Some of the adjectives that will be in circulation within the UK fishing industry today, to describe the change in UK quota shares as the UK leaves the EU and the CFP, and the content of what was agreed in Brussels on Christmas eve sinks in. Some of the bell-weather stocks tell the story most vividly, After a further five years adjustment period, the UK’s share of Channel cod will have increased from 9.3% to 10.2%.
The UK’s share of Celtic Sea haddock will have increased from 10% to 20%, leaving 80% in the hands of the EU fleets for a further five years.
North Sea saithe: UK share increases from 23% to 26%, again, in steps over 5 years, leaving the lion’s share in EU hands.
In the meantime, EU fleets have free access to fish in UK waters – including up to six miles of the shoreline in the areas where it matters.
Throughout the fishing industry there is a profound sense of disillusionment, betrayal, and fury that after all the rhetoric, promises and assurances, the Government caved-in on fish.
This was a decision taken at the highest political levels and it is important that responsibility is taken for the choices made. This is no time for spin.
It is unlikely that obstacles in the road will now derail the ratification process, but the fishing industry will want it clearly understood that the best opportunity in a generation for a different and better future has been squandered.
Quota Shares
The UK’s quota shares will increase within a 25% envelope. The increases will be phased in over 5 years
- Year 1 15%
- Year 2 17.5%
- Year 3 20%
- Year 4 22.5%
- Year 5 25%
The specific stocks for which will quota will be increased, and the % increase by stock have been agreed but the information is not yet available
Access
In return, EU has full access to fish in UK waters during the adjustment period. There will be annual negotiations, but these will focus on setting TACs. This access includes grandfather rights for vessels who have a track record of fishing within the 6-12 nm limit. (At least one day in every year of reference period). At the end of the adjustment period, access will become a matter of annual negotiation. Access applies to all stocks including the main pelagic stocks. If access is denied after the end of the 5-year adjustment period, the EU holds the right to deny access to EU waters and to apply proportionate tariffs to UK fishery products.
Regulatory Autonomy
There will be regulatory autonomy. The UK will be able to develop its own fisheries management systems outside the CFP as long as the measures are non-discriminatory.
As the negotiations with the EU enter the 11th hour, rumours are swirling around in the media about what each side has offered and counter offered, as the two side seek a trade deal and an acceptable compromise on fishing rights. Many of these rumours have been wildly inaccurate during earlier phases in the negotiations, and so we will wait for the definitive briefing from the UK negotiators, or the Prime Minister, before making comment.
In these fraught and uncertain times, though, it is worth reiterating what is at stake.
The UK fishing industry (and the UK government) have been clear that as the UK leaves the EU and the transition phase, what we seek is an outcome consistent with our new status as an independent coastal state:
- Negotiated, not automatic, rights over access to fish in UK waters
- Annual fisheries agreements which set TACs, agree quota shares, access arrangements and where mutually beneficial, quota exchanges
- An exclusive 12-mile limit to protect our inshore fisheries
- A rebalancing of quota shares to reflect the resources in UK waters
- Frictionless, access to market to the extent that this without surrendering sovereign fishing rights
These rights are only those which any self-respecting coastal state which shares stocks with a neighbouring country enjoys. It is only the distorting effect of the Common Fisheries Policy over the last 40 years that means the gulf that has now to be crossed is so wide. Those objectives have been shared by the Government throughout the negotiations and the extent to which they are reflected in a final deal (and the assurances given) will be the measure against which the deal will be judged.
The BBC last night reported that:
“Talks to reach a post-Brexit trade deal are in a “serious situation”, Boris Johnson said after a call with the EU Commission head Ursula von der Leyen.
He warned that “time was short” and that a no deal scenario was “very likely” unless the EU position changed “substantially”.
“On fisheries he stressed that the UK could not accept a situation where it was the only sovereign country in the world not to be able to control access to its own waters for an extended period and to be faced with fisheries quotas which hugely disadvantaged its own industry.
“The EU’s position in this area was simply not reasonable and if there was to be an agreement it needed to shift significantly.”
