Europêche does not oppose a rational tariff free setting for certain fishery products that are not sufficiently produced in the EU. However, fish stocks have significantly recovered over the last decade, securing fish supply in Europe, whilst maintaining the highest socio-economic and environmental standards.

Precisely, several sustainability standards are mandated in trade agreements with third countries to enable the potential for tariff reductions. However, the ATQ system completely ignores the principle of sustainability. Take, for instance, the tuna industry, where a significant portion of tuna loins are imported from Thailand and China at zero duty. These countries however have a well-documented history of engaging in IUU fishing practices and labour abuses. Europêche argues that the sole motivation behind the use of ATQs in this and other cases is to drive down prices which in turn rewards unsustainable practices and results in unfair competition. Consequently, the ATQ system compels the EU catching sector to lower prices and seek alternative markets. It also disrupts links with longstanding partners from African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS) that not only endure discriminatory treatment but also suffer from the loss of valuable market opportunities.

Javier Garat, President of Europêche, declared: “We cannot accept that the EU champions products of dubious origin and fishing conditions while our industry struggle to rapidly adapt to ever-stricter sustainability standards.”

According to Europêche, many of the latest European Commission’s fisheries and environmental policies are grounded on the urgent need to tackle climate change and biodiversity decline. However, the sector wonders why such approach is not being applied to the ATQ system. Mr Garat added: “It is shocking that while the EU fleet is decimating due to geopolitical factors and EU policies, ATQ volumes do not stop to grow. We wonder if the idea is to replace EU production with imports from countries far from EU sustainability standards. Is this the definition of food security pursued by the EU?

The ATQ system does not differentiate between fish originating from any country. For instance, high volumes of Russian pollack and cod receive tax derogations. This raises both political and ethical concerns regarding the continued provision of trade preferences to these fish products, especially considering that the EU has severed ties with Russia and even imposed bans on specific seafood imports into our market. Besides, how can the Commission propose bottom fishing bans in the EU while still supporting large-scale imports from controversial non-EU bottom trawling fisheries?

Mr Garat concluded: “Rewarding those who have done little for fish stock sustainability and fair treatment of people, including those involved in IUU fishing and serious labour abuses, with preferential market access is no longer acceptable. The European market demands nothing less than high standards and expects fleets from all countries to operate with the same level of sustainability as European fleets. This is essential to ensure fair competition within the market.”

The EU fishing industry urges the Commission to employ the ATQ system to counterbalance unsustainable and irresponsible practices in the Northeast Atlantic, such as those observed by Norway and the Faroe Islands. Their overfishing of Atlantic mackerel and their continuous challenge to the well-established historical rights of the EU fleet whilst demanding higher access to our market necessitate action.

In this context, it is essential for the EU to utilize trade preferences and leverage its market power to safeguard and advance the interests of the EU fishing fleet within the framework of fishing and trade agreements with third countries. By doing so, the EU can protect the sustainability of our waters and ensure fair competition.

Press contacts:

Daniel Voces, Managing Director of Europêche: +32 489 26 81 07 daniel.voces@europeche.org

Anne-France Mattlet, Europêche Tuna Group Director: anne-france.mattlet@europeche.org

EP Press Release – ATQ

Picture: © Chris Gomersall 2020 vision

Over the past days, first the Faroe Islands and then Norway decided to unilaterally set large excessive quotas for their share in the mackerel fishery in 2022, at 35% and 19.6% of the scientific advice for total catches respectively. They continue to fish at the same irresponsible, unrealistically inflated levels as in the past year, when both countries increased their shares by 55%. The basis for Norway’s decision, the zonal attachment approach[1], was in this case recently judged by scientists from all involved Coastal States as highly flawed, since the data on geographic distribution is incomplete and gives room for multiple interpretations.

These actions fly in the face of the ongoing efforts to reach agreement on a sharing arrangement between all involved Coastal States for the Northeast Atlantic mackerel stock. Although the Coastal States have set the total fishing opportunities for 2022 in line with scientific advice (794,920 tonnes), total catches will  again be much higher due to the fact that most parties are fishing substantially more than would be allowed on the basis of the last agreed shares. At this point only the EU and the UK are sticking with quotas based on the most recent sharing arrangement in place.

Tim Heddema, chair of the EU pelagic fishing industry, organized under the banner of EAPO and Europêche, comments: “This overfishing remains entirely unjustified and at odds with the sensible and sustainable fisheries management that the world supports and demands. It puts unacceptable pressure on a stock that is of great importance for many European fishing nations. While appealing to Norway and Faroe Islands to work in partnership for the benefit of all, we now need a strong voice from the EU, and moreover, we need strong action. The solution is not to sit back and leave it to the EU to compensate for the recklessness of others by fishing less ourselves, which in turn is further disadvantaging the EU industry’s market position. Instead, the EU has plenty of options available to counteract and deter this unacceptable behaviour, such as – but not limited to – using its power as the main market for the other Coastal States’ seafood exports. We are calling on the Commission for immediate action. In addition, with regard to further negotiations on the sharing arrangement, the EU needs to make it 100% clear that it will not accept the current overfishing to count towards an increased fishing track record for those parties concerned.”

[1] ‘Zonal attachment’ of a stock refers to the share of the stock residing within a particular country’s economic zone, if necessary weighted by the time it spends in a country’s zone over a year.

Press contact:

Tim Heddema – +31625045602 / theddema@pelagicfish.eu

EP and EAPO Press Release – 2022 NEA mackerel quotas Norway and Faroe Islands