If there is one European legislature that the fishing industry will remember, and not exactly in a good way, it is the one that concludes in June 2024. With the coming of new elections in the Twenty-Seven. Changes are coming – at least that’s what they want –, and this feeling is closely linked to the restrictive policies implemented. Brussels rose above the waters, It leaves hanging an event where thousands of people live on the block.
With the Veto’s lethal impact on bottom fishing in 87 regions of the North Atlantic more present than ever, just a year after its entry into force, the latest threat that most worried, disturbed and imploded shipowners and mobilized fishermen has been eliminated. controversial action plan Announced by the European Commission (EC) on February 21; Essentially formalized a trawling veto in all marine protected areas, By 2030, the entire community recommends banning 30% of the sea surface.
After the regulations in question were “vocally and unanimously” rejected by Spain, France, Germany and other European Union (EU) countries, it was short-lived for Environment, Oceans and Fisheries Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevicius to step back. . His cabinet assured him in early April that this was not a measure with “binding objectives” but rather an “invitation to dialogue”.
Discussion is served. The proximity of elections increasingly reveals the political tone of parliamentary groups, and the European Parliament’s Fisheries Committee (PECH) has done its homework in recent months; Quests whose fruits came yesterday. The organization approved the draft report on that initiative, which aims to continue to contain the fishing industry, with 20 votes in favor and only 4 against. A document that collects his criticisms and takes into account: action plan “It lacks a consistent approach with other priorities and strategies of the Commission”, such as “guaranteeing food security, the strategic autonomy of the Union and ensuring a level playing field with third countries”.
Voices from the fishing industry, consulted by Faro de Vigo from the Prensa Ibérica group, celebrated the PECH decision this Thursday and commented: The attitude of MEPs makes it clear to the EC that “this is not the right way to legislate.” “Another institution proves us right once again,” the officials said, adding that Sinkevicius’ policies focus on the EU’s environmental protection “without taking into account the socioeconomic conditions of fisheries”.
Approval of the draft report will go to Strasbourg. Consulted sources state that there will be a vote in the European Parliament in January, which will predictably mark the distance to the measure published by the European Commission. When you do this it fails action planThe latter will have three months to hand over his position.
What is clear is that, yes or no, the decision from Strasbourg will have to be considered by the Commissioner for the Environment, Oceans and Fisheries in the future – unless fisheries are merged with Agriculture as a fishing sector. requests. Whoever is in charge in Brussels.
An “unrealistic” measure
For now, PECH sent out a statement yesterday stating: MPs criticized action plan EC being “unreal”. Among them is the Galician Francisco Millán Mon, who this Thursday reiterated the need to develop control regulations through “close dialogue” with the fishing industry.
In this context, the Fisheries Committee of the European Parliament emphasizes that: The initiative “lacks a balance between biodiversity conservation and the fishing industry” He questions “the Commission’s overly simplistic approach” and considers it necessary “to use the European Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFF) to support the transition to more selective fishing techniques.”
The European Bottom Fishing Alliance (EBFA) also made a statement yesterday after the approval of the draft report containing accusations against it. action plandefined as “Another wake-up call to the EU from EU legislators” European Commission“It is a call to underline that we can no longer tolerate policies that compromise the survival and food security of the EU fleet.” “It is time for the EC to reconsider its political approach and functioning. The Commission needs to rethink where it wants seafood products to come from; “We import 70% of the seafood we eat from the EU,” he said.