The UK’s chief negotiator David Frost echoed the prime minister’s tone, tweeting: “The situation in our talks with the EU is very serious tonight. Progress seems blocked and time is running out.”
Contingency
The recent publication of the EU’s contingency plans carries forward the same belief. It is assumed that the UK’s new legal status as an independent coastal state, although underpinned by international law, will be set aside and that the UK will be cowed into ceding automatic access to fish in UK waters for 2021. The UK is required to make an abject surrender that would tie us into CFP-like arrangements for decades.
There is no sign that is going to happen. The scene is therefore set for the scenario that will cause most harm to the EU: no access to fish in UK waters from 1st January. EU fleets, in value terms, catch around six times as much in UK waters, as UK vessels fish in EU waters. Whilst the UK will have to adjust to increased border checks, the EU will have to deal with the serious consequences of fleet displacement – until a new agreement on fish is reached.
Compromise
Having made control over waters a centrepiece of both the referendum to leave the EU, and the subsequent general election campaign, a humiliating UK surrender on fish would not be survivable politically. There is no sign in anything that has been said by the Prime Minster, or his cabinet ministers, or the UK negotiating team, that suggests a cave-in on fish is contemplated. In the country, even implacable remainers, unreconciled to the referendum result, can see that the UK fishing industry has been tied into an asymmetric and exploitative relationship for 40 years. The UK share of Channel cod is 9%; the French share is 84%. Those numbers succinctly spell out what is at stake. Continuing that relationship beyond the end of the transition period would be to disavow the referendum result and the repeated commitments made and assurances given.
A compromise, however, is on offer. Access to fish in UK waters could be granted to the EU fleets on the same terms that apply between any other coastal states that share fish stocks.
Annual Fisheries Agreement
Normally at this time of year there would be trilateral and bilateral negotiations between coastal states to set total allowable catches on jointly managed stocks for the coming year, and the other elements of an annual fisheries agreement, including access and quota shares. The UK is the new coastal state and has already taken its place at the table in a number of coastal state negotiations.
It is unclear at this stage, whether there will be bilateral UK/EU negotiations to fix total allowable TACs for shared stocks for 2021, or whether we will move straight to autonomous quotas, set by each side, which will remain in place until there is an agreement. Norway, as a major player in the North Sea, has been waiting patiently for the UK and the EU to settle their differences and for talks to begin.
What is clear, is that mutual access to fish in each other’s waters will be part of that agreement and not an automatic right.
Resolution
There will be an agreement between the UK and the EU on fish. Sometime.
There is a legal obligation on countries which share stocks to negotiate, and to manage fish stocks sustainably. Alongside those legal responsibilities, are a number of legal rights, including the right for each coastal state to harvest the resources within their exclusive 200-mile zone. Agreement, when it is reached, will recognise that fundamental change in legal status which underpins the UK’s negotiating positions.
Summary
In a nutshell, the EU has overplayed its hand and risks bringing on the one thing on fisheries that it has sought to avoid. The exclusion of its fleets from UK waters from 1st January. By backing the UK into a corner on fish, it has left the UK Prime Minister no option but to turn and fight.Europe
The announcement that no further progress can be made in negotiations towards an agreement on the future UK/EU relationship, by the chief negotiators, David Frost and Michel Barnier, comes as no surprise. The gulf between the two sides on fisheries has been huge and seems to have widened in recent days.
In the negotiations, the EU side has moved only millimetres from its original mandate which insists that the only acceptable terms for a trade agreement would be a humiliating surrender by the UK on fisheries. And it would be a huge capitulation. Under the conditions insisted upon by the EU, EU fleets would essentially retain the automatic access to fish in UK waters and hold the status quo on quota shares. To agree to these conditions would be to deny the UK’s legal status as an independent coastal state and render the UK’s departure from the EU as utterly worthless, so far as fisheries are concerned. Even the right to control its own waters inside its own 12-mile limit would be surrendered. On quota shares, be reminded that the UK share of Channel cod is 9%; the French share is 84%.
