Progress: Procedure completed
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | PECH |
FRAGA ESTÉVEZ Carmen ( PPE-DE)
|
|
| Committee Opinion | ENVI |
RIES Frédérique ( ALDE)
|
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Subjects
Events
The Council held an exchange of views on the Commission's Communication on a Community approach towards eco-labelling schemes for fisheries, on the basis of a Presidency questionnaire.
1) As regards the type of schemes, most delegations indicated that they were in favour of establishing minimum requirements for voluntary eco-labelling schemes (option 3).
2) Apart from the provisions that eco-labelling schemes should be transparent, market-driven, nondiscriminatory, voluntary, accessible to operators irrespective of their size and economic contexts, based on sound scientific evidence and fully consistent with WTO rules, several delegations mentioned clear and objective criteria concerning fishing practices, together with quality of fish. Such principles should ensure and maintain credible schemes and avoid confusion on the part of consumers.
3) As regards the added value expected from eco-labelling schemes in the overall framework of the
Common Fisheries Policy, the following issues were raised:
- compatibility with international trade;
- clear links with sustainable fisheries;
- better consumer information and confidence;
- improved fisheries practices.
After a final report on the issue, the Commission may present a legislative proposal on the ecolabelling scheme accompanied by a full impact assessment.
The European Parliament adopted a resolution based on the own-initiative report drafted by Carmen FRAGA ESTÉVEZ (EPP-ED, ES) on the Commission communication launching a debate on a Community approach towards eco-labelling schemes for fisheries products. The resolution was adopted by 536 votes in favour to 27 against with 10 abstentions. (Please see the summary of 21/06/2006.)
The committee adopted the own-initiative report drawn up by Carmen FRAGA ESTÉVEZ (EPP-ED, ES) in response to the Commission communication launching a debate on a Community approach towards eco-labelling schemes for fisheries products. MEPs regretted the Commission's delay in coming forward with its communication, which had allowed privately initiated eco-labels to proliferate without any form of control. This was giving rise to "issues of credibility and confusion for producers and consumers". The report also deplored the communication's "lack of ambition" and felt that it did not properly address the issues. It stressed that "whatever labels are used in the marketplace must be independently monitored in order to be absolutely reliable and credible for the consumer". A further debate was needed, with the participation of all parties concerned, including representatives of the non-industrial fishing sector.
MEPs said that establishing a single EU eco-label was bureaucratically cumbersome. They called on the Commission to draw up a communication within six months, detailing the minimum requirements and guidelines with which a Community eco-labelling scheme for fisheries products must comply. There was a need to take account of international criteria, in particular those set out by the FAO, to ensure that any EU eco-labelling scheme was consistent with the FAO Code of Conduct and the resolutions adopted by other international organisations such as the UN and the WTO, and that it did not pose obstacles to trade, particularly as regards developing countries. The committee added that the scheme should be promoted by the Commission, which should be responsible for establishing rules governing its operation and guaranteeing the independence of specialist accreditation and certification bodies, key components in the procedure, as well as the credibility of the claims made by the label.
PURPOSE : Communication to launch a debate on a Community approach towards eco-labelling schemes for fisheries products.
CONTENT : The objective of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy adopted in 2002 is to ensure exploitation of living aquatic resources in a way that provides for sustainable economic, environmental and social conditions. Progress on the implementation of the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy makes it necessary to address the question of the introduction of eco-labelling schemes as a means of integrating environmental protection concerns into the fisheries sector. Moreover, the recent emergence of an increasing number of "eco-labelled" products raises important questions with respect to competition, trade and consumer protection policies. This Communication intends to launch an in-depth conceptual debate about these topics and to explore the possibilities of moving ahead.
An eco-labelling scheme entitles a product to bear a distinctive logo, or statement, by way of which consumers are assured that the product has been produced according to a given set of environmental standards, such as the sustainability of the resource used as raw material, the environmental impact of the production method, or the recyclability of the product.
The Commission discusses current eco-labelling schemes in the fisheries sector, such as "Dolphin-safe/Dolphin-friendly" labelled tuna and the Marine Stewardship Council eco-labelling scheme.
It details the work on eco-labelling in international fora such as the Food and Agriculture Organisation, and the WTO. It is of the view that a coherent Community policy on eco-labelling for fish and fisheries products should be developed to address the consequences of the emergence of disparate sets of eco-labels.
The main question for public authorities is how far voluntary eco-labelling schemes should be subject to rules in order to protect public interest. Three options seem to be available:
-No action;
-Creating a single Community eco-labelling scheme for fish and fishery products;
-Establishing minimum requirements for voluntary eco-labelling schemes.
