BETA


2011/2291(INI) Reporting obligations under Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the CFP

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead PECH HAGLUND Carl (icon: ALDE ALDE) FRAGA ESTÉVEZ Carmen (icon: PPE PPE), BESSET Jean-Paul (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE), GRÓBARCZYK Marek Józef (icon: ECR ECR)
Committee Opinion ENVI
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 052

Events

2012/09/12
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2012/09/12
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 377 to 241 votes, with 33 abstentions, a resolution on reporting obligations under Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy.

Members note that the Commission has now fulfilled its commitments under Council Regulation No 2371/2002, which obliges it to report on i) the operation of the CFP with respect to Chapters II (Conservation and Sustainability) and III (Adjustment of Fishing Capacity) of that regulation; and ii) on the arrangement on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical mile zone.

Conservation and sustainability (Chapter II): the resolution stresses the need for a balance between the ecological and the economic and social situation in each fishery while acknowledging that without plentiful fish stocks there will be no profitable fishing industry.

Parliament believes that, as part of the objective of guaranteeing sustainability, the policies considered should focus on the future of the fishing sector and, consequently, on facilitating the entry of new generations of fishermen. It calls on the Commission, the Member States and the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs), in the future, to use the ecosystem approach as a basis for all long-term management plans (LTMPs) which should be the basis of the future CFP.

Parliament highlights the need to develop an effective no-discards policy at EU level whereby the Community Fisheries Control Agency (CFCA) has greater powers to ensure a fair system of rules and sanctions.

It argues that a discard ban should be implemented gradually on a fishery-by-fishery basis, form part of the different management plans and not relate to different fish stocks. It stresses that selective fishing gear and other devices which reduce or eliminate by-catches of non-targeted species, or of juveniles of targeted species, should be promoted, along with other sustainable fishing methods

The Commission is invited to:

provide for the establishment of long-term management plans for all commercial EU fisheries within a highly decentralised management regime which fully involves all relevant stakeholders; assess the possibility of establishing a network of closed areas in which all fishing activities are prohibited for a certain period of time in order to increase fish productivity and conserve living aquatic resources and the marine ecosystem; address immediately the lack of sufficient reliable data necessary for sound scientific advice by establishing a system whereby Member States which do not fulfil their respective obligations regarding data collection and transmission under the European fisheries data programme are sanctioned; take measures to reduce the negative effects of seals and certain seabirds on fish stocks, particularly where these are invasive species in a particular region.

The resolution emphasises that scientific fisheries research is an essential tool for identifying factors that influence the development of fishery resources, with a view to carrying out a quantitative assessment but also for improving fishing gear. In this context, it stresses the need to invest in the training of human resources, to provide adequate financial resources and to promote cooperation between various public bodies in the Member States.

Adjustment of fishing capacity (Chapter III): Parliament calls on the Commission to:

establish a definition of overcapacity at EU level, accommodating regional definitions and taking into account local specificities; redefine fishing capacity in such a way that both the vessel’s fishing capacity and its actual fishing effort are taken as a basis; measure, before the end of 2013, the capacity of European fleets in order to establish where there is overcapacity in relation to the resources available and what reductions/conversions are required; monitor and adjust fleet capacity ceilings for Member States so that they are in line with reliable data and technical advances are taken into account.

Members emphasise that the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) must provide for adequate financial assistance to mitigate any socio-economic impact of measures aimed at reducing overcapacity, and to adjust the size and effort of fishing fleets in line with fishing opportunities and long-term sustainability.

The resolution stresses the need to set clear deadlines and make progress as soon as possible towards fleet adjustments where necessary. It urges the Commission to provide for a scheme of measures to sanction Member States which do not fulfil their respective obligations within the set timelines, while also providing adequate funding for this process, and to develop further the concept of ecological and social conditionality in the context of access to fishing resources and remuneration which rewards sustainable fishing.

The Commission is called upon to establish a system of result-based management for awarding access rights whereby the burden of proof of sustainable fishing is upon the industry.

Lastly, Parliament believes that, for the present, the special access regime for small-scale fisheries in the 12 nautical mile zone should be retained , as should specific restrictions for vessels registered in the ports of the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands in respect of the waters around these archipelagos, particularly the bio-geographically sensitive areas currently covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003.

Documents
2012/09/12
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2012/09/11
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2012/07/03
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Details

The Committee on Fisheries adopted the initiative report by Carl HAGLUND (ALDE, FI) on reporting obligations under Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP).

Members note that the Commission has now fulfilled its commitments under Council Regulation No 2371/2002, which obliges it to report on i) the operation of the CFP with respect to Chapters II (Conservation and Sustainability) and III (Adjustment of Fishing Capacity) of that regulation; and ii) on the arrangement on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical mile zone.

Conservation and sustainability (Chapter II): the report stresses the need for a balance between the ecological and the economic and social situation in each fishery while acknowledging that without plentiful fish stocks there will be no profitable fishing industry.

Members believe that, as part of the objective of guaranteeing sustainability, the policies considered should focus on the future of the fishing sector and, consequently, on facilitating the entry of new generations of fishermen . They call on the Commission, the Member States and the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs), in the future, to use the ecosystem approach as a basis for all long-term management plans (LTMPs) which should be the basis of the future CFP.

