EU: Common Fisheries Policy Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateLord Sewel
Main Page: Lord Sewel (Non-affiliated - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Sewel's debates with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
(13 years, 11 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, my noble friend is absolutely right. It is a disgrace. However, we are where we are. The common fisheries policy was last reformed in 2002 and I imagine that there are noble Lords opposite who remember with some feeling taking part in that process. We are determined to try and get the policy properly reformed on this occasion—it happens on a 10-year cycle. We are grateful that the Commission now seems to recognise the problems that we face. As for discards, we, and I think the Commission, are determined to reduce this wasteful and horrendous practice. There must be a focus on catches—what is taken from the sea—rather than on landings. By that means we hope we can get rid of discards in their entirety.
My Lords, the Minister will recall that your Lordships’ European Union Committee has been a strong advocate of the reform of the common fisheries policy and, as part of that reform, the move to local management of fisheries, whereby you get stakeholder involvement. Does he consider that the reform in that direction has suffered a huge and possibly fatal blow, because of the reported and successfully prosecuted illegal landings of huge value—many millions of pounds—that have come to light through the Scottish courts over this summer, as a result of the activities of the Shetland pelagic fleet?
My Lords, no I do not think that it has suffered a blow. The important thing is that your Lordships’ committee, this House, the Government, many member states and the Commission all now believe that reform of the CFP is necessary and desirable. As part of that process, we will push for greater regionalisation in decision-making, as we think that that will lead in the end to a much better process. We are fortunate to have reached a stage where there is slightly more agreement than there has been in the past. We want to build on that.