Agraeixo molt al meu assessor en assumptes de pesca al Grup Verds/ALE, en Michael Earle, perquè s’ha encomanat la difícil tasca d’il·lustrar-nos als diputats i diputades sobre aspectes que habitualment són a la vegada complexes i polítics, i per descomptat sensibles, en la mesura que afecten a qüestions tan importants com la situació dels recursos i els estocs, així com al dret a treballar de molts milers de persones. El text que adjunto a continuació és un acurat  anàlisi sobre la dimensió econòmico-financera de la gestió de pesqueries com la de túnids i similars, i posa de manifest que, mentre la manera de gestionar aquestes pesqueries sigui l'actual sistema d'organitzacions regionals de pesca, amb els dinàmiques i les prioritats econòmiques que comporten, em temo que la conservació dels estocs, i encara menys la seva recuperació, no està de cap manera garantida. Confio que, com a mi, us sigui d’utilitat per prendre postura al respecte.

Money Rears its Head, by Michael Earle
Greens' blog from ICCAT (International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas)

25 November 2010

Money Rears its Head

Yesterday morning was a session of the finance committee of ICCAT, with another obscure name – STACFAD. Sometimes it is as if even the names of the committees are chose to make them as obscure as possible.

Like every organisation, ICCAT has a budget to pay for administration, research, data analysis and other things. The money comes from the countries that are Contracting Parties, which pay according to a formula based upon their overall catches in the ICCAT area and their economic wealth (the richer countries pay more than the poorer countries).

For several years, ICCAT has had a budget problem since many countries are not paying their bills on time. This year, there are 13 countries that have not paid their dues from 2009, and some of those have debts outstanding from before 2007. In total, almost EUR 2 million is still owed from previous years.

In most countries, if you don't pay your taxes, you have a problem and there are consequences, which can include going to jail. In ICCAT, nothing happens! From time to time there are suggestions that if a country doesn't pay it should lose its voting rights, or maybe even lose some of its quota, but the discussion always concludes with "next year". And the next year, it is put off again.

No organisation can function effectively that way. ICCAT needs to improve its data collection programmes, its scientific analyses, its verification of surveillance reports, etc. In short, ICCAT needs to move into the 21st century. This costs money, but ICCAT doesn't have money.

This has extremely serious consequences for the fish. Consider bluefin tuna. The ICCAT management measures result in an enormous amount of data being sent to ICCAT on the traceability of the fish which should be used to identify illegally-caught fish. But the secretariat has not enough human resources to analyse those data. In fact, it was two NGOs – Greenpeace and WWF – which did the most complete examination of the data. So it is not clear how much of the bluefin was legal since the necessary analyses were not done.

Research can also suffer. If scientific research is not conducted, the stock assessments are not as good as they could be. Too often, the weakness of the scientific analyses is used as an excuse to not reduce fishing pressure – the opposite of the precautionary approach. A major research programme on bluefin tuna was adopted but it seems that some countries do not want to make their contributions.

In short, keeping ICCAT on the verge of bankruptcy is a very efficient way of keeping it ineffective.