A compromise is on offer. The UK would agree to reasonable levels of access for EU fleets to fish in UK waters outside the 12-mile limit – in return for a rebalance of quota shares and recognition that the UK will act as any other coastal state, to maintain control over who fishes in its waters. The EU’s offer on quota shares has been risible and the EU will only accept terms that would neuter the UK’s rights as an independent coastal state. Hence the impasse.
The two parties will now take stock and consult with their political masters. We can expect that the phone lines between the capitals will be busy. The stakes are high:
- A free trade deal which is in everyone’s interest
- The future of a UK fishing industry that has been tied for 40 years into an asymmetric and exploitative relationship with the EU
- The presidency of France and the future of Europe as Macron faces re-election in April 2022
- The future, and legacy of the British Prime Minister, elected to get one job done.
All hang in the balance. On fish, Boris Johnson knows that this is his Ted Heath moment.
No Deal
Leaving aside the unlikely, and frankly suicidal, possibility that the Prime Minister accepts the EU’s conditions of surrender, two possibilities occur. The other member states might curb President Macron’s Versailles-like surrender terms and a reasonable compromise could be reached in the next few days. Alternatively, there could be an acceptance that a trade deal is not achievable at this juncture. There is no disguising that this would carry serious adverse implications for both the UK and many EU member states. Tariffs would apply and trade between the UK and the EU would be conducted on less advantageous WTO terms.
No deal would also mean that the EU will immediately enter negotiations with the UK (and where they have an interest, with Norway) for an annual fisheries agreement for 2021, with no prior guarantee that EU fleets would have access to fish any part of UK waters from 1st January. Negotiations for an annual fisheries agreement (as opposed to the framework agreement under discussion) would normally have been approaching conclusion by this stage in the year. In the absence of a fisheries agreement for 2021, something like 3000 EU fishing vessels will have no legal access to fish in UK waters, until there is an agreement. The EU faced something like this a number of years ago when Morocco closed its waters to the EU fleets.
The EU is exerting every muscle to thwart the UK’s legal right under international law as a coastal state to harvest the resources within its exclusive economic zone. The reason why is clear. EU fleets benefit massively from the asymmetrical arrangements agreed in 1973 and again in 1983, with the introduction of quotas.
It is, however, the balance of domestic politics, particularly in France, that prevents the EU from gracefully accepting this landmark change in the legal and political realities.
It is also the balance of domestic politics that ensures that the UK Prime Minister is highly unlikely to follow Ted Heath in sacrificing the fishing industry, which has a huge totemic significance for those who voted to leave the EU.
Dave was known and appreciated as a straight-talking individual with a wealth of knowledge and deep understanding of the fishing industry, based on has experience as a skipper fishing out of his home port Scarborough. The relationships that he fostered, and built upon with the oil and gas, renewables and cables industry, were the foundation of a highly successful commercial operation.
His life was not unmarked by personal tragedy. He was author of a book, Ship Ashore, an eyewitness account of the stranding of the Port Sunlight, the last ship stranded at Flamborough head. He also raised money for St Catherine’s Hospice.
Tough when necessary, but jovial in turn, Dave built up a huge network of contacts across sectors. Those relationships are a prerequisite for successfully mediating the coexistence of different industries operating offshore. The 25th anniversary dinner for NFFO Services Limited in the Merchant Adventurers Hall in York was a fitting tribute to Dave’s efforts and the business and personal relationships that he had established.
The benefits of Dave’s work in NFFO Services have been felt by the fishing industry well beyond the obvious advantages of mutual respect between differing seabed users. In addition to supporting the NFFO’s representative work, the revenues generated by Dave and his team supported the NFFO Training Trust, which has brought direct benefits to young fishermen and to the whole industry through grants for safety equipment.
Dave is survived by his wife and son, daughter-in-law and grand-daughter, to whom we extend our heartfelt sympathies for their grievous and premature loss.
Updating Industry Guidance on Potting Rollers and Haulers (2011-12)
Pot fisheries are one of the most dangerous types of fisheries as the hauling and deployment of pots can be particularly hazardous. This project reviewed the use of pot rollers and provided recommendations for updating Seafish’s technical guidance for fishermen and boat builders in order to minimise risk.
