, Common Fisheries policy and aquaculture and Mr. Jean-Pierre VERCRUYSSE Policy Officer UNIT A/3, in charge of FARNET attended the meeting. Mr. Jean-Claude CUEFF, presented the state of play of the debate about the reform of the CFP. He focused his presentation both on results of the La Coruna Conference (held on 2 nd and 3 rd May 2010) and of the informal meeting of the Fisheries Ministries Council (4th 5th May 2010). With regard to the Conference hosted in La Coruna, Mr. CUEFF stressed that it was built around the most controversial issues affecting the debate on the reform of the CFC. He (Cueff?)mainly dealt with: FISHING RIGHTS SMALE SCALE FISHERIES REGIONALISATION - It would seem that nobody challenges the fact that fishing rights represent one of the tools at the basis of the CFP s management. However many doubts still lay ahead which type system/type (transferable not transferable; linked to vessels ownerships or single fishermen; etc ) - As for the market for rights, there is a wide consensus about the need for more transparency about the system for transferring them. Specifically the transfer of rights will be allowed only inside a member State and not at transnational level. - There is a wide consensus around maintaining both the 12 mile-limit and boxes; - An interesting debate around possible new definitions of small scale fisheries is being developed. However the approach regarding the next category of the small scale fisheries presented during the La Coruna conference should not cover trawling vessels - - The European Commission has been working to find out a solution to the issues regarding the limits of decentralisation (of decision making) laid down in the Lisbon treaty in the framework of the CFP. - Some references are made to the idea of regional body at basin level and the role that should be played by Member States and RACs.

4 With regard to the informal Fisheries Council hosted in Vigo, Mr. CUEFF mentioned the main political position showed by some Member States on the following issues: OVER CAPACITY REGIONALISATION FISHERIES MANAGEMENT CMO EXTERNAL DIMENSION AQUACULTURE FINANCIAL TOOLS - A general consensus would seem to be achieved around the fact that overcapacity is one of the most dangerous challenges to achieving the sustainable development of the CFP. However, there is not yet a common view on the path that should be followed to tackle this issue. While some Member States for instance propose to maintain public aid in favour of decommissioning of vessels (even if with some restriction based on the type of vessels), other ones point out that a good solution might be to link fishing rights to vessels, and allow the private sector to buy these rights when vessels are decommissioned: in this way the financial support provided by public aid might be substituted by a market based allocation. It must be stressed that both solutions might encourage a concentration of rights. - Last but not least, some Member States pointed out their fear about the impact that the market based allocation system might have on the small scale fisheries. - There is not yet a common consensus on the future governance that is expected to be launched in the framework of the reformed CFP. In such a context, even if many Member States (e.g. UK, PL, SLO, LT) have been supporting some proposals dealing with different scenarios of decentralisation, it would be quite difficult for a revolutionary scheme of regionalisation to be quickly achieved in the renewed CFP. - The great majority of Member States confirmed their will to avoid a system based on the transfer of fishing rights at European level. Only a few members have still been calling for an in-depth reflection on this option (e.g. UK) - There is a large consensus on the possibility to launch long-term management plans (4 or 5 years); - The MSY goal will not likely be achieved in 2015, while 2020 ecosystems objectives have been confirmed. - Member States agree to retain either the 12-mile limit rule or the boxes. - Even if the great majority of Member States agree on maintaining the principle of responsible fisheries, Belgium and Spain wish to modify it by including some structural changes which could take into account the SWAPs. - Member States agree on retaining it and call for the creation of a European label for «sustainable fishing» - Member States are in favour of the application of the CFP outside of the European seas under specific conditions (maintain the dimension of aid for development etc.) - Member States wish to introduce a specific chapter dealing with aquaculture into the new baseline regulation for the new CFP. This will is also be supported by the European Parliament. - A proposal was made to reduce financial support for vessels decommissioning and, at the same time, to improve direct aid for fisheries communities Mr. SIMPSON thanked Mr. CUEFF for his interesting intervention and opened the debate. The questions raised by participants and responses provided by the DG MARE delegations have been summarized in the table below: Regional questions and remarks Mr. Michael J. COOK asked which role Regions are expected to have in the future phases of the CFP s reform? Mr. Michael J. COOK asked also if there is a final scenario around the concept of Responses provided by DG-MARE Mr. CUEFF pointed out that debate on the reform of CFP is still open. A specific role for Regions has not been yet planned, but they obviously must feel free to provide their contribution Mr. CUEFF recalled the limits laid down by the Lisbon Treaty and stressed that steps ahead towards a more decentralised CFP

