Preserving fish stocks in the Mediterranean

A Ministerial Conference on the sustainable development of fisheries in the Mediterranean came to an end in Venice on Wednesday. In a joint statement, ministers from all the states around the Mediterranean agreed to establish the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) and to promote a series of measures designed to manage and preserve fish stocks in the region.

In the Mediterranean region, fishing employs around 100,000 EU citizens on over 40,000 vessels. The Mediterranean is home to a number of migratory fish species, such as tuna, swordfish, sardine and anchovy.

Scientists warn that unless action is taken to preserve fish stocks, these may seriously dwindle in the years to come, just as happened in the North Sea and the Atlantic.

This will lead to various negative consequences, including the loss of jobs, shortage of supplies for the processing industry, more fish imports from outside the region, the loss of export markets and the destruction of traditional fishing communities in the region.

The initiative to do something about Mediterranean fisheries was started some years ago by the European Union. The Venice Conference held last week decided to attack one of the main negative causes of fish stocks' decline in the Mediterranean, namely illegal and uncontrolled fishing effort.

One of the main reasons why this happens is that Mediterranean states have not extended their jurisdiction beyond their territorial waters for the obvious reason that they can overlap. This makes it easier for illegal fishing to operate on the high seas beyond the 12 nautical mile territorial waters controlled by the costal states.

In Venice the ministers have agreed to create fisheries protection zones. They initiated the frantic effort to determine the criteria by which these will be established. The aim of these zones is to preserve traditional fish stocks by regulating fishing effort.

Malta's 25-mile conservation zone

On October 9, the European Commission published a Communication in which it proposed a Council Regulation for the establishment of management measures for the sustainable exploitation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean sea. Chapter 10 of this draft regulation deals exclusively with the implementation of measures to put into effect the agreement reached with Malta during the membership negotiations in the fisheries sector. This agreement empowers Malta to operate a conservation zone in an area 25 nautical miles long from its coastal base-lines.

According to this agreement, Malta can limit fishing in its 25-mile management zone to coastal fishing involving vessels that are less than 12 meters long. In all 1,950 vessels with a total engine power of 83,000 kw and a tonnage of 4,035 will be permitted to operate in the zone, comprising the same effort observed in 2000-01.

Trawlers operating in the zone shall be issued with a special fishing permit. Restrictions on dolphinfish (lampuki) fishing in the zone have also been imposed. The use of fishing aggregating devices (FADs) are prohibited between January 1 and the end of July each year.

The number of vessels that can fish for dolphinfish within the zone is limited to 130. The Maltese authorities have to inform the Commission by July 1 of each year of the vessels taking part in dolphinfish fishing and these will be granted a special fishing permit to carry out their activities.

The draft regulation proposes to increase the control over the type of fishing gear used and to introduce new technical measures applicable in all of the European Union's fishing areas.

Member states are given more powers to regulate fishing efforts in their territorial waters involving fishing activities which do not have a significant environmental impact or does not affect the rest of the EU.

As can be seen, this draft regulation not only puts into effect new measures to preserve fish stocks in the Mediterranean and thus ensure the long-term survival of this economic activity, but it also effectively establishes the first conservation zone - Malta's zone.

A Franco-German fudge

When the member states of the European Union were putting together the agreement to establish the single currency, the euro, Germany insisted so loudly on the need to maintain price stability that special provisions were agreed to cap deficits in government spending to a maximum of 3% of GDP.

An agreement was reached obliging the countries joining the euro to keep within the parameters of a "Stability and Growth Pact". Among other things this pact specifies that the member sates of the euro zone should aim to raise more revenue than they spend but, should their expenditure exceed their revenue, they should not allow this to surpass the limit of 3% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

To ensure that the member states keep to their commitments would-be lapsers were threatened with heavy fines. Germany's misgivings were thus soothed by this arrangement, eventually permitting it to dump its strong mark for a still untried euro.

Alas that agreement may no longer be worth the paper it was written on. France and Germany have prevailed over it, despite the fact that both governments ran deficits of more than 3% of GDP last year and will do so again this year. Both expect to breach the limit for the third time in 2004.

In other words both EU member states have been permitted by a majority of EU member states in the Eurozone to ignore the recommendations of the European Commission, which had asked France to cut its deficit by 1% of GDP and Germany by 0.8% this year.