UK Fishermen’s Information Mapping Project (UKFIM) (2012-13)
Fish plotters are routinely used in the industry in order to plan and run fishing operations. The data is unparalleled in its level of detail on the spatial operation of fishing vessels. In circumstances of increasing competition for marine space and the need for more systematic marine planning (see blog), it offers a valuable source of information for evidencing the location and interpreting the importance of fisheries.
Working alongside the Crown Estate, we gathered and processed a broad spectrum of fish plotter data, sourced from both the domestic industry and that from neighbouring European states, for integration into the Crown Estate’s GIS system to enable systematic analysis of the data. The data is now available to support leasing functions within the Crown Estate and for prospective developers to better understand fisheries within potential locations of marine development.
The project also supported the fitting of inshore VMS systems on board small scale vessels in order to support their evidencing needs.
Fishing Spatio-Temporal Pressures and Sensitivities Analysis for MPAs (2013-14)
This project sought to advance methodologies to understand the spatial distribution, footprint and intensity of fishing activities in the context of marine planning and MPA fisheries management planning. This included analysis and comparison of VMS records together with fish plotter data from UKFIM in order to validate applications of the former and to assess the extent to which fishing grounds can be delineated using both sets of data.
Gear experts were also brought together to define gear component specifications for fisheries operating on the Dogger Bank and develop a methodology for translating the operation of gear components into physical seabed pressures.
The project was undertaken in collaboration with Cefas and Seafish under the Fisheries Challenge Fund.
Download the report development of fishing layers from VMS data
Download the report comparison of fishing information from VMS data and on-board plotter systems
Download report on the workshop on the physical effects of fishing activities on the Dogger Bank
Fishing Industry Multibeam Sidescan Sonar Marine Habitats Survey Trial (2011-12)
Involving the fishing industry in gathering evidence and in the monitoring of MPAs provides a potential means to offset the impact of more restrictive fisheries management measures, whilst also encouraging buy-in to the management of the site. The multibeam side scan trial was a pilot to help to gauge the feasibility of fishing vessels being used for this type of seabed survey.
Changes to Fishing Practices around the UK as a result of the Development of Offshore Wind Farms (2014-15)
Although the scale of offshore wind farm planning in UK waters is considerable, there is currently little concrete evidence about the extent to which fishing activity will re-locate within the vicinity of installations and under what conditions. A definitive answer is only possible by examining the activities of the fishing industry once projects have been installed.
The NFFO conducted a pilot study on behalf of the Crown Estate focusing on the Eastern Irish Sea offshore wind farm installations. Findings suggest that fishing activity within OWF boundaries has changed, primarily because fishermen are fearful of fishing gear becoming entrapped by seabed obstacles such as cables, cable crossing points and rock armouring, and wary of vessel breakdown with the consequent risk of turbine collision. However, fishing was found to co-exist with OWFs. A small number of fishermen claimed to operate demersal trawl gear in cable-free corridors between the turbines (for example where interarray cables ran parallel to the trawl tracks). Other fishermen thought confidence to operate inside OWFs would increase as experience and knowledge of those who do increased. Measures suggested by respondents that could help to increase the level of co-existence between the fishing and offshore wind farm industry included: better knowledge of seabed hazards and their location; fishing-friendly methods of cable protection; monitoring of risks and exposure; and regular communication and knowledge exchange between wind farm developers / maintenance companies and fishers.
Supporting Risk-Based Assessments of Fisheries in MPAs (2015)
This project aimed to support the evidence base underpinning risk assessments of fisheries operating in the vicinity of MPAs. The research provided greater insight into the environmental impacts of fisheries in two main ways – one assessing how fishing activity affects MPA habitats, the other assessing how environmental conditions do the same.
Firstly, it trialled ways to reduce uncertainties in understanding the distribution and intensity of mobile gear fishing activities while also analysing the effects of fishing gears on habitats and species. Secondly, it modelled the physical disturbance of seabed sediments from wave and tidal action that influences the habitats of the MPAs. This provides further insight into the environmental context in which the fishing activities are taking place, ensuring that disturbance from fishing is considered in the context of levels of natural disturbance that the habitats and species are adapted to.