5 regionalisation Mr. Kjell NYBACKA asked if Member States have been lobbying for a recentralisation of competences/powers at national level. Mrs. Aude KÖRFER asked which role should be played by RACs in this new scenario of regionalisation for the CFP. Mr. François Desrentes asked if AXIS 4 is expected to play a bigger role in the next generation of EFF. Mr. Giuseppe SCIACCA asked if there is a reflection on how to better link the territorial approach with coastal development and the future economic viability of small scale fisheries in the framework of the next generation of AXIS 4. Mr. François Desrentes pointed out that at present we have to tackle the big problem of visibility when we try to have a broad view of the initiatives/activities funded by EU money: too many programmes, projects and indicators lead both to harder relationships between DGs and bigger difficulties in terms of harmonisation between the different available funds. Mr. Kjell NYBACKA recalled that in Finland when we look at salmon management there is a concrete debate on the impact of recreational fishing and its relationships with professional fishing. He then asked if attention is being paid to recreational fishing and to the fresh water fishes exploitation Mr. Michael J. COOK asked for some information about the state of play of the debate on discards Mrs. Aude KÖRFER recalled that safety on vessels plays a key role in the debate concerning the social dimension. She then wondered if some financial aid was planned to improve safety on vessels. Mr. François Desrentes wondered if new will be difficult if we are not able to find a legal way for the transfer of competences/powers Mr. CUEFF highlighted that when one talks about regionalisation we must imagine it above all at maritime basin level. He then referred to the example of the Baltic region where debate around cod stocks management should lead to a global consensus between Member States, RAC Baltic Sea and HELCOM about tools which are expected to be used Mr. CUEFF pointed out that RACs will be linked to the «regional body», but he also added that is not yet sure that RACs will be allowed to join it. Last but not least he highlighted that a debate on the possibility to improve financial support for RACs has been starting to obtain a wider consensus Mr. CUEFF recalled that debate on the future EFF is being led by the necessity to have a cheaper policy for Then he stressed that the experience of AXIS 4 should be continued even if further efforts must be still made to build more synergies with other financial tools (e.g. LEADER) Mr. Jean-Pierre VERCRUYSSE recalled that in La Coruna some ideas concerning the possibility to support small scale fisheries through funds under AXIS 4 have been pointed out. However he stressed that this debate is still in its early stages and that no final proposal has yet been made. Mr. CUEFF confirmed that up to now no formal proposal exists to link AXIS 4 to small scale fisheries. Mr. CUEFF pointed out that we still need better cooperation between the different DGs and that it could be possible that, in some case, there is a lack of coherence between the different initiatives/actions funded. Mr. CUEFF recalled that the CFP deals with recreational fishing even if no measures are being developed up to now. Mr. CUEFF recalled that discards would already fall if current legislation were actually implemented. He added that DG MARE has been reflecting on the possibility to adopt a global ban on discards. However he pointed out that many collateral effects must be taken into account ( for instance if a global ban on discards is approved fishermen could call for rules to be changed concerning the minimum size allowed for landing fisheries products. Mr. CUEFF said that there is a wide consensus on the reduction/elimination of aid for the construction of new vessels. Mr. CUEFF replied that today transnational cooperation is

6 financial tools in favour of transnational projects dealing with fisheries are being planned. already possible by funds under AXIS 4. He also added that there is a large consensus around the possibility of introducing specific measures for transnational and interregional cooperation into the next generation of EFF. However he recalled that such measures could lead to problems of micro-management. 4. Next Steps: Participants pointed out the need for another FIG meeting in Aberdeen to coincide with the CPM General Assembly. Mr. SIMPSON stated that a proposal for the date and venue of the next meeting would be sent asap.