91999E1505

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1505/99

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Situation of the fishing fleet in the NAFO area in the context of bilateral relations between the European Union and Canada

The Community fishing fleet, which operates in international waters under multilateral NAFO control, has seen its ships considerably reduced in numbers over the last few years and the allowable catches have also been reduced. EU and Canadian delegations met recently in Cologne to sign a commercial and economic cooperation agreement, which will not cover fishery relations. There are therefore no guarantees that Canada will repeal Law C-27 which authorises the country to fish outside the 200-mile exclusive economic

zone and is contrary to international law. Some time ago this situation led to the seizure of the Galician vessel Estai and a dispute which has still not been settled in law.

In view of all this, can the Commission say why it refuses to settle the ongoing fisheries dispute? What steps has the EU devised to safeguard Community fishing interests which affect Galicia in particular in the NAFO area, in view of the authorised increase in fishing activity and the repeal of Law C-27?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 October 1999)

It should be recalled that the dispute, which arose within the Northwest Atlantic fisheries organisation (NAFO) on the sharing of the Greenland halibut stock and which culminated in Canada's arrest of the Spanish trawler Estai in international waters in March 1995, was settled by both the conclusion of the Agreement constituted in the form of an agreed minute, an exchange of letters, an exchange of notes and the Annexes thereto between the European Community and Canada on fisheries in the context of the NAFO Convention of 20 April 1995(1) and, as intended, the subsequent adoption (multilateralisation) by NAFO of the agreed package of measures at the 17th annual meeting of NAFO which was held from 11 to 15 September 1995. Under the terms of this settlement, Canada removed Spain and Portugal from the list of states against which the Canadian fisheries legislation of 1994 (so-called Bill C-29) could be applied.

It should also be noted that, in recent dealings about the new legislation enabling Canada to implement the 1995 United Nations (UN) Agreement on straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks (so-called Bill C-27), Canada restated in writing that further to the 1995 Canada/EU Agreed Minute, Canada took Spain and Portugal off the list of States against which the provisions of Bill C-29 could be applied; those two countries are still off that list and the adoption of Bill C-27 does not change anything in that respect.

The Commission believes that firmness on principles offers the best prospects for the avoidance of a repetition of the events of 1995. In line with this, the Commission has consistently taken exception to extra-territorial aspects of Canadian fisheries legislation. Furthermore, it has emphasised and continues to emphasise the importance of the rule of law in international fisheries relations, the priority of international law (i.e. the NAFO Convention and customary international law in the present instance) over pieces of domestic legislation and the need for appropriate procedures for the peaceful settlement of international disputes. In the latter context, the Commission has insisted on a continuation and acceleration of work on a specific dispute settlement mechanism in the framework of NAFO. At this year's annual meeting of NAFO, which was held from 13 to 17 September 1999, and against initial resistance from Canada, this motion remained successful.

(1) Council Decision 95/0586/EC of 22 December 1995, OJ L 327, 30.12.1995.