There have been many messages this year, released before and after publications. One clear takeaway stands out: the February Action Plan from the European Commission aims to protect 30% of community waters as marine protected areas and to restrict trawling. Charlina Vitcheva, Director-General of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries at the European Commission, warned during a visit to Vigo that protecting the seabed would not be compatible with allowing trawling to continue. This stance drew criticism from the fishing industry and from the Spanish and Galician governments, even as other EC officials signaled different priorities. Virginijus Sinkevicius, Commissioner for the Environment, Oceans and Fisheries, has repeatedly sent mixed messages, insisting that the plan will not cripple fleets while urging member states to adopt it. He defended his position in the European Parliament, where he faced questions about environmental goals versus economic realities and argued that science remains the guiding principle of their approach.
Across the political spectrum, from popular and socialist groups to European liberals and even the far right, diverse factions criticized the Plan presented by Sinkevicius. In Brussels, allies on the Left and Greens questioned the strategy, while several groups voiced support for more measured measures and clearer scientific grounds. For the Lithuanian perspective, this moment is pivotal for ocean health, with Sinkevicius noting that the science base remains the starting point for policy while acknowledging that a portion of funding was redirected toward regional solutions. The emphasis is on maintaining a balance between fishing effort, gear innovation, and the resilience of marine populations.
The Brussels proposal is described as not legally binding at this stage, yet it calls for states to craft regional plans that expand marine protected areas and align with political commitments in this field. While acknowledging that fishing would not be outright banned, the plan raises concerns within the sector and prompts calls for investment in new ideas and gear technologies. The overarching message remains: if the marine environment is not protected, the long-term consequences will ripple through the entire industry and the communities that rely on it.
Galician representative Francisco Millán Mon criticized the Commission for what he termed a structural bias toward environmentalism that may disadvantage the fishing industry. He labeled the Action Plan as inefficient, legally confusing, and unfair in its current form. Ana Miranda condemned Brussels’ decisions, arguing that certain fishing methods are being demonized without sufficient scientific, environmental, social, and economic justification. She noted that the regional fleet had expressed concerns during demonstrations at ports and urged leadership to engage more openly with fishermen to preserve both sustainability and economic viability. Isabel Carvalhais, a socialist member of the European Parliament, called for goals grounded in robust science, while Izaskun Bilbao, a liberal MEP, reaffirmed Brussels’ plan to phase out those gear types and emphasized the need for inclusive consultations to move toward sustainable and resilient fishing within the European framework.