President. – The next item is the report by Isabella Lövin, on behalf of the Committee on Fisheries, on combating illegal fishing at the global level – the role of the EU [2010/2210(INI)] - (A7-0362/2011).

  Isabella Lövin, rapporteur. – Mr President, at this very moment around the world, at least one out of every five fish that is eaten has been taken out of the sea illegally. Some of these fish perhaps is the result of fishing a little bit over the quota by basically legal operators that may stretch the rules – which of course is not acceptable – but a lot of that fish is also taken by large-scale operators that premeditate and organise their crimes in a very skilled manner, who deliberately hide between flags of convenience, hide behind shell companies registered in tax havens, operators that bribe and corrupt coastguards and customs officers, operators that steal fish from sensitive unprotected areas and put the billion-euro profit directly into their own pockets, organised crime that now operate with a minimal risk of detection and sanction all over the world, especially in developing countries’ waters and in the high seas in international waters.

It is estimated that illegal fishing accounts for between 11 and 26 million tonnes of fish a year, making illegal fishing the world’s second largest fish producer in the world.

The EU last year put in place its new IUU and control regulations and this was indeed a major step forward in the fight against IUU globally.

One of the main elements was the new catch certification document that now has to accompany all the fish that enters the EU. This is important, since over 60% of all fish that is consumed in the EU today is imported. Why is this the case? Because we have overfished our own waters, consciously and with large contributions from subsidies, and this has led to a 40% decrease of catches since 1995. So our increasing dependency on fish from the outside, and with the EU fleet itself fishing all over the planet, our own responsibility to see to it that this fish is not illegally or irresponsibly caught is very evident.

In my report I point to some of the dangers to the world that overfishing, and illegal fishing in particular, poses. They are not small. It threatens food security in developing countries, but also for future generations. It is one of the major causes of loss of biodiversity on the planet today, and the emptying of the world’s oceans of its living creatures is also degrading marine ecosystems so the oceans to a lesser extent are capable of doing their job as carbon sinks absorbing CO2.

We, the EU, have signed up to a lot of international obligations to eradicate hunger, halt the loss of biodiversity and fight against climate change – and fighting against the very concrete threats to the ocean that international illegal fishing represents is one of the most evident steps that the EU can take to try to achieve all of these objectives.

In my report, I point to a number of concrete actions that the EU must take. We cannot wait for the UN to move, we have to take unilateral actions in order to form alliances with the world’s largest fish markets. We need global certification schemes. But documents are not enough. We need global databases of fish DNA, we need global electronic traceability systems and we need advanced police cooperation between states.

We cannot forget that two thirds of the world’s oceans are beyond national jurisdiction, and that the control, management and conservation of these areas today is largely lacking. I am therefore very happy that the European Parliament states the need to enlarge the regional fisheries organisations, both extend their geographical extension but also their mandate. They have to become more of management and conservation authorities, and less of exploitation clubs.

I would like to express my thanks to all the shadows, of course, and a last comment is about the amendment about the introduction of a common European coastguard dealing with migrants, etc. I believe this is an issue far too politically sensitive to be included in my report, and therefore I recommend deleting those words from paragraphs 12 and 13.

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I very much welcome the report on combating illegal fishing at the global level, and I would like to congratulate the rapporteur, Ms Isabella Lövin, on the excellent way in which she brought together different opinions into a report. I know this is a controversial issue. I would like to congratulate her because her report deals with all the relevant issues. I would also like to thank all Members of the Committee on Fisheries for their outstanding work on this report, and of course Members from other relevant committees.

In general, I fully agree with Ms Lövin’s analysis. Illegal fishing is a global problem and a very difficult problem to handle since a lot of countries are involved in each operation. This is the great problem about illegal fisheries. You could have a Greek vessel, a French captain, a Korean crew, and they go to the Canaries to land what they have caught, so it is very difficult to tackle the problem.

That is why – after the implementation of the IUU Regulation – we are trying to have a consistent stance inside the European Union and outside the European Union. This is a very important parameter if we want to fight illegal fishing. We have to behave the same way inside and outside EU waters, otherwise we cannot be reliable.

