CFP Reform Wide Open

that was the impression left by Lowri Evans, Director General of DG Mare, the EU Directorate that deals with fisheries and marine affairs, when she met with UK stakeholders in London recently.

The Commission’s proposals were published on 13 July but the Director General signalled that the final outcome will be heavily influenced by the positions taken by member states and the European Parliament.

A number of UK stakeholders expressed concern about the lack of detail in the Proposals on how CFP decentralisation – one of the main themes in the Commission’s Green Paper – would work in practice.

The NFFO voiced the concern that the model advanced by the Commission, with objectives, targets and timetables set by the European institutions and the responsibility for implementation lying with the member states, bore more than a passing resemblance to the current (and largely discredited) EU Cod Management Plan.

It’s one thing for the European institutions (Commission, Council and Parliament) to lay down standards and broad principles; it’s another if they prescribe detailed policy. That would only replace one form of centralised command and control with another.

The DG conceded that there was a risk that the legislators in the member states and Parliament could block the move to effective decentralisation, if they want to retain detailed control. She reaffirmed the Commission’s desire to “move micro-management decisions away from the Co-decision level”.