Research outputs include:
Assessment of Shrimp Trawling Activity in The Wash and North Norfolk Coast SAC
Assessment of Otter Trawling Activity in Margate and Long Sands SCI
Assessment of Beam Trawling Activity in North Norfolk Sandbanks and Saturn Reef SCI
Fishing Industry E-log/VMS Data Pooling Specification (2016-2017)
As part of the Seafish Strategic Investment Programme, a report was completed to assess the feasibility of establishing an IT interface, initially in England, that would enable simple access to VMS and E-log data streams already collected for regulatory purposes so that they may be used as a source of evidencing fisheries for applications that provide collective benefits to the fishing industry, whilst also facilitating improved fisheries and marine management.
Fisheries Science Strategy for Industry Generated Data (2016-2017)
This study was undertaken to address the increasing need for a strategic approach to industry-led data collection in the face of reducing resources and growing need for evidence in fisheries management. The aim was to establish partnerships and action plans that will support the inclusion of fishing industry knowledge and data in the evidence-base for managing UK fisheries.
Three main activities were used to progress the study:
• A review of existing initiatives that have incorporated industry generated data into fisheries management advice and their degree of success.
• A rapid appraisal of data deficient UK targeted stocks, assessment of data needs/gaps that may be augmented by industry generated data, and selection of case study stocks.
• Development of action plans on how data gaps for case study stocks of commercial importance to UK fleets could be filled by the industry.
The review of past projects where fishermen have collected data indicated that there are 19 key attributes to have/avoid in industry-led data collection initiatives. Five of these were identified as fundamental ingredients of successful industry-led data collection initiatives. They include:
• Industry participation – from the grassroots
• Trust and understanding – making sure everyone is on the same page
• Incentives – carrots are better than sticks
• Resources – it’s not free data
• Feedback – fishermen need to see and hear progress.
It was noted that the available literature regularly overlooks these points and in this project efforts had to be made to speak directly with project leads to gain insights.
Scoping Industry Approaches to Fully Documented Fisheries (2012-13)
There is an ever greater need in fisheries policy to effectively evidence fisheries in order to underpin science and management. At the same time, new technologies are on the verge of being able to revolutionise the types and quantity of data that can be gathered on board fishing vessels in practical ways for the benefit of industry, scientists and policy-makers.
The NFFO in collaboration with Cefas under the Fisheries Science Partnership sought to evaluate the basis for enabling the use of data sourced from on board fishing vessels and broadening its potential, and moving beyond initial trials using CCTV to implementing a whole host of industry data gathering strategies that may underpin approaches to fully documented fisheries.
The project included as workshop which was successful in bringing together fishermen, scientists, technology experts, retailers and policy-makers in a mature, considered and thoughtful exchange about the future of catch recording.
Enabling evidence streams from the industry and using it on its behalf offers the potential to realise bottom-up co-management of fisheries and increasingly move away from a centralised “one-size fits all” approach that has characterised past policy failings.
North Sea Stock Survey (2002 onwards)
The North Sea Stock Survey is an annual survey of the North Sea industry’s assessment of the status of stocks over the last year and changes taking place. Managed by the North Sea Advisory Council the survey is an innovative approach to systematically gathering fishermen’s knowledge, which has now generated a time series going back to 2002. We continue to routinely gather inputs from our North Sea members as part of the survey.
North Sea Stocks Survey website
Annual Fisheries Reports (2009, 2011)
Policy makers and the scientific community usually have only a limited knowledge and understanding of how fishing businesses are coping and responding to regulatory measures. This project pioneered a systematic reporting framework on the status of fishing operations and responses to regulation in order to feed back to the scientific and policy communities.
Aligning Spurdog Management with the Landing Obligation under the reformed Common Fisheries Policy (2014-2015)
For the last few years spurdog ( Squalus acanthias) has been classified as a zero TAC species but the landing obligation for demersal species from 2016 has the potential to lead to a regulatory incompatibility, threatening to create an unmanageable choke species. One approach is to reclassify spurdog as a prohibited species but this does not address the underlying problem of dead discarding.
