European fisheries body Europêche has called upon European policymakers to rework elements of the E.U.'s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), including strengthening its socioeconomic and food security sections and ensuring the European seafood industry is maintains its competitiveness internationally.
Alongside these requests, in a recent meeting with member states in preparation for the next legislative term of the European Parliament, Europêche reiterated its issues with E.U. nature protection rules and the implementation of the bloc’s fisheries control system, calling for an “urgent surgical revision” of failed E.U. policies such as its landing obligation.
“Unfortunately, certain E.U. fisheries policies were unworkable from their conception. Proof of that is the landing obligation,” Europêche Managing Director Daniel Voces told SeafoodSource. “It’s a clear example on how certain rules fabricated in Brussels were based on emotional campaigns and had little to do with reality. Despite continuous investments on innovation and gear selectivity, fishers have been criticized for not fully implementing a failed policy that, per definition, is unachievable."
Europêche previously voiced its appreciation for the efforts of E.U. co-legislators over five years of “difficult and complex negotiations” to modernize the control and enforcement measures originally adopted in 2009. But it reiterated its opposition to the requirement of onboard cameras and the permitted margin of error (or tolerance) between catch estimates made onboard and actual landings.
"The [European] Commission is trying now to make everybody believe that CCTV onboard will sort out the problem," Voces said. "The answer is much easier: we need to revise these rules.”
Similarly, the goal of establishing maximum sustainable yield (MSY) targets for all stocks by 2020 proved overly ambitious, Voces said. Consequently, for certain regions such as the Mediterranean, despite huge improvements made in recent years, the European Commission has had no choice but to delay the deadline for implementation, he said.
While the CFP has notably succeeded in replenishing the stock of numerous seafood species, there have been drawbacks to the policy, Voces said. For instance, by 2020, overall fishing pressure in the Northeast Atlantic had reached a historic low, and this took a heavy toll on the fisheries sector, which has seen a 28 percent decrease in the number of vessels active in the fishery since 2000, accompanied by a corresponding decline in employment.
With the ambitious laws adopted before 2020 governing technical measures, multiannual plans, management of the external fleet, working conditions, and more, together with the new European Maritime, Fisheries, and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) control rules and the signing of international environmental accords, E.U. fishers expected a period of legislative stability to follow, since the introduction of new regulations generated massive bureaucracy and implementation challenges, Voces said.
“Instead, the E.U. came with a new layer of legislation in the form of a strong environmental hammer under the E.U. Green Deal and its biodiversity strategy,” he said. “These policies are triggering the closure of traditional fishing grounds and banning certified bottom-fishing gears. Anything seems to be a perfect excuse to shut down sustainable fishing operations and make way for maritime emerging industries such as offshore wind farms.”
The gap in supply left by the E.U.’s stringent environmental policies are now being filled with imports, often from countries with much less strict environmental rules and lax labor norms, Voces said.
“The E.U. market needs an increasing supply of seafood, and here is where the legislative paradox becomes clear: What the E.U. preaches internally does not apply to third-country fleets and products entering our market,” he said. “There are critical loopholes and a lack of accountability in ensuring that global seafood imports align with the sustainability objectives championed within E.U. borders. What is worse, non-E.U. seafood, notably from Asia, which falls short of E.U. standards, receive tax derogations (ATQs), making competition impossible in our own market.”
Voces said Europêche has heard the E.U.'s agriculture sector has faced similar frustrations.
“For many years, we have been collaborating with the main E.U. representative of farmers, the Copa-Cogeca, on different matters. However, the Nature Restoration Law united our call,” he said. “This unfair environmental policy is putting at risk our way of living. We share the same concerns: competition for space on land and at sea with renewable energy and environmental ambitions; facing the same crises, such as Covid-19, Brexit, and the energy crisis; competition with cheap imports championed by E.U. trade agreements; and tax derogations that make competition for our producers impossible.”
While many farmer protests have achieved positive outcomes for their sector, the seafood industry has not had similar success.
“If the problems are the same for fishers and farmers, why is such treatment not granted to us? We still hear [the solutions offered to farmers] are impossible solutions for our sector,” Voces said.
As for whether policymakers have signaled that these imbalances will be addressed in the new legislative term, Voces said both the European Council and Parliament have recognized that E.U.’s food sovereignty must improve – especially given current levels of global geopolitical turmoil – while the E.U. works toward restoring a level playing field with imported products from third countries.
“The E.U. cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that external dependency exceeds 70 percent for fisheries and aquaculture products and that there is no focus on regulating the standards of those imports at the same level as E.U. production,” Voces said. “There is good momentum to change the political agenda and structure of the European Commission. It’s no longer acceptable for E.U. food producers to bear the primary burden of these regulations while others are allowed to proceed unchecked in the name of green energy.”