The report highlights the need to develop an effective no-discards policy at EU level whereby the Community Fisheries Control Agency (CFCA) has greater powers to ensure a fair system of rules and sanctions. It also stresses that selective fishing gear and other devices which reduce or eliminate by-catches of non-targeted species, or of juveniles of targeted species, should be promoted, along with other sustainable fishing methods.

The Commission is invited to:

· provide for the establishment of long-term management plans for all commercial EU fisheries within a highly decentralised management regime which fully involves all relevant stakeholders;

· assess the possibility of establishing a network of closed areas in which all fishing activities are prohibited for a certain period of time in order to increase fish productivity and conserve living aquatic resources and the marine ecosystem;

· address immediately the lack of sufficient reliable data necessary for sound scientific advice by establishing a system whereby Member States which do not fulfil their respective obligations regarding data collection and transmission under the European fisheries data programme are sanctioned.

The report emphasises that scientific fisheries research is an essential tool for identifying factors that influence the development of fishery resources, with a view to carrying out a quantitative assessment but also for improving fishing gear. In this context, it stresses the need to invest in the training of human resources, to provide adequate financial resources and to promote cooperation between various public bodies in the Member States.

Adjustment of fishine capacity (Chapter III): the report calls on the Commission to:

· establish a definition of overcapacity at EU level, accommodating regional definitions and taking into account local specificities;

· redefine fishing capacity in such a way that both the vessel ’ s fishing capacity and its actual fishing effort are taken as a basis;

· measure, before the end of 2013, the capacity of European fleets in order to establish where there is overcapacity in relation to the resources available and what reductions/conversions are required;

· monitor and adjust fleet capacity ceilings for Member States so that they are in line with reliable data and technical advances are taken into account.

Members emphasise that the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) must provide for adequate financial assistance to mitigate any socio-economic impact of measures aimed at reducing overcapacity, and to adjust the size and effort of fishing fleets in line with fishing opportunities and long-term sustainability.

The report stresses the need to set clear deadlines and make progress as soon as possible towards fleet adjustments where necessary. It urges the Commission to provide for a scheme of measures to sanction Member States which do not fulfil their respective obligations within the set timelines, while also providing adequate funding for this process, and to develop further the concept of ecological and social conditionality in the context of access to fishing resources and remuneration which rewards sustainable fishing.

Lastly, Members believe that, for the present, the special access regime for small-scale fisheries in the 12 nautical mile zone should be retained , as should specific restrictions for vessels registered in the ports of the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands in respect of the waters around these archipelagos, particularly the bio-geographically sensitive areas currently covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003.

Documents
2012/06/20
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2012/03/29
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2012/03/01
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2011/11/17
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2011/09/26
   EP - HAGLUND Carl (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in PECH
2011/07/13
   EC - Follow-up document
Details

PURPOSE: to present a Commission report on Council Regulation (EC) n° 2371/2002 regarding the chapters Conservation and Sustainability and Adjustment of Fishing Capacity and also on the arrangements set out in Article 17 (2) on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters.

CONTENT: in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), the Commission presents a report on the operation of the CFP with respect to chapters II (Conservation and Sustainability) and III (Adjustment of Fishing Capacity) as well as on the arrangements on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters. This report complements the reporting in the Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy .

Conservation and sustainability : since 2002, multi-annual recovery and management plans with clear objectives and harvest rules have become the core of the conservation policy. They balance ecological requisites (state of the stocks and exploitation rates) and economic and social considerations (stability of catches).

Improvements in the situation since 2003 : a decrease in the numbers of stocks outside safe biological limits, as well as in stocks for which a fishing closure has been advised. However, of the stocks for which robust data is available, over 60% is still fished beyond maximum sustainable yield.

Progress has been made as regards the levels of Total Allowable Catches (TAC) adopted by Council, compared to sustainable catch levels. There has also been an increase in the number of stocks for which no scientific advice is available.

The Commission’s report confirms that:

· multi-annual plans are more effective in taking a long-term perspective in managing stocks than the annual TAC decision-making, especially since Council has started to respect the rules of the plans for the TACs;

· nevertheless, the framework resulting from the 2002 CFP reform has not curbed overfishing enough , so EU fisheries continue to see declining catches taken from EU waters;

· the very significant gap between the levels of TACs agreed in Council and sustainable catches confirms the prevalence of short-term concerns over long-term sustainability . This continues to put stocks at further risk, though the recent narrowing of the gap is a significant step forward;

· while vital to sound policy making, the knowledge base is under constant pressure , impeding progress in the coverage of stocks for which scientific advice is provided;

· lastly, the new CFP needs to provide the right tools for integrating the ecosystems approach fully into conservation and sustainability.

2) Adjustment of fishing capacity : in 2002, responsibility for adjusting the size of the fleet was devolved to Member States. From then on, targets for mandatory cuts to fishing capacity were no longer set. Nevertheless, there were still global limits on fishing capacity per Member State, and these have been complied with.

However, it is clear that there is still significant over-capacity , and this is still a serious problem. The devolution of fleet management to Member States has not led to sufficient cuts in fleet capacity, even if nominal capacity is within the ceilings set for Member States. Adjustment has been relatively slow, despite the poor state of stocks throughout the EU.