Next year these two member states will slash their deficits by 0.8% (France) and 0.6% (Germany).

The two countries have promised to bring their deficits down to below 3% of GDP in 2005. But that is a promise and, if treaties are not binding enough to ensure that states honour their commitments, are we to believe that ordinary promises will be more effective? So only time will tell whether Germany and France will honour their new commitments.

The implications of the decision taken last Tuesday to let both countries off the hook are many. The binding nature of treaty commitments has been shaken badly, as has the credibility of the euro. That is why both the European Commission and the European Central Bank were shocked by the decision.

Mind you, we claim this with a little caution. Up to the time of writing this piece, the markets had not reacted negatively. Many economic operators have indeed welcomed France's and Germany's dogged determination to oppose the pact if this move gives them more elbow room to revitalise their struggling economies.

Many governments would naturally welcome a German economic revival since Germany plays the role of an economic locomotive pulling all the other economies behind it.

If the economic reason for this decision proves to have been correct then the damage to the process of European union will indeed be more limited. However, the political damage is of a different magnitude, no matter how one looks at it.

There is no denying that the Commission has been undercut, despite the special role given to it by the Treaties to ensure that the commitments made in the treaties on the "Stability and Growth Pact" are kept.

Small states have been given the ammunition they may have been waiting for to oppose the demands being made by the bigger member states in the Intergovernmental Conference, which is currently discussing the new draft European Constitution. From a Maltese perspective this fallout may not be harmful at all.

But the smaller member states have really not been amused by the way France and Germany steam-rolled over them. They will also increase their alertness for future parallel situations.

The Commission may yet take the issue to the Court of Justice. Whether it will eventually do this remains to be seen. One thing is certain: that this episode has shaken the EU from its foundations and it may take some time for things to settle down.

Draft Constitution

Italy wants the new European Constitution, currently being debated within the IGC to be approved by the end of its Presidency. It has said time and time again that it would be nice to have a second Treaty of Rome to inaugurate this new phase in European unity. The first Treaty of Rome, that of 1957, established the European Economic Community (EEC).

So frantic efforts are being made to bring the IGC to a conclusion. At the time of writing a meeting of EU foreign ministers and acceding countries was taking place in Naples to try and iron out the remaining disagreements.

In an effort to achieve this, the Italians have produced another draft treaty that is now being discussed by the member states in preparation for the Council meeting, which takes place next week.

The Italian draft is reported to propose some recourse to qualified majority voting in matters of defence and security. The United Kingdom is also reported to have serious reservations on this part. As would Malta.

The last phase of previous intergovernmental conferences have always been the most exciting. The current one will prove to be no exception. Assuming of course that agreement is achieved.

Foreign Ministers meeting

The sixth meeting of ministers of foreign affairs of the European Union and the Mediterranean countries is being held in Naples on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Three main issues are before the ministers: the establishment of a Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly, the establishment of a Euro-Mediterranean Bank or alternatively the reinforcement of the existing lending facility for Euro-Mediterranean investment and the establishment of the Euro-Mediterranean Foundation for the Dialogue of Cultures.

Progress on the Parliamentary Assembly has been bogged down by disagreement between national parliaments and the European Parliament on the composition of such a hypothetical assembly.

Much as progress is desired in the area of political and security co-operation, the results which will be achieved in Naples are unlikely to be satisfactory, despite the European Commission's appeal that any linkage between the Middle East peace process and the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership should be avoided.

The Commission is also proposing the launching of co-operation between the EU and the Mediterranean partners under the umbrella of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP).

Another area that has been emphasised by the Commission is human rights and democracy, which it describes as "crucial to the success of the Partnership". Both issues raise a lot of difficulties and progress has been slow in the past.

It will be interesting to see what importance ministers would give to the proposal to increase co-operation under the umbrella of the ESDP and what importance they will attach to the promotion of human rights and democratic principles in the Mediterranean region.

On the economic front it is good to note that the agreements between the EU and all the Arab states except Syria have been signed. But it is sad to note that the Agadir Agreement to create a free trade area between Jordan, Tunisia, Morocco and Egypt was initialled in January but has not yet been signed.

The Commission says it will be desirable if this agreement is signed and ratified before the EU's enlargement. That is unlikely to happen. Meanwhile progress on further liberalisation of agricultural trade is also likely to be slow.