I think two issues are very important here: better governance and transparency. We must also solve the problem of subsidies. We need to increase cooperation among market States, develop new tools at international level, and pursue the development of a global catch documentation system.

I would like to highlight two issues; firstly on cooperation among market States, I have already taken the first step. We have signed the Joint Statement with the United States pledging bilateral cooperation to combat illegal fisheries. But we have to implement this agreement and we also have to have further cooperation and sign similar agreements with other very important countries. Here we are planning to work with Japan, Canada and other countries – including China of course – because if we really want to combat illegal fishing worldwide we have to cooperate with everybody.

Secondly, I want to highlight the issue of subsidies where we have shared views. The Regulation provides that subsidies can no longer be granted to operators involved directly or indirectly in illegal fishing. My services will now look closely into allegations relating to incidents that happened after the rules entered into force. For the previous period we cannot do much, but after the entry into force of this Regulation we can do something, and that is what we are trying to do now.

To make our framework even stronger, I plan to introduce two specific elements in the future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund. First, conditionality. No subsidy can be granted to operators involved in illegal fishing. This will be a rule: absolute conditionality. Second, financial correction. Subsidies granted to such operators will be withdrawn. We need these clear rules to fill the existing gaps.

I also subscribe to Ms Lövin’s views that illegal fishing activities by their very nature are in fact criminal activities. Countries need to cooperate with each other in investigations, proceedings, and ultimately prosecutions if we want to actively combat these ‘pirate’ actions.

As a final point, the EU as the biggest player in this market has a moral obligation to take the lead in this fight. I am looking forward to continue working with Parliament and all stakeholders in order to best shape our role. I would like to emphasise that we are doing our best, but you need to bear in mind that we have just started. We have limited resources and we cannot be everywhere in the world, but we are going to use taxpayers’ money in the best way in order to have concrete results.

  Maurice Ponga, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Development. – (FR) Mr President, I wanted to begin by congratulating the rapporteur, Ms Lövin, on her excellent work.

As rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Development, I am pleased that the Committee on Fisheries has taken up the points contained in our opinion, because it is vital for the development dimension to be taken into account in the measures to combat illegal fishing at the global level, for the sake of policy coherence and the close links with development policy.

Indeed, combating illegal fishing requires global solutions and the involvement of all countries, including developing ones. However, countries’ technical and financial capabilities also need to be taken into account in the actions to be undertaken. The same constraints cannot be imposed on developed and developing countries without support measures.

Small island states have very limited capabilities, for example. Therefore, they must be supported in their efforts to combat illegal fishing. That is why the Union will have to increase the budget for the fisheries sector when it signs agreements in this area in developing countries.

Furthermore, it is vital to ensure that the measures to combat illegal fishing are actually applied, because this practice harms the development of countries insofar as it reduces the financial resources they could earn from fishing as an economic activity. The fact is, developing countries need those resources to implement social, economic and education policies.

Lastly, it is important for the European Union, when implementing these measures to combat illegal fishing in developing countries, to encourage the involvement of civil society and businesses alongside the countries receiving aid. A holistic approach needs to be taken to halt the scourge of illegal fishing.

  Barbara Matera, on behalf of the PPE Group. – (IT) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing is very widespread at a global level and, as a result, it is impossible to make an accurate estimate of how many tonnes of fish are caught illegally every day.

As already acknowledged by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) in 2001 with the adoption of a plan of action to combat illegal fishing, the battle against this problem is a declared priority of the international community. IUU fishing causes serious environmental, economic and social damage and, as also shown by the United Nations report on drugs and crime, is often carried out by actual criminal organisations committing crimes such as tax evasion, customs fraud, money laundering, corruption and handling stolen goods.

The IUU and Control Regulations provide the EU with powerful tools to combat IUU fishing by defining the obligations and opportunities of both Member States and third countries. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure global cooperation by all countries, not just European Member States. In order to achieve this, the EU must itself be above reproach, and must not hesitate to take all necessary action, even against Member States themselves, to combat this illegal activity.