The Commission examines the arguments for and against each option. It concludes that, all in all, the third option of establishing minimum requirements for voluntary eco-labelling schemes would be the most appropriate one at this juncture. This option would offer enough flexibility and would be proportionate in terms of costs. It would make it possible to take appropriate action for greater sustainability, while allowing a gradual approach. It would also offer adequate protection to consumers.
The Communication concludes that eco-labelling is a multi-faceted topic and that, therefore, a variety of questions will have to be considered as the intended debate follows its course.
The debate will have to touch upon key questions, like:
-What should an eco-labelling scheme certify: a fishery, a fishing method, anything other component? Should therefore single issue labels be considered as an integral part of an eco-labelling policy?
-How to ensure an approach that is devoid of contradictions whilst simultaneously offering a high degree of voluntarism and feasibility?
-How to fully use the potential of eco-labelling schemes for the promotion of sustainable fisheries, while yielding real benefits for fishermen, processors and consumers?
-Should the approach be more result oriented or means oriented?
Yet the overall objective remains to ensure a genuine Community approach to eco-labelling of fish and fisheries products reflecting best practice in this field. It is also the intention to reaffirm the Community’s strong commitment to sustainability in the fields of the capture and use of fish. By means of such an approach, collaborative work with the fishing industry to encourage shared stewardship of the resource will also be a must.
The Commission invites the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee to debate the issues raised in this Communication. Consultation with the EEA members with the aim of ensuring a common approach will also be necessary, given their strong interest in this issue. Furthermore, the Commission also intends to consult with stakeholders, mainly through the Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture and, in parallel, to carry out scientific and technical support work.
PURPOSE : Communication to launch a debate on a Community approach towards eco-labelling schemes for fisheries products.
CONTENT : The objective of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy adopted in 2002 is to ensure exploitation of living aquatic resources in a way that provides for sustainable economic, environmental and social conditions. Progress on the implementation of the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy makes it necessary to address the question of the introduction of eco-labelling schemes as a means of integrating environmental protection concerns into the fisheries sector. Moreover, the recent emergence of an increasing number of "eco-labelled" products raises important questions with respect to competition, trade and consumer protection policies. This Communication intends to launch an in-depth conceptual debate about these topics and to explore the possibilities of moving ahead.
An eco-labelling scheme entitles a product to bear a distinctive logo, or statement, by way of which consumers are assured that the product has been produced according to a given set of environmental standards, such as the sustainability of the resource used as raw material, the environmental impact of the production method, or the recyclability of the product.
The Commission discusses current eco-labelling schemes in the fisheries sector, such as "Dolphin-safe/Dolphin-friendly" labelled tuna and the Marine Stewardship Council eco-labelling scheme.
It details the work on eco-labelling in international fora such as the Food and Agriculture Organisation, and the WTO. It is of the view that a coherent Community policy on eco-labelling for fish and fisheries products should be developed to address the consequences of the emergence of disparate sets of eco-labels.
The main question for public authorities is how far voluntary eco-labelling schemes should be subject to rules in order to protect public interest. Three options seem to be available:
-No action;
-Creating a single Community eco-labelling scheme for fish and fishery products;
-Establishing minimum requirements for voluntary eco-labelling schemes.
The Commission examines the arguments for and against each option. It concludes that, all in all, the third option of establishing minimum requirements for voluntary eco-labelling schemes would be the most appropriate one at this juncture. This option would offer enough flexibility and would be proportionate in terms of costs. It would make it possible to take appropriate action for greater sustainability, while allowing a gradual approach. It would also offer adequate protection to consumers.
The Communication concludes that eco-labelling is a multi-faceted topic and that, therefore, a variety of questions will have to be considered as the intended debate follows its course.
The debate will have to touch upon key questions, like:
-What should an eco-labelling scheme certify: a fishery, a fishing method, anything other component? Should therefore single issue labels be considered as an integral part of an eco-labelling policy?
-How to ensure an approach that is devoid of contradictions whilst simultaneously offering a high degree of voluntarism and feasibility?
-How to fully use the potential of eco-labelling schemes for the promotion of sustainable fisheries, while yielding real benefits for fishermen, processors and consumers?
-Should the approach be more result oriented or means oriented?
Yet the overall objective remains to ensure a genuine Community approach to eco-labelling of fish and fisheries products reflecting best practice in this field. It is also the intention to reaffirm the Community’s strong commitment to sustainability in the fields of the capture and use of fish. By means of such an approach, collaborative work with the fishing industry to encourage shared stewardship of the resource will also be a must.