All Member States have complied with legal fishing capacity limitations . Though some had difficulties when the new rules came into force, today most Member States have fleets with capacity under the ceilings they are allowed.

Lastly, Member States are obliged to report on fleet capacity, and this is an essential component of the policy. The results assessed are not satisfactory. The reporting tool has not enabled precise estimates of excess fishing capacity per segment or fishery.

In view of these considerations, some conclusions can be drawn concerning the performance of the fishing capacity management provisions:

· despite compliance with the fishing capacity management rules defined at EU level, there are still clear indications of over-capacity in the EU fleet, namely: excess of fishing mortality in some stocks, low profitability and low capacity utilization;

· while tonnage is a reliable fishing capacity indicator, the Commission has serious concerns about the reported power of fishing vessels, as the data suggest under-declaration, making it extremely difficult to estimate fleet capacity accurately;

· the policy is static, in that it only establishes a ceiling, with no specific objectives for reduction. Compliance with nominal capacity limits under these ceilings does not mean that there is no persistent overcapacity. The system does not integrate technical progress into the management measures;

· it has proven very difficult to set clear objectives for the size of the fleet and to monitor the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities due to the complexity inherent in quantifying over-capacity. Determining an adequate level for the size of the fleet given a certain amount of fishing possibilities needs to take into account factors other than the biological and economic.

3) Fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters : the objectives related to introduction (before entry into force of the CFP) of specific arrangements in the waters up to 12 nautical miles were: (i) conservation of fish resources through allowing only small-scale coastal fleets into the area; (ii) preservation of coastal fleets' traditional fishing activities to maintain the social and economic infrastructure of these areas.

These specific restriction provisions were introduced in the CFP in 1983 and have been extended with every reform of the policy since.

Since 2002, the Commission has not been not informed of (real) problems or conflicts on specific restrictions , whether on setting them, or on their management and functioning. Member States were able to resolve problems without having to refer any of them to the Commission. The regime is very stable , and the rules have continued to operate satisfactorily. All Member States stressed the importance of the specific restrictions in the light of their original objectives. One Member State suggested extending the 6-12 miles regime to 10-20 miles to achieve the regime’s objectives more effectively.

Considering the current conservation state of many stocks, and the continued sensitivity of coastal waters for conservation, as well as ongoing difficulties in coastal areas highly dependent on fisheries and unlikely to benefit from other economic development, the objectives for the specific regime appear to remain as valid as they were in 2002. Modifying current arrangements might disrupt the current balance that has developed since the introduction of the special regime.

2011/07/13
   EC - Non-legislative basic document published
Details

In accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), the Commission presents a report on the operation of the CFP with respect to chapters II and III.

The Commission is also obliged to report on the arrangements set out in Article 17 paragraph 2 on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters by 31 December 2011. This report complements the reporting in the Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy.

Chapter II – Conservation and Sustainability: the report notes that since 2002, multi-annual recovery and management plans with clear objectives and harvest rules have become the core of the conservation policy, and it gives an overview of the initiatives undertaken in this area. Community plans were adopted for 17 stocks in the EU waters. By the end of 2010, around 25% of the stocks and 80% of the catches concerned (in tonnes) can be considered under multiannual plans and harvest rules. The 2010 Communication on consultation on fishing opportunities showed improvements in the situation since 2003: a decrease in the numbers of stocks outside safe biological limits, as well as in stocks for which a fishing closure has been advised. However, of the stocks for which robust data is available, over 60% is still fished beyond maximum sustainable yield . Progress has been made as regards the levels of Total Allowable Catches (TAC) adopted by Council, compared to sustainable catch levels: on average, Council exceeded advice by 45%, with peaks as high as 59% (2005) and 51% (2008), but the gap between the advice and the result has narrowed in the last two years, and the 23% gap in the decision for 2011 is unprecedented. There has been an increase in the number of stocks for which no scientific advice is available.

From this overview it can be confirmed that:

multi-annual plans are more effective in taking a long-term perspective in managing stocks than the annual TAC decision-making, especially since Council has started to respect the rules of the plans for the TACs; nevertheless, the framework resulting from the 2002 CFP reform has not curbed over-fishing enough, so EU fisheries continue to see declining catches taken from EU waters; the very significant gap between the levels of TACs agreed in Council and sustainable catches confirms the prevalence of short-term concerns over long-term sustainability. This continues to put stocks at further risk, though the recent narrowing of the gap is a significant step forward; while vital to sound policy making, the knowledge base is under constant pressure, impeding progress in the coverage of stocks for which scientific advice is provided; the new CFP needs to provide the right tools for integrating the ecosystems approach fully into conservation and sustainability.

Chapter III – Adjustment of Fishing Capacity: i n 2002, responsibility for adjusting the size of the fleet was devolved to Member States. From then on, targets for mandatory cuts to fishing capacity were no longer set. Nevertheless, there were still global limits on fishing capacity per Member State, and these have been complied with. However, it is clear that there is still significant over-capacity, and this is still a serious problem. The devolution of fleet management to Member States has not led to sufficient cuts in fleet capacity, even if nominal capacity is within the ceilings set for Member States. Adjustment has been relatively slow, despite the poor state of stocks throughout the EU. The drop in fleet capacity decrease is nominal, and has stayed below what is considered the technological development rate of the fleet. As there are no real yardsticks for success, it has not been possible to verify what progress has actually been made. In short, the policy on adjusting the size of the fleet has not delivered satisfactory results.