I think it is useful to continue, in fact to improve the various surveillance programmes in developing countries. All the measures leading to closer cooperation on a legislative and operational level in the various regional fishing organisations that have been clearly identified in the report by Ms Lövin, to whom I offer my compliments, should be implemented.

Mr President, I would like to conclude by saying that it is crucial for the EU to undertake the necessary action on a multilateral and global level because, as everyone is well aware, this is not a problem that the EU can resolve on its own.

  Ole Christensen, on behalf of the S&D Group. – (DA) Mr President, my thanks to the rapporteur, Ms Lövin, for her work on this report and for her cooperation. It is about time that we combated illegal fishing at the global level. It should not be possible to land illegally caught fish in any port in the world. Clearly, we have to take a look at ourselves in Europe, too, to ensure that we have our own house in order. If there are no ports where someone can land and sell the fish, the incentive for illegal fishing will also be removed.

In my view, illegal fishing is something despicable, and serious infringements should be punished on a par with economic offences. After all, illegal fishing is detrimental to everything and everyone. It is detrimental to fish stocks and it makes it difficult to assess their sustainability. It is detrimental to the ecosystem in the world’s oceans because we do not know how many fish are being caught. Lastly, of course, it is also detrimental to those fishermen who behave decently and stay within the realms of the law. With this report, we now have a good basis for tightening up the rules, which is something that has been lacking in the fight against illegal fishing. Illegal fishing must be stopped. It is one of the biggest threats to sustainable fishing in the future.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – (ES) Mr President, I should also like to begin by expressing my thanks and congratulations for the magnificent work of Ms Lövin in this most important area of combating illegal fishing.

This is one of the worst threats, not only to biodiversity, but also to those parts of the sector which depend specifically on healthy resources and which want to do things in the right way.

However, in order to do this, we need greater coherence. It is unacceptable that, as we have been told, ships and companies that have been fishing illegally are in receipt of public, institutional funding from the European Union or from Member States, as is happening in Spain in the case of Vidal Armadores. This is unacceptable.

Therefore, we need measures to ensure more investigation, more monitoring capability, and, above all, deterrent and exemplary penalties. We have an excellent opportunity to do this through the reform of Community fishing policy.

For this reason, I welcome not only the report but also the Commission’s statements, and I hope that we will take this opportunity which, unfortunately, we have neglected to take in the past.

  Marek Józef Gróbarczyk, on behalf of the ECR Group. – (PL) Mr President, I would like to thank Isabella Lövin for the excellent preparation of the report on combating illegal fishing. Given the state of resources in seas and oceans, this is a report of key importance for the future common fisheries policy. Of unprecedented importance is the need to ensure that the standards binding within the European Union come into force the world over. The EU is the biggest importer of fish products, which gives us the right to introduce requirements and rules for eliminating illegal fishing. The common fisheries policy contains extremely demanding stipulations as regards the European fisheries. Illegal fishing constitutes the darkest element of the unfair competition that depletes our environment and destroys European fisheries.

When approving the report, it is also worth remembering that we should enforce it by joint efforts, not just within the European Commission, but also in all parliamentary committees. Thank you very much.

  João Ferreira, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – (PT) Mr President, Commissioner, as the rapporteur rightly says, fishing is a global activity, so illegal fishing necessarily is too. Illegal, undeclared and unregulated fishing has a significant negative impact on part of humankind’s common heritage: the oceans and their immense, but finite, resources. It is estimated that it accounts for at least 15% of total catches, although it could very well account for much more.

The conservation of this heritage can only be a common task and responsibility of humankind. The combating of illegal fishing must therefore be considered a priority in the context of international cooperation within the framework of multilateral organisations like the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations (UN).

As such, the FAO Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing, the UN Fish Stocks Agreement, the FAO Agreement to Promote Compliance with International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas, and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, are of particular importance. It is also important to step up the role of regional fisheries management organisations in international cooperation.

We should like to acknowledge and show our appreciation for the rapporteur’s efforts to encourage a broad debate, which includes various interim reports, and to draft a comprehensive and thorough report.