Possible alternatives to a zero TAC for spurdog are the focus of a Fisheries Science Partnership project undertaken by the NFFO in collaboration with Cefas. It draws on the idea of communicating real-time “traffic light” information on the aggregations of the species in order to inform avoidance behaviour. In return, this would be incentivised via a small by-catch allowance consistent with continued stock recovery.
The project included a workshop held in London, attended by industry, managers, policy makers and NGOs, to work through the various practical issues associated with the proposal. The intention is to undertake a trial in 2015 in the Celtic Sea. If successful, it may provide a model that could be applied to other potential choke species as the landings obligation is implemented.
Discards for Bait (2013-14)
The landing obligation has the potential to generate landings, some of which will not be suitable for human consumption.
A study into the feasibility of using sources of discards generated under the landing obligation for pot bait was completed for Seafish and Defra. This included assessing transportation and logistical considerations and trialling alternative baits in the crab and lobster fisheries.
Typical discard species were found to provide effective bait in the crab fisheries but not in the lobster fisheries. The key driver affecting the use of such sources for bait will likely be cost and the availability of freezing facilities to support the processing of fish not fit for human consumption.
Cefas has been collecting biological data from commercial landings at fish markets, merchants and on quaysides in England and Wales since the 1950s. The observer programme which also collects the same data from discards offshore has been running continuously since 2002. In March, the lockdown brought this activity to a halt. The onshore programme was able to resume safely in June, however, the at sea observer programme is still severely restricted.
NFFO Chief Executive, Barrie Deas, said:
“The Covid crisis has disturbed the way in which scientists collect the data that provides the raw material for fish stock assessments. Without good data we cannot expect good management decisions and the risk of tighter restrictions through the application of a precautionary approach is increased.
There is potential, however, to turn this problem into an opportunity by increasing the industry’s direct involvement in the provision of data. The result could be greater industry confidence that they have had a part in undertaking.”
The at sea observer programme is the only source of biological discard data that, combined with the onshore data, feeds into the annual round of fish stock assessments to inform advice on catch options, quotas and fisheries management. While COVID restrictions continue, the gap in the observer data continues to grow which could affect the advice for 2022, and longer-term potentially. As the UK becomes an independent coastal state and is able to make more decisions about the management of stocks within its waters, it is important to be confident in the evidence and the data collected that advise those decisions.
Cefas Fisheries Scientist, Jon Elson said:
“We are working with the fishing industry, to set up a temporary programme, so that individual vessels can bring back samples for our observers to process ashore. We are currently piloting this approach, before extending the programme to the wider fleet. The quality of these data is crucial, if it is to be useful. We will work with the industry to ensure that what we ask is practical, reasonable, avoids disruption and, importantly, produces effective data.”
An inconvenience payment of £25 per haul sampled capped at £200 per trip will be paid and a report on the data collected will be provided to each skipper sampled. Cefas will report on on achievements in early 2021.
For further information contact AFSTcosampling@cefas.co.uk and visit Cefas’ website to download a leaflet
Listen to the podcast here
We’re deep into November, and the tumultuous, exhausting year of 2020 is coming to an end. And who could be better placed to give an end of 2020 check-in, than Tom McCormack, CEO of the MMO. Tom joins us on the podcast with his top team Phil Haslam, Operations Director, and Michelle Willis, Finance Director, to outline a number of critical updates from the MMO that will help the industry navigate the UK’s fast-approaching transition to an independent coastal state.
It’s easy to get lost in all the Brexit jargon and overwhelmed by the plethora of changes happening this year. But as Tom says, ‘we want to focus first on what we know… the EU transition period is definitely ending on the 31st of December.’ He continues, ‘whether there’s a trade agreement or not, things will change. We need to be ready to fish in our own waters and in EU waters’.