All Member States have complied with legal fishing capacity limitations. Though some had difficulties when the new rules came into force, today most Member States have fleets with capacity under the ceilings they are allowed. This margin averages 10% in tonnage and 8% in power. This means that reductions in the size of the fleet were partly achieved without public aid. Given that Member States have complied with fishing capacity management rules, Article 16 on the conditionality EU funds for the fleet has never been applied.

Lastly, the report notes that Member States are obliged to report on fleet capacity, and this is an essential component of the policy. The results assessed are not satisfactory. Member States have reported to the Commission annually, providing information for the Commission's annual report on the state of the fleet. However, the reports might have been expected to show an excess of fishing capacity, the most important issue at stake, and the data available is inconclusive . The reporting tool has not enabled precise estimates of excess fishing capacity per segment or fishery.

In view of the above, some conclusions can be drawn concerning the performance of the fishing capacity management provisions:

despite compliance with the fishing capacity management rules defined at EU level, there are still clear indications of over-capacity in the EU fleet, namely excess of fishing mortality in some stocks, low profitability and low capacity utilisation; while tonnage is a reliable fishing capacity indicator, the Commission has serious concerns about the reported power of fishing vessels, as the data suggest under-declaration, making it extremely difficult to estimate fleet capacity accurately; the policy is static, in that it only establishes a ceiling, with no specific objectives for reduction. Compliance with nominal capacity limits under these ceilings does not mean that there is no persistent overcapacity. The system does not integrate technical progress into the management measures. However, due to technological progress, a static capacity ceiling leads to overcapacity; it has proven very difficult to set clear objectives for the size of the fleet and to monitor the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities due to the complexity inherent in quantifying over-capacity. Determining an adequate level for the size of the fleet given a certain amount of fishing possibilities needs to take into account factors other than the biological and economic.

Article 12 – fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters : since 2002, the Commission has not been not informed of real problems on specific restrictions, whether on setting them, or on their management and functioning. Member States were able to resolve problems without having to refer any of them to the Commission. The regime is very stable, and the rules have continued to operate satisfactorily. All Member States stressed the importance of the specific restrictions in the light of their original objectives in their reactions to the Green Paper on CFP reform. One Member State suggested extending the 6-12 miles regime to 10-20 miles to achieve the regime’s objectives more effectively. Considering the current conservation state of many stocks and the continued sensitivity of coastal waters for conservation, as well as difficulties in coastal areas highly dependent on fisheries and unlikely to benefit from other economic development, the objectives for the specific regime appear to remain as valid as they were in 2002. Modifying current arrangements might disrupt the balance that has developed since the introduction of the special regime.

Documents

AmendmentsDossier
108 2011/2291(INI)
2012/03/29 PECH 108 amendments...
source: PE-485.898