We should also like to acknowledge her willingness to take on board all relevant suggestions. Despite some naturally conflicting views, the consensus that has been reached will reflect not just the nature of the topic but also the working method followed.

Regrettably, the amendments tabled by the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats), concerning the creation of a European coastguard, are threatening this consensus. These amendments clearly distort the scope of the report and the debate held whilst it was being prepared. Unlike most of the others in the report, these amendments – some of which are innovative – are far from consensual.

We therefore call for these amendments to be rejected: otherwise, in our opinion, the report will be substantially weakened.

  Derek Roland Clark, on behalf of the EFD Group. – Mr President, the CFP was only introduced in 1973, when the UK joined the common market. Up to then, UK fishermen had looked after their fisheries so well, without all these regulations, that other profligate Member States wanted a slice of our action. The result? Illegal fishing.

Any system of complex rules and regulations produces cheats – that is human nature. Now you want to duplicate our coastguard and to consider more rules to combat possible illegal recreational fishing. Does the EU never stop meddling? To preserve fish stocks, Member States must be responsible for their own fishing waters up to the 200-mile limit or the median line. Bilateral arrangements would be up to them and they would have to protect their own fish stocks in their own interests, under their laws and their enforcement.

Norway does just that. Stocks have recovered, especially the spawning stocks of several species – but then Norway is not in the EU and does not have to obey its crazy rules. It bans discards, requiring that all fish caught be landed. Meanwhile, EU stocks are seriously depleted. I know thought is being given to discards, but after 38 years of waste, will our stocks recover?

As to combating illegal fishing globally, the EU’s discard policy is the greatest illegal fishing scandal of all! That – and licensing European fleets to raid the waters of the third world, reducing those people to poverty – is what I call illegal.

  Diane Dodds (NI). – Mr President, I would like to thank my colleague, Ms Lövin, for the report and to assure her of my support for it.

Last week, I presented the Commission with details of an innovative project being launched by marine scientists in Northern Ireland, who are about to begin work on an ecosystem approach to management within the Irish Sea. That process is far from simple. However, in the meantime, annual decisions will soon be made that will have far-reaching consequences for our fishermen.

The Commission has proposed significant cuts in a range of fishing opportunities for 2012, on the basis that the stocks concerned are ‘data poor’. We are told that the failed long-term cod recovery plan has to stay in place for at least another year, either because of a lack of resources to fix it or because the Treaty denies us the flexibility to do so. The development of an integrated maritime policy is sensible but will take time, and in the meantime we risk ignoring the problems that are impacting upon my constituents and our seas today.

Turning to the question of combating illegal fishing on a global level, I will again highlight a problem on the EU’s doorstep; namely the illegal catches of mackerel by Iceland and the Faroe Islands, as well as further dramatic autonomous increases in their catches during 2011. The Faroe Islands have issued mackerel licences to a number of third-country vessels, some of which are blacklisted by the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission. A solution must be found – but not one that rewards Iceland and the Faroes with a further substantial share of that stock.

  Josefa Andrés Barea (S&D). – (ES) Mr President, my congratulations to Ms Lövin and Mr Christensen for their contributions. In my group, we have obtained compromise amendments.

This report gives the European Union a wider role in relation to illegal fishing. Europe can now take on a global leadership role. Previous regulation has apparently proved insufficient.

This regulation will give us more guarantees as there will be the same kind of inspection in all Member States, the same checking of information and the same penalties. This presupposes that we will be able to identify the offender, as we do not want to punish the sector, Mr Romeva i Rueva, only the offender.

There will also be a very important external factor, namely, introducing conditions for fish imports from third countries in the form of supporting documents from the authorities in these countries. The agreements will play a crucial role in closing our doors to fleets which do not meet these conditions.

We must all combat illegal fishing; however, the European Union can now lead the way in taking action against illegal fishing throughout the world.

  Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, my Green Group colleague, Ms Lövin, has contributed her expertise and commitment to this report and that is one of the reasons why – unusually for a Fisheries Committee report – it is being greeted with unanimity across this Chamber.

