"Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy" - Margot Wallström

This leads to a vicious cycle: As the fishermen compete with each other over a dwindling resource, they have to become more efficient, which in turn increases the pressure on the stocks.

Trawls in some fisheries now have a circumference of more than 3 km.

In other fisheries the use of two or even three trawls simultaneously is on the increase.

I find it amazing to read that at the same time, in many fisheries, anything between 20 and 60 per cent of the catch, and in some cases even more, is under-sized or by-catch of non-target species and thrown back into the sea often dead or dying.

This lack of selectivity in their operations should be an embarrassment to fishermen and adds up an enormous waste of resources.

The factors behind this situation are equally clear. The catch quotas set by the Fisheries Council have all too often not followed scientific advice on how much could safely be taken out of the seas.

Poor enforcement of the agreed quotas has also contributed to over-fishing.

It is a sad truth that Community subsidies have at the same time supported the construction of ever bigger and more efficient vessels and thus added to the problem hardly the most rational use of tax payers' money in a situation of over-fishing.

What I am telling you here is not new of course.

The Green Paper on the future of the Common Fisheries Policy that the Commission published last year analysed all these problems. It made it clear that the crisis in fisheries is structural rather than temporary.

Fisheries is over-capitalised in relation to available stocks, which make sit economically vulnerable with low profitability. There are too many boats trying to catch too few fish.

The Commission now estimates that the fishing effort in some of the most important EU's fisheries should be reduced by 30 to 60 per cent to bring it into line with available stocks.

This cannot be done without reducing the size of the fleet.

Let me emphasise one thing: I am not blaming the fishermen on their vessels who do a hard job and often risk their lives. On the contrary, I see them as the victims of the current situation. I am pointing to the failure of the current fisheries policy to manage its resource properly and thus provide fishermen with a future.

I am criticising subsidies that are adding to the problem rather than addressing it.

It is clearly not a thorough reform of the Common Fisheries Policy that will cost jobs and lead to economic decline in the regions concerned.

Employment in the sector is already decreasing. A reform can only make things better by ensuring the long-term sustainability of fishing and managing the restructuring process in an orderly way.

It would in my view be a cynical policy that allowed for business as usual and did not go to the heart of the problem, namely, over-fishing and over-capacity of the fleet.

What we need is a reform of the CFP that manages the crisis head-on, re-directs subsidies towards scrapping vessels and creates new economic prospects for the fishermen and the regions affected. This approach was already put forward in the Green Paper of March last year.

The international dimension

Before I conclude, let me turn to the global dimension of fisheries, which is equally close to my heart.

This summer, political leaders will meet at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa. The aim is to give new impetus to worldwide efforts to protect the environment and to fight poverty in the developing countries.

Fish is a major component to the food of people in the poorer parts of the world. According to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), fish provides about 6 per cent of total world protein consumption. Nearly one billion people worldwide rely on fish as their primary source of protein, most of them in Asia.

Protecting this resource not only means protecting the livelihoods of many small fishermen in developing nations, it also provides an important global food supply.

FAO also projects that per capita catches of fish including from fish farms will decline substantially over the next few years.

A few years ago, it estimated that 11 of the world's 15 major fishing grounds and 70 per cent of major fish species were either fully or over-exploited.

This is not an encouraging signal for sustainable development in the poorer countries of the world.

The European Union is a major importer of fish products, much of which comes from developing countries.

European fishing vessels operate in many parts of the world on the high seas and under bilateral fishing agreements with third countries, often developing countries.

I am certainly not opposed to such bilateral fishing agreements. They can benefit partner developing countries by providing resources and capacity building.

However, these agreements have been criticised repeatedly for leading to an over-exploitation of stocks and for a lack of monitoring and enforcement.

Illegal fishing is another problem and apparently not a marginal one.

In early 2000, for example, the Tanzanian government estimated that more than 70 vessels were fishing illegally in its waters.

Flag-of-convenience ships have been estimated to account for 5 to 10 per cent of the world fishing fleet. And flags of convenience usually mean lax controls and little enforcement of the rules.

Strong action is needed at international level to clamp down on illegal fishing and the EU should be a driving force in this respect.

In short, I would hope that a reform of the CFP will lead to better management of the EU's international fishing activities and promote an active role in international fisheries organisations. This would be a positive signal for the Johannesburg Summit on sustainable development.