 Thank you also for the to the Institute for arranging this. I think it's a really really very good timing of you to do this just a couple of months before the Irish presidency and I can tell you right away The latest on what's going on in the European Parliament on the reform of the common fisheries policy And that is that the vote that was expected in Fisheries Committee on the basic regulation Will be postponed So we thought it would be in in the beginning of October, but due to the negotiations, which are really complicated with more than 2,500 amendments to the Commission's proposal Now the time set for a vote in Fisheries Committee will be the 28th of November Which means that we will not be able to vote in plenary until Probably I would suspect after Christmas Christmas break so and Then it's you guys who will Swing the club at the president's table and will be also I think very much in charge of negotiations with the parliament on the final outcome of this reform and Yes, I was asked to give a title to to this speech and I Well, I thought it better just to say it right away lost turns to Change the European Fisheries and save our seas. I actually think this is it This is the moment because next time around we're going to reform the common fisheries policy will be in 2022 So in 10 years time. So this is the last reform was in 92 and now Things have not gone that splendidly since then Just to set the frame What we've seen since Well, since the last reform actually is 30% decrease in catches Which means that people that thought the last reform that being too harsh on environmental legislation and setting the prior the priority for conserving the the environment and the fish Because that would lead to sufferings for fishermen. They were wrong catches have gone down employment has gone down and Also profitability in the industry has also gone down Maybe you know that now the European Union is importing more than 60% of all fish that we consume and The idea I think why people Resist resisted a big reform in 1992 because they thought that it would be very important to have subsidies and and have kind of Compromise a balance between environmental Sustainability and economic and social sustainability because how how would things look like if we didn't have that I think it's this is a picture from your country now well from England and This is how normal catch could look back in 1900 and this was done with boats without Eco sound without Well fuel subsidies that most of them had sales and so on so it's important to keep in mind What is the if you if you're from the industry and perhaps you just want to know how what is the Production capacity of the seas and it's really really very much larger than we see now this is a picture of the North Atlantic and the colors the red color is Indicating biomass densities of over 11 tons of fish per square kilometer and In a hundred years, we've seen a decrease by between 70 and 90 percent of predatory fish in the Atlantic Ocean and It's interesting because it's not only the density the Number of fish but also the composition of the fish. What did the fish? I mean what types of species did we have what sizes did we have earlier on and This is a picture from from Florida, but it's the same North Atlantic Showing what these the anglers used to brag about on the case They always put the biggest catches out there to be photographed. So this is what it looked like a normal day in 1950s and In 1980s, this is what it looked like This is what it looks like now So basically we've changed very much the species composition also in the oceans through very efficient fishing methods that are very unselected when it comes to well Preserving the big the big fish which are also very important for the functioning of the marine ecosystem Okay employment and European Fisheries have gone down By the way, it's less than zero point two percent of total EU employment And since you all know that I'm from the Greens. I mean, I think it's really Quite upsetting that the concerns we have for this very small proportion of EU's working force Actually has led to the very dramatic degradation of wild nature nature in EU that is In fact in terms of size it's as big as the terrestrial Countries well the EU's seas is that way and These are very fresh figures on the economic performance of different EU member states If this is The net profit as a total percent percent of total income is actually on the negative side Should be that word because Sweden is also on the negative side and Finland and Slovenia So it shows that it's really not going very well in 2009 These are from the European Commission in 2009 the entire EU Fisheries Settler was doing with subsidies a lot So I think it's net profit without subsidies exactly without subsidies Was mine as I'm here but last year's going upwards Slightly but only a few percent So in short if we don't have a reform what will happen if we don't do anything According to the Commission only eight out of 136 Commercial exploited stocks will be within safe biological limits in 2022 when we have the next chance of reform We will lose one stock after the other there would be Even more degradation of the marine ecosystem more jobs will be lost and Increased needs of import of course So this whole reform process started out well Basically in 2009 when the Commission European Commission published its so-called green paper on the reform of the common fisheries policy I think it's interesting to look back at that now and what they identified as the five major structural failings of the common fisheries policy The first one that they mentioned