The report says that the EU, at least on paper, has armed itself with tools to combat illegal fishing, but we have to do more than that to persuade other regimes and other states. We have to be above reproach, and it further calls on the review of the common fisheries policy (CFP) to be used to create incentives for legal fishing. This is very important. Incentives are absolutely crucial to successful fisheries management policy, and the current CFP has singularly failed to provide them.

By contrast, the conservation credit scheme that is operating in Scotland has government, industry and environmental NGOs all working together to devise and implement successful management measures which, among other things, are radically reducing the wastage of discards. In my view, a CFP which threatens equal access to waters and resources will not help to encourage such initiatives, nor will it provide the necessary incentives to report illegal activity.

  Elie Hoarau (GUE/NGL). – (FR) Mr President, I should like to say that the European Union is the world’s biggest maritime power largely as a result of its outermost regions. They are a major asset for Europe, and so the development and implementation of a comprehensive policy on the seas, oceans and seabed are essential for the future. However, I fear that EUR 20 million or EUR 50 million will not be enough to meet this great challenge. The fight against illegal fishing is part of this major policy, and there is an urgent need, at EU level, to find an appropriate solution to this problem, particularly in the context of international cooperation.

I would also point out that the maritime areas of Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, Mayotte and Réunion are regularly raped and pillaged. As the report includes no mention of it, I am taking advantage of this opportunity to draw the attention of my fellow Members and the Commission to this particular problem.

  Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI). – (ES) Mr President, Ms Lövin’s report places valuable emphasis on the fundamental issue of making a united effort to combat illegal fishing.

The aims of a common policy on sustainable fishing, protection of the marine environment and promotion of fishing without unfair competition will not be accomplished if we do not take a committed stand in the fight against such illegal fishing.

The oceans know no boundaries, so efforts must be made at both European and international level. The European Union needs to have credible policies here and should impose penalties on practices like those recently publicised where Community-flagged vessels operate illegally in waters protected by conservation measures.

The problem of illegal fishing does not only concern third-country vessels but also EU-flagged operators. Furthermore, we cannot make progress in the absence of powerful financial instruments which will make access to public money conditional on carrying out effective monitoring procedures and complying with all fishing regulations.

  Kriton Arsenis (S&D). – (EL) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I truly welcome this report and I congratulate Ms Lövin on a job very well done.

Illegal and unreported fishing is a form of organised crime and a threat to our seas and to all of us. Nineteen per cent of global fishing is illegal and unreported and we, in the European Union, are subsidising this activity to the tune of EUR 1.1 billion a year.

I welcome the proposals in this report on the technical measures needed to combat illegal fishing and achieve real traceability of fisheries products. We need international cooperation, as Ms Damanaki said, especially in identifying and recording the vessels involved in illegal activities.

Finally, I would like to comment on the question of the European coastline: I consider that, if we fail to take this measure, we shall be unable to change the situation; we shall be unable to combat illegal fishing.

  Guido Milana (S&D). – (IT) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in this case, too, you have strong support from Parliament. Ms Lövin has carried out an extraordinary task, an excellent preliminary job, even though on some points and issues, she could have gone further. I have a different opinion as to whether or not it is appropriate or justified to set up a European coastguard, although I will support her position. I have a different opinion, but I will, in any case, support her position.

Commissioner, there is only one real issue, and that is that the Commission needs to have a global role. We have said this in many different ways, and I think that this is the real key, to establish a real foreign policy for this activity. The relationship with the United States, China and Japan is crucial in this sense, because the essence of this activity lies within this relationship, within the construction of common rules and the resulting behaviours. Therefore the true goal is to increase awareness that fishing, in this sense, is a common asset, and a global common asset.

  Richard Howitt (S&D). – Mr President, I rise as MEP for East Anglia to protest that the objectives discussed in the earlier debate on integrated maritime policy, as well as those in paragraph 12 of this report on combating illegal fishing, are fatally undermined by the UK closure of coastguard stations, including both Walton and Great Yarmouth in my constituency.