Phil then gives an overview of how exporting and importing will change on January 1st. Exported fish will need catch certificates, as proof of legal and sustainable sourcing – to facilitate this process, the MMO are piloting an online platform on which fishermen can apply for catch certificates, and access useful services (including a 24/7 helpline) to support their applications. This week represents an iterative ‘warm up period’, allowing the industry to trial this Fish Export Service and give their feedback. We also hear about licencing, control and enforcement.
The MMO have been a vast source of support for fishermen throughout recent months, running ‘MMO outdoors’ for face-to-face support as the pandemic has unfolded. Michelle confirms that as of December 29th, support will be 24/7. Also to note is the repurposing of £800,000 of
Maritime and Fisheries Fund (MFF) funding – which so far has been invested in winches, refrigeration, and health and safety projects, and to which new applications are encouraged.
- There are a number of key things that fishermen should do now to prepare:
- Register for the Fish Export Service if you intend to direct land in the EU, and join the dummy run to familiarise yourself with the system
- Register for your IMO number – contact the MMO with your phone number and email address if you haven’t already done so
- Attend the MMO’s workshops, where you can ask real-time questions, happening between 21 – 26 Nov
- Get in touch with the MMO
These dark winter months are the perfect time to ready yourself for the incoming changes – as usual, Fathom is here to help you, with an easily-digestible, conversational breakdown from the experts.
Fathom guests
Tom McCormack, MMO
Phil Haslam, MMO
Michelle Willis, MMO
Useful links
Prepare your fisheries business for changes from January 1st 2021
As negotiations between the UK and the EU reach a critical stage, Sean O’Donoghue makes the case for the status quo on fisheries on behalf of the European Fisheries Alliance. Here
The UK is accused of myth-making and bluster as it seeks to reset its fisheries relationship with the EU.
UN Law of the Sea
It is true, as Sean says, that there are responsibilities, enshrined in UN law of the sea, that require coastal states to cooperate on the sustainable harvesting of shared fisheries resources. Alongside those responsibilities, however, are a number of important rights. The foremost of these is the right for coastal states to harvest the resources within their exclusive 200-mile economic zones, and the right to control access to those resources.
This is the legal bedrock of the UK’s case for a new deal on fisheries. Quota shares and access arrangements should reflect the UK’s new legal status as an independent coastal state outside of the Common Fisheries Policy.
Sell-Out
Three statistics illustrate vividly why UK fishermen consider that they were sold out by their own government in 1974 and again in the quota share out in 1983:
- Channel cod: UK share 9%; French share 84%
- Celtic Sea haddock: UK share 10%; French share 66%
- EU vessels take 5 times as much out of UK waters, in value terms, as UK fleets take out of EU waters
Compromise
In short, for the 40 years over which the UK has been tethered to the Common Fisheries Policy, the EU fleets have had the lion’s share of the fish resources in UK waters. The legal conditions that underpinned that asymmetrical relationship are now falling away as the UK leaves the EU.
The EU is playing hardball by making an artificial linkage between a trade deal and a deal on fisheries. That is a dangerous game of Russian roulette for all concerned. A compromise is available on fish – access for EU vessels to fish in UK waters in return for a move to quota shares which reflect the resources located in UK waters. In other words, the international norm, governed by UNCLOS on how two coastal states should relate to each other.
Time will tell which side has been telling itself stories to keep up its courage. For our part, we see no sign that our Government is preparing to sell-out its fishers a second time.
The Bill now goes to the Queen for signature and will become the Fisheries Act 2020. This could be within the next week.
Despite its sometime difficult passage across, over a general election and two separate administrations, the end result looks very similar to the original Bill tabled by the Government, with a few technical improvements. A number of potentially damaging amendments, which if successful would have replicated some of the most grievous weaknesses in the Common Fisheries Policy were defeated.
The Act will provide the legislative framework for future fisheries management in the UK for the next 20, or perhaps 40 years. It was essential, therefore, that the new framework avoided the pitfalls of the CFP and delivered the potential for a much more agile and flexible system.
Behind the scenes, the passage of this landmark Bill has involved a mountain of work and the NFFO has been helped by parliamentary specialists, Connect, to arrange meetings with key legislators and prepare briefing notes at all of the key stages.