was fleet over capacity. So too many boats the second was the conflicting objectives set out in Actually in article one of the CFP which talks about the objective of the common fisheries policy to Maintain environmental social and economic sustainability and it turned out that when decision-makers are trying to make a decision between short-term economic sustainability and long-term Environmental and social and economic sustainability it always kind of tends to to to be a compromise where you compromise with the environment and In other countries like in the US or in New Zealand, etc. They kind of Learned this lesson. So environmental sustainability is the priority in the objectives in those countries But but not here and this is something the EU Commission identified Number three is a decision-making system which encourages Short-term focus and that is basically the yearly quota negotiations by the council So moving away from that and having more long-term management plans for all the fish stocks is something we need Number four is that the framework does not give sufficient responsibility to the industry and number five Lack of political will to do something. I think that is very very important and I think the reason for that has been quite Too little debate. I think in the public debate domain about these things So what did the Commission propose to do about these structural failings Well an over capacity they suggested Fundatory so-called transferable fishing concessions to be introduced in all over Europe This has raised a lot of opposition Not only in council and different member states, but but also in the European Parliament So I can tell you all this I think that that Proposal is dead. I don't think it's going anywhere. The council has already said that they think it could be Voluntary and the European Parliament is on the same line. So I said, I don't think that will fly So what will we do about the too many boats at the over capacity? the Parliament now the things that are being discussed is putting binding of locations on member states to adjust the fishing capacity to the available resources and Also putting a threat if they don't do it They wouldn't have had access to the European maritime and fisheries fund. So if you don't adjust your capacity You won't have access to the money That is I think what the what will be the position of the Parliament and How would you do such a selection? What boats should stay or what boats should go basically if you just don't want to prioritize those that are most Have the let's say the thickest wallets then perhaps Society should try to prioritize those that fishing in a desirable way from the society's point of view and that might be Those that fish environmentally more sustainable than others. So you also have this tool every member states can allocate fishing possibilities inside the framework work of relative stability and That is also a proposal that is being discussed in Parliament and there's quite a lot of of support for it But exactly how that could be implemented from a European point of view is is more open I think that should more be let's say a tool for member states to use themselves On the anchor clear policy objectives work surprisingly enough the Commission did not propose to put environment first as the first objective, but they Continue to have the same formulation as they had earlier on with a balance between economic social and sustainability it looks like Presently in the in negotiations that the Parliament will support Putting environment as the prerequisite for social and economic Sustainability, and I hope that would be the position. We know that council did not go for that so We need to Fight for that and I'm fighting for that because I think that's very very fundamental on the short term in Termism as the third fundamental Failing The Commission proposes long-term management plans for all species and legally binding exploitation levels so Fishing mortality below So-called maximum sustainable yield by 2015 Those of you that perhaps are not that Much experts on fishing terminology. This might sound a little complicated, but Basically the maximum sustainable yield is the amount of fish you can take from a stock each year without the stock Decreasing so it turn it's like the interest rate of your capital if you have capital on the bank You should not try and take more than the interest rate because otherwise your capital will decrease so maximum sustainable yield is Actually an international obligation to manage all fish stocks by 2015 according to maximum sustainable yield and that is something that the EU and the world has signed up to in Johannesburg in 2002 and in Rio and Rio plus 20 a few months ago in June so There's a lot of discussion about this 2015 why is 2015? I mean that's almost tomorrow. It's not possible to do it But it's a legal obligation Already in Unclos, which is the UN law of the seas Commission on the law of the seas and we've committed to that and The Commission thinks it's very important to to have is as an objective even if we know what we won't achieve it But for all stocks for some stocks, it's absolutely attainable and some stocks already are at maximum sustainable yield but there's a lot of discussions around the date and Also about a little word there and the word is below. Sorry. Yeah mortality below MSY, but You can also measure it by biomass and the Commission is proposing to have biomass over maximum sustainable yield above MSY and There's also a lot of discussions about those small tiny words should we have biomass above MSY or around or close to or at MSY or MSY