Chairman’s Report 2013

What is less certain is whether
the positives will outweigh the negatives. Much will depend on the commitment
and vigour of organisations like the NFFO as well as the member states charged
with implementing the reformed CFP.

Although unlikely to be the main
feature of the reform in the media spotlight, the scope for detailed
decision-making on fisheries policy to be made at the regional seas level,
rather than by the European institutions in Brussels is potentially of
momentous significance. All will depend on the details and the commitment of
member states and stakeholders once the legislation is in place but this
potentially decisive departure from the over-centralised micromanagement offers
a real opportunity for a more responsive and therefore effective CFP.

Parallel to this decentralisation of the CFP, the steps
towards an obligation to land all catches of the main target species – the discard ban – likewise means that
fisheries policy and management is likely to be very different from here on.
What is clear is that the industry faces a difficult period of transition
whilst the landings obligation is implemented.

What exactly these two changes,
interacting with each other in future years, will mean for the NFFO’s members
is not easy to foretell. Much depends on how much detailed control it retained
at the centre. Much also depends on the degree to which member states and the advisory councils, at the regional seas level,
take up the opportunities and flexibilities that the new structure provides.

What is abundantly clear,
however, is that if fishermen in the member states want to influence the
outcomes, they will have to put divisions behind them and work coherently and
cohesively to ensure that their voice is heard and taken account of. For
England, Wales and Northern Ireland the NFFO provides that voice and is
committed to working tirelessly for and within a more rational and responsive
management system that is up to the job of facing future challenges.

CFP Reform

When regionalisation of the CFP
was advanced by the NFFO and the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation more than a
decade ago, it was considered by many to be dangerously a dangerously radical
idea that threatened the foundations of the CFP. In that intervening decade,
the continued failures of the top-down command
and control approach – most notably in the EU Cod Management Plan – and the evident success of the regional
advisory councils has meant the concept has moved centre stage although with
different degrees of enthusiasm from different quarters. This shows the
importance of persisting with well-thought through alternatives and using every
opportunity to explain how they could be implemented in practice.

Co-Decision

The European Parliament’s new
powers under the Lisbon Treaty have meant that the Federation, along with other
European fishing organisations, has had to adapt to the new political landscape
if it is to remain influential. This means keeping MEPs briefed and intervening
through hearings in the Parliament and through direct contact with MEPS. As
yet, it is too early to say how co-decision will work in practice. Our fear is
that the Parliament will hold back decentralisation of CFP decision making,
partly because having been recently given new powers they will be keen to
exercise them to micro-manage rather than sharing them with the regional level.

Under-10 Quota Management

It has become quite apparent that
there is a log-jam at government level in making progress in resolving the
quota problems facing some parts of the under-10m fleet. The Federation has
made clear in a number of publications its view that the roots under-10 problem
is multi-faceted and its solutions if they are to work must take account of
those different facets. Simplistic narratives, no matter how they appeal to
some parts of the media and to some MPs will not deliver effective, fair or
balanced outcomes. One of the big mistakes to plague the debate so far has been
to treat all under-10s as if they are the same in catching power or access to
non-TAC fisheries.

In face of the absence of
progress, the Federation has taken the initiative to convene a meeting between
producer organisations and key under-10 groups in the South East to discuss
quota pinch-points and means through which unutilised quota could be
re-directed in real time.

Shellfish

The NFFO Shellfish Committee,
which is comprised of shell-fishermen from all parts of the coast, has worked
hard over the last year to produce a policy which addressed the most urgent
issues facing the sector. The policy whilst maintaining flexibility to meet the
very different needs of varying parts of the fleet and coastal fisheries is
designed to ensure the future sustainability of the crab and lobster fisheries.
The Government’s inertia in responding to this positive initiative has been a
great disappointment and the Federation’s task now is to focus the Minister’s
attention onto this lost opportunity if Government inaction continues.

Deep Water Species

Slow maturing species and
vulnerable marine ecosystems in the waters of the continental shelf edge means
that a particularly careful approach to harvesting commercial fish species is
an absolute prerequisite. This is very different however from the Commission’s
proposal for a blanket ban on bottom-trawling and gill-netting which was
published before the results of a major study funded by the Commission itself
which provides the basis for a much more reasoned and proportionate approach.
The Federation, recognising that these kind of politically-driven, science-free
initiatives threaten all fisheries is working with Defra, the European
Parliament and in the regional advisory councils to refocus on a balanced
approach.