By definition, the sailing community travels between the UK, France, Belgium and the Netherlands and thus relies on adequate coastguard services on both sides of the Channel and the North Sea. From an East Anglian perspective – given the need to serve the busy shipping routes to the ports of Yarmouth, Harwich, Felixstowe and Tilbury, as well as the economic importance of seaside tourism and the mass development of offshore wind farms – this is a disaster waiting to happen on a level with the Gulf of Mexico.

Britain has already withdrawn four rescue and fire-fighting tugs from the Channel and has put the responsibility on France; a step which, according to my colleague Ms Grelier, is causing widespread anger in Northern France.

I call on the Commission to investigate whether the British closure of coastguard stations breaches the principles of EU maritime policy and our country’s obligations to protect European marine protection sites in Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex; and I call on the British Government to think again, or it will have lost lives on its conscience.

  Gesine Meissner (ALDE). – (DE) Mr President, we have just been discussing the integrated maritime policy and, of course, fishing also plays a role there. Since I have been dealing with this topic for some time, I am aware that fishing is usually the last policy to be decided. Fishermen naturally play an important role in our food supply, however. It is also important for small and medium-sized enterprises that they should be able to work in a secure area and that illegal fishing should be prevented as it makes their work and their position in the marketplace more difficult.

What we have heard is quite true: this issue does not just affect cooperation with developing countries. It goes without saying that this is significant because these countries also import fish. It is also important for us, however, because we need to prevent illegal fishing. For this reason, I should like to pick up on one of the points Mr Milana and Ms Lövin raised. I know that not everyone equally favours the European coastguard service. However, I do believe that we need better cooperation on this front in Europe at least. This was already called for in a Parliamentary report on integrated maritime policy dating from 2008. I have brought this up repeatedly and the Commission also needs to table a proposal in this area.

  Silvia-Adriana Ţicău (S&D). – (RO) Mr President, given the technological advances and the investment required in the European Union’s space policy, I should stress the important role which the use of satellite navigation systems plays in monitoring, controlling and carrying out surveillance on fishing activities. Romania and Bulgaria joined the European Union in 2007, which extended the scope of the common fisheries policy to the Black Sea. Unfortunately, there is no global agreement on the regional management of the Black Sea fish stocks, apart from bilateral agreements.

The Commission’s support is needed to develop regional dialogue aimed at devising a common marine strategy in the Black Sea region, also involving the other states bordering the Black Sea. I think that setting up a Black Sea consultative forum is appropriate. This will provide a technical form of communication and cooperation for the operators in the fisheries sector. If a basic sharing agreement continues to remain in abeyance, there is a risk of the resources collapsing, and the economic damage already caused to certain fisheries resources will become widespread.

  Andrew Henry William Brons (NI). – Mr President, the eagerness with which the UK was bundled into the EU’s predecessor in 1973 had nothing to do with our collective charm and charisma and everything to do with access to our fishing grounds.

The EU is not content to have ruined our fishing fleet and halved our number of fishermen, but it is now turning its attention to criminalising our recreational sea anglers. The Commission will decide by the end of 2012 whether recreational fishing can be regarded as illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. Recreational anglers catch a minuscule percentage of the total catch but, most important of all, recreational anglers are much more likely to return immature fish safely to the sea.

The report calls for an end to flags of convenience. However, the 1991 ECJ decision legalising quota-hopping legalised just that – a form of flags of convenience.

  Ulrike Rodust (S&D). – (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, illegal fishing poses a serious threat to our fish stocks and to all honest fishermen, who are being swindled out of part of their income. At this point, I would like to take the unusual step of praising the Council of Ministers, which succeeded in agreeing an IUU regulation before the Treaty of Lisbon came into force, in other words, without our cooperation. That was an important step forward.

However, Ms Lövin’s excellent report makes it clear that there is still a lot of work to do. Illegal fishing is a typical example of problems that are so big that the European Union cannot deal with them on its own. We need global solutions. The fact is that global solutions require effective global institutions.

As the rapporteur on reform of the common fisheries policy, I would like to close with the following remark: the best protection against illegal fishing is afforded by fishermen who know the rules and who are convinced that these make sense. This must be our guiding principle in pursuing new reforms.