where possible all these words are being tossed around in this very moment and I'm coming back to that because I think it's really really important that you understand that above MSY is the only wise option and Something else that I hope that the Irish presidency will help Resolving and that is that the long-term management plans are all stuck in between European Parliament and council at this very moment So one of the good things that happened in the last reform was that The EU introduced this long-term management objectives, so For for instance for card in the North Sea or the Baltic Sea etc. and many other species We have this four five six seven years or long plans but after the Lisbon Treaty there has been a Little conflict between European Parliament and council on the competence on some of the ingredients in these long-term management plans and we haven't really been able to Implement any new long-term management plan since 2009 which is a catastrophe and for the For the reform if we don't resolve this which is all is only a conflict of competence between EP and European Parliament and council if we don't resolve this The reform is really also very much in danger because of those Well things that shouldn't be in the way the fourth structural failing that the Commission pointed to was insufficient responsibility to the through the industry and The solution to that was to propose regionalization So that at let's say the top level at the European Parliament and council We should set limits to targets the objectives and then at the regional level You could design the management plans and do that together with all the stakeholders That is a very good idea, but the details are very unclear in the Commission's proposal We're talking right now in Parliament about our ideas on how to do it And probably I mean it will be very much I think up to each member states or Region to try and sort this out I think the important thing is to leave it as open as possible in the basic regulation So it's possible for members to different member states and regions to actually take power over the day-to-day management of their fisheries and Well, the fifth structural failing the lack of political will Commission and I think the right Tries to do something about the pressure that is put on all the fisheries ministers each December council when there's negotiations on the next year's quotas By establishing binding harvest control rules to keep stocks above MSY To have a discord ban and the conditionality on funding So that if you don't abide by CFP rules, etc. You won't get access to the money and this will kind of Take off pressures. I think political pressure from home on short-term decisions and and also create Well better conditions, we've already seen that actually in the US that that is happening when you have long-term objectives and Binding harvest control rules, so you can't negotiate with with the scientific advice My colleagues in the European Parliament are worried about this they want flexibility always some Openness to to take social and economic consequences into the equation and not be so So strict and I'm worried about that because I think that always Leads to the short-term Gain to be put as the priority So, okay, the major conflicts right now for us in the European Parliament as I mentioned The wording around the concept of maximum sustainable yield should it be should we keep stocks above MSY around at MSY or close to it. I'll come back to that again Another conflict is regarding the disc the proposed discard ban. So Commission has proposed to eliminate discards But of course, it's also Question of words. I mean elimination of these cards will be Very difficult. Well, it won't be difficult to eliminate because if you just bring everything ashore Then then you have everything ashore, but will be very difficult to eliminate unwanted catches And that would must be the ultimate objective of a discard ban should be to to avoid the unwanted catches But basically the the the the different views in Parliament and I think also in council is that some of us feel that It's very important to have a political statement and say discards are not acceptable and Then everything will be be solved after you make that political statement and some others They think that it should be very much case by case gradual Not being applied in the Mediterranean all sorts of exceptions another conflict that is coming a little bit after The basic regulation is the money question and all the money is put in the European maritime officials fund Which we will vote after the basic regulation hopefully and in the fund the Commission has proposed money should be used for Well more environmentally friendly gear selective gear Safety and health things They have taken away money for Well renewal was all renew well building of new ships that were already removed in the old reform in 2002 But they also removed every type of modernization of the ship that could lead to increased fishing capacity Which is good They also Removed the the Intervention the intervention mechanism which where you if if the price of fish fell below a certain level Then the EU by EU money you bought that fish That would be too cheap for the markets. Let's say and and you destroyed it So that's gone, but there's another thing for storage aid instead so Very many of my colleagues some to the right some to the left. They think that there should be money for building new vessels there should be money for mitigating fuel price increases and they think There should also be money for temporary cessation in by let biological rest periods and and