Raül Romeva i Rueda

Below I explain the reasons why I am opposed to
the EU and Member States to increase subsidies to fishing to compensate for the
rise in fuel prices.

This was a topic today, in the European Parliament,
following a proposal made some colleagues, from the PPE, who claim aid increases.

It is somewhat curious that the same people who
proclaim the close of the welfare state do not have too many problems to subsidize
environmentally destructive activities and to jeopardize thus the move towards
a more responsible and sustainable fishing.

Political groups have each prepared a resolution
that will play tomorrow negotiate and vote on thursday.

My rationale as Greens Vicepresident and
Fisheries Committee Member is the following:

    A whereas all sectors in the EU dependent on
fossil oil are equally affected by the increased oil prices, except aviation
and shipping (including fisheries) since these sectors are excluded from energy
taxes on fuel (Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003) and therefore
these sectors are proportionally already much less affected by an increase in
fuel prices than other sectors;

    B whereas more than 70% of European fish stocks
are overfished;

    C whereas fuel subsidies, including exemption
from fuel taxes, are well known to contribute to, and can be the factor that
economically catalyses overfishing, since low operating costs allow fishing to
continue on overfished or depleted stocks;

    D whereas an increase in fuel prices, according
to the Commission Communication (2008)453 is hitting in particular those with
the largest energy consumption most, i.e. beamtrawlers, with fuel costs in some
cases corresponding to 60% of value of the landed fish, while coastal vessels
fishing with passive gear are far less affected, with fuel costs corresponding
to only between 5 and 20 % of value of landed fish;

    E whereas the situation is exacerbated by the
inability of many fishermen to pass on the costs of their activities in their
sale price, owing to the current market structure and the dominance of
corporate intermediaries,

    F whereas the global fishing fleet has been
estimated to account for at least 1,2% of global oil consumption;

    G whereas the de-minimis, state aid to the
fisheries sector (Commission Regulation (EC) No 875/2007 of 24 July 2007) was
already increased tenfold in 2007 from €3000 to €30 000;

    H whereas the EU has recognised the IPCC
conclusions that industrialised countries need to reduce their greenhouse gas
emissions by 25-40% by 2020 compared to 1990 levels and the European Council
has decided on an EU objective to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95% by
2050;

    I whereas the European Parliament called for the
EU to shift to a 30% greenhouse gas reduction target for 2020 in its resolution
adopted 25 November 2010;

    J whereas EU Member States at the Biodiversity
summit in Nagoya in October 2010 are committed to eliminate environmentally
harmful subsidies by 2020 at the latest;

    K whereas G-20 Leaders committed in 2009 to
phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies over the medium term;

    L whereas in many Member States, the available
EU subsidies have too often been used to support the development of
large-scale, energy-intensive, environmentally destructive fishing fleets, on
the assumption that energy would remain inexpensive;

    M whereas high energy costs are not a temporary
phenomenon, but rather structural and permanent in nature, and whereas the
sector must adapt accordingly;

    N whereas certain Member States have initiated
schemes aimed at reducing fuel consumption by their fleets and whereas such
innovations are to be supported;

    O whereas the discussions in WTO in the context
of the Doha round are focussed on how to eliminate distorting fisheries
subsidies;

  
1. Concludes that there is an urgent need for the European fishing
fleets to restructure so as to move away from energy-intensive, environmentally
destructive fishing vessels and gear and to adopt more benign practices that
require less energy and are more sustainable in the long term, environmentally,
socially and economically;

  
2. Calls upon the Commission to launch a study of the effects of
removing the Member States’ obligation to exempt marine fuel from taxation,
introducing a minimum level of energy tax on marine fuel and including the
maritime transport sector in the EU emissions trading system;

  
3. Considers that granting more public money to the fisheries sector
because of increased fuel prices would send the wrong signal during the reform
of the CFP and provide an incentive for vessel owners to use more powerful and
fuel-consuming engines;

  
4. Considers that fuel subsidies, including foregone tax, result in
reduced costs that restore profitability and create incentives for continued
fishing in the face of declining catches, leading to overfishing, fleet
overcapitalization, reduced economic efficiency of the sector, and lost
resource rent;

  
5. Believes that an increase in de-minimis from €30 000 to compensate
for an increase in fuel prices would hinder adaptation of the fishing industry
to the inevitable continued increase in fuel prices that affects all sectors
dependent on fossil fuels, bearing in mind that the fishing sector is less
vulnerable than other sectors due to the tax exemption;

  
6. Believes that increasing fuel subsidies, at the time of general
cutbacks in government spending, and following pledges by the G-20 leaders to
phase out fuel subsidies and agreement by WTO members to bring fisheries
subsidies within WTO disciplines, is likely to undermine EU’s leadership in
ongoing negotiation processes, sending a signal that would encourage other
countries to also increase subsidies and contributing to a vicious circle that
has already made operations costs of destructive fishing techniques on the
worlds oceans much too low, thus contributing to disastrous overfishing;