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Fisheries
committee
PECH
rapporteur
name: HAGLUND Carl date: 2011-09-26T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Fisheries
committee
PECH
date
2011-09-26T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: HAGLUND Carl group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
shadows
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf
events/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf
events/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2012-225&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2012-0225_EN.html
events/6/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-335
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2012-0335_EN.html
activities
  • date: 2011-07-13T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf title: COM(2011)0418 type: Non-legislative basic document published celexid: CELEX:52011DC0418:EN body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/ title: Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Commissioner: DAMANAKI Maria type: Non-legislative basic document published
  • date: 2011-11-17T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety committee: ENVI body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FRAGA ESTÉVEZ Carmen group: Verts/ALE name: BESSET Jean-Paul group: ECR name: GRÓBARCZYK Marek Józef responsible: True committee: PECH date: 2011-09-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Fisheries rapporteur: group: ALDE name: HAGLUND Carl
  • date: 2012-06-20T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety committee: ENVI body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FRAGA ESTÉVEZ Carmen group: Verts/ALE name: BESSET Jean-Paul group: ECR name: GRÓBARCZYK Marek Józef responsible: True committee: PECH date: 2011-09-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Fisheries rapporteur: group: ALDE name: HAGLUND Carl
  • date: 2012-07-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2012-225&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0225/2012 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2012-09-11T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20120911&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2012-09-12T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=21823&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-335 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0335/2012 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
commission
  • body: EC dg: Maritime Affairs and Fisheries commissioner: DAMANAKI Maria
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Fisheries
committee
PECH
date
2011-09-26T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: HAGLUND Carl group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
shadows
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
False
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
opinion
False
committees/1
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
PECH
date
2011-09-26T00:00:00
committee_full
Fisheries
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: HAGLUND Carl
docs
  • date: 2011-07-13T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf title: COM(2011)0418 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=418 title: EUR-Lex summary: PURPOSE: to present a Commission report on Council Regulation (EC) n° 2371/2002 regarding the chapters Conservation and Sustainability and Adjustment of Fishing Capacity and also on the arrangements set out in Article 17 (2) on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters. CONTENT: in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), the Commission presents a report on the operation of the CFP with respect to chapters II (Conservation and Sustainability) and III (Adjustment of Fishing Capacity) as well as on the arrangements on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters. This report complements the reporting in the Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy . Conservation and sustainability : since 2002, multi-annual recovery and management plans with clear objectives and harvest rules have become the core of the conservation policy. They balance ecological requisites (state of the stocks and exploitation rates) and economic and social considerations (stability of catches). Improvements in the situation since 2003 : a decrease in the numbers of stocks outside safe biological limits, as well as in stocks for which a fishing closure has been advised. However, of the stocks for which robust data is available, over 60% is still fished beyond maximum sustainable yield. Progress has been made as regards the levels of Total Allowable Catches (TAC) adopted by Council, compared to sustainable catch levels. There has also been an increase in the number of stocks for which no scientific advice is available. The Commission’s report confirms that: · multi-annual plans are more effective in taking a long-term perspective in managing stocks than the annual TAC decision-making, especially since Council has started to respect the rules of the plans for the TACs; · nevertheless, the framework resulting from the 2002 CFP reform has not curbed overfishing enough , so EU fisheries continue to see declining catches taken from EU waters; · the very significant gap between the levels of TACs agreed in Council and sustainable catches confirms the prevalence of short-term concerns over long-term sustainability . This continues to put stocks at further risk, though the recent narrowing of the gap is a significant step forward; · while vital to sound policy making, the knowledge base is under constant pressure , impeding progress in the coverage of stocks for which scientific advice is provided; · lastly, the new CFP needs to provide the right tools for integrating the ecosystems approach fully into conservation and sustainability. 2) Adjustment of fishing capacity : in 2002, responsibility for adjusting the size of the fleet was devolved to Member States. From then on, targets for mandatory cuts to fishing capacity were no longer set. Nevertheless, there were still global limits on fishing capacity per Member State, and these have been complied with. However, it is clear that there is still significant over-capacity , and this is still a serious problem. The devolution of fleet management to Member States has not led to sufficient cuts in fleet capacity, even if nominal capacity is within the ceilings set for Member States. Adjustment has been relatively slow, despite the poor state of stocks throughout the EU. All Member States have complied with legal fishing capacity limitations . Though some had difficulties when the new rules came into force, today most Member States have fleets with capacity under the ceilings they are allowed. Lastly, Member States are obliged to report on fleet capacity, and this is an essential component of the policy. The results assessed are not satisfactory. The reporting tool has not enabled precise estimates of excess fishing capacity per segment or fishery. In view of these considerations, some conclusions can be drawn concerning the performance of the fishing capacity management provisions: · despite compliance with the fishing capacity management rules defined at EU level, there are still clear indications of over-capacity in the EU fleet, namely: excess of fishing mortality in some stocks, low profitability and low capacity utilization; · while tonnage is a reliable fishing capacity indicator, the Commission has serious concerns about the reported power of fishing vessels, as the data suggest under-declaration, making it extremely difficult to estimate fleet capacity accurately; · the policy is static, in that it only establishes a ceiling, with no specific objectives for reduction. Compliance with nominal capacity limits under these ceilings does not mean that there is no persistent overcapacity. The system does not integrate technical progress into the management measures; · it has proven very difficult to set clear objectives for the size of the fleet and to monitor the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities due to the complexity inherent in quantifying over-capacity. Determining an adequate level for the size of the fleet given a certain amount of fishing possibilities needs to take into account factors other than the biological and economic. 3) Fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters : the objectives related to introduction (before entry into force of the CFP) of specific arrangements in the waters up to 12 nautical miles were: (i) conservation of fish resources through allowing only small-scale coastal fleets into the area; (ii) preservation of coastal fleets' traditional fishing activities to maintain the social and economic infrastructure of these areas. These specific restriction provisions were introduced in the CFP in 1983 and have been extended with every reform of the policy since. Since 2002, the Commission has not been not informed of (real) problems or conflicts on specific restrictions , whether on setting them, or on their management and functioning. Member States were able to resolve problems without having to refer any of them to the Commission. The regime is very stable , and the rules have continued to operate satisfactorily. All Member States stressed the importance of the specific restrictions in the light of their original objectives. One Member State suggested extending the 6-12 miles regime to 10-20 miles to achieve the regime’s objectives more effectively. Considering the current conservation state of many stocks, and the continued sensitivity of coastal waters for conservation, as well as ongoing difficulties in coastal areas highly dependent on fisheries and unlikely to benefit from other economic development, the objectives for the specific regime appear to remain as valid as they were in 2002. Modifying current arrangements might disrupt the current balance that has developed since the introduction of the special regime. type: Follow-up document body: EC
  • date: 2012-03-01T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE480.886 title: PE480.886 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2012-03-29T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE485.898 title: PE485.898 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
events
  • date: 2011-07-13T00:00:00 type: Non-legislative basic document published body: EC docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf title: COM(2011)0418 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2011&nu_doc=418 title: EUR-Lex summary: In accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), the Commission presents a report on the operation of the CFP with respect to chapters II and III. The Commission is also obliged to report on the arrangements set out in Article 17 paragraph 2 on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters by 31 December 2011. This report complements the reporting in the Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. Chapter II – Conservation and Sustainability: the report notes that since 2002, multi-annual recovery and management plans with clear objectives and harvest rules have become the core of the conservation policy, and it gives an overview of the initiatives undertaken in this area. Community plans were adopted for 17 stocks in the EU waters. By the end of 2010, around 25% of the stocks and 80% of the catches concerned (in tonnes) can be considered under multiannual plans and harvest rules. The 2010 Communication on consultation on fishing opportunities showed improvements in the situation since 2003: a decrease in the numbers of stocks outside safe biological limits, as well as in stocks for which a fishing closure has been advised. However, of the stocks for which robust data is available, over 60% is still fished beyond maximum sustainable yield . Progress has been made as regards the levels of Total Allowable Catches (TAC) adopted by Council, compared to sustainable catch levels: on average, Council exceeded advice by 45%, with peaks as high as 59% (2005) and 51% (2008), but the gap between the advice and the result has narrowed in the last two years, and the 23% gap in the decision for 2011 is unprecedented. There has been an increase in the number of stocks for which no scientific advice is available. From this overview it can be confirmed that: multi-annual plans are more effective in taking a long-term perspective in managing stocks than the annual TAC decision-making, especially since Council has started to respect the rules of the plans for the TACs; nevertheless, the framework resulting from the 2002 CFP reform has not curbed over-fishing enough, so EU fisheries continue to see declining catches taken from EU waters; the very significant gap between the levels of TACs agreed in Council and sustainable catches confirms the prevalence of short-term concerns over long-term sustainability. This continues to put stocks at further risk, though the recent narrowing of the gap is a significant step forward; while vital to sound policy making, the knowledge base is under constant pressure, impeding progress in the coverage of stocks for which scientific advice is provided; the new CFP needs to provide the right tools for integrating the ecosystems approach fully into conservation and sustainability. Chapter III – Adjustment of Fishing Capacity: i n 2002, responsibility for adjusting the size of the fleet was devolved to Member States. From then on, targets for mandatory cuts to fishing capacity were no longer set. Nevertheless, there were still global limits on fishing capacity per Member State, and these have been complied with. However, it is clear that there is still significant over-capacity, and this is still a serious problem. The devolution of fleet management to Member States has not led to sufficient cuts in fleet capacity, even if nominal capacity is within the ceilings set for Member States. Adjustment has been relatively slow, despite the poor state of stocks throughout the EU. The drop in fleet capacity decrease is nominal, and has stayed below what is considered the technological development rate of the fleet. As there are no real yardsticks for success, it has not been possible to verify what progress has actually been made. In short, the policy on adjusting the size of the fleet has not delivered satisfactory results. All Member States have complied with legal fishing capacity limitations. Though some had difficulties when the new rules came into force, today most Member States have fleets with capacity under the ceilings they are allowed. This margin averages 10% in tonnage and 8% in power. This means that reductions in the size of the fleet were partly achieved without public aid. Given that Member States have complied with fishing capacity management rules, Article 16 on the conditionality EU funds for the fleet has never been applied. Lastly, the report notes that Member States are obliged to report on fleet capacity, and this is an essential component of the policy. The results assessed are not satisfactory. Member States have reported to the Commission annually, providing information for the Commission's annual report on the state of the fleet. However, the reports might have been expected to show an excess of fishing capacity, the most important issue at stake, and the data available is inconclusive . The reporting tool has not enabled precise estimates of excess fishing capacity per segment or fishery. In view of the above, some conclusions can be drawn concerning the performance of the fishing capacity management provisions: despite compliance with the fishing capacity management rules defined at EU level, there are still clear indications of over-capacity in the EU fleet, namely excess of fishing mortality in some stocks, low profitability and low capacity utilisation; while tonnage is a reliable fishing capacity indicator, the Commission has serious concerns about the reported power of fishing vessels, as the data suggest under-declaration, making it extremely difficult to estimate fleet capacity accurately; the policy is static, in that it only establishes a ceiling, with no specific objectives for reduction. Compliance with nominal capacity limits under these ceilings does not mean that there is no persistent overcapacity. The system does not integrate technical progress into the management measures. However, due to technological