lots of measures to to support fishermen which I fear is only artificially Keeping fishermen in the industry when it's not Really profitable to stay and the last conflict is not a conflict within the parliament But that's the conflict with the council and which I already mentioned and that is about our competencies on on these management plans and I would very much hope that that could be solved because it's really Very formalistic Things that could be should be solved But now it's a deadlocking council Okay, this is my favorite topic. So be prepared for some fisheries biology Okay, so why is keeping stocks above MSY important? These are sturgeons by the way This is not from Europe, but we used to have sturgeons in the Baltic Sea. They're one of the the few species actually, but It's very like it's very sad anyway that have been completely extinct in Europe Okay, so the council and very many of my colleagues. They think that above keeping stocks above MSY That seems very superfluous while just stick to MSY maximum sustainable yield. That sounds perfect. Let's go for that well, if you Actually, I'm a bit grateful to the Scandinavian airline systems that That showed very practically today that you can't always be so certain of everything in life You know, even if we thought that we had X Thousand tons of fish in the sea last year It can turn out two years later when you do your back calculations. No, there weren't so many fish Because of some some factor that you couldn't really predict so of course The precautionary approach tells us that keeping a bit of a safety margin is very wise By the way already we have some stocks that are being managed above MSY we have the card in the Baltic Sea and We have horse mackerel in North Atlantic and The thing is if you go exactly by MSY then you would have quota fluctuations by 2540 sometimes 50 or 100 percent from one year to another and the industry They don't like that even if you could take that that would mean okay big investments for this year and then next year Oh, it's 70% Cut in the quotas and then I mean that would have Very negative consequences for the industry so in the Baltic Sea we're seeing a slow recovery of the Baltic cod due to Harvest control rule that says never increase or decrease the quota from one year to another by more than 15% Although MSY would have allowed an increase by 40% last year of the cod But then you would have had an increase by 35% The year the following year so it's it's not good To always stick to at MSY increased resilience of the ecosystem well Finally, I get to confess that I really am agreeing because I'm not I'm always using these economic arguments but of course Fish are not only in the sea as some kind of potential food that we can catch They also have another function and that is keeping the resilience of the ecosystem So it can take let's say climate change environmental catastrophe if there's Some fish disease that happens all of a sudden then if we just have managing every Stalk at my MSY then you don't have the safety margin at all and and you don't have for instance Alien species when they come in you cannot MSY if you keep stocks at MSY, it means you keep them at less than 50% of their virgin state and I showed you a few historical pictures of fish how big they used to be and how many you used to Catch and I mean the virgin state. I don't think we Today we think it's possible, but it is possible and if we would get to that level. We would have more catches So and also on the mixed fisheries. It's very difficult to be at MSY on every species so you also need to have a safety level and you should not compromise with the most vulnerable species to to Take the the least vulnerable species at MSY and then compromise downwards There's also lots of Calculations been done showing that it costs less to fish if you have stocks above MSY you need less fuel actually to go out and take and catch those fish and You would approach that concept the maximum economic yield which in fact fish are Fisheries are managed after in in Australia and in the US. I think I'm almost done so Right now out of 54 northeast Atlantic fish stocks 49 are over fished and Restoring these stocks would deliver up to 14 point 62 billion pounds a year in gross revenues This is 2.7 times the current value of landings. This was a report from new economic foundation that came out two weeks ago Okay, you have to take all these figures with a grain of salt, but but basically this is what every Fisheries economists that do the calculations come up with that you should actually Double or triple catches and and incomes if you do this So this is a card It's a card that I I saw in a Aquaculture plant in Norway and he was a bit sad because I Think it's it's sad that you have aquaculture of card in a sea where you have so plentiful of wine card that it shouldn't really be Shouldn't be necessary to to cultivate them and and I'm going to leave the floor open for for questions and discussions before I do that. I just wanted to make a little advertisement of this site that Well, I have established It's called CFP reform watch and where we keep updating all the time What's going on in the parliament and in the council and in the Commission and We also have links to all the relevant documents Amendments, and we try to be as transparent as possible on what's going on And this was really something that something that I missed when I tried to do research on my book Five six years ago to find all the information in one place so we really tried to to create this site to to give access to journalists and NGOs and and everyone so Please note that