Interview, 17 May 2011
Standpoints on EU's future Fisheries Partnership Agreements identified
On Friday 13 May EU Commissioner for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Maria Damanaki invited EU fisheries ministers to a meeting with ministers of countries with which the EU has Fisheries Partnership Agreements (FPA).
Robert Andrén, Deputy Director-General at the Ministry for Rural Affairs
The purpose of the meeting, which was held in Brussels, was to identify standpoints on current agreements and record what should be improved in the imminent reform of EU fisheries policy. Sweden was represented by Robert Andrén, Deputy Director-General at the Ministry for Rural Affairs.
What opinions were put forward concerning current agreements?
- All countries that were represented stressed that the agreements were good tools and that they had generated much that was positive for the partner countries, as well as for consumers in the EU. Several of the partner countries believed, however, that EU requirements are sometimes unrealistic. The requirements may sometimes mean extensive draft legislation involving parliaments, which in some countries is a major procedure. There is no capacity to push through such large changes within the short time frame set by the EU. Several Member States also highlighted the problems of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU), indicating that they are nowhere near being able to handle this.
Fisheries Partnership Agreements
FPA stands for Fisheries Partnership Agreements, which are partnership agreements on fishing between the EU and third countries.
Are there any clear dividing lines between the EU and third country partners?
- At the meeting it was made very clear by the partner countries that they do not question the agreements as tools but would rather focus on how they can be better designed, while within the EU there is sometimes a discussion as to whether we should have agreements at all.
As the representative of Sweden, which aspects did you raise?
Sweden raised three main aspects of the FPA issue, which were
- EU vessels fishing under FPAs in other countries must of course follow the same rules as apply in EU waters,
- FPAs must be evaluated by independent institutions with regard to their ecological, economic and social effects on the actors involved, and finally
- EU support must be separated as far as possible from costs of fishing. It should be paid by those who really do fish under the agreements, in other words by the industry itself.
What do you yourself highlight as the most important conclusion from the meeting?
The Commission indicated several points for improvement during the day. I think that some of the important points are that the EU needs to listen to and cooperate even more with third country parties, which also means that the countries must give a better account of how they are to use the support for their administration and infrastructure. It is also important to better synchronise the FPAs and events in the area of development assistance in future. There can be any amount of nice words in the agreements, but if they do not entail actual results, changes or deliveries to achieve these fine objectives then we have failed. The link between objectives and delivery must be strengthened.
What will happen after the meeting?
- The Commission will absorb and use the standpoints, particularly those from third country parties, in its work during the summer of drawing up a proposal for a reformed fisheries policy.
Which countries participated in this meeting?
The following countries with which the EU has Fisheries Partnership Agreements participated in the meeting on 13 May: Cape Verde, Kiribati, the Comoros, Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Equatorial Guinea, Greenland, Madagascar, Morocco, Mauritius, Mauritania, Mozambique, the Solomon Islands, Sao Tomé and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles.