progress, a static capacity ceiling leads to overcapacity; it has proven very difficult to set clear objectives for the size of the fleet and to monitor the balance between fishing capacity and fishing opportunities due to the complexity inherent in quantifying over-capacity. Determining an adequate level for the size of the fleet given a certain amount of fishing possibilities needs to take into account factors other than the biological and economic. Article 12 – fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical miles waters : since 2002, the Commission has not been not informed of real problems on specific restrictions, whether on setting them, or on their management and functioning. Member States were able to resolve problems without having to refer any of them to the Commission. The regime is very stable, and the rules have continued to operate satisfactorily. All Member States stressed the importance of the specific restrictions in the light of their original objectives in their reactions to the Green Paper on CFP reform. One Member State suggested extending the 6-12 miles regime to 10-20 miles to achieve the regime’s objectives more effectively. Considering the current conservation state of many stocks and the continued sensitivity of coastal waters for conservation, as well as difficulties in coastal areas highly dependent on fisheries and unlikely to benefit from other economic development, the objectives for the specific regime appear to remain as valid as they were in 2002. Modifying current arrangements might disrupt the balance that has developed since the introduction of the special regime.
  • date: 2011-11-17T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2012-06-20T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2012-07-03T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2012-225&language=EN title: A7-0225/2012 summary: The Committee on Fisheries adopted the initiative report by Carl HAGLUND (ALDE, FI) on reporting obligations under Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). Members note that the Commission has now fulfilled its commitments under Council Regulation No 2371/2002, which obliges it to report on i) the operation of the CFP with respect to Chapters II (Conservation and Sustainability) and III (Adjustment of Fishing Capacity) of that regulation; and ii) on the arrangement on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical mile zone. Conservation and sustainability (Chapter II): the report stresses the need for a balance between the ecological and the economic and social situation in each fishery while acknowledging that without plentiful fish stocks there will be no profitable fishing industry. Members believe that, as part of the objective of guaranteeing sustainability, the policies considered should focus on the future of the fishing sector and, consequently, on facilitating the entry of new generations of fishermen . They call on the Commission, the Member States and the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs), in the future, to use the ecosystem approach as a basis for all long-term management plans (LTMPs) which should be the basis of the future CFP. The report highlights the need to develop an effective no-discards policy at EU level whereby the Community Fisheries Control Agency (CFCA) has greater powers to ensure a fair system of rules and sanctions. It also stresses that selective fishing gear and other devices which reduce or eliminate by-catches of non-targeted species, or of juveniles of targeted species, should be promoted, along with other sustainable fishing methods. The Commission is invited to: · provide for the establishment of long-term management plans for all commercial EU fisheries within a highly decentralised management regime which fully involves all relevant stakeholders; · assess the possibility of establishing a network of closed areas in which all fishing activities are prohibited for a certain period of time in order to increase fish productivity and conserve living aquatic resources and the marine ecosystem; · address immediately the lack of sufficient reliable data necessary for sound scientific advice by establishing a system whereby Member States which do not fulfil their respective obligations regarding data collection and transmission under the European fisheries data programme are sanctioned. The report emphasises that scientific fisheries research is an essential tool for identifying factors that influence the development of fishery resources, with a view to carrying out a quantitative assessment but also for improving fishing gear. In this context, it stresses the need to invest in the training of human resources, to provide adequate financial resources and to promote cooperation between various public bodies in the Member States. Adjustment of fishine capacity (Chapter III): the report calls on the Commission to: · establish a definition of overcapacity at EU level, accommodating regional definitions and taking into account local specificities; · redefine fishing capacity in such a way that both the vessel ’ s fishing capacity and its actual fishing effort are taken as a basis; · measure, before the end of 2013, the capacity of European fleets in order to establish where there is overcapacity in relation to the resources available and what reductions/conversions are required; · monitor and adjust fleet capacity ceilings for Member States so that they are in line with reliable data and technical advances are taken into account. Members emphasise that the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) must provide for adequate financial assistance to mitigate any socio-economic impact of measures aimed at reducing overcapacity, and to adjust the size and effort of fishing fleets in line with fishing opportunities and long-term sustainability. The report stresses the need to set clear deadlines and make progress as soon as possible towards fleet adjustments where necessary. It urges the Commission to provide for a scheme of measures to sanction Member States which do not fulfil their respective obligations within the set timelines, while also providing adequate funding for this process, and to develop further the concept of ecological and social conditionality in the context of access to fishing resources and remuneration which rewards sustainable fishing. Lastly, Members believe that, for the present, the special access regime for small-scale fisheries in the 12 nautical mile zone should be retained , as should specific restrictions for vessels registered in the ports of the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands in respect of the waters around these archipelagos, particularly the bio-geographically sensitive areas currently covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003.
  • date: 2012-09-11T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20120911&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2012-09-12T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=21823&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2012-09-12T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-335 title: T7-0335/2012 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 377 to 241 votes, with 33 abstentions, a resolution on reporting obligations under Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy. Members note that the Commission has now fulfilled its commitments under Council Regulation No 2371/2002, which obliges it to report on i) the operation of the CFP with respect to Chapters II (Conservation and Sustainability) and III (Adjustment of Fishing Capacity) of that regulation; and ii) on the arrangement on fishing restrictions in the 12 nautical mile zone. Conservation and sustainability (Chapter II): the resolution stresses the need for a balance between the ecological and the economic and social situation in each fishery while acknowledging that without plentiful fish stocks there will be no profitable fishing industry. Parliament believes that, as part of the objective of guaranteeing sustainability, the policies considered should focus on the future of the fishing sector and, consequently, on facilitating the entry of new generations of fishermen. It