Wind-farms

The success of the Federation’s
collaborative work with the Crown Estate to produce very precise mapping of
fishing activity base on plotter data supplied by skippers themselves has moved
decisions on the location of future wind–farm zones as well as dialogue with
individual developers onto a new plane.

This approach has implications
also for marine protected areas and marine spatial planning generally.
Fisheries Minister Richard Benyon when presented with the results through the
Crown Estate’s MaRs system conceded that it was a “game-changer” not least
because this precision come with a very low price tag compared to the £4.2
million spent on the considerably less precise data used for the four regional
stakeholder projects.

Cables

The Federation this year has
agreed a memorandum of understanding with UKSC, the representative body for the
cable industry. We consider this as an important basis for minimising potential
conflicts in the future not least because of the number of export cables from
wind-farms expected to cross important fishing grounds in the near future.

Regional Advisory Councils

The NFFO accords the highest
priority to working within the four regional advisory councils which are of
relevance to our members’ fisheries: North Sea, North Western Waters, Pelagic
and Distant Waters.

Industry Reputation

The Federation has been dismayed
by the constant flow of hostile and ill-informed criticism in the media. As a
result in addition to working with Seafish and others in the industry we have
taken on communications specialists Acceleris
to redress the balance. We were therefore in a strong position to rebut
Greenpeace’s bizarre series of attacks on the NFFO and on the industry’s unity
more generally. The point however is not really to swat away Greenpeace’s
attentions but to ensure that the industry’s achievements in meeting society’s
changing expectations and delivering sustainable fisheries are fully
recognised, not least in the areas of food security, fisheries science
partnerships and stock rebuilding.

Control Issues

When the new EU Control
Regulation was adopted in November 2009, it was recognised as the last gasp of
the Commission’s command and control ideology, rushed through before EU
co-decision making arrived. As predicted, the fishing industry is now having to
deal with the consequences of this impetuous approach, not least in the arrival
of electronic log-books.

Information technology has much
to offer the fishing industry, as in other areas of society and the economy but
it is quite easy to get things wrong through a rushed process which fails to
take account of the specifics of fishing. The failure of the UK to take the
opportunity to exempt day-boats at the very least until the problems are
resolved in the larger vessels defeats mortal minds. This along with a range of
control issues is being addressed by the Federation through direct discussions
with MMO and Defra and through the RACs.

Marine Protected Areas

The marine protected areas
bandwagon is well underway, with celebrity chefs, media-oriented academics,
environmental NGOs, politicians and journalists proclaiming their arrival,
overstating their likely benefits and studiously ignoring the potential adverse
economic, community and ecological effects of displacement of fisheries from
their customary fishing grounds. The Federation has worked within the MPA
Fishing Coalition to redress the balance and it is pleasing to report that
Defra and the MMO both exhibit a deeper understanding of the issues than those
bodies which for their own reasons support an immediate network of MPAs in UK
waters. We will continue to work with Government for a fully rational
evidence-based and thought-through process.

Fishing Vessel Safety

The high cost of bringing fish to
consumers in terms of lives and injuries to fishermen is usually subordinated
to conservation concerns in the public debates about fishing. The Federation
however, through the work of its safety and training officer, the work of the
Fishing Industry Safety Group, regular circulation of safety information and
MAIB reports to its members and most recently the purchase and circulation of
1000 grant aided low-cost lifejackets, strives to encourage the safety culture
that is the only way of reducing the casualty rate. As safety training and is
the key to progress in this area the Federation whilst open to reviewing all
aspect of how to improve the safety regime is strenuously resisting attempts to
block Seafish levy for training.

Conclusion

With the changing political
landscape for European decisions in fisheries; with the misinformation
campaigns used by media savvy NGOs; with an array of pressures from marine
protected areas to maximum sustainable yield that were hardly on the horizon
ten years ago; it is more important the fishing industry strives to speak with
a united voice. The NFFO has earned respect (and not a little heat) for
performing that role creditably. As we move forward it is of absolutely
critical importance that it continues to do so. I hope that we will continue to
advance rational, fair, well thought-through policies. I hope that we will
continue to work with all kinds of groups which share our ambitions. I hope
that we will remain responsive to our grass roots members.

I hope that we will continue to
be listened to not just because we are the largest and most established
fishermen’s organisation in the area that we represent but because what we say
is worth listening to – and most importantly, acted upon.