  Phil Prendergast (S&D). – Mr President, it is difficult to estimate the extent of IUU fishing. It has a direct economic impact on countries, especially developing countries, and these countries are losing the value of the catches that could be taken by local fishermen if IUU fishing was not taking place. This fishing is facilitated by a lack of access to information about vessel names and the identity of their owners. We must ensure Member States fully enforce rules obliging ships to carry this information.

Of equal concern is the role of organised crime in IUU fishing. Criminal organisations have been dipping their feet into the world of this criminal activity, and they have a strong economic incentive. Many species of fish, particularly those that have been over-exploited, are in short supply and are therefore of high value. Some of the more traditional criminal techniques are now being put to use to support IUU fishing; techniques such as human trafficking, slave labour, tax evasion, money laundering, customs fraud, corruption and handling of stolen goods, etc.

  Maria Damanaki, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, I would like to thank all the speakers. Let me start by giving you some clarification on recreational fisheries. Recreational fisheries is not, I repeat not, an EU competence. So the European Commission is not responsible, and the national governments have to tackle all these problems. So please, do not come back again and again here to recreational fisheries. The Commission’s only responsibility is to ensure, when we are talking about recreational fisheries, that the product cannot be sold. Everything else comes under the competence of national governments.

Let me now turn to our main point. This report was broadly supported and deserves it, because it is a good report, is well-balanced and also refers to all the relevant issues. However, I would like to answer some of your remarks and would mainly like to raise two points. I would like to try to convince you that we are improving, and I would like to convey to you this positive message.

We have done a lot since this IUU regulation was put in force. We have achieved much and sometimes we have solved some problems. That has to be recognised. For example, you have mentioned our obligation to be responsible in our waters. Well, we have been responsible. The Commission is doing its job. I should mention the last case of the use of drift nets in the Mediterranean. The national governments have been pushed and been obliged to take all the necessary measures, and we are going further on this case.

Secondly, Mr Romeva i Rueda referred to a Spanish enterprise. Well, I can tell you that we have had some news today: the owner of that enterprise himself was sanctioned by a court in Las Palmas, and now he is facing a prison sentence because of fishing illegally in the Antarctic. So we are improving here, and not only on paper as somebody said.

Regarding international cooperation, we have done much in the last year. Let me just give you some figures. To date, the Commission has finalised ten evaluation missions to Panama, Belize, Sri Lanka, Mauritania, Thailand, China, Guinea-Conakry, Senegal, Korea and Indonesia. So we have done a lot of work. Referring to other countries and our cooperation, I would like also to mention that since July 2011 we have gone through 120 procedures of requests to flag states because their vessels have fished illegally. Up to now, the flag states concerned have put sanctions on 19 vessels. We are talking about Belize, China – 13 vessels were punished by the Chinese authorities themselves – the Comoros, Guinea and others. We are doing a lot, bearing in mind our limited resources, but I do agree that we have to do more and I really rely on you in order to take that exercise further.

  Isabella Lövin, rapporteur. – Mr President, thank you so much to all the colleagues for your support. I am really proud that there is such a consensus about this report.

I would like to thank the shadows, of course, for their excellent work and all the opinion-makers in the Committee on Development and the Committee on the Environment as well.

I would like to say a few words on the European coastguard, which was raised a couple of times. I am very much in favour of more cooperation between different coastguards, and we also have the Fisheries Control Agency in Vigo, which I think should be reinforced in their work so that is out of the question, but I think that the European coastguard is going too far in this report.

I am extremely proud that this Parliament would endorse the notions that also are included in this report: the creation of a global body to fill the void that is actually right now very, very evident in this world and that is the governance of our world’s oceans and the international waters, and that we support the creation of a body, possibly under the auspices of the UN, and that the RFMOs should go from being exploitation clubs to actually management bodies of the world’s oceans. That is also something that I am very glad that this Parliament supports.