The Commission invites the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee to debate the issues raised in this Communication. Consultation with the EEA members with the aim of ensuring a common approach will also be necessary, given their strong interest in this issue. Furthermore, the Commission also intends to consult with stakeholders, mainly through the Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture and, in parallel, to carry out scientific and technical support work.
Documents
- Debate in Council: 2793
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)4861
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)4772
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T6-0347/2006
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0219/2006
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A6-0219/2006
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE374.007
- Committee opinion: PE368.005
- Committee draft report: PE362.792
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES0237/2006
- Non-legislative basic document: COM(2005)0275
- Non-legislative basic document: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2005)0275
- Non-legislative basic document published: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document: COM(2005)0275 EUR-Lex
- Economic and Social Committee: opinion, report: CES0237/2006
- Committee draft report: PE362.792
- Committee opinion: PE368.005
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE374.007
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0219/2006
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)4772
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2006)4861
Activities
- Pedro GUERREIRO
Plenary Speeches (6)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Eco-labelling schemes for fisheries products (debate)
- Hélène GOUDIN
Plenary Speeches (5)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Luís QUEIRÓ
Plenary Speeches (5)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Ilda FIGUEIREDO
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Bruno GOLLNISCH
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- David MARTIN
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Alejo VIDAL-QUADRAS
Plenary Speeches (3)
- Charlotte CEDERSCHIÖLD
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Christofer FJELLNER
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Glyn FORD
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Gunnar HÖKMARK
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Anna IBRISAGIC
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Athanasios PAFILIS
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Alyn SMITH
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Adamos ADAMOU
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Jim ALLISTER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jan ANDERSSON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Stavros ARNAOUTAKIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Elspeth ATTWOOLL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jean-Pierre AUDY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Bernadette BOURZAI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Iles BRAGHETTO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marco CAPPATO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Paulo CASACA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Zdzisław Kazimierz CHMIELEWSKI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Philip CLAEYS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Brigitte DOUAY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Den DOVER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Edite ESTRELA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Emanuel Jardim FERNANDES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Carmen FRAGA ESTÉVEZ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Duarte FREITAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Patrick GAUBERT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Ioannis GKLAVAKIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ewa HEDKVIST PETERSEN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Romano Maria LA RUSSA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Albert Jan MAAT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Mary Lou McDONALD
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Sérgio MARQUES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Jean-Claude MARTINEZ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Rosa MIGUÉLEZ RAMOS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Willy MEYER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- James NICHOLSON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Tobias PFLÜGER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Carl SCHLYTER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Inger SEGELSTRÖM
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Kathy SINNOTT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Bart STAES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
- Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Explanations of vote
Votes
Rapport Fraga Estevez A6-0219/2006 - résolution #
PSE
Verts/ALE
GUE/NGL
NI
UEN
IND/DEMHistory
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2 |
|
| docs/3 |
|
| docs/3/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ENVI-AD-368005_EN.html
|
| docs/5 |
|
| docs/6 |
|
| docs/6 |
|
| docs/6/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=11329&j=0&l=en
|
| docs/7 |
|
| docs/7/docs/0/url |
Old
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=11329&j=0&l=enNew
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=11329&j=1&l=en |
| events/0 |
|
| events/0 |
|
| docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
https://dm.eesc.europa.eu/EESCDocumentSearch/Pages/redresults.aspx?k=(documenttype:AC)(documentnumber:0237)(documentyear:2006)(documentlanguage:EN)New
https://dmsearch.eesc.europa.eu/search/public?k=(documenttype:AC)(documentnumber:0237)(documentyear:2006)(documentlanguage:EN) |
| docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE362.792New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE362.792 |
| docs/2/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE368.005&secondRef=02
|
| docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE374.007New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE374.007 |
| docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0219_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0219_EN.html |
| docs/5/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=11329&j=1&l=en
|
| events/1/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
| events/2/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
| events/3 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| events/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20060906&type=CRENew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=20060906&type=CRE |
| events/6 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2006-219&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0219_EN.html |
| docs/5/body |
EC
|
| docs/6/body |
EC
|
| events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2006-219&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2006-0219_EN.html |
| events/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2006-347New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2006-0347_EN.html |
| activities |
|
| commission |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| council |
|
| docs |
|
| events |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
PECH/6/30440New
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
| procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
| activities/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2005/0275/COM_COM(2005)0275_EN.pdfNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2005/0275/COM_COM(2005)0275_EN.pdf |
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|