calls on the Commission, the Member States and the Regional Advisory Councils (RACs), in the future, to use the ecosystem approach as a basis for all long-term management plans (LTMPs) which should be the basis of the future CFP. Parliament highlights the need to develop an effective no-discards policy at EU level whereby the Community Fisheries Control Agency (CFCA) has greater powers to ensure a fair system of rules and sanctions. It argues that a discard ban should be implemented gradually on a fishery-by-fishery basis, form part of the different management plans and not relate to different fish stocks. It stresses that selective fishing gear and other devices which reduce or eliminate by-catches of non-targeted species, or of juveniles of targeted species, should be promoted, along with other sustainable fishing methods The Commission is invited to: provide for the establishment of long-term management plans for all commercial EU fisheries within a highly decentralised management regime which fully involves all relevant stakeholders; assess the possibility of establishing a network of closed areas in which all fishing activities are prohibited for a certain period of time in order to increase fish productivity and conserve living aquatic resources and the marine ecosystem; address immediately the lack of sufficient reliable data necessary for sound scientific advice by establishing a system whereby Member States which do not fulfil their respective obligations regarding data collection and transmission under the European fisheries data programme are sanctioned; take measures to reduce the negative effects of seals and certain seabirds on fish stocks, particularly where these are invasive species in a particular region. The resolution emphasises that scientific fisheries research is an essential tool for identifying factors that influence the development of fishery resources, with a view to carrying out a quantitative assessment but also for improving fishing gear. In this context, it stresses the need to invest in the training of human resources, to provide adequate financial resources and to promote cooperation between various public bodies in the Member States. Adjustment of fishing capacity (Chapter III): Parliament calls on the Commission to: establish a definition of overcapacity at EU level, accommodating regional definitions and taking into account local specificities; redefine fishing capacity in such a way that both the vessel’s fishing capacity and its actual fishing effort are taken as a basis; measure, before the end of 2013, the capacity of European fleets in order to establish where there is overcapacity in relation to the resources available and what reductions/conversions are required; monitor and adjust fleet capacity ceilings for Member States so that they are in line with reliable data and technical advances are taken into account. Members emphasise that the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) must provide for adequate financial assistance to mitigate any socio-economic impact of measures aimed at reducing overcapacity, and to adjust the size and effort of fishing fleets in line with fishing opportunities and long-term sustainability. The resolution stresses the need to set clear deadlines and make progress as soon as possible towards fleet adjustments where necessary. It urges the Commission to provide for a scheme of measures to sanction Member States which do not fulfil their respective obligations within the set timelines, while also providing adequate funding for this process, and to develop further the concept of ecological and social conditionality in the context of access to fishing resources and remuneration which rewards sustainable fishing. The Commission is called upon to establish a system of result-based management for awarding access rights whereby the burden of proof of sustainable fishing is upon the industry. Lastly, Parliament believes that, for the present, the special access regime for small-scale fisheries in the 12 nautical mile zone should be retained , as should specific restrictions for vessels registered in the ports of the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands in respect of the waters around these archipelagos, particularly the bio-geographically sensitive areas currently covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003.
  • date: 2012-09-12T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/ title: Maritime Affairs and Fisheries commissioner: DAMANAKI Maria
procedure/Modified legal basis
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
New
Rules of Procedure EP 150
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
PECH/7/07315
New
  • PECH/7/07315
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 052
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
procedure/subject
Old
  • 3.15.01 Fish stocks, conservation of fishery resources
  • 3.15.05 Fish catches, import tariff quotas
  • 3.15.06 Fishing industry and statistics, fishery products
  • 3.15.07 Fisheries inspectorate, surveillance of fishing vessels and areas
New
3.15.01
Fish stocks, conservation of fishery resources
3.15.05
Fish catches, import tariff quotas
3.15.06
Fishing industry and statistics, fishery products
3.15.07
Fisheries inspectorate, surveillance of fishing vessels and areas
procedure/subtype
Old
Initiative
New
  • Initiative
  • See also 2002/0114(CNS)
procedure/summary
  • See also
activities/0/docs/0/celexid
CELEX:52011DC0418:EN
activities/0/docs/0/celexid
CELEX:52011DC0418:EN
activities/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf
activities
  • date: 2011-07-13T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0418/COM_COM(2011)0418_EN.pdf title: COM(2011)0418 type: Non-legislative basic document published celexid: CELEX:52011DC0418:EN body: EC type: Non-legislative basic document published commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/ title: Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Commissioner: DAMANAKI Maria
  • date: 2011-11-17T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety committee: ENVI body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FRAGA ESTÉVEZ Carmen group: Verts/ALE name: BESSET Jean-Paul group: ECR name: GRÓBARCZYK Marek Józef responsible: True committee: PECH date: 2011-09-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Fisheries rapporteur: group: ALDE name: HAGLUND Carl
  • date: 2012-06-20T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety committee: ENVI body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FRAGA ESTÉVEZ Carmen group: Verts/ALE name: BESSET Jean-Paul group: ECR name: GRÓBARCZYK Marek Józef responsible: True committee: PECH date: 2011-09-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Fisheries rapporteur: group: ALDE name: HAGLUND Carl
  • date: 2012-07-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2012-225&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0225/2012 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2012-09-11T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20120911&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2012-09-12T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=21823&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2012-335 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0335/2012 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
committees
  • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety committee: ENVI
  • body: EP shadows: group: PPE name: FRAGA ESTÉVEZ Carmen group: Verts/ALE name: BESSET Jean-Paul group: ECR name: GRÓBARCZYK Marek Józef responsible: True committee: PECH date: 2011-09-26T00:00:00 committee_full: Fisheries rapporteur: group: ALDE name: HAGLUND Carl
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/ title: Maritime Affairs and Fisheries commissioner: DAMANAKI Maria
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
PECH/7/07315
reference
2011/2291(INI)
title
Reporting obligations under Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the CFP
legal_basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
stage_reached
Procedure completed
summary
See also
subtype
Initiative
Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subject