Finally, this report also calls for the international oceans governance to be made a priority at the next world summit on sustainable development in Rio – the Rio+20 next year. As Ms Rohde said, we need global solutions and I think we need global institutions, perhaps, to tackle this problem and, given the challenges of a shrinking planet, we need to think boldly and very urgently as well. So thank you, colleagues. Thank you, Mr President.

Written statements (Rule 149)

  Luís Paulo Alves (S&D), in writing. – (PT) Protection against illegal, undeclared and unregulated (IUU) fishing is also crucial for the sustainability of resources and the activities of fishing communities in the Azores. The region in which we live possesses the largest exclusive economic zone in Europe. However, in the absence of continental shelves, this vast area has a lot of very deep water but few fish. The balanced exploitation of these fragile ecosystems is crucial if their deterioration is to be prevented. However, preventing IUU fishing in this area is difficult, because of the vastness of our waters, and of the insufficient and inappropriate methods that Portugal has been using to control the amount of fishing in our waters. It is therefore necessary that the European Union intervene and that priority be given to adequate surveillance and to control methods capable of counteracting this threat and monitoring and controlling the illegal activities that are squandering our resources, thus endangering them and threatening the survival of our fishing communities.

  Béla Glattfelder (PPE), in writing. – (HU) According to many researchers, three-quarters of the world’s seas are over-fished; in other words, fish stocks there are no longer able to replenish themselves. Since almost two-thirds of the oceans do not come under the exclusive jurisdiction of one country but are classed as international waters, it will require concerted international action and international legislation if we are to curb illegal fishing. At the same time, however, there is an increasing need for protein from the sea to feed the world’s growing population. For this reason, at the same time as combating illegal fishing, we need to develop and support freshwater aquaculture as the most sustainable form of fishing.

  Pavel Poc (S&D), in writing. – (CS) Overfishing poses a serious threat to biodiversity and sustainable marine environments. The situation is made more acute by illegal fishing, which further exacerbates the social and economic impacts of depleted fish stocks. Finally, the potential risks to food security continue to grow due to the fact that, for more than a billion inhabitants of planet Earth, fish and other seafood are the primary source of protein. The problem of illegal fishing is not that the means do not exist for surveillance or for securing evidence where the rules are broken. The problem is that everyone is always blaming something, and meanwhile half a million tonnes of illegally caught fish worth over a billion euro is imported into the EU every year. Lack of political will is harming both European fishermen and fish stocks. Tests of origin using the worldwide DNA database now cost about EUR 8 per sample, and large numbers do not have to be carried out: it is enough to carry out random testing. And if we can pay anyone to take satellite photographs of, or eavesdrop on, anyone anywhere on the globe, we can also occasionally use this technology for something sensible. Even here, the costs are not staggering in comparison with the losses caused by illegal fishing. It is therefore essential to examine the adequacy of the control mechanisms and their use in practice.

  Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE), in writing. – (PL) The report introduced by Ms Lövin illustrates the grievous nature of the problem related to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU). To drive the message home, it is sufficient to compare the value of 6.4 million tonnes of fish caught by the countries within the European Union in the course of a year with what is – I would stress that – a lower estimate of the volume of illegal fishing, with an annual value of 11 million tonnes, which is nearly twice the total annual catch within the entire European Union. In my opinion, the EU countries should not just combat IUU fishing but also take some practical steps towards preventing it. Among other things, legislation should be harmonised to such a level as to enable effective operation of the executive bodies in combating IUU fishing.

Nearly half of the EU residents are linked, directly or indirectly, economically or socially, with fisheries in a broader sense, which is why improving the situation in this industry would be a substantial catalyst for economic growth. An important aspect of providing support to fisheries is cooperation with countries outside the EU. A strong position enjoyed by the EU in the sphere of fisheries notwithstanding, I believe that cooperating with such countries as Japan, China or the United States is of great importance for the efficient introduction of regulations. The IUU phenomenon has no frontiers and should be kept in check, and then eliminated in accordance with the subject of the above report, that is, through international cooperation at the global level.

  President. − The debate is closed.

The vote will take place shortly.

(The sitting was suspended at 11.55 and resumed at 12.00)

IN THE CHAIR